- Post a new discussion related to the topics covered in this module. Your post needs to provide specific lessons learned with examples from this module helping you enhance your leadership capacity at work.
- After posting your discussion, review posts provided by other students in the class and reply to at least one of them.
I learned in this module that there could be several different approaches to leadership. All may have a time and place in various job assignments. I have always liked an Authentic Leader and try to be that way with my subordinates. When you have developed yourself throughout a career, it’s best to take the lessons learned back to newer officers and subordinates. This builds trust, makes you more open to subordinates, and helps your department's future.
During my career I have noticed different traits in supervisors. This lesson showed me even more that those traits are imbedded in supervisors all throughout our department. I have watched first hand that without cohesiveness an organization cannot thrive. Explaining that leadership is a process of a group of individuals to achieve a common goal was spot on. When you have a divide in your leadership that do not have that common goal it causes tension and sometimes conflict. I see even more that having that common goal and cohesive groups are required for leadership to be successful.
Leadership does create balance in most cases and as you indicated, it varies from person to person. Having a balanced leader is extremely important because it creates a notion of fairness and the impartial judgement. I've also had leaders with multiple characteristics which sometimes brought joy and sometimes not, but it allowed the individuals under that leadership to grow. Having an authentic leader is sometimes priceless because you always know what you're getting with that person.
Lieutenant Commander John Willink speech on extreme ownership was intense. I do not have a military background, but I was able to resonate with Lt. Willink because it has always been important to me that leaders take responsibility for their actions along with their subordinates’ actions. I wholeheartedly agree that you learn more when things go wrong. I have witnessed leaders in my life take responsibility for their actions whether right or wrong. I have more respect for leaders that can take that kind of responsibility and not blame anything or anyone else.
The module was extremely informative. The module gave me several different perspectives to evaluate within myself. In my mind, I have never separated management and leadership. I have always thought of them as one in the same. Although similar, knowing that effectiveness and influence are required to be a leader and seeking order, stability, and efficiency are management styles will help me become a better leader in the future.
I also learned a lot from the Jocko Willink video. His experiences show us a lot about taking Extreme Ownership. The benefits from this approach can help all leaders, both at work and in their home life.
By showing this attitude to your followers, they can see your human side, making you more relatable and trustworthy.
This module is fascinating. As I listened and became more in tune with the speaker, I began to put my career and experiences into focus. I'm drawn to the culture of leadership and the thinking of the follower. The temperature of law enforcement is so different in today's world, and we have to be careful not to get caught up in the culture. Leadership has to be fair, balanced, and able to transition into the now. I understand that every leader has a different style, and the ear of each follower is unique, but the vision has to equate to building your people to understand the value of fairness and equality. The debate between a "born leader" and a "trained leader" has continued for many years. I feel that leaders are not per se born. However, circumstances, backgrounds, opportunities, and abilities create the necessary atmosphere for proper leadership training.
Leadership is linear. This phrase resonated with me, the interaction between a leader and the followers must be in place or the leadership simply becomes management. Another stated in a comment above that a manager controls inanimate objects while a leader influences people, if the relationship is not present then it could be said that the one at the top views those in his charge as objects put there to just do a job, not people placed to accomplish a mission. Our daily tasks can easily overshadow the human aspect of our roles as leaders, the linear aspect must be worked on daily to insure that communication is flowing in both directions and not just orders being given down.
The leadership concepts in this module provided valuable lessons for enhancing my leadership capacity.
Understanding the difference between assigned and emergent leadership will help me better recognize the importance of inspiring and influencing others rather than relying on credentials or seniority.
Also, knowledge of the five bases of power widened my eyes because utilizing my power positively and ethically will help create a positive organizational culture.
Just as significantly, recognizing the distinction between management and leadership will help me balance stability, adaptability, and innovation.
Applying these concepts will enhance my leadership capacity and create a more positive and effective workplace environment.
This module lecture made me think of my past experiences with people in power and which of the five bases of power they each used. Having been an athlete in high school I can recall that many of my coaches had coercive power. They used their coercive power to make me run suicides on the basketball court or laps around the track when they thought that I had messed up. In my law enforcement career I have also witnessed a lot of judges that had legitimate power, by having the power to take ones freedom with a sentence. Then there were those in with expert power that I have always been drawn to, in order for me to learn and gain as much knowledge as I could.
Looking back in my law enforcement career I was able to decipher between the transformational leaders and the Introduction authentic leaders that I have known. There were those transformational leaders who were great at inspiring people to follow. Then the authentic leaders who were followed because of their morals and values. I strive to be both a transformational leader and an authentic leader.
In my organization, I see multiple levels of leadership including leadership approaches used case by case though an array of situations on a daily occurrence. One leader comes to mind that naturally fits four out of five of the Common Bases of Power; referent, expert, legitimate, and reward power. Oddly enough, every single one of the characteristics of the bases seem to come natural to this person, mimicking the transformational approach to leadership the most while also heavily highlighting the authentic approach. I believe leadership is something you have to constantly maintain; however, the example of this person suits one that has lots of great and natural leadership behaviors and characteristics.
In this session, I had the opportunity to reflect on the type of leader our department requires. The design of this module is well-suited for our learning goals. Our department is fortunate to have many excellent individuals and leaders, although a few may benefit from further development. It is my opinion that these individuals may have relied on "Coercive Power or Legitimate Power" to achieve their current position, making it challenging for them to make the decisions necessary for effective leadership.
This module shared a lot of information about different types of leaders. It made me think about the different types and styles of leaders I have experienced throughout my career. To an extent, the majority of leaders I have experienced over the years possess a lot of these same traits. In looking at myself, I can see where I have exhibited some of the same traits as well. Some good traits and some bad. This pointed out to me things I need to change. I like how the bases of power were broken down into five categories and described. I have experienced coercive power over the years and understand completely why it is not used as a model of ideal leadership. I just never had it broken down and defined until now.
I understand, going through this lesson makes me realize we looked at some supervisors and their leadership styles. It forces us to look at the different type of leadership styles and contemplate on the leaders we would like to become.
I agree completely Jeff and have learned this same lesson. I would try to be on the same page as my supervisors. But now realize that I should mold myself into my own style and be the better person. It makes me realize the guys under me will most likely do the same thing so I need to be a better role model then what I had.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. It is great to hear that the module helped you reflect on the different types and styles of leaders you have experienced throughout your career. Recognizing good and bad traits in leaders is essential, as this can help us identify areas for improvement in ourselves and others. I felt the same way after completing this module.
The breakdown of power into five categories is a valuable framework for understanding the different bases of power that leaders can utilize. It is encouraging to hear that you have recognized the negative impact of coercive power and the importance of avoiding it in leadership. It's not often to hear someone admit these truths.
Reflecting on our own behavior and actions is an essential step toward becoming a better leader. It is commendable that you have taken this opportunity to reflect on your own leadership style and recognize areas for growth and improvement.
Overall, it is great to hear that the leadership module has benefited your personal and professional development. It is essential to continue to learn and grow as a leader. You have encouraged me to continue reflecting on my leadership style and seeking opportunities for growth and development.
In law enforcement, and probably everywhere else, a supervisor is often confused with leader. The two are very different. Supervision merely requires the one in charge to know what needs to be done, how to get it done, who does it, and when it needs to be done by. A leader motivates team members to learn, grow, and accomplish goals because the leader has convinced them to believe in what needs to be accomplished.
I agree the labels supervisor or manager have been used interchangeably with a leader and they could not be more different. A supervisor or manager is as you said, the one who is in charge and should have knowledge of the task and how it is accomplished, whereas a leader has the power to influence the group to accomplish the task while empowering them to decide on the process itself. Supervision and management do not include influence, they both rely on position and authority.
I have seen many different styles of leadership throughout my Law Enforcement career. Most have been good and deserving of the positions but there have been some that left a lot to be desired and were not natural leaders. My best experience has been with a leader who shared both the referred power and the expert power traits. These types of leaders have been hard to come by during my career.
I agree with you that referent power and expert power traits can make the best leaders. Experience and learning gives the leader the expert power. Referent power in a leader is when a leader is liked and is able to make connections with their followers. I have also seen both powers in leaders.
In law enforcement, we often experience many of the different types of managers and leaders discussed in this module. Unfortunately, many of those are poor examples of leaders by utilizing the "Coercive Power" or "Middle of the Road". I have learned just as much about being a leader from the bad supervisors as I have from the good supervisors.
I agree with this post. I have often mentioned how I have worked under many different types of leaders, both good and bad. i have learned something from each and every one of them. I like to think that I have taken a little something from the better leaders and developed my own style of leadership.
The only reason I put in for a supervisor role was because of the bad supervisors. I wanted their position so I could implement an idea of leadership over supervision.
This in itself indicates a leader. Not only did you want the role because of the bad supervisors, you had a plan/vision for what you were going to do with the position. I hope you have been successfully in honoring your vision. Since you are here, I’d say you have been.
Leaders are born in my opinion. I do believe people, mangers, and supervisors can be taught many lessons to become more efficient in those roles, but I still believe most good leaders are born with a certain intellectual understanding and natural ability to lead. Most good leaders that I have worked with were ones that possessed many different attributes that combined made them great leaders, such as honesty, humility, and the ability to listen and apply good ideas. Expertise in the subject matter they are leading certainly helps but a common-sense approach to leadership in my experience always leads the way.
National Command & Staff College
Session # 17, Myrtle Beach, SC
Learning Area 1, Module 2
Discussion Board: Approaches to Leadership
Law enforcement does a great job of ensuring there are plenty of supervisors and managers amongst the ranks but not so well with ensuring there are leaders. Although agencies can and should be blamed for not inspiring leaders, providing enough educational opportunities, and have a culture of leadership within the agency, individual are to blame as well. In life, if we wish to succeed, we must take it upon ourselves to grow and learn continually to become better today than we were yesterday.
Situational Leadership, where there is not one best style of leadership because you must adapt various styles depending on the situation works extremely well in law enforcement. It is incumbent upon leaders to listen through direct communication and surveys as to the direction of the agency, morale, and other issues but at the same time, this type of leadership will not work in emergency situations; look no further than Uvalde, Texas.
To succeed, we must learn the various styles and approaches to properly influence the group to achieve the common goals. This must be done with sincerity for the greater good utilizing trust, transparency, ethics, morals, honesty, fairness, and charisma while openly demonstrating and communicating the vision and goals daily.
This lesson reminded me of how important it is to hold yourself to high ethical and moral standards, both on and off the job. You can't become so rigid in your leadership style that your subordinates consider you to be unapproachable and inflexible. To lead effectively, you must lead by example, which extends to your home life as well. I have known highly competent supervisors whose credibility was irreparably damaged by negative conduct off-duty. Based on the lecture, we know that it is not enough to simply "manage" faceless employees. You have to share your successes and take responsibility for your failures, while knowing when to lead from the front and when to support your officers from behind the scenes.
There was a great deal of information on various types of leadership presented in this module. One that I have found really useful in the law enforcement field is situational leadership. Being able to adapt your approach based on who and what your leading is important. I have worked in Patrol, Detectives, Special Operations and recently was the Section Commander of Human Resources and in charge of our training academy. Situation leadership was definitely necessary to manage the people and the workload in these various units. The operational needs are different and the type of people working within those sections are completely different. Each has their own values and customs and this style of leadership or understanding and using the basics of it a least has helped me navigate some of this. Hopefully we expand on this area further as we move forward as it think it is very useful tool for many situations.
Hi Daniel. Your discussion of situational leadership put me in mind of my own credo when it comes to problem-solving and navigating obstacles, whether in a leadership role or in my personal life - "Improvise, Adapt, and Overcome!" I learned this saying in the Marine Corps NROTC program back in 1985, and even though I wound up becoming a police officer and not a career Marine, it has served me well in law enforcement. To me, improvise, adapt, and overcome is the definition of situational leadership, because you realize that there isn't a "one size fits all" approach to problem solving, and you gauge your corrective course of action accordingly (and flexibly). I have also found that my fellow officers gravitate to supervisors who can flex their leadership style to varying situational needs.
I agree with you on the situational leadership principle. One thing I have found over the years is that being able to adapt to the people around you is crucial. As a supervisor in Uniform Patrol you have many different personality types on the shift, and each person responded differently to a certain of leadership. There were some who were extrinsically motivated and needed to have someone "light a fire under them" to get results, while others were intrinsically motivated and only needed a clear description of the objectives and let them go to work.
There are several different styles of leadership as pointed out in this lesson. Appointed leadership can by far be one of the worst when the appointed has no influence or drive to better themselves. I have seen several different types of leadership throughout my career. From sports to the military now Law Enforcement. One of the worst leaders I have ever had was appointed, he influenced me to want never be like him. A good leader has to always be willing to change in any situation and be flexible with their people. If you can’t do this it becomes a problem for everyone.
After completing Dr. Normore’s lesson on approaches to leadership, I found myself reflecting on past supervisors and those that lead without rank. Although I was unaware of it at the time, or simply didn’t try to classify their leadership styles, I began identifying many of the qualities of good supervisors and leaders and some of the less desirable traits from poor supervisors and leaders. Dr. Normore stated, “ethical leadership is simply the right way to go”. I believe this was exemplified by the opening video from Jocko Willink who demonstrated that his extreme ownership helped him earn the respect and trust of his team. I think Willink put it best by saying, “when a team takes ownership of its problems, the problems get resolved”.
Jocko Willink's video reminded me of a quote one of my previous supervisors said often. "You can delegate the task, but you cannot delegate the responsibility". Adversity is also a great teacher. I strongly agree with this view. It is impossible to respect a leader who only blames others.
Dr. Normore's lecture was very in depth of many aspects of leadership. He discussed many facets I never considered. As he defined the bases of power, the components of leadership, and the styles of leadership, I began to self-reflect. I know the types that I strive to be, and I wonder how my troops perceive me to be. I want have referent power and/or expect power. I want to encourage team style management. I strongly believe in moral and ethical leadership. Especially in the field of law enforcement.
I have worked under leaders throughout my career that I felt covered almost all those traits in Dr. Normore’s lecture. I learned from all of them, good and bad. However, I know I was fortunate to have worked for one leader for several years that influenced my leadership significantly. That person is still a mentor and friend. I hope I can influence my officers the same way.
This module provided information on types of leadership. One that got my attention was ethical leadership.
We no longer live in a time where "getting it done by any means" is acceptable. You must have values that will
allow you to conduct yourself in an ethical manner. If we are in this profession to serve others, how will those without
ethical behavior succeed. We must instill in those entering our profession good ethical behavior to earn and maintain the trust
of those that we serve each day.
I completely agree with you. Ethics and morals are a basis of trust. Earning and maintaining the trust of our communities is essential to how effect we are able to serve the community. My agency in recent years has made significant progress with community outreach. A lot of events seemed pointless initially; however, I will be the first to admit I was wrong. I have been won over to this approach. By being transparent and engaged with the community we have received great support. Not that many years ago, many major crimes, like murders frequently went unsolved. Officers would hear the “rumors” on the streets and basically know what happened, but we could never prove what happened. Since our community outreach initiative, we have solved every murder typically within days. Witnesses come forward now. Trust is a corner stone of our profession.
Jason, you are 100% correct. We must have ethics and demonstrate it daily. We must hold ourselves accountable and other as well. We must understand that we have all fallen short at times but we need to use that as a learning experience, do better, and if necessary turn it into a teachable moment vs. it allowing us to enable others to go astray without learning and/or accountability. It starts with the culture of the agency and in order to be successful, must be a priority in all divisions with all personnel.
My biggest takeaway was from the opening video (Jocko Willink speech), rather than the Normore lecture itself. In particular, the following quote, "When a team takes ownership of it's problems, the problems get solved."
Finger pointing won't fix anything, it creates resentment, anger, and deflection from responsibility. Ownership is the first big step to fixing problems.
This lesson made me think about people I consider to be good leaders. It made me think about which leadership approach applies to them and why I might be drawn to them. It also made me think about ways in which I try to mimic them in my position. The lesson provided an opportunity to examine who I follow and what attributes I have that might convince someone to follow me. Like leadership, this thought process is a two way street. In order to improve and achieve self growth, I have to consider what might be included in my approach that might prevent people from following me. If leadership involves influence in a group with common goals, one of the challenges is to influence additional people who might not share my beliefs without alienating my current following.
While completing the lectures and reviewing many of the other discussion board posts above, I began to consider my experiences with my supervisors. Many of these superiors were managers and simply did not understand that managers and leaders are not necessarily synonymous with each other. Far to often the promotion processes I have been a part of were more about reciting learned information and failed to have any defined measurement of leadership putting to many managers in assigned leadership positions who have little to no understanding of how to lead. Then there is little to no effort put in place to train these managers on how to lead and leaving these newly promoted supervisors to figure it out for themselves through trial and error, assuming they even try to begin with. Many of the best leaders I have worked with did not have rank. They were charismatic and down to earth. They each had a gravity about them that would draw you in and have your drinking the Kool-Aid so to speak. While I concede that knowledge of policy, case law, and procedures are vital to successful leadership, it can not be the sole unit of measurement for advancement. The authentic leadership model is a relatively new idea introduced by Bill George in 2003 I believe, but all the characteristics have long been a part of great leadership. One of the most important characteristics, in my opinion, being the ability to build great relationships within the team. To quote Simon Sinek “Leadership isn’t about being charge. It’s about caring for those in your charge.”
I agree with Holcombe, we have had very few leaders in our department. I have been with this city a good bit longer than he has, and we are definitely on an upswing. The majority of our “leaders” were promoted because it was their time. Which can cause a very stressful environment for the younger less experienced officers. My experiences in the military showed a lot of different leadership styles and abilities.
Assigned leadership is the go-to answer for most situations in law enforcement, which in my opinion is the wrong answer. Just because someone can memorize a policy does not make them a good leader. Although it is needed on rare occasions, it very much so does not set a good example. I like the fact that this separates managers from leaders, being a manager in no way makes you a leader.
As a fan of the teachings of Jocko Willink, the opening video is a great way to begin the topic of leadership. Ownership and accountability show subordinates that you are committed to doing the right thing and are not afraid to admit wrongdoing or learn from mistakes.
An important takeaway for me was the statement from Dr. Normore that "a leader affects by and is affected by followers." This simple message is so vital for leaders to understand and get right.
You said it Dan. The biggest ownership and accountability in Jocko's scenario was the first Seal to raise his hand and own up to his mistake in the mission. He did so in front of his team leader, the higher ups, and his team mates. Once he put himself out there, he made it easier for every other team member to own up until ultimately Jocko followed suit.
Very interesting topic. I didn't realize all the different leadership groups. I see I have a lot to learn, but I have done a few of them. I've been around, and learned from, supervisors who had the " do as I say, not as I do" mentality and I'm glad to see there are way I can change the narrative for myself and future leaders.
I have seen people get promoted without additional direction or assistance from their predecessors. These people go from being led to one who leads without any personal management experience other than the title, Some people are natural leaders and have many of the attributes that are stated during this lecture and can excel without initial management training. There, of course, are people who are promoted and are ill-equipped to lead. I realize from this lecture that a person's personal purpose in leading and their desire to lead are a big part of what kind of leader they will be. Leaders need training before and during management. It is important to encourage them to be ethical leaders and to lead by the best possible example. Leaders must change with the community's needs when a positive ethical outcome is achievable for the benefit of all.
In this module of leadership, it has shown me several leadership traits which I have described to my supervisors and subordinates. Being able to recognize the different types of leadership and explain them to others, gives others an idea how and what it takes to be an effective leader. I have seen the coercive power at its best with a Captain who shows his ability to threaten others to get the response he wants. His receives his power by manifesting fear in everyone. This would also fall under the "Peter Principal." I believe this also works with the Legitimate power style. Several supervisors believe just because they have made the rank of Lieutenant or Captain, they demand the respect of others without demonstrating their ability to apply the necessary attributes it requires. During the description of the Ethical Leadership, I find myself really concentrating on this style. I have also been able to demonstrate this type of leadership in my roll as an assistant SWAT commander. I truly work on being an effective influencer.
The leadership lecture was informative and broke down the different levels of leadership. The biggest take away for me was that leaders must have the power to influence others and without that power the leader’s only value is holding a position. I have worked with many non-ranking leaders that controlled the atmosphere of the shift. When a new sergeant was assigned to my shift, I would set him down and tell him who the non-ranking leaders on my shift were and to get on their good side. Rank is necessary for the structure of the agency but has little value and becomes destructive when the position is held by an unqualified person. The leader needs to be flexible, compassionate and have the ability to relate to his subordinates.
There is often confusion for some, in the differences concerning leadership and management. Simply put, leaders compel people to succeed and managers control inanimate objects. I have found the value of communication to be a highly effective measure in ensuring mission success. We have all been exposed to complex assignments, where the end result could have been accomplished more easily had the vision, objectives , and right team members been discussed. I have further found it beneficial when working collectively, to independently study any issue, to ensure that I can assist within my knowledge, when attempting to overcome a problem. Working hand in hand to achieve the desired outcome, has served me well when a situation is less than desirable. I have observed leaders in the past, that would direct subordinates to complete something that they themselves would seldom do. I greatly appreciate the movement in various organizations to promote inclusion.
While going over the Approach to Leadership lecture, it reminder me of my time as a follower first. as a young soldier and as a young deputy I have had many types of leaders with very different leadership styles. In some of those leaders, they were more of a authority - compliance or middle of the road management style leader. One who only look at the end state of a personal gain or goal or satisfaction from the management (authoritative) view. These leaders taught me more important what type of leader I strive to not become. One that only looked at the mission or self goal instead of the team builders that wins the war. I have in my career equally been bless to have back, them we called a combined leadership type of leader. The type of leader that look at the entire picture and sought input and well as output from others to come up with a collective plan. This type of leader I always wanted to become. As I learned during this lecture I am a Team Management Leadership style leader. for I try to get and keep my team involved in the process of any situation.
I completely agree with Patrick Hall. Being a veteran myself, I have seen the style of leadership where others will take the results of what their subordinates have accomplished and recognized themselves as being the one who accomplished the task. I have also seen so called supervisors belittle others for their own gain. I too, have sworn not to become that negative leader and promote the positive aspect of law enforcement. In Hall's last sentence, "keep my team involved in the process of any situation," is another aspect I admire. I follow this as well as I keep everyone in the investigative division informed in all situations.
In this module it discussed how management and leadership differ. It described management as more of goal orientated seeking while leadership focused on interpersonal and intrapersonal skills. I really liked the Authentic Leadership approach, which discussed the three elements of conceptional leadership and categorized them.
Jeremey, I agree with you in reference to considering peoples opinion. I would also suggest that in order to be an effective leader people should welcome the critique of their fellow subordinates. Often time however, in law enforcement that is not the case.
The module makes clear the differences between management and leadership. It also defines different types of power. I think that in law enforcement too many people are dependent on legitimate power. They focus on their own rank as a means to get subordinates to follow them. While rank has its meaning and should command a certain level of respect, I try to always consider the people that work under me. I will ask them for their opinions rather than adopting a "because I said so" mentality.
Jeremy, I totally agree with you. Too often we see the Officer that attempts to lead from that authority role instead of looking at what is best for the overall end state. A good leader will always put the needs of the people over and above any personal gain or goal. They will seek to build a close net team that will deliver outstanding results.
You are spot with many leading with a "because I said so" mentality. I see more and more leaders and community influencers becoming aware of the people they lead and their decisions' effects on them. We still have some people in major positions who think it's their way or no way at all. I am hoping to see more positive and ethical leaders in law enforcement and the community. We have some amazing leaders that will bend and adjust to better the communities and some that won't bend at all.
Jeremy i like the segmenting of these two terms as well. I always like to say I need to manage things.... payroll, staffing, operations plans etc., and I need to lead the people that do these things or who are affected by them. Some decisions and orders are just misunderstood and unpopular. A true leader will help his followers understand that and work with them to navigate whatever hurdles happen to be in the way safely and effectively.
Throughout my career, I have seen many confuse the concepts of management and leadership. These two are not the same and not interchangeable. Management has nothing to do with leadership. Management is strictly about the job or the task, whereas leadership has a humanistic component. I have encountered many managers that did not possess an ounce of leadership. They were only task-driven. They had no interest in advancing the person or the organization. This lesson clarifies that every manager is not a leader.
I agree. I would also offer that the necessity to emphasize succession planning is integral to building the leaders of the future.
I also agree. I have experienced more managers than actual leaders throughout my career. This was very prevalent at the beginning of my career. Recently, I have seen more leaders throughout my department.
The responsibility of was leadership was very heart felt by Lieutenant Commander John Willink in his presentation. I also felt a great deal of compassion for his leadership style, as I am also a 28 year veteran in the military, and also serving in leadership roles while deployed oversees in Iraq.
The module was able to identify several different types of leadership and the powers of leadership. As a leader for law enforcement and military, I observe that I lead subordinates differently in each change of my environment. I have learned that because of that I do not have one style of leadership but adapt to the changing environment and culture.
It is hard to imagine a more deeply intense and personal commitment to leadership than that recounted by Lieutenant Commander John Willink in his presentation. It was clear that owning accountability cannot be a half measure.
The module was helpful in simplifying and quantifying the essence of leadership. It would seem most necessarily, if unknowingly, embody a combination of leadership styles, as adhering to one style (in short order or over time) would likely lead to failure at the expense of the leader, those led, and the organization. The differentiation between leadership and management was instructive and something to which I had given little consideration.
I agree completely. Leadership style has to be catered and developed by the relationship between the leader and those being led on an individual level.
Throughout my career, I have seen the different forms of leadership and can now identify them. I agree that different situations call for different styles and knowing when to use them is key. Also understanding people in your organization. I have seen leaders with rank shut a group of people down by just using the wrong words or tone. I have also seen groups migrate to a natural leader that showed emergent power without rank. The final part about ethical leadership is important cause I agree without this any leader would eventually fail.
I agree with this. Throughout my time in law enforcement I have observed some really great leaders and some really bad ones. Although I did not know it at the time, I was learning what and soaking in the habits of both. With the great leaders, I learned what to do for people to follow them and the bad ones, I learned what not to do. As far as ethical leadership, I have seen this come a long way and feel that this should also coincide with the culture and environment. Without ethical leadership subordinates would lose faith in the leaders around them.
First, to comment of the opening video seminar from Jocko Willink: his message was very powerful regarding what is to be learned from war. Things I took away from the video was that as leaders, we must take ownership of our mistakes and failures. Don’t place blame on anyone or anything else. Don’t let ego or pride get in the way. Your team will respect and follow you.
As to the module on approaches to leadership: First, leadership is defined so many ways, but the definition that leadership is a process by which an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal seems to be an all-encompassing definition and one I understand and agree with. I also liked the statement that without influence, leadership does not exist. Lastly, I benefitted from the differentiation between management and leadership - that management is more about organizing and leadership was more about influence. I have seen many “leaders” in law enforcement who are just managers and who lack the influence and inspiration to lead others or to encourage anyone to follow them.
As a fan of Jocko for some time, I agree with your post. Showing ownership demands credibility and accountability. Allowing suburbanites to see these actions is a great way to earn respect.
Lawrence, I agree Jocko Willink's video was an inspiring reminder of the importance of owning up to mistakes and not allowing ego or pride to get in the way. His message is particularly applicable to leaders, who must recognize that a successful team depends on their ability to accept responsibility for failure and success.
Being a leader should always be someone who is willing to work alongside and be willing to guide others and not just management. Having a good approach on leadership will also get you a lot further with co workers and others that work under you. The lecture had me thinking of how my leadership approach affect other that are my leaders, fellow leaders, and people I lead.
Jason, I totally agree. Respect should be earned and not just given. Trust is something that
you have to continually work at. You will know if you've earned that respect and trust. They will
come to you for guidance. Once you've earned it, it's not hard to keep; just be fair but firm.
I agree Jason. Some of the leaders and supervisors that I have had the most respect for are the ones that never hesitated to get their own hands dirty and never asked anyone to do something they wouldn't do. These leaders' attitudes helped them earn the trust and respect of those that the led.
Joseph Spadoni, Jr.
The positive communication behaviors such as being verbally involved, being informed, and seeking others’ opinions stand out to me. I believe as a team, we should be communicating amongst each other, and it should not just be a “my way or no way” type of attitude. Leaders lead by influence and being an inspiration to others. We must start with letting go of any ego we may have; it is about our team, not just one person. We must develop trust with our team; relationships need to be formed. When I started leading my team, our relationships were already formed from working with each other over the years. I encourage my team to speak up with what is on their minds and be verbally involved and informed. I ask them for their opinions on everything we need to do to accomplish our goals. I don’t want my team thinking that this is just about me. I try to show them it is about us as a team. I learned from the module that I am on the right track with doing that and am learning more ways to make my team better.
While not the only detriment to achieving goals, ego-driven leadership may be one of the most significant. It draws focus away from mission accomplishment and the welfare of those who are led. The sense of team should be more prevalent than the sense of self.
The concept of Authentic Leadership seems the most natural and automatic. With many of the other approaches, there are more opportunities for negative facets which could be detrimental to their success. Authentic Leadership focuses on the leader themselves, previous experiences, as well as cooperative methods between the leader and those they lead.
Also, Authentic Leadership appears to have the best chance of success, as it was grown out of the failures of other approaches. How do you argue with genuine, trustworthy, good leadership? In addition, transparent, morally grounded, and responsive to people’s needs and values. I look forward to seeing if this approach can deliver the best chance of successful leadership.
Alan, I agree that Authentic Leadership is natural and automatic; we are who we are. I feel that because we deal with multiple personalities, we are forced to adapt to other styles to get through to more people and still stay grounded in our kind of leadership.
As a leader, you have to recognize each individual strength and weakness. Leading by example goes a long way when trying to lead a group and develop future leaders. When I was first placed into a leadership roll, the way I began leading was the way I was led at the start of my career. As time past, I learned everyone have different personality traits so I had to adapt. A effective leader is always trying to learn new ways to learn so they can prepare others for leadership roles.
I agree that leading by example goes a long way. I found throughout my career working for other supervisors, some having the attitude as do as I say not as I do had me not wanting to perform to the best of my abilities. When I worked under a supervisor that lead my by their examples I felt more inclined to want to do more. I had more drive to do better.
I agree with you, Devon. As a leader, we must constantly better ourselves and continue to make things better in any way possible. It is also easy to lose sight of the common goal, so we must strive to help each other. Doing this will better your own agency and community.
I agree. Over time and with increased knowledge, our leadership style evolves. Most of us never received any formal leadership training when we first were placed in a leadership role. Our leadership style must continuously evolve to meet the needs of our group.
The style of leadership that I find the most used is situational. As the chief, I have "legitimate" leadership which I use when issuing new policies or making formal disciplinary or promotional decisions. When communicating the goals of the City to my staff, referent leadership works well, as what may seem to a line officer to be irrelevant can be made relevant by appealing to the officer's "admiration" for me and seeing me buy in to the City's goal. My long work history, participation in many different units, and my position as an instructor in numerous disciplines can influence people as to the rightness of my position.
Overall, as a leader I must be focused on the goal and tailor my approach to what is best suited to influence the accomplishment of that goal.
Gerald Whealton Session 15
Approaches to leadership: The first video I watched in the module entitled “Extreme Ownership” by Jocko Willink was a powerful reflection by this Seal team commander.
As he prepared to answer to his commanding officer for a failed mission, injured team members and a dead Iraqi solider, I felt his pain and couldn’t help but to see how he worked through the dilemma of becoming an authentic leader. His dilemma, unbeknownst to him at the time, was his ego. As he worked his way through the answers he would give, he identified the breakdown in communications down to individual team members and thought he had his answers. His ego wouldn’t allow him to take the blame as the commander. However, at the crucible when he gave his debrief to his superiors, he realized that the failure was his alone as the team commander and took responsibility without mentioning team members. When he let go of his ego, at that point he became a true leader.
I learned the lesson of ownership early in my working career, probably to a fault, as I do not commonly “drop the hammer” on subordinates when they do an inferior job. I take it personally as a failure in my leadership or the training I failed to send them through. My style is to attempt to influence better decision-making choice in future.
So, in this module, I learned “my style” of leadership is primarily one of influence. As Dr. Normore said, “if you have influence, then you have power as a leader”.
This module reaffirmed my leadership experience in that leadership is a process, I set end goals for the unit and we interact and influence each other as a group to achieve common goals. As pointed out, leadership is a process so I will continue to hone my influencing skills.
Jocko's video was powerful. He hits the nail on the head about ownership. He also described his fellow SEALs as taking responsibility for their own failures in the mission. This shows that they understand it is important to take ownership as well. I think if we all adopted this mentality we would all get along better. Not just in law enforcement, but also in society as a whole.
Jeremy, I agree with you! I've seen that video before, and it was inspiring to view it again. It's a great reminder of how we should lead and assume the responsibility and the consequences for our actions. We are responsible not only for ourselves but for all that fall up under our chain of command.
It's funny how when I watch this lecture different people pop into my head. I've had managers and leaders as have most of us. The Legitimate, the coercive, and the Referent. I can literally see faces
Absolutely. Throughout my career, I have taken lessons from a great many of the leaders around me. I have modeled myself of what I perceived as effective leaders, and have worked hard not to replicate the failings of bad leaders. Everybody has something to teach me; sometimes, that lesson is how NOT to do something.
Could not have hit it anymore on the head than that. Many persons from the past come to mind about what I should and should NOT do as a leader. It definitely plays a big part in how I approach my leadership capacity.
This is a test
The topics discussed in Approached to Leadership are all too familiar, as I’m sure they are to most Police officers today and in the past. While studying this topic several current personal scenarios came to mind. I agree leadership is absolute an interactive trait. I was able to reflect on the components of leadership and how I would like to incorporate them into my leadership skills.
I believe as a leader we strive to do the very best job we can. We must lead by example, building trust that allows our subordinates to grow and develop their own leadership skills. This can be achieved by setting good examples such as being approachable, lead from the front, and having an open mind. Ethics is a big part of leadership. The mentality of “I’m the boss” or “I can do what I want” will turn your others against you. This attitude will cause turbulence within the organization. Every decision you make must be weighed to make sure it is the best for your organization and the people in the organization. In my career, I have worked with true leaders and those who called themselves leaders. Those true leaders always had the best interest of the organization as a whole. The pseudo leaders only had concern for themselves. Both styles have taught me how to develop my own style of leadership and how to make the right decisions by using values and morals without pride and corruption.
I agree with you that setting good examples such as being approachable is the key. I have failed in that although I have said that, I have to act on it too. I tell my people that I am here for them, for whatever, but saying it isn't enough. I have to act. Although I have just begun in this experience, I need to remind myself that from the first module, you have to START!.
In the discussion regarding the ‘Trait Perspective of Leadership’, which says, “Individuals have traits or characteristics they are born with that suggest their potential as leaders.” I was reminded of the leadership training I received while in Marine Corps boot camp. They discussed fourteen individual traits that every Marine leader should possess. They even provide every Marine with an acronym to help remember them all, JJ DID TIE BUCKLE, which I remember to this day. The one constant about the traits is not one of them stands alone. They are reliant on each other to be effective. If you are missing or are deficient in one, the others are affected. However, as I have grown throughout my law enforcement career, I do not feel you have to be born with innate traits but can learn to be an effective leader through training and experience.
Chris, I agree with your comment about training and experience. The leaders we admire have their current leadership approach, in part, due to previous experiences. They learned from those experiences and made adjustments. There is also professional growth, such as this program, which allows us to focus specifically on what will make us better.
I believe the ethical approach should be incorporated into everything we do. I do see the need for various leadership approaches. I am sure we have all seen this play out in our departments. You can assign an officer to a training officer, or supervisor and the officer may struggle. On the other hand, you can transfer the same officer to a different trainer or supervisor, and they can flourish. Sometimes personalities clash or the way we explain things may not relate, but another person can present the same information differently and be impactful. We as leaders must be able to put our ego aside and recognize our way isn’t making the connection and change our style to fit the needs of our team.
Mitchell, I will certainly agree that we as supervisors need to have the ability to leave our ego at the door. That is a must! I have also seen new officers struggle with one training officer and excel with another. I do believe a leader does need the ability to wear several different hats and adapt to each situation that arises, hints the phrase “leave your ego at the door”. With that being said, the ethical approach is top-quality but it doesn’t hurt to have an extra tool on the belt.
I found both Dr. Normore's lecture and the introduction video with Jacko Willink to be very informative. Dr. Normore defines an emergent leader to be the most influential person in the group. I have found this type of leadership within your group to be both good and bad. A challenge we sometimes face is that most influential individual has no buy in for moving toward the common goal of the organization. This person will often negatively taint the group who holds a lot of respect for the individual. As the assigned leader of the group I sometimes find it challenging to address this. I find myself spending a lot of time with the individual working with them to get them to buy into the overall mission and seeing the bigger person. I also have been successful in countering this by giving that informal leader more responsibility within the group. This gives them some ownership in working toward the common goal and that positivity can spread throughout the group just as fast as the negativity.
Dan, the "emergent leader" is a hot topic on this board. I agree with you that this type of leadership within a group can be both good and bad. In my experiences, I have found the bad ones rooted in way or another in selfishness. Like me, I’m sure you’ve seen the “emergent leader” from different angles, one as a fellow team member and one as a supervisor.
As a team member who observed, listened to, and learned the bad “emergent leader” over my life, I’ve have observed many character flaws associated with this type of behavior that is far from virtuous. Like you said, the bad one can taint the group.
On the other hand, I have witnessed good emergent leaders as well, virtuous and good for the mission.
I think as a supervisor, we must really be keen when we see an emergent leader. This person could be a homerun or a cancer to the group or mission. This is whereas a supervisor, we must pay attention to the other members of the team to assess the emergent leader’s characteristics that are out of view of supervision. If its of the bad variety, it’s time to start influencing that person before they lose their career. If it’s of the good variety, it’s time to start nurturing that person to take your place.
This lecture on Approaches to Leadership by Dr. Normore was very enlightening. There is so much to unpack. I keyed in on attempting to understand leadership approaches and how they can be applied in the real world. It is great to have a theoretical understanding of leadership, but it is far more valuable to have the skill set to apply those theories to real-world situations.
One of my first takeaway was the discussion on assigned leadership verse emergent leadership. A person placed in a position of authority will have assigned leadership due to the position they hold within the organization. Whether they are an effective leader is not a prerequisite to being placed in that position of authority. An emergent leader is an individual who has the ability to influence a group to accomplish a common goal. It is not because of a rank or position of authority but is based on trust from the group. I have seen that far too often individuals in positions of authority feel threatened by those who are emergent leaders.
I found myself gravitating towards the concept of transformational approach leadership. This concept empowers not only the leader but also the follower. The leader is focused on the needs and wants of the team and is more concerned with the process than self-reward. A transformational leader acts in ways that inspire trust. They emphasize strong morals and values and promote the growth of their team members.
Jeremy Harrison-Session #16
The information provided by Dr. Normore was fascinating and applicable. However, I want to focus on the introductory video provided through Jocko Willink’s Ted Talk. Jocko said, “when a team takes ownership of its problems, the problems get solved” (Willink, 2017,11:40). Mr. Willink also pleaded with leaders to resist any temptation to pass the burden of command “down the chain” (Willink, 2017, 11:10).
I have seen instances where a leader will take responsibility for some mistake in front of their superiors. Unfortunately, there are times when that leader will then turn to their subordinates and respond in anger and disgust. The anger appears to come from embarrassment, but that does not justify the response and tends to alienate subordinates. In reality, though the leader takes responsibility in front of superiors, the leader then turns around and points fingers.
Creating an organizational culture where we refuse to pass the buck or point fingers will be quite a lift, but I do not believe it is impossible. The culture shift must come from humility and kindness and not from an attempt to preserve personal pride. This is not to say we should not address problems and get them corrected, we should. However, how leaders approach problems set the tone for correction. We have learned that responding out of anger leans more towards “coercive power,” which should be avoided (Normore, 2017, section12).
A leader who identifies the issue and takes responsibility also finds a way to lead subordinates through the problem-solving process. Employees generally want to work for a leader who calmly and kindly leads them through problems and mistakes instead of berating them over what are typically minor issues that do not change the organization’s trajectory. I look forward to working toward a culture where everyone takes responsibility, and we view one another as teammates and not hindrances.
I too found the Ted Talk provided by Jocko Willink’s hitting home. Taking ownership is so critically important, especially when things don’t go according to a plan. It is far too easy to blame someone else for not doing something or missing an assignment than it is to take full ownership.
This module has given us some tools to place in our leadership tool bag. More importantly, it has challenged me to think past the moment and slow down before making any decision that will impact the organization.
You can’t truly be a leader if you have no one following. This is why it is critical to have buy-in from the team you are leading. Whether it is just a shift or a whole division. What I am learning the most is that it is okay not to know all the answers and to rely on members of the team for counsel and guidance. However, I know that whatever decision is made is mine to own if things don’t go according to plan.
I agree with you on the impact of the Jocko video. Ownership is a critical component to leadership and one that I find lacking in most organizations and "leaders". I also found it poignant, when Dr. Normore stated, "Leading of oneself is not considered leadership..." This is a problem I see in my organization where people are promoted into positions where they provide no leadership to anyone but themselves.
I agree with you on this. As the leader whatever is done while you are in charge falls back on you. You must take ownership of it.
This lesson was a good reminder that I need to slow down and be more calculated and strategic with my leadership when time allows. Although the Situational Approach to Leadership is a simple concept, it is easy to get caught up in the moment and fail recognize what I can do to tailor my leadership style to a particular person or situation. I have a bad habit of trying to handle situations as quickly and efficiently as possible, which isn’t necessarily the way I should handle a given situation to attain the best possible outcome. Each time I fail to apply the situational approach to a leadership situation I miss an opportunity to improve and develop my leadership skills.
A point I keyed on from the module was the discussion of assigned versus emergent leaders. Our department, like most others, has assigned leaders. Hopefully, the assigned leaders are able to influence employees, but emergent leaders, or informal leaders are so important. Often, emergent/informal leaders work more closely with and have opportunities to have more informal interactions with employees than an assigned leader. If an assigned leader is able to influence the informal leaders of his organization, those informal leaders can help that permeate within the organization.
An interesting intersection between this module and my daily life happened today. Not long after watching Jacko Willink's TED talk on the intro to Module 2, I had lunch with one of my units. One of the detectives brought up that officers often feel like they are being punished for every nit-picky thing. The example he used was when officers are given training reviews for failing to shuffle steer in pursuits. These almost never lead to progressive discipline and are designed to reinforce the best practices that we have trained our officers.
I suspect that many of us have heard these complaints from our people, and they're valid concerns. We know that these kinds of little course corrections are not punitive, but officers nevertheless feel like they are. I told him that the fact that officers feel like these legitimate corrections from supervisors are punishment is a failure of our leadership. To me, one of the greatest reasons officers feel this way is that too many supervisors fail to take ownership of those small corrections. As I explained to him, when supervisors address small issues right away, this usually feels like coaching because officers tend to trust their supervisors and accept that their boss wants what's best for them. On the other hand, if these things aren't addressed right away and the follow-up packets go up the chain and back down, the time it took for this to happen and the fact that now the correction feels like a mandate from on high feels like discipline to the officer, even if it isn't. Thus, as supervisors, our failure to take "extreme ownership" as Willink calls it, and to address these issues as soon as we see them at our level may help us to protect our reputation as being "one of the good guys" or a "pro-cop supervisor" but it hurts our people. This is because our failure to address a situation while it still feels like coaching causes our officers to instead feel punished when the issue has to be addressed from higher up the chain of command. Thus, our failure causes an unnecessary morale problem for our officers, and so we fail them. In this way, our willingness to take ownership protects our officers in ways that we may not always realize.
I have found this to be challenging too. The timeliness of the training review or debrief is so important. When it is completed quickly after the incident by the lieutenant it does seem to have more of a coaching feel. One challenge is when a supervisor doesn't know the training/coaching is needed until after they review body worn camera. Depending on their schedule, sometimes that is several days after the incident. When time has passed I think the officer's perception of the training is different. The incident happened and the officer thought it was complete and then several days later it is brought up again.
I completely agree with your assessment here and would love to find a solution. I cannot help but bring up relationships because I just watched Brent Venables acceptance speech as the head coach at the University of Oklahoma. Venables speech was all about relationships (2021). I am curious if our organization is so bogged down with what is on our computer screens, we have failed in establishing meaningful relationships with our officers.
If we spent more time building our relationships with our subordinates, would delivering corrective action be better received throughout the chain of command? This is not to say many of us are not attempting this. However, the personal time I spend with my command and subordinates is minimal compared to the time I spend in my office sending emails back and forth. I have often said commanders should be in the field much more than they currently are. However, our current method of operations demands they be in the office. If we could find a way to redirect or restructure workload, I believe we could improve the relationships in the department and change the way corrective action is received. Brent Venables suggested that leadership must be relational, not transactional (2021). If we focus more on relationships and less on emails, I believe a culture shift could occur.
Venables, B. (2021, December 6). Watch: Oklahoma hc Brent Venables introduction pep ralley [Video]. Retrieved from
This module has taught me about the differences in power that leadership falls under. Expert power, legitimate power, reward power, and coercive power. As a supervisor, I have fallen under all five. We are challenged to do our job and sometimes are not liked due to the decisions that we have to make. This module also teaches about culture and leadership. Prejudice when it comes to leadership does not allow a leader to judge their subtenants fairly. This is a preconceived opinion that is based on reason or actual experiences. A leader leads reasonably without having any prejudices against anyone.
I learned the difference between management and leaders. I never thought of the difference in the meanings before watching this lecture. I believe leaders have to be able to adapt to the different people we lead. As a leader, we have to be the influencing factor to those around us.
What I noticed from the session was stated several times as influencing others to meet a common goal and the definitions of the type of leaders for that influence. Far too often in law enforcement is assigned leadership. Where people are sometimes put in a position of management and that person expects the acceptance of followers because of a newfound title or position. I find that a leader who is emergent and meets the role before being placed in a position of management is more effective and has more respect from their followers.
A leader teaches other leaders and watches the outcome. A supervisor becomes a leader before they are an assigned leader. I agree with your post. Being a leader is never easy, but someone has to do it and be very fair about it. I have learned that as a leader, you will not always be liked at times, but that also comes with the territory. Great post!
Steve, I've also keyed in on that conception of leadership as influencing others toward a common goal. I'm not sure our agencies or units are always very clear on what our goals are. We have a tendency in our professional to fall very easily into a mundane daily workflow (answer calls as they come, complete this investigation and move to the next) so that, perhaps ironically considering our profession, we end up living day to day, the same stuff, with no clear goal to work for. I wonder if this might be a factor in some of the burnout we see; officers do the same things for years and never feel like they get anywhere. It might be worth wrestling with the questions: what are we trying to do? Why? and how will we know when we've gotten there? Common big-picture approaches might be driving a certain crime type down, but it's questionable how much influence we actually have on this (except perhaps in very specific areas for a very short time). We might focus on organizational core values, which is important, but as far as attainable goals may be not very measurable. It might even be worth it to ask what a "goal" would mean in our profession.
One of the things you mention that resonates with me is that we often assign leaders that are not effective leaders. When we have our promotional processes, the individuals, who have the highest scores and win the promotions are many times simply assigned leaders, who have no true leadership skills. We need to do a better job of designing promotional processes to help ensure we select those with better leadership potential and competencies.
I have seen this a few times in my career. I agree more needs to be done to identify positive leaders within an organization without just a test. Granted the test is much better than the old seniority next in line concept. There needs to be a fair and consistent way to select our leaders of the future. The test selection is not enough.
Kent, I completely agree with your statement. Just because someone has department time on another person does not mean they are fit for the job. Often times when someone is promoted based on department time alone, we see that person use coercive power within that position and are only interested in their own goals.
This is test
We as leaders have to be able to lead and manage but not get the two confused. In some of our agencies we have hundreds of staff members and we have to figure out the best ways to lead and manage.
As a young supervisor I had a Captain take me under his wing and mentored me through the bumps and bruises all new supervisors go through. One thing he told me early was that great leaders are good managers, but being a great manager doesn't mean you’re a leader. I assume he told me this because I was trying to manager my team instead of leading them. As the lecture pointed out, these are two completely different skill sets. However, I have found that working on developing myself as a leader has, consequently, also developed my managerial skills.
I was struck by how many styles of leadership were identified and how many combinations of styles there could be. I certainly think being born with certain leadership traits is a head start. Learning, bridging, and applying many of these other styles of leadership could be more important. The power to affect others through influence and move people toward a common goal is an awesome thing. I am hopeful that I can take the things I am naturally good at and expand on them with what I learn. I want to be recognized as more of an ethical leader and hope to have more influence through traits like trust and credibility.
I feel this module really explained the different styles and types of leadership. There is no one style of leadership that works for everyone. You must change the style of leadership you use when dealing with different people. Using subordinates as role models from within the ranks also helps without showing favoritism, I feel it really helps change the none traditional roles and ways of old school leadership.
I enjoyed the discussion on the different styles of leadership and what they involve. I definitely see a variety of styles in our organization. I think that it is important to have different styles and to be able to switch back and forth among some depending on the situation. This is not an easy task for all to accomplish. I have seen managers that think they are leading but actually are just managing a department with little to no influence over their team. These individuals lack the respect from officers and other staff members. They are more micromanagers than leaders. I believe the authoritarian leader is by far the least effective of all the approaches. I have always tried to use the team approach. Allowing participation and input from officers is beneficial. When you give them the opportunity to share their insight, it opens communication and allows them buy-in to the organization.
You're exactly right! Getting input from the team is crucial to creating a team that wants to give your organization 100%, versus a team that is only there for a paycheck. Additionally, if you are the smartest on the team, then you are on the wrong team. For some it is hard to be humble enough to admit that people around them are smarter or better in certain areas, but that is why teams are so effective!
This is a second test from Wellington
This is a test comment from Wellington
Having been in Law Enforcement for the time that I have and the Marine Corps prior to that, I have seen nearly all of the leadership styles that were talked about in this session. Some of them I still see on a daily basis. Some of them create great work environments and some of them make you not want to come to work. Being able to lead people definitely doesn't come from the rank that you hold or the title that someone has given you. If you did not start learning to be a leader prior to holding that title or rank then you will struggle to get the respect from the people you are now leading. There is always a difference between a manager and a leader. Many people can be taught to manage but learning to lead takes a lot more effort and responsibility.
All of the leadership methods that were mentioned seem to have a place to be used, however I think that Ethical is always the way that we need to be seen by our peers, subordinates and the world in general. We should all strive to be this leader, and to demand this from our entire agency when it comes to leadership.
This is a test with Wellington and Sheriff Clarke.
Throughout the lecture recitation it became very apparent that there are numerous approaches to leadership and most have individual aspects that are valuable. Bringing them together into a holistic approach is what I see Authentic Leadership fundamentally is. Leadership is an interactive event, as stated, but has not been historically incorporated. An effective leader first and foremost has to be informed with a clear vision of the mission at hand. To be successful though, the leader has to be verbally involved, seek others opinions and new ideas, while still being firm but not rigid. Additionally, personal aspects of each team member must be explored and valued to assure the health of the work group. Leadership is not a one stop job but one that has multiple facets that must have attention in order to be successful. The goal has to be to bring individual talents together to meet a common goal.
This module covered a variety of informative areas and certainly provided me with information which benefits any person in becoming a better leader within his or her respective position. I am reminded of what an authentic leader is in the lecture presented by Dr. Normore. This type of leader is self-aware and reflects on his own conduct and sees his strengths and weaknesses. Perhaps, the best example of leadership in this module was listening to the concept of extreme ownership. Jocko Wollink spoke of being the commander of his team and during a mission, a drastic mistake took place. This mistake could have been the fault of many who were present, however, the ultimate responsibility fell on his shoulders and he chose to take extreme ownership of that.
Through him controlling his own ego, he set out a plan of action and a vision to repair the deficient areas where the issue was present and ultimately gained even more respect from his team. Even though several team members initially chose to take responsibility individually, he showed that as a leader, the responsibility should not be cast down to them but rather the one person who allowed it to happen in the first place.
I have worked for previous leaders that shifted blame on everyone but themselves and in turn, they were covertly disrespected, and it ultimately caused many issues. This action by Mr. Wollink brought me to the self-realization that I should constantly strive to ensure I also possess this same trait and better myself as a leader. In the event, something happens, I will make the right decision under the circumstances. By acting in this manner, this will help ensure that the group I lead will be influenced in a positive way and become better followers.
I really enjoyed this module. Early on with my agency, I had a supervisor who loved letting you know that he was the supervisor, (said so right on the side of his patrol car). I often thought that they can hang the moniker “Supervisor” around anyone’s neck, but it takes much more to be a leader.
Learning more about the 5 bases of power took me back to the 80’s as a young NCO in the Marine Corps. I realize that I relied heavy on the legitimate and coercive style’s and can see why I wasn’t always popular. Having had the benefit of many leadership classes, and now this program I can see that I have learned from those mistakes. I recognize the need to continue to develop more Authentic leadership and see where the ability to combine styles in a given situation will come in handy.
When I started in law enforcement, it was easy to go with the do as I say not as I do mentality but given the climate across the country and the better educated people coming into our organizations, we have to inspire them to learn and excel. Looking out for their growth will lead to better experience’s for our officers and the communities we serve.
In the life and times we are currently working being authentic seems to be the most desirable of leadership approaches. Now more than ever we need to not only be relatable to the community we serve but also feel comfortable being open about our morals and emotions. Those we lead need to realize that the days of being the stoic emotionless officer are over. We must learn to be more empathetic in all aspects of our lives and release any fear we may have about being viewed as weak.
Leadership from this module and other sources show that there is not one style or mode that fits all. Different leaders will use different styles based upon what they have learned or what they need to achieve their mission. The key factor behind it is that leaders are an essential part of the organization just as the employees are as well. Where I see another topic of concern that I have experienced is the concern when two leaders in one organization come at odds with each others styles. While their goals maybe the same their over all results and problems are handled differently. This is a challenge for an leader and I think would make an interesting topic. The most important task in this blending of leaders or in any part of leadership is commuication. As long as a leader communicates or performs their work for the right reason, then their is no problem that can not be overcome.
I found that the discussion about an Authentic Leadership approach very informative. In todays world with law enforcement being under a microscope, the Authentic Approach seems like a great example. The Authentic Leadership Approach is trustworthy and genuine. The leadership is transparent and is morally grounded. With these traits in the Authentic Leadership Approach, the police will grow trust and respect with the public. Also, the police will be more assessible to the citizens they serve.
With law enforcement being under a microscope, an authentic approach is needed for everything. Even when someone is just calling into the station. You're absolutely right that this approach is a great example. I believe if all leaders modeled this behavior the trust and respect will grown inside and outside of the organization.
Johnathan is right as our job now more than ever is about trust and respect from the public we serve. When the public trusts and respects us they also begin to engage as stewards of the community and become more involved in problem solving as well.
I completely agree with gaining the public’s trust again. This Authentic leadership style has proven to be the best way in dealing with many of the issues we face as Law Enforcement officers. Society sees us as the unwanted necessity and for us to gain their trust again through teamwork and transparency, we will see a change in the way we are perceived by the public and in turn they will do what they can to see that our vision is carried out.
I completed my Module on the Approaches to leadership. During the review of the lectures, I thought about the differences in assigned leadership and emergent leadership. As a police officer, we have all worked with assigned leaders. Some assigned leaders had emergent leadership qualities prior to promotions and became great supervisors. I have seen other assigned leaders lose their influence on their units by others and eventually they would either leave their position or get transferred. Some leaders have that natural ability to influence and inspire others while others need to work hard to do the same.
Having the ability to inspire or have the confidence of the troops under your command is essential. Having influence is like putting money into an account or making a deposit into the bank. You gain more reputation by deeds and actions, which will increase your reputation, and loose the ability to influence by poor actions.
While some have natural ability, the actions and deeds help contibute to the influence and leader has. Your post was a very good point I wanted to add to.
Glenn - I like what you said about assigned leadership, unfortunately there are so many that are assigned leaders that do not have the leadership traits, but continue to be in the positions and never learn to lead people. When those people are in the wrong positions they can be detrimental to the department as a whole.
Rodney, you are so correct here. Many departments are handicapped when people are promoted to a position simply based on longevity instead of performance. Not only have these people not proven they have the ability to lead, they may not even possess it. I find this stifles growth from below, as people who were granted positions are often uninterested in seeing others succeed for fear of being exposed as not actually being a leader.
Glenn-Looking at the replies to your comment I think its obvious we are all very used to seeing assigned leadership in law enforcement. I believe being an assigned leader want take you very far or keep you there very long. Ethical leaders have a larger more lasting impact on an organization. I cant imagine any leader not wanting to be viewed as trusted, respected, credible and over all ethical in their decisions.
Law Enforcement is in need of strong leadership. I believe that the majority of officers are good leaders and that they have a great ethical background. I also believe that the bad apples within law enforcement that are always being highlighted fall prey to the inherent coercive power that is misused by bad law enforcement officers. There is a temptation to use the badge as a tool to punish others, and unless you have strong ethics it can be too easily abused.
I couldn't agree with you more John, I feel that the few bad apples in our profession are always the ones that you hear about in the media which causes the negative perception of the police. The majority of our officers serve with honor and integrity. As leaders we need to promote our good values and build trust with the communities we serve.
This module on approaches to leadership had a wealth of information that was found to be educational. Law enforcement professionals have recognized that the development of leaders inside their organization is crucial to being successful. To be a good leader the individual must develop the skills to influence others. The module described several types of leadership styles that could fit an individual’s strengths. The ethical leadership style has seemed to work for me throughout my law enforcement career. By using this leadership style and incorporating a system of treating everyone fair in the division personnel are more efficient at doing their jobs.
When I was a new supervisor, I had what I thought was a simple administrative question about a fairly trivial matter from a subordinate. My immediate supervisor was not available so I proceeded to the Captain's office to ask the Captain, who had previously stated to me, that if you need anything or have any questions, do not hesitate to ask. Upon asking my question, my captain looked at me angrily and stated, "You are a Sergeant, aren't you supposed to know that". That left an indelible impression on me and how I conducted myself toward subordinates from that time forward. I found out later that the reason for the captain's response to me was because they did not know the answer, and I had caught them off guard. From that day forward I vowed that when ever I was asked a question, no matter how trivial it may seem, that I would treat the person asking like answering their question was the most important thing that I had to do that day. I further vowed that if I did not have an immediate answer that I would let the person asking know that I did not know the answer but that I would find out the answer for them. This has helped me immeasurably in getting the most out of subordinates as they had the confidence to come to me with their job related questions and has prevented countless mistakes by subordinates who were afraid to ask questions when they did not know or understand what was required of them at that moment.
It sounds as if your captain was more of a manager, which seems to be the consensus of that generation of law enforcement supervision, and I have no doubt that they learned to be managers from the generation ahead of them. I think we are fortunate now to be in a place in law enforcement that those such as yourself took that situation and instead of emulating his behvior, inherently saw what was wrong with the way he supervised and modeled your leadership style opposite of his.
In listening to Dr. Normore's lecture and in my own study of various leadership theories I think it is very important to always be authentic and ethical, no matter your style of leadership. In that, the situational leadership, while I believe valid, has somewhat always left me feeling that if you adjust how you lead based on the situation, then are you really being authentic. I understand that the idea behind situational is that different situations call for different styles, but I think that can take away from the perspective of being consistent, or in some cases possibly even your authenticity, at least in the eyes of those for whom you are responsible.
In addition to that, Jocko Willink is spot on. I've never been through war or served in the military, but it was when I began taking ownership of my failures and not blaming others that I saw those above me actually trust me more. I may have been disciplined, but I was trusted to be truthful and take responsibility.
Authentic is a good trait, fakeness is a huge turnoff and it blinds people to the message you are trying to convey. I will take Jocko's experience one step further. If the mission succeeded the team succeeded. If the mission failed, I failed as a leader to properly train and inform the team.
I agree wholeheartedly Keven. Individuals in the profession have always had a hard time with taking responsibility when they have failed. So many times law enforcement officers are out of touch with reality because of their ego gets in the way. Officers have a tendency to make excuses and point fingers at others when a situation goes bad. I have always found that the best practice is to take ownership of the failure up front. You will receive more respect from the person handing out the punishment in most cases.
I agree with the need to be authentic, but I believe it has to be coupled with the courage to be vulnerable. You can be authentic and still not be very nice, but you can't be authentic and vulnerable without be a nice guy. Vulnerability also leads to better Ethical decision and a stronger relational focus in leadership.
Trent, I could not agree with you more. I also feel that the most important trait for a leader is to be authentic and ethical. Those traits will provide a strong base for your leadership style and approach. An authentic ethical leader will always get more respect from his followers, peers and superiors.
Leadership brings balance and effectiveness to strategies. The module did highlight some very great points in carrying out those measures. In Leadership you must be able to engage your peers. The key to engaging your peers is how you communicate. Healthy dialog is important so that everyone can be on the same tasks. You must be personable as a leader as this will help others to follow and carry out orders. Another great leadership point discussed was accountability. In the video, Jocko Willink, discussed his experience after not properly strategizing during combat. He mentioned how he and his team were at war with each other and not at the targets. When he went to debrief he could only point the blame at himself as a leader. There are many times we think that we can handle or be prepared for certain things just based on our knowledge. Preparation means everything and if there aren't policies and procedures set in place especially in law enforcement, those task can be unorganized and overwhelming. It will definitely show throughout the performance of your entire organization. Just like Willink said, we would be at odds with each other instead of working towards the goals of the organization. It is the leaders job to ensure that their is a balance and different strategies that will help maintain order and create successful progress among the organization.
I enjoyed this module regarding the Approaches to Leadership and was able to recognize several of these qualities not only in myself, but in other supervisors I've served under or worked with. I do believe that leadership is a process and I was taught early on in the Marine Corps that to be a good leader, you must first be a good follower. In my law enforcement career i was fortunate enough to have worked for some excellent leaders. They truly lead by example and were able to balance the obligation of completing the task at hand timely and as efficiently as possible, while ensuring the subordinates were learning and growing as future leaders themselves.
I found this module to be very enlightening. I realized that after 17 years of being a supervisor I have used several of these of these styles. What really resonated with me was the element of interpersonal in the Authentic Leader style. As a young sergeant one of my first evaluations suggested that I was too militaristic and needed to be more person orientated. After having served in the Marine Corps I was more driven by statistics and outcomes rather than needs the people I supervised. In time I learned that mission accomplishment and troop welfare could be simultaneously and achieved better results by doing so.
Donald, I agree. From being an NCO in the Army and a supervisor in Law Enforcement, I too find that I sometimes adapt the style of leadership I'm using to achieve the goal. Some subordinates respond better to different motivations, or some situations require different outlooks.
Working through this module I feel I fall into a couple of leadership approaches, but the one that best fits me at this point in my career is Transformational Leadership. In my Investigations Unit that I supervise and lead a variety of experience levels and know that I can't treat everyone the same. Many of their needs and motives are different and I have to be able to adapt to each Investigator appropriately. With that said, I believe I also fall squarely into Authentic Leadership as well. I work very hard to be genuine, trustworthy, transparent, morally grounded and responsive to peoples needs and values. This leadership course will help me grow in these areas as well as areas where I am not as strong.
After completing the module, I have recognized one of the most effective styles to be the Transformational Approach. Leaders must be willing and able to adopt to their followers. Leaders must recognize that each individual is different and unique. If a leader takes the Transformational Approach, they can be more effective in reaching each individual working for them.
As leaders, we use many of the spoken methods on a day-to-day basis. In this lesson, I learned the proper terminology for the different approaches to leadership. For example, the situational approach to leadership is one that most of us have probably used. I know as far as in patrol, every situation is different, and a leader has to adapt as the situation changes. Flexibility is extremely important to be successful in decision-making. Another interesting approach is the Transformational Approach which would seem difficult but one which makes sense, as it is easier for the leader of a team to adapt to his followers than to ask several followers to adapt to the one leader. This adaptation alone would make others want to follow someone. It is important to understand what we are doing and why we do it. Module #2 help me understand some of that.
After watching this module, I learned a lot about the different styles of leadership. I also learned there is a difference between management and leadership. I began thinking back to the beginning of my career in law enforcement and my short time working in retail. During my time working in retail and even in the beginning of my law enforcement career, the supervisors I worked for were more management than leadership.
When I started with the Sheriff’s Office I am currently with, I noticed a big difference in the types of supervisors I had. These supervisors were more leaders than managers. They would inspire their subordinates to strive for the best. If their subordinates succeeded it benefitted the department.
Now that I am a supervisor, I feel like I use the transformational approach to leadership.
I believe that if departments did a better job of recognizing emergent leaders, and promoting them, that departments would have a more positive leadership dynamic. When they do not have a MAGNUS mindset, the assigned leaders will stifle the want of their subordinates to become great at what they do. In my experience, the assigned leaders, that only have followers because of their position, do not want to have great people below them because they worry about losing their position. A great leader wants to encourage his subordinates to make themselves the best they can be. They want to train up people that can replace them. If a supervisor can trust his people to do his job, the supervisor is free for promotion and is not tied to a single position. If we can promote more of the natural, emergent leaders, we can increase the morale and productivity of every department. Another thing is that many assigned leaders feel the need to coerce rather than lead. Emergent leaders tend to have people that want to follow them because of their ability not their position.
Burt, I completely agree with you. A great leader always encourages their subordinates to do better. Great leaders are not afraid to teach and train people. I believe morale starts at the top of the department and agree with promoting emergent leaders, which can increase the morale in the whole department.
I also agree, Darryl. I have watched my agency really focus on emergent leaders over the last several years. It has been a morale booster in many ways and I am confident we will continue in that direction based on what we have seen transpire for the good of our organization and community.
A good leader is always looking to develop others who will continue to move the organization forward. A good leader is not concerned with a follower learning more or promoting ahead of him. A good leader understands the goals of the organization and is constantly working towards that goal.
I agree with your comment Burt and unfortunately it is common practice at several agencies.
Sergeant Ronald F. Springer III St. Charles Sheriff’s Office Session 12
After listening to the lecture for module two and the TEDtalk video I thought about the structure and experiences I had over my career. As with most I have worked for both managers and leaders as my supervisors. I had the opportunity to learn from their examples as well as their mistakes and downfalls. This module gave me definitions for the types of leaders and managers I enjoyed working for and that I had contempt for. The inclusion of the TEDtalk video was a great addition as it helped to put into context the importance of and reasoning for being a leader and taking ownership.
The two segments that stood out the most to me were the definitions of emergent leadership versus assigned positions and the explanation of the bases of power. When thinking of the supervisors I have and had in the past it is easy now to categorize them into the five bases of power and how they utilized them as a supervisor and leader. This once again this caused introspection on my part to think of how my subordinates and peers would see me in relation to these bases.
Normore, A. (2017). Approaches to leadership. Module 2, Week 1. National Command Staff College.
Good points made. The TEDtalk video was really good and inspirational. Unfortunately, we also have to be ready for the consequences of our decisions. Either way, I believe holding yourself accountable will always benefit you and your team. The respect earned outweighs the consequence. We are human and will make mistakes. Those mistakes can be used as lessons to better ourselves and for others to learn from.
Excellent points. The TEDtalk hit home. I have often told my team mates that it can be their idea, but it will always be my responsibility. Letting your officers have input, not only shows you have trust, but shows it’s not going to be the end of the world for them if mistakes happen. WE can share the glory or learn from the mistakes, but accountability has to be kept personal.
As others in the thread, I to found myself reflecting on the past leaders in my life and career. I think of the style each leader had and amount of success associated with it. With this lecture I have a better understanding of how a limited perspective on leadership approach can affect future leaders within the organization and how they develop. (Coercive Power, Authority – Compliance seen mostly a few years ago in my organization). Of the different approach types in this lesson, I’m drawn mostly to the authentic approach which I have seen to be highly rewarding for all involved. I look forward for opportunities to share some points mentioned in the discussion with members of our agency and under my command.
After listening to the lecture, I reflected on the past 25 years of my law enforcement career and the leaders in interacted with; as well as my own leadership journey. What stood out to me were two concepts, #1: Bases of Power consisting of: referent, expert, legitimate, reward and coercive. I was fortunate to have leaders who had a combo of referent/expert and legitimate power; but like many also had the unfortunate experience of interacting with leaders who used coercive power as their baseline to maintain order and achieve outputs.
#2: Style Approach to Leadership focuses on what the leader does rather than who they are; and is solely concerned with results rather than their people. I was aware of the coercive approach; but after listening to Dr. Normore's lecture on the Style Approach, there is a direct correlation between coercive power and this style of leadership.
I found over my career that most leaders who used coercive power did not have to resort to this because they in fact had a combo of legitimate and expert power bases. Unfortunately, a lack of self awareness and good mentorship allowed these individuals to be tolerated.
I believe we have all seen "assigned leadership" come as a reward to a member of an organization who had practiced "emergent leadership," and I believe that is how it should be. Any of us with years on the job would also readily recognize when "assigned leadership" positions are not based upon prior demonstration of leadership ability. Under some well-intended rules governing public sector employment, advancement into leadership positions is more contingent upon test scores and tenure alone.
As stated in the lecture, a crucial leadership skill is the ability to assess the needs of the followers. Leaders operate by influence, and unless the leader takes the time to understand what motivates the individuals of the group, influence is compromised. In the past, members of organizations were much more accepting of coercive leadership tactics. I can vividly remember from younger days how ranking staff were beyond reproach and to question any of them was likely to draw harsh penalty. More modern, (and more effective) leadership models such as were covered in the lecture, seek to empower team members to more freely interact with leaders. It is incumbent upon the leader to solicit feedback, evaluate the effectiveness of his motivational style based upon that information, and adjust as necessary to increase performance and work product.
In my experience too often the emergent leaders are passed over by those who may have a "hook" in the administration. Where who you know becomes more important than what you can do. Then these appointed leaders feel the need to use intimidation and coercion to get their goals accomplished.
This module regarding various approaches to leadership is very interesting because the 27 years that i have been with my agency i have seen every kind of approach to leadership that was mentioned. This has been a very unique learning experience for me. By learning the five common important basses of power. Referent power which is the liking of the leader. Expert power having competence before knowledge. Legitimate power having the authority. Reward power providing awards to others. Coercive power which is the power to penalize or punish others. These were all a wake up call as a leader.
Approaches to leadership discussion was informative and I immediately was able to understand and recognize some of those leadership styles that were discussed do occur within my department. One stands out and that is being an ethical leader. We have to remember that no matter what style of leadership or management we take on that we have to always have good ethical practices in place. Good ethics can be applied at every level of supervision.
The module for Approaches to Leadership allowed me to reflect on the value placed on effective leaders within my department and the selection process. During the past 20 years I have experienced leaders promoted based on who they were, who they knew, how much they raised for campaigns, etc. Although many changes have occurred to establish a better promotion process, often times this still occurs. I would like to see my leaders consider the attributes of a person and their qualities while making a decision on future leaders. I agree that leaders should be able to encourage and empower others, however they should also be competent in their work.
I too have experienced a flawed promotional process in the past. Changes were made and a new promotional process was created in order to change the culture of favoritism and political favors. Those changes have benefited our department as there has been an emphasis placed on the quality, skillset and knowledge of that candidate.
I agree with you on flawed promotional process in the past. I think the people who are promoted for what they know then who they know gives the people a since of fairness.
I also have seen this happen through the years and it still happens just not as often. When it does happen it hurts the morale of the officers and needs to be corrected asap.
Approaches to Leadership
Being in law enforcement for 12 years and the Marine Corps before, I have personally observed several of the different approaches that were explained in this module. The most common thing I heard as a young officer from certain leaders were “do as I say, not as I do”. I personally hated when one would say this because I felt as a leader you should always lead by example and most importantly lead from the front. You also hear people say I respect the rank, but the person. That type of leader is the one who rules with the iron fist and is the same leader who does not ask for input from his subordinates. Those leaders often times are able to fly by, but are hated by the “troops” and often times have a one-sided message.
I have also worked around some influential leaders, the ones that I rely on for advice in my personal and work life. Those leaders are my mentors to this current day as I progress in rank. I now return the favor and try and be mentors to the younger officers and give them sound career advice. I always tell people that I feel in law enforcement officers often change positions and Agencies due to not having a mentor, someone who can guide them to make the best decisions for themselves and their family.
I took a few things away from this lesson but the most striking to me was the difference between assigned and emergent leadership and how they are very different things. A title or status is assigned leadership and is based simply on that title or status. An emergent leader occurs when others perceive a person as the most influential member of the group. Emergent leadership has nothing to do with title and in my opinion is probably a much more effective type of leadership. We have all experienced a supervisor who was a leader in title only and lacked the skill or ability to be an influential member of the group. I think a strong trait of an assigned leader is to recognize, develop and utilize the emergent leaders within their organization (and within the group they supervise). You can still be an assigned leader and utilize an emergent leader to accomplish the goals and objectives of your organization. In fact, you are successful as an assigned leader even if you are the periphery leader and allow others you supervise to fill the role of the emergent (or active) leader.
I agree Brent. While organizations need both, I find emergent leaders are often the stronger and more effective of the two. When "assigned leaders" come into an organization, where emergent leaders already exist, it is wise for them to find a way to use these already existing leaders to help accomplish the goals and objectives of an organization.
People respect those that work their way to the top than to be assign as a leader.
I'm with you also on this Brent. I have seen Assigned leaders become successful, but they have been Magnus individuals seen by management at a young age and promoted. They emerged but couldn't beat the clock and it took time for most people to follow.
I agree as well. It was one of the biggest take away from this module. It made me think of the different leaders I have worked for and the past as well as some of the subordinates I currently have. I find that a strong emergent leader is capable of completely changing the dynamic of a group and team. A leader can change the outlook for the team for either the positive or the negative. They have a greater impact than a manager that is assigned a position or title.
While starting out in my Department, it seemed as leading with the “iron fist” was the norm. Coercive power was what I was accustomed to on the job. This style of leadership was the way things got done. As I moved forward in my career I began to see that in the end, this style was not very effective. Are you really an effective leader if this is your style? I don`t think so. Many of the officers we lead today are of the “millennial” age. This has made myself and others around me to reflect and readdressed our leadership style. Thoughts?
I agree Scott. I have said many times that our Millennial Cops made me a better leader because it allowed me to develop my transformational skill set. The transactional approach, coercive and legitimate power bases that I was exposed to in my early years were not going to work w/our current cops infusing our ranks. You can have high standards but still be tender-hearted w/people.
Of course after viewing the lectures I couldn't help to ask myself, Ok what category of leader do I fall under. And then after some self reflection, the question was what kind of leader do I want to be. In about fours years I was promoted to corporal, then Sergeant then to Lieutenant. And with each ranking position came different responsibilities with the same objective within the patrol division. Also with this came different personnel that I supervised. Its interesting to me now to think back how I've changed as well as how my style has changed. However through it all I believe the ethical approach was the best approach.
I enjoyed the presentation by Jocko, By taking responsivity for the failures of your team they gain respect for you. When the people under you respect you as a leader they will follow you. When your employees follow you because they respect you, you can be a more effective leader.
When you are respected by you subordinates, they will always go to bat for you no matter what the situation is. Just like Jocko said he knew someone was going to end up being the "Escape Goat", but at the end of it he knew that person was him. Often to many times in law enforcement I have seen an order given by someone of higher authority and when something goes side ways they attempt to side step and point the finger at someone else. It happens all the time, people tend to be more in self-preservation, then to do what is right for their subordinates.
I totally agree with you. I have worked under an authoritative leader or manager who demanded respect because of his rank. He was not respected by his subordinates and basically told them you’ll do things my way because I said that’s how they will be done. There was no influencing or buy in and when things went wrong, or his people made mistakes he never took credit for it blamed them. After a change in leadership in the unit, we had enthusiastic leaders who were well respected and influenced people in positive ways. We all followed them because they were respected and took credit for both failures and accomplishments of the unit. The entire unit became more productive and did great things.
This module made me do a lot of self reflecting during my time as an "Assigned Leader" at my Pd as well as an emergent leader. I have made many mistakes as an assigned leader early in my career as a Lieutenant. Younger officer are looking up to you and expect you to have all the answers. As a new lieutenant I though that I had to have the answer immediately and was a sign of weakness or incompetency if I don't know. I would wonder if they officer would question why the department promoted me. I then realized that lack of knowledge is not incompetence, as long as you are willing to admit that you don't know the answer and will find it out for them. Throughout my career i am also reflecting back on many deputies and officers that I know that did not take a promotion. They stayed as patrol officers. At first one might say that they weren't qualified to be leaders or to lazy to go through the promotional process. I realize that some of these officers were actually the biggest leaders of the departments that i worked at. They were the "go to" people when another officer or even a supervisor had a questions. I also remember a quote from a school that I went to and I wish I could remember who said the quote as I believe that it is very applicable, "Managers do thigs right, Leaders do the right thing"
I also have lived your experience exactly as you have described it! There are many people within my agency that are "go to" people when a question needs an answer. Many of them have not been leaders and don't have any desire to be a formal or assigned leader. I try to take notice of, and value, these people within the organization as they play a pivotal role.
The discussion on ethnocentrism quickly brought to mind a blunder in my own past. As a young Lance Corporal in the Marine Corps, we ran a mission with some members of the Iraqi Police to Al Asad Air Base for some of our higher ups to meet with theirs. As meetings with higher ups tend to do, it drug on for quite a while. The Iraqi Police were for some reason not allowed access to the chow hall on base, and I endeavored to do what I thought at the time was a good deed. I went to the Pizza Hut on base (a luxury I couldn't imagine having on base, but after all, it was an Air Base), and bought a stack of pizzas for my new found allies. I proudly approached the men, who had gone hours without chow by this point, and watched the look of ecstasy on their faces turn to horror when they opened the lid of one box after the next. I had gotten America's favorite....pepperoni. Pepperoni made from pork. It had never crossed my mind that most of our Iraqi Police counterparts practiced Islam and where therefore forbidden from eating pork . My intentions, though good, failed to account for other's cultural norms and religious beliefs. Transitioning to toady I think it's especially important in a law enforcement context that we do our best to educate ourselves and bear in mind differences in cultural and religious norms when interacting with our coworkers and communities lest good intentions result in insult.
A good example of the crucial nature of assessment of motivational needs. How often, as leaders, and with all of the best of intentions, do we misjudge our team's reception of our efforts? This demonstrates the need for us to be flexible and to operate with the fluidity and flexible nature that the lecture describes.
I found this module to be very interesting and informative. Being able to understand what style of leadership you possess will undoubtedly help you in becoming a strong leader. Being A poor or weak leader is being someone who thinks they are able to coerce someone into things they want done whether ethical in their eyes or not. They also use coercion to belittle or speak down to someone to gain what they want.
I have found that being in a LEADERSHIP role and left to discover and learn everything on my own as I went along allowed me the opportunity to discover who I wanted to be as a LEADER. There were times I felt I was being ineffective or segregating myself from the team. This felt as if I was acting more as a manger than a LEADER which is not what I wanted to be or do. I found myself using self reflection and adapting to the TEAM FIRST LEADERSHIP philosophy.
This module having touched on the difference between being a LEADER and a manager really stuck with me. As mentioned above, I found myself struggling with how to separate the two and be the leader who delegates to the managers but still interacts with all of those I lead.
It's definitely a challenge trying to figure out leadership roles on one's on. I'm thankful for some good mentors, good examples, and I even learned from some examples what not to do. Finding the balance between being more of a friend than a leader and segregation is also difficult, especially at smaller departments.
I can certainly relate to having some good mentors. I didn't realize just how blessed I was to have them at the time but I'm certainly grateful now. And lucky that many were still around to thank them.
We always hear Supervisors (Leaders) say; "he /she works for me or works under me." I firmly perceive true LEADERS strongly believe in working with their staff. Genuine leaders often say "he/she WORKS WITH me." A title does not make you a great leader or give you genuine respect. In this module the Management topic really peaked my interest.
The reason it did, is because it emulates the personality of a leader; who has not forgotten where they came from. It "screams" experience, confidence, personality, and compassion. When the statement; leaders are more effective when their skills match their management level; is so true. When leaders are able to complete the same tasks they delegate; speaks volumes for their character and ability to lead.
The ability to plan, organize, staff, delegate, and / or control; comes from experience and confidence. Great leaders are individuals that have struggled, experienced what their colleagues are experiencing, and are not afraid to work shoulder to shoulder with their counterparts.
I agree with you on using the term "with" Any situation that we are involved in everyone needs to work together. WE all have different roles, but we are s team to get the job done. It doesn't matter if you have stars or bars on you collar it is the collaborative effort of all involved that work together. Unfortunately I believe at times we forget that.
It was once said to me that a boss will say "go" do that, but a leader will say "lets go do this together". Meaning that just because one has been placed into a position of supervision he may not have the knowledge to do the job or the drive. Good leaders have a lead from the front or by example way of doing things. When a leader shows that he has done or is willing to do a task along side of the people he leads it makes it easier for those persons to follow him. It has also been said to me that a good leader should be able to lead his team to complete a task together, he should be able to teach his team the things that are needed to achieve the goal, and to motivate his team to accomplish said goal in a positive timely manor.
I strongly agree with you in reference to a leader having the ability to teach. Leaders should lead by example. How can you lead if you are not willing or able to complete a task you've delegated. How can you supervise if you're not able to answer a question; or solve a problem your group has. Like stated in the module, leaders are role models. Leaders have the ability to influence and effect individual's lives. How can you lead a group or give advice on something you have no knowledge of or haven't experienced.
Its' not a good look and is usually a recipe for disaster or embarrassment.
I appreciated that leadership is a complex process, and that we are still trying to find new ways to improve it. However, I never actually considered it from the conception of an idea, until the the completion of a project, there is a massive amount of influence at work. This influence (good or bad) will be taken, and applied by the group as a whole, as they work towards their common goal. If leaders look at themselves as coaches, and genuinely valued their team, they would always put forth their best effort and push them towards victory.
During this lesson there were several things that I was aware of, but had never defined, or "put into words". The thing that stands out the most to me was the idea that a leaders management level, should be matched by their skill level. To me this means that a leader should be capable of not only delegating a task, but performing it as well.
In my opinion, being in a position of authority does not automatically qualify you to demand things of others that you are not able to carry out yourself if needed. I believe that "Developmental Leadership" is often appreciated because others have the luxury of knowing that you have, or that you are capable of, performing the task that you are requiring of them.
I agree with this.
Having come and gone from the law enforcement job several times I was able to work in other trades. In some of those jobs I was supervised or lead by men that were placed there for may other reasons other than their ability to lead. Many times I was more knowledgeable and or willing to complete the task at hand than the "leader", and I was instructed to do the job his way or no way. This style of leadership always had a negative outcome on the job and morale in the shop and these leaders never lasted long. On the reverse side of that the leaders that grabbed a tool and helped out or pointed out a new or different way of doing the job were easy to work for and with. This always kept the jobs moving and morale in the shop was always up.
I agree with this 100%. I also found the idea that a leaders management level should match the the respected person's skill level very interesting. I agree with your opinion on what this means but would add to that. I believe this also means that the person leading has to have knowledge and understanding on what they are leading on. They need to know their area of expertise and have basic general knowledge of the things they are leading in.
The topic from this module that resonated with me the most was that of the authentic leader. I liked how this leadership style takes a more holistic approach to the leaders themself. The authentic style is based on not only how they act in the present, but also how they have developed over time, both in their life and as a leader working with followers (transactional approach). I think this style creates a leader who is an example for others to follow; they check their ego at the door and focus on the team before themself.
I agree. I believe a leaders past experience, accomplishments, and even how they have responded to failures defines them. I have found that people respect a leader that they can relate to. Often, knowing that the person that is asking you to perform has task, has performed a similar task at some point, encourages others.
Well said Eric. I have worked with some supervisors that talk the talk but don't necessarily walk the walk and lose all credibility with their subordinates. The authentic leader is one that continually does a lot of self-reflection and admits mistakes to both themselves and others and always puts the team first. Although it's not always easy to admit one's faults, it does bring unity to the team.
Today’s environment in the criminal justice sphere requires a transformational type of leadership that extends even further beyond what has been a popular namesake. A recalibration amongst law enforcement agencies across the country is confirming the public’s need to see increased accountability and transparency in policy-making, budgeting and staffing decisions. These expectations have been communicated for many years by reform advocates. However, recent events in our country have catapulted such concerns to the forefront of decision-making bodies tasked with creating a vision and providing funding for police agencies. Included in the concerns outlined by reformists and politicians are how the profession develops its leadership. Accordingly, the evolution of leadership in law enforcement must be addressed and the profession must adapt leadership styles to provide more inclusivity. In doing, so, many models and approaches can be reviewed tenet by tenet to construct the most effective leadership model.
A review of the many leadership approaches Dr. Normore (2021) outlines makes it clear that leadership styles have long been evolving. The need for this evolution is readily apparent when consideration is given regarding trust, transparency and collaboration. The Style Leadership Approach reviews five major styles that encompass techniques including authority, country club, middle of the road, team and impoverished styles. These styles vary in their focus and power bases. For example, Authority/compliance style utilizes a coercive base while the country club style uses referent base. These styles subscribe to more dated models of developing influence and are not as inclusive or collaborative as the more emergent models. Further, they do not imbibe trust amongst team members, which is inhibitive to collaborative processes. Hence, teams cannot evolve when trust is lacking in leadership (Anderson, Gisborne & Holliday et. al, 2017).
As best practices in leadership evolve and are developed, it is explicit as to the importance of growing leaders whom are competent and ethical. People will follow individuals who are confident and competent, trustworthy, ethical in their decision making and who believe in their team. This imbibes collaboration and leads to solutions that are encompass organizational change for the better. Effective, emergent leadership philosophies that illustrate collaboration and inclusiveness are the most prominent approaches today, as they should be. This style, known as the Ethical Leadership Model emanates from the best principles of other approaches by combining them and incorporating their focus towards trust, accountability and transparency (Normore, 2021). Ethical leadership fosters the leader as a role model and further promotes credible decisions and respect in groups. The concept further provides a logical foundation for collaboration. Embarking upon this avenue forges a foundation for building leaders in the Ethical Leadership Model and provides a forum for conversations to take place on the public stage regarding the management, growth, vision and direction of their law enforcement agencies.
Anderson, T.D., Gisborne, K.D., Holliday, P.N. et al. (2017). Every officer is a leader, Coaching leadership, learning and performance in justice, public safety, and security organizations, the third edition. Holly Springs, NC: International Academy of Public Safety, Inc.
Normore, A.H. (2021). Approaches to leadership. Module #2, week #2. National Command and Staff College.
This module was very detailed on defining the different types of leadership, and how leadership occurs. I believe that a leader influence individuals with a common goal or purpose. Every year when my department has an audit we all meet and decide who will pull what forms that will be needed. We all have a common goal and that's to pass the audit. I think my team work so well because I always give them credit once the audit is over, and I'm always positive about our audits. I do use reward power as often as I can, even if it's something small. I learned from experience that people work harder and do better when they are appreciated. I enjoyed the lecture about Ethical Leadership because it covered many important topics such as trust, honesty, fairness, and values. If a leader is Ethical their employees will follow. My supervisor is very fair, and I think that's why so many people respect him. After to listening to the discussion about management, it helped me understand the difference between a manager and a leader. At times, people tend to manage more than lead in my department. I believe that a leader will influence people more than a manager.
I concur- the importance of recognition to the team reinforces several key points of leadership. It cements the buy-in needed to finish the mission. It also promotes trust and provides an avenue for growth. Additionally, it formulates collaborations that are innovative and key to proactively identifying potential pitfalls in the operations arena.
Strong collaborative teams are high performers because they run on the high octane fuel of mutual respect and trust...and that is what makes the difference! These are the folks that will be there in the long haul and will fill key leadership roles in the agency.
One of the key concepts discussed in this module that stuck with me was the difference between leadership and management. There are any aspects to leadership and management. Although it is important to have strong managers in our line of work, I think it is more important to have strong leaders. One of the best illustrations I have seen of the difference between a manager and a leader was a picture of workers pulling a heavy stone with the word “Mission” written in it. In the picture it shows a person sitting on top of the stone giving orders to the worker. This person is labeled as the manager. The second picture shows the same; however, there is no one sitting on the stone giving orders. Instead, there is a person helping pull the stone in the front of the group labeled as leader.
I believe that this is a great representation of leadership, because successful leaders have influence over their group. Leaders can gain this influence through many means. I think one term that is important when discussing leadership is authentic leadership. This is when the leader is genuine, trustworthy, transparent, and morally grounded. These are the individuals that care for the members of their group and work hard to set the example for their group to follow. As I stated above, I recognize that there is a need for management in law enforcement. However, I also believe that it is much easier to be a manager than a leader, and being an authentic leader is something we need to strive for.
I agree Jared. I think being a manager is a lot easier than being a leader. Personally I rather be a leader than a manager. I strive to be a great leader, and yes it does get hard at times. You must care for your team or group!
I completely agree with this post. I hadn't been aware of how different the concepts of leadership and management can be and to be a truly great manager (or supervisor), it is important to learn beyond simply seeking order, stability, and efficiency. A good manager becomes an effective leader because of the (positive) influence they have over others.
I too have seen that picture, as a matter of fact that very one is posted on the bulletin board at work. To me there is a very distinct difference between a manager and a leader. I feel that you can have the best managers in the world, but if you don`t have the type of Leadership that can explain the managers vision, and reach the employees then the end result may not be what the manager had imagined. In today`s world, we as leaders are met with so many personalities, that if you don`t adjust your style, you might not reach the lever of leader that you should.
There are a variety of approaches toward leading others, and each person will have a different set of styles and approaches, based on experience, background, education, and personal characteristics. Dr. Normore spoke of the influence leaders have over others. However, influence is not only a good thing. Leaders can influence people to act poorly or seek a new job or role. The power of influence is incredibly important and can allow an organization to thrive or dive. Personally, I try to influence others via empowering those I work with. Let them know they have a voice, are able to make decisions, and are competent enough they do not need micro-managing. This entails speaking with employees, building rapport, getting to know personnel, and being frank and direct with both correction and praise. My hope is this style and approach will promote a positive influence to those around me.
You make an excellent point. Influence can be for good but can also be a bad thing. I did not think of this from that perspective. I also believe that sometimes certain people are enticed to that poor influence because they might see a personal gain. However, it does not always pay off in the end.
I agree with your approach to leadership as you mentioned, we will have different approaches based on our experience, background, education, and personal characteristics. As influence is important, you have to possess the willingness to become a leader. I highly agree that leaders can influence people to act poorly. We see this all the time in law enforcement. From your topic I gather be personable. The leader sets the tone and carries it out but with a personable approach. I believe the results should be rewarding if the peers are receptive.
Interesting module thoroughly explaining leadership and the variety of leadership approaches. Interesting is that the topic of integrity appeared to have been the longest. Integrity was one the the five virtues I chose to write about in the first module. I think that integrity truly defines who we are as a person molding us into a model citizens. I think true leaders care for those who they are in charge of leading.
This module shows how training in law enforcement should include more ethical leadership training. It talked about Ethical leadership which is very important in todays law enforcement on how our community partners view us and how we are viewed from within our own ranks. I believe there is distrust from within law enforcement staff feeling they were not treated fairly either through the promotion process or in the handling of their disciplinary enforcement. This to me is where being a ethical leader is very important, due to most agencies having a small circle of staff that are always rewarded for their by promotions or very little administrative action when they are wrong as apposed to someone who is not in the small circle who will be treated harshly for their actions. Todays leaders should always be fair, honest, have a good moral compass, and treat everyone equally. In doing this i believe some leaders can lift morale inside their agency and earn the respect of everyone.
I agree that we in Law Enforcement have seen that inner circle of rewards and accomplishment and recognition. I have worked for four agencies and have seen that ebb and flow with both time, changes in leadership, and in varying geographic regions. Yet, overall, it does seem to pervade those in leadership. I think a lot of that comes down to a different set of ethical viewpoints. Ethics is not clearly defined and is often interpreted with variations, slight or not, by each individual. This, is the crux of the problem. What Leader A feels is an ethical approach, may by all appearances actually be ethical. And the same could be of Leader B, even though they have a differing view. Herein lies the squall. A storm brews at the perceptions of all involved, both leader and follower. The ultimate definition of how Leader A and B display ethics should come from above them. And that is where I find much of the issues arise. The Alpha-Leader has failed to take charge, failed to set standards, and completely failed to communicate and hold accountable those under them.
This lecture re-emphasizes to me the concepts of leaders are followers. Developing those officers who will someday sit in my chair leaves me with the obligation to encourage people to learn the major components of ethical behavior. In section 4 the simple breakdown of the components to process, influence, groups, and common goals has one very important lesson, common goals. How many times do we sit and listen in on briefings when the conversations reflect the attitude of the administration just does not get it or why are we changing what works. There are leaders at these briefings who might be considered opposition leaders because things are moving outside their comfort zone. This brings me to the ethical leadership and the conversation that all new sergeants and field training officers need to have, being an ethical leader you will learn and understand any individual undermining the authority and the command is violating the code of ethics we adhere to. Ethical leadership creates ethical officers, ethical warriors (when needed), and an ethical organization. The organization is not just the police department it is the entire city entity the department reports to. Maintaining an ethical standard throughout the police department through the city entity and into the community is how police officers have their legitimate authority, it comes from the people.
Throughout this module I found myself going back and examining the various leadership approaches that I have personally experienced as a follower. My experience both in the military and law enforcement I recognized several approaches that I had been involved in as a follower. I realize now that some of my own approaches to leadership have most assuredly been influenced by the leaders and management that I have had in my career. This module helped me all of these concepts and approaches into a much better context, in what I hope to better apply them in the future.
Some of my most favorite career moments and memories include being a part of a team wherein both emergent and assigned leaders complimented each other in the effort to accomplish the overall missions. Many times the situational approach to leadership served the team well while being bolstered by other leaders and their different approaches.
I've learned a lot in this module relating to leadership. I didn't put much thought into what leadership style I was most in line with or how I adapted my approach to fit the needs of the situation. This module has allowed me to see which type I align with and has also given me insight into other styles out there to help further my abilities.
It's interesting looking back at over a 15-year career how many leaders I've relied on for my development and growth that were not designated leaders in my department. They were emergent leaders who had far more impact on our shift than some of the managers assigned to lead us.
In the breakdown of the leadership approaches several key points stood out. In my 16 years in law enforcement having experienced great leaders and managers, to poor leaders and managers. In my experiences the poor leaders commonly utilized coercive power to belittle those around them. This was due to their lack of knowledge and skill to handle different situations. The great leaders that I have been around, nurtured my growth both as an officer and in my daily life. These great leaders, lead through both transformational and authentic leadership visions. The trust that was developed through authentic leadership instilled high morale and officer wellness along with weathering difficult times.
With this lecture I took time to reflect on what types of leadership I see within my agency as well as the types I myself have practiced. I find while thinking about the people I hold in high regard as good leaders that they display many of these different leadership styles depending on the situation, who they are leading and what their desired outcome is.
When I was first placed into a formal leadership roll I was largely left to “discover my own style”; I found this difficult to say the least. Initially I solely sought to be a manager to those I lead, however found that in our organization the leadership approach was just as important if not more so.
I quickly learned that I need to be flexible in my approach as no two people or situation are alike. There is a time and a place to assert your position and conversely a time to take a softer approach – for this reason I find myself working towards using the situational approach of leadership.
This module discussed different approaches to leadership. I learned that leadership is a complex process that has multiple dimensions. Simply put, its more than being "a boss" or filing a rank in a chain of command. Being a leader involves followers, such as the people you supervise, and the relationship with those followers. A good leader is able to work with and influence others to achieve a common goal. I liked the information on Ethical Leadership. Ethical leaders focus on the intrapersonal, developmental, and interpersonal elements of leadership. Having a leader who is ethical fosters trust in the organization and can help make the culture of an organization positive.
You put a lot into a short paragraph, as an influencer you have touched on the definitions of leadership. I believe you are on the right track with the ethical leadership. The very best way to protect your followers, leaders, and organization is to be the ethical leader sought out because of how you approach challenges.
One of the leadership approaches I learned more about was using a situational approach. As leadership is not defined exclusively as a role a person may play within a group or organization, anyone could exhibit these traits and be seen as a leader. A situational approach directly relates to law enforcement as often our calls for service or organization needs are not one size fits all. We must adapt our leadership style to each situation, who is involved in the situation, and our desired outcome. Its important to keep in mind that the leader of this might not be a person with rank who fulfills a management role. In modern policing, this could not be more evident when officers go to their peers as opposed to those who hold rank.
The statement about being an ethical leader builds trust from those who follow. I guess this brought some light to what I thought being an ethical leader meant. Prior to this I thought that just being an ethical leader is the way that you carry yourself, and didn't think about that being an ethical leader had as much impact on the leadership of others. Not being an ethical leader will not allow you to influence individuals, and without influence leadership does not exist. This makes alot of sense.
My thoughts exactly, Troy. The topic of ethical leadership appeared to have been the longest. Ethical leadership was explained in depth. I think was all by design. To me ethics and and being ethical means a great deal.
The topic in this module had great timing for me, as just yesterday a Patrol Sergeant in our agency retired after 25 years of service. Watching this, I couldn’t help but analyze how he was not only a manger to subordinates under him, but a true leader in all facets of his duties. The module talks different powers: referent power, expert power, legitimate power, reward power, and coercive power. An effective leader will blend these to gain trust of their followers, and allow them to grow and become successful. To be well liked, having a strong knowledge base, using authority to act with the power provided to them, being able to reward or compliment followers’ actions, and to correct followers’ actions when needed, are all important.
This Sergeant provided order, stability, and efficiency as a part of management, but also exhibited leadership effectiveness and influence. A foundation of becoming a great leader, in a management role, would be to inspire followers to accomplish great things. This leader would empower followers to meet high standards and act in ways to want others to trust them.
Dr. Normore stated, “Without influence, leadership does not exist.” I could not agree more, especially when thinking of the actions of the retired Sergeant that I spoke of. Positive influence will motivate and inspire followers, which will ripple down the chain to make the agency more successful to serve their communities.
I couldn't agree more with the influence a great leader has on those around them. This creates a culture of greatness, ethical leadership and organizational success. As this culture grows hopefully it cancels out the negativity and unethical behavior that occurs. I had a mentor recently retire after 30 years who embodied authentic leadership and ethical behavior. He inspired numerous officers who will continue to carry on what being a true leader is. Expanding this culture takes time but is worth it.
With the discussion on the "5 Bases of Power", I found it interesting that it is easy to identify those with Coercive Power. In my own agency, there are people at different ranks exhibiting traits of coercive power. From the Deputy level where a staff member can be seen as a "bully" or the one who uses intimidation or condescension to influence others among their own rank, to those of higher rank, who use their power that may meet the mission of the organization, but minimizes the the importance of those who are subordinate. I am sure most every large agency has folks like this. It basically brought to light for me what I have seen happening with the leadership roles in my agency.
It was interesting to listen to the types of influence individuals possess. When they're laid out in front of you in this manner, it's easy to identify how people use their sources of influence. It seems like there is always at least one person in management that abuses and over uses coercive influence to obtain their objectives, when other means are clearly more effective and appropriate.
The age old debate if a leader is born or if someone can learn to be a leader... As mentioned in this session, leadership is a process and not a trait that you are born with. I enjoyed reviewing the different leadership styles. I have worked with people in many of these styles and can relate to them as they were being explained. Personally, I like working with transformational leaders. They are able to adapt to the needs of the group, are able to articulate a clear vision, they can provide meaning to organizational life, focus on the development of their followers, and put a strong emphasis on morals and values. I like being encouraged to better myself and transformational leaders empower their team to do so.
I’ve never really thought about the fact that leadership can’t occur without others or a group. That group that has a leader should have a common goal that they are trying to reach. They should share the same goal, and if they don’t, that would most likely create a lot of issues. A good leader will influence others in the group using their different leadership approaches and styles and demonstrating strong ethics and show that they are credible. I believe that a good leader will be flexible and be able to adjust to different personalities, characteristics, and situations that come along for that group. According to Normore, 2017 “without influence leadership does not exist.” If the leader has a negative impact or influence on the others, then the results from that group are most likely going to be negative as well. I have been part of those groups that have a bad leader, and it is challenging to work for someone that has bad intentions or is not motivated to change the direction of the group. I currently work for a supervisor that is the opposite of that, but that can often have its own challenges. Adjusting to the way someone else does something or wants it done can be challenging, but once you learn to trust that supervisor, the outcome is usually positive.
Normore, A. (2017). Approaches to leadership. Learning area 1, Module 2. National Command and Staff College.
Of the topics on leadership covered within the module, a key point of interest taken is in the area of power. Understanding a leader’s powerbase is derived from when the leader “can affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses of action” (Normore, Section 11, 5:35-5:37) creates a need for a me, as a leader, to understand better the core values, beliefs, and culture of my organization to appropriately develop and use my power.
Within the bases of power referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and coercive, the elements of organizational influence exist. I must understand, and more importantly, embrace the core values and beliefs of the organization. Only then can I adapt and transform, as necessary, to create the required amount of influence to get all on board with achieving a common goal.
The path towards goal accomplishment, within our profession, supports the transactional leader, especially emergent leaders. Transformational leadership qualities and characteristics embody the head of an organization, such as a Chief or Sheriff. Interestingly, the transformative values of leadership are often at the core of our desires of junior leaders.
We want all leaders to inspire others to do great things, recognize the need to be and have change agents, empower others to higher standards, to act in ways that develop trust, and to maintain a high regard for morals and values (Normore, Section 17). Moral leadership is a mandate; regardless of the organization, it is the foundation of trust. Trust is an expectation of our followers, and more importantly, the community we are entrusted to serve.
Normore, A. (2017). Approaches to leadership. Learning area 1, Module 2. National Command and Staff College.
I liked that this module opened with Jocko! Good or bad, everyone should take ownership. We're human and should be expected to have highs and lows. The Authentic Approach to leadership seemed to stick out the most to me as being the most successful model, with a good mix of the others. Trust is built on more than just interactions with our peers, but also the community. I work in a geographically large county and the communities are quite diverse. Having deputies that are morally grounded and value the community has made for strong relations throughout the county.
As mentioned in other posts, I’ve seen people get promoted based on performance versus leadership ability. Most of that was at lower levels and was a reward for consistently giving 110%. We are fortunate at our office that longevity plays very little role in selecting leaders. I don’t see how some agencies have survived promoting employees based solely on a numerical list. I guess the same as the ones that use the “good ole boy” system.
I agree with your assessment of promoting quality leaders and that it shouldn't be based on one thing alone. I think a quality leader will be one that exhibits a strong work ethic and might have a reputation of giving 110%, so hearing your perspective is interesting to me. It goes with the old saying practice what you preach and lead by example.
I agree, we have been fighting to get away from the " good ole boy" system from some time, I believe it handicaps a agency by promoting based on that. This system destroys trust within a agency and tends to reward most with compromised moral values.
I agree, Nathan. I too was impacted by Jocko's speech, it was very powerful. As leaders, we must own our mistakes as much as we take credit for our successes. Too much blame is passed around. Pride and ego run rampant in our profession.
We both know a lot of managers and very few great leaders, but they stand out. I agree with you and really like the fact that we promote based on leadership ability and merit rather than being able to memorize policy and show statistically good numbers on a checklist.
Sadly, not every manager is a leader and not every leader is a manager. The block about emergent leadership vs assigned leadership fits nicely with that observation. I think many leaders don’t want their people to “emerge” into a leadership role. Often leaders are worried that the subordinate that steps up to lead will undermine their command or take the glory. Such practices inhibit the growth of subordinates, hurt morale, and stifle initiative. Pushing leadership down to the lowest levels possible makes an organization more agile and better equipped to deal with loss of personnel. I encourage emergent leadership. The more unofficial junior leaders I have under me, the more they will help others in the group “buy in” to the common goal. That extra layer of leadership can make my job easier too.
One observation I have seen is that not all leaders need to be managers and not all managers need to be leaders. Leaders don't need any title at all, so they are not tasked with managing. I feel that entry level supervisors are more leaders than they are managers and as you climb up the latter, this slowly switches until the highest levels of the organization are mostly manager and only slightly leaders.
I see the emergent leaders as the ones who are able to "lead up the chain of command". These folks who embrace their abilities to lead at every level to help the organization. I agree with enabling leadership down the chain of command to make us better equipped as a whole. Those in position of leadership (higher ranks), who feel threatened when someone below them shows better leadership qualities than they do, are a detriment to the organization. We should always have the desire to leave something in the hands of people who can take it and run with it, making it better than what we were able to do in those positions. It's pretty honoring when you can humble yourself to recognize you played a part in fostering the growth of those who replace you and do things better than you did.
Ethical leadership stood out to me as a critical component in our positions in the law enforcement community. And organization operating ethically in the community creates trust and relationships. These relationships will lead to improvements both in the agency and the community. When a major incident occurs the community can trust the information being disseminated by law enforcement.
I agree! Ethics are a key component of law enforcement and I would expect leadership to exhibit this as well. Leaders should be role models, demonstrating the right way of doing things, both to the public but also to their colleagues. Leaders are not necessary only higher on the chain of command. The rookie officer can be a leader and exhibit impeccable ethics, causing others to follow his lead. I do not feel any officer tends to be unethical when they start the job, but over time, some people can drift into some unethical behaviors and rookie officers can lead them back on path by demonstrating ethical behaviors.
I agree completely. The trust formed by ethical behaviors and ethical leadership is extremely helpful in facing a wide range of issues that come up within our communities. It is never more apparent than when it is not to be found.
I'm very familiar with Jocko Willink and his book Extreme Ownership and also The Dichotomy of Leadership, both are a must-read. The concept of taking ownership of your team failures is a humbling one to wrap your head around. In my office, we've talked about this very thing when something goes awry and ask, "how could this possibly be my fault?" Dr. Normore touches on this exact question when he discusses Authentic Leadership and Ethical Leadership. I think Jocko is very Authentic in his style and developed over his career. The evidence is when he asks his team, "who's fault is this?" They all fell on the sword and were willing to step up solidifying the interpersonal make-up of Authentic Leadership.
One other key take away for me in this module was on Ethical Leadership. I see myself in this realm often over my tenure in supervision/leadership. People, internal and external, look towards leadership in all instances and watch how we behave and how we approach leadership. There is grey for sure in a lot of areas but ethics is often a black and white path. By doing the right thing, always, we build confidence and trust among our followers and our peers.
Nice analysis. Taking ownership is hard but essential. I have lost men in battle (Iraq) and it is difficult on many levels. But the lessons learned from the experience made me a stronger leader (and human) and helped enhance the training of many others.
Over the time that I have watched leadership, Influence played a significant role related to the direction of the organization. I have seen specific leaders pick their favorites and upon picking their favorites, those people then drive the organizational goals and structure. While I do believe that many of these leaders meant well in their own right, they left the followers questioning their integrity and choices. Ethical leaders do not allow questions to linger with their followers. I understand that its natural to have people in your circle who you trust and people that are easier to like, but as an ethical leader you must be able to surround yourself with not just people you trust but those who have built and ethical reputation for themselves. As a leader, you should ask yourself what has this person that i am surrounding myself with done with their career, why should I put them in this position, are they morally and ethically sound, will they follow the department/cities vision. You must be able to understand and communicate with all subsets or your department. For example a middle size police department usually operates with numerous subsets such as, Administration, to include upper management and middle management, first line supervisors, patrol, investigations, specialty units, collective bargaining(union) just as a few examples. An ethical leader who has to make a decision related to one subset or person who is a part of the subset will have a good knowledge base of related to that subset, and good communication. This does not mean that the leader will agree all the time with that subset but the leader will have to be able to show they attained all the information they could, analyzed it and made a good moral decision based off the information. This could be related to policy decisions, discipline, community engagement, etc. If the leader treats everyone with respect and has made the decision based on all the facts and on ethical grounds, the organization or subset with respect the decision even if they do not agree with it. Leaders are people, they are imperfect but ethical leaders must have ethical influence, not just influence.
Andy, I like your comment about Ethical Leaders and they should leave no question in the minds of followers. This is why we must do the right thing, always. I too have seen over time people advance into positions that had no business taking those roles. By earning respect through Authentic Leadership over time, a leader builds confidence in the ranks that the best people will be chosen for promotions or tasks. If we were a fortune 500 business and we didn't pick the best of the best for everything, what would that do to our bottom line and our stakeholders? I argue that the taxpayer, among a few, are the stakeholders for our line or work. They should expect and receive the best decision-makers in place.
I found this post well thought out and genuine. At times, many of the best leaders of our country picked persons they didn't particularly like to head departments, as opposed to a close friend (or friend of a friend). They knew, regardless of their opinion of them individually, he or she was the right person for the job and would challenge the process. It most often delivered the most thought out and appropriate results.
As I watched the Extreme Leadership video by Jocko Willink he made the comment "War teaches you the most when things go wrong" no statement has made more sense in my time in a leadership role. In this module, I was able to take away several different types of leaders that I have worked under and what I have taken from each one of those experiences. During the lecture it was said that leadership is a process, leadership involves influence, leadership occurs in groups and leadership involves common goals. This is a great reminder that should be brought back to the table when results are needed.
I totally agree that we learn the most when things go wrong Samantha. I think the one thing that separates ethical leaders from other leaders is what do they do after that mistake. Jocko Willink makes a great statement about taking responsibility, but I think another major piece is what that leader does after taking responsibility, do they move to correct the action that lead to the mistake, so that the mistake does not repeat it self.
Leadership is definitely a process, a long and never finished process. The sad reality is that many in "leadership" roles don't sign onto that belief. I have seen "leaders" assume a role and stop any personal growth. We train all the time in firearms, DT, and the like, why? to hone our skills. I ask this questions then, what's the difference in leadership training?
This module caused me to reflect on the various styles of leadership I have worked under and witnessed. It also made me pause and think about what category my style of leadership would fall under. Having worked under several styles of leaders I have tried to keep the positive lessons learned and forget about the negative aspects of the various styles. I see myself as a situational leader who takes an ethical approach to the demands of each problem that arises.
Approaches to Leadership
The varied styles of leadership provide interesting reflection on my own approach to leadership and the variance in styles/ approaches that I’ve seen applied. I suspect that as times change and the years have gone by, the styles that were once effective may now be less effective. In current times, it is no surprise that the Authentic approach is more widely accepted and applied. The transparency alone is not only expected, but demanded.
The differentiation from leadership to management also was meaningful. I have heard many comments from officers concerning the difference between a “leader” and a “supervisor” so the theory isn’t new. Having it better explained was valuable
Hi Brad. I would add a third branch into the equation, management. Leaders inspire, managers define processes, and supervisors make sure processes are carried out. That's a rudimentary breakdown but I think you get the idea. Having been through many leadership courses, I often bring to the discussion that we can get too heavy on the leadership and forget about the management and supervision, they all work together in my opinion and at different times. Consider the example of a critical incident, very little time for leadership, and more need for supervision. Just a few thoughts I had. Thanks
I enjoyed learning about the different types of leadership. There are certainly examples of each leadership styles, effective and ineffective, that come to mind with each style. I especially think of two types of leadership that were discussed : Assigned and Emergent. While leadership can obviously be assigned based upon one's performance in a promotional process, I would most like to be recognized as a emergent leader based on the positive influence I provide to the organization.
This lecture made me analyze and evaluate my current leadership style as well as the leadership style practiced by my peers and supervisors. I believe leadership is a work in progress and leaders could always improve and get better. From the leadership styles covered in this lecture, l have many take aways. As leader, l have neglected the people oriented approach and was focused more on the results oriented approach type of leadership style. This was due to the demands of my position. While I was being successful obtaining organizational results such as solving analytical problems, project planning, creating innovations, maintaining productivity, and making fast decisions, l neglected the most important part of being a leader, which caused a disconnect between me and some of my people. Being a people oriented leader will help me reconnect with my people. I will focus on regaining my style of ethical and people oriented leadership style to foster a positive environment. Thank you all for the great posts.
I, like many of you have had the pleasure of working for some very effective leaders, and others whom where not effective and where more difficult to follow. Those that were easy to work for generally inspired me to want to be better and have a high expectation for myself and those around me. I told myself that this was the type of leader I wanted to be if I became a leader. I feel that ethical leadership with a transformational approach would be the leader and style I would most like to emulate and work for, someone who leads, guided by grounded moral character, yet takes the time to adapt to the needs of my subordinates and show them that they are valued.
Very well said Sir. I also had the pleasure of working for great leaders that inspired me to be better. Equally important was the fact that these leaders were also viewed and respected by their peers and supervisors. My first interaction with a leader in law enforcement inspired me to always remember that the most part of an organization is the people.
I certainly agree. I want to inspire others to work for the success of the organization by following the ethical leadership style that I emulate.
And never forget where you came from and what you hated in supervisors you had in your past.
I agree. I think a blend of leadership approaches would be most effective in being a good supervisor. I like that you identified we may need to adapt to the needs of our subordinates. It could be their figuring out their learning style, learning what motivates them, and how best to get our message across in a positive way.
Over the years I have seen many different types of leadership styles. This lecture formalized what I would describe as characteristics into leadership styles. I try to emulate the characteristics that I have seen from supervisors that I admired and not of those I didn’t. While going through the lecture I could identify the ways I have used my power to influence others. I can also see the different leadership styles and the effect of assigned vs. emergent leaders. I would consider myself a transformational leader. When I started in law enforcement, I loved training and would put myself out there for judgement and criticism. It gave me the opportunity to learn, grow, develop trust, integrity and built great relationships with my peers and supervisors. Today I see a lot of great emergent leaders in our organization most of which refuse to step up into formal leadership positions or even try. Perhaps this reflects my inability to influence others even though I think I inspire and promote positive changes as a leader. I guess it would be safe to say that there are those that want to lead but do not have the skills to do it therefore there are those that should lead and don’t want to.
Your post made me analyze the current situation my agency is experiencing in terms of emergent vs assigned leaders. There are outstanding officers that display and embrace the leadership style my agency needs but for some reason don’t want nothing to do with supervision. I need to take the time and get with my peers to see what we can do to motivate them and mentor them to become supervisors. I believe this can promote positive changes. Great post!
This lecture discussed different approaches to leadership and the role of the individual as a leader. Since leadership is a process, it is important for us to understand that leadership evolves over time and that our leadership approach determines whether our organization is successful. Most organizations train people to be good managers because it is easy to identify a specific task, give instructions on how to complete it, and see the end result as a pass-fail scenario. Leadership, however, cannot be dissected that easy. This is why most organizations don’t teach practical applications of leadership and instead rely on the individual to acquire these skills through education, life experience, or through a mentor. When development of leadership skills is placed solely on the individual, organizations fail to recognize that they have responsibility for and influence over the individual. In other words, organizations cannot exist without leadership (good or bad) and organizations that uphold ethical and moral values in principal and practice are more likely to develop authentic and ethical leaders.
Thank you Maja for so properly phrasing the area where many agencies fail. They train managers (supervisors) but not leaders. I suspect many administrators wouldn't be able to tell you exactly what the difference is. This lecture made it very clear and understandable. I enjoyed your submission.
This presentation was very interesting because it made me think about various supervisors I have had. I think I've had supervisors that exclusively used each of the supervisory powers described and I've learned from each of them, some showed me what to do while others showed me what not to do. I do wish the presentation went more in depth on the two behavior styles - task vs relationship. This is so evident in some people. I tend to lean towards the relationship style. This has helped me in many situations, but I've had a few learning lessons along the way. This presentation also made me think about my progression in this career. I started very young and I remember an evaluation I had within the first couple of years. My supervisor told me I was looked upon as a leader of the platoon. At that time I assumed a leader and a manager were the same so I didn't really understand and thought whoever looked at me as a leader had lost their mind, I was still seeing myself as the rookie on platoon. Over the years I've learned more about management and leadership and I started to understand the wording in that eval from many years ago. This presentation touched on that when it discussed assigned leadership vs emergent leadership. I did appreciate the presentation wrapped up talking about ethical leadership. This needs to be the focus for all of us in a leadership role.
No statement is more true than learning something from every type of supervisor that you've had. I think we can all say we have taken away good and bad things from every supervisor we have had.
I believe that one of the common elements to poor leadership is not defining the type of leaders your organization has in positions of power and how they influence their staff. One example is leaders who use coercive power. These leaders are in it for themselves and have little interest in benefitting others. They are typically selfish and self-motivated and can destroy an organization from within. I also think that it is very important to define management and leadership in your organization. I think that many are confused with this relationship and try to put managers in leadership positions. I appreciate when people work in their areas of strength and use a style that is effective in the given situation, and there should always be an emphasis on ethical leadership.
I agree with your views of how devastating a coercive leader can be. I have witnessed the negative consequences in both police work and personal life of this type of leadership.
Two leadership styles that I identify with the most from this module are the Authentic Leadership Approach and the Ethical Leadership Approach. The Authentic approach discusses the importance of 3 elements: Intrapersonal, Developmental, and Interpersonal. I have experienced that the best supervisors I have worked for are change agents that look internally, are interested in the growth of those in their command, and know the importance of good communication within the agency on all levels. A person in a leadership role that can't look at themselves objectively, are only worried about keeping those under their command "out of trouble" or "off the radar", and don't make an effort to pass information up and down aren't good leaders. The Ethical approach explains that leaders are role models, create and maintain a good climate within the organization, and are dedicated to its mission. I think everyone in a leadership role should strive to give those in their command a reason to look up to them. Establishing a strong moral foundation is important and bringing morality into discussions about decision making is important for all leaders. Also, staying positive as a leader in a profession with so much negativity is important and and helps steer the troops to join their positivity and feel better about their job and the impact they have on the community.
One of my greatest takeaways came from the discussion about assigned leadership versus emergent leadership. I think there are several different ways to look at this specific topic. One of the ways to look at staff influence comes from the time you were a peer with staff members and then promote to management positions within the department. Although the relationships will now need to change, if you had the respect of the staff prior to the promotion and showed your leadership abilities then, that will carry with you. However, conversely, if you were promoted, your "assigned leadership" status will also carry with you and will be difficult to change perspectives. Other ways to review this topic are if you enter into a department as a manager, and people do not have a working knowledge of you are and what your leadership status is. There are many different pieces that weigh on both the leaders we seek to be as well as the leaders we are perceived to be, and these often times differ.
I agree with your view on assigned vs. emergent leadership. Prior to my promotion I considered myself an emergent leader. I was an FTO, instructor and part of specialty teams prior to my promotion. It provided a path of growth for me and strengthened my qualities. I had earned respect from my supervisors and peers prior to my promotion and have kept it. Of course there are those that will always have the perception that you don’t have the qualities needed to do the job but these are also the same people that cannot inspire change and don’t build on the mission for the department.
In the points made on assigned leadership and emergent leadership were important. At times people when think of leadership solely on the basis of assigned leadership. In my experience some of the best leaders show themselves well before receiving assigned leadership (rank). Understanding the different styles in leadership is important, but even more important is the ability to be flexible and adapt your leadership style to be most effective.
I agree that leaders need to be able to adapt in many ways. A great leader has an understanding of the people they are trying to influence and adapt their behavior and style to individuals rather than expecting everyone to be receptive to one individual style.
You are exactly on point with this. The purpose of learning about leadership styles is to identify who you are as a leader and to understand how others lead. Your comment about adopting leadership style to fit the situation is also very true. Effective leaders know when they need to switch gears and the really good ones do it flawlessly.
I recently ended my military career as a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Reserve. Since 2016, I taught Military History, Leadership and operations for the Command and General Staff College to traditional (drilling) army majors. In my 34 years of military service and 27 years of law enforcement/ security experience, I have worked for some horrible leaders. Most of these leaders acquired their position through promotion or assignment ( Assigned Leadership/ legitimate power-authority). All by virtue of their position had the ability to reward and punish (Reward/ Coercive Power) and were generally only "in it for themselves". Yes, they were role models but not in a good way. Through their actions and in many cases inaction, these persons in authority demonstrated bad leadership traits to such a point that anyone with any common sense and leadership aspirations pointed to them and said "that is the leader I never want to be". Conversely, I have also had the great honor to work with (and for) some of the most phenomenal leaders in both the military/ law enforcement fields. These leaders present clear goals, actively solicit opinions, work with and gain the trust of the informal leaders on their teams and demonstrate Ethical leadership. In my career, I have looked to these emergent leaders for guidance and mentorship and I have tried to emulate those positive traits that have made them successful.
I can very much relate to your experience. I served 20+ years as a Special Agent with the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (OSI) and have worked the past 10 years in civilian law enforcement. I have learned as much or more from the bad leaders than I did from the great ones.
The 2 sections of this training I found most interesting were as follows:
1. I really like the enthusiasm and message from Jocko Willink in the TedTalk video. The message that he shared about taking extreme ownership of all facets of your life really hit home for me. I see too often that when mistakes are made that finger pointing happens. Having this mindset and owning issues and facilitating positive change is a great message.
2. Dr. Normore’s topic of 5 Bases of Power. Throughout my organization, I see all 5 of these today. With Reward Power being the least frequent in our profession. However, Referent, Expert, Legitimate and Coercive Powers can be seen just about each day.
As I have gone through my career i have learned you do have to be adaptable to different people, opinions, and situations. Being able to effectively deal with them will greatly enhance yourself as a leader.
I agree with you. Leadership is a process when dealing with different personalities trying to get others to follow.
Since the beginning of my career and throughout, I have always found myself very drawn to authentic and ethical leaders. It helped me to evolve into the leader I became. Dr. Normore explained leadership must be worked on. The five components of effective leadership help guide us into the skills we build and learn from others.
Since the beginning of my career and throughout, I have always found myself very drawn to authentic and ethical leaders. It helped me to evolve into the leader I became. Dr. Normore explained leadership must be worked on. The five components of effective leadership help guide us into the skills we build and learn from others.
I agree with this module, this is why.
Before becoming a leader, I had the privilege to be under the leadership of some great leaders. Some leaders not so great. I've witness leaders use expert powers and some leaders utilize coercive power. I consider myself an Ethical Leader. I practice honesty, respect, and I lead by example. I use this throughout my career, and I use it in my personnel life as well.
The biggest take away for me in section two was early on in the presentation when Dr. Normore stated that leadership is not linear, that it is interactive and available to everyone. Dr. Normore's statement immediately grabs you and points out that most people can be leaders if they choose to rise up, grab on and accept the challenge. It is clearly pointed out in this section that leadership needs to be worked at which includes the big five of competencies, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences and environmental influences. Ending the section with ethical leadership was brilliant in the fact that it is very basic to understand. People are willing to follow and trust a leader that they perceive as being ethical. Without a following of those who trust you it is hard to accomplish future goals or even simple every day tasks.
I agree, with the ethical leadership. I've always find it harder to have task completed if there is no trust in your leader.
I agree. Your people HAVE to trust you, or it won't get done. This is especially true with cops. Cops are trained to sense and detect dishonesty. If you aren't genuine and honest with them, they will spot it in a heartbeat. It really gets challenging when you get put in the position of promoting/enforcing a policy that you completely disagree with. The chain of command expects that I will implement the policy/directive. I must find a way to achieve that goal whilst keeping my credibility and influence over those that I lead. If I openly express my opinions, my team will never follow the directive or do so begrudgingly. If I lie and say that it’s the best policy ever, I loss my teams trust. It’s a balancing act that can only be achieved with careful honesty.
What I found most interesting about this lecture is how Dr. Normore described the style approach of leadership. He listed two behavior types that leaders exhibit: Task behavior, which focuses more on results, and relationship behavior, where the leader is focused more on the person. Over the years, I have had leaders with each type of leadership behavior styles.
While in the U.S. Army back in the early '90s, most of my leaders were mission-focused and cared more about their overall success. Oddly enough, this type of leadership style was effective. It worked in that environment because the U.S. Army knew that you were obligated to complete your contract.
So, which style approach to leadership is more effective? The answer is that there needs to be a balance. As leaders, we can't be so fixated on performance and arrest statistics that we disregard the personal needs of those that we lead.
Drawing inference to the Army is interesting, but I take the dominant leadership style leaning, especially in the ’90s, towards the task style for different reasons. Soldiering and warfare preparation is very task-oriented with goals and metrics, and when combined with time-sensitivity and exigency, the behavior pattern of relationships gets pushed aside.
Additionally, the U.S. Army framework does not support the relationship behavior as command tenures were reduced from three to two-year tours for Officers and 5 for Noncommissioned Officers. In the ’90s, leader development was about the tasks due to the conditions of the world. It is easier and quicker to evaluate, document, and standardize warrior tasks and skills.
One place the relationship behavior existed was in some of the most senior command staffs or planning groups. In part, this occurred as many of these members of the team were composed of many leaders that routinely and often worked together, thus foster relationships and mutual understandings.
In this module several aspects of leadership were discussed. It is difficult to listen and not compare this to the styles of the many supervisors I have had over the years. It also caused a bit of self-reflection on my part. I think being able to define your approach to leadership is crucial to being a successful leader for your team and the department.
Jeff, While listening to Dr. Normore's lecture, I caught myself doing the exact thing. Each time he described a particular leadership style or component of leadership, I immediately thought of a leader that I had over the years.
I would agree that we all reflect back on previous supervisors that we have had and how we want to model ourselves after them or in most cases distance ourselves as far from them as possible. In my 20+ years of law enforcement it is easy to look back at those supervisors who displayed the traits and abilities of those discussed in this section. It is our duty to be a MAGNANIMOUS officer and lead the way for those following behind us.
Sheriff Jesse Jahner
I believe that assigned leadership and emergent leadership play a huge part in one another and need to be looked upon when selecting or assigning leaders. In my opinion a great leader is one that leads by example and can influence others to do the same. Those individuals who are emergent leaders are those that the assigned leaders view as the individuals in our organizations who can get others to follow the vision and mission of the department. They are those who through communication or through their work product, knowledge of situations typically rise to the top. They are the ones others in the organization look to. It is important to recognize these individuals as emergent leaders to make sure they are following the goals of the organization. Sometimes emergent leaders can also be the ones who are leading others down a dangerous path. Therefore it is important to recognize these emergent leaders and influence their "buy in" to the organization.
Assigned leaders must recognize that just because they are in a position of authority doesn't mean that others will follow them. They must look for ways to be influential in getting others to follow the vision, mission and goals of the organization.
I like how this module identified the different styles and approaches to leadership while not indicating or placing preference on any one style as the best or most effective. I think the important take away from this is that as leaders, we need to recognize that there is not just one approach to all situations and followers. We need to be able to adapt our styles to the situation and realize that some of our people will never very different things from us than their peers. To have different styles in your "tool box" that you can easily fall back on and adapt to, will equip you to be more effective and influential with followers and peers.
I agree leaders need to be adaptable. Leaders have to adapt with the situation or task at hand and need to be able to adapt to their people and what motivates them. Many of us have learned through different leadership courses the many different generations of employees that we have and each generation has different motivation factors. Having an understanding of many leadership styles gives the leader different options of ways to influence and motivate employees.
I completely agree with Jesse. I believe you have to be adaptable as a leader. There is a new generation entering the field and they are completely different from my generation. You have to know the type of person you are dealing with and adapt to them.
A part of this module discussed leadership as a process. Leadership affects and is affected by followers. Leadership is also available to everyone and is not restricted to just one person. Each person has the ability and the chance to lead and has the ability to influence others. This module discussed how leaders are more effective when their skills match their management level. I agree that leaders should lead by example and that they should recognize that there is not just one best style of leadership, instead, leaders need to be flexible and adapt their styles to the requirement of the situation. This was a very informational module on how leaders can lead in order to reach a common goal. Individuals will follow a leader because they know they can trust that person to do the right thing. In the reference to leadership involves leadership, I agree that without influence, leadership does not exist. No matter what, good or bad, your attitude and behaviors will affect those around you.
Mitchell makes a great point.. "leadership is also available to everyone and is not restricted to just one person". When I was first promoted to lieutenant at my department, I learned pretty quickly the value of buy in from the informal leaders in the department. Sure, I could sit down with my peers and shift supervisors and talk about policy and operational changes but if I wanted straight answers and opinions I reached out to my "go to" informal leaders that I could count on. They always provided me with honest perspectives and were open to listening to my points of view. When these these officers were asked to be on important committees and work groups early in the process, they became the voices of reason when new policies were published or important operational changes were made. Several of these "Informal leaders" are now in leadership positions in the department.
Good point Mitch, that leadership isn't restricted to those whom have the rank, but to every individual in the organization. I feel that an effective way to measure if we are effectively leading and influencing our partners or those in our lives can be associated with peers asking for our input, how we would do something, or for our help or guidance.
I appreciated how module #2 jumped right into the components of leadership. Explaining that leadership is a process that involves influence, within a group that is dedicated to a common goal. Taking it an additional step further this module stresses that the team has to have “buy in” from every person involved and a big portion of that “buy in” revolves around influence. In reference to the portion discussing positive communication a point that really spoke to me was how leaders are firm but not ridgid, knowing what the team goal is and not wavering from that but being open to new ideas is important. As the speaker was talking about the 5 bases of power the image of former leaders, and supervisors, popped into my head as he was laying out the definition of each base. We obviously need to stay away from coercive power and I feel that effective leaders can be a combination of some or all of the remaining.
This module contained numerous components that laid out very different approaches (or definitions) of what leadership is. Components of Operationalizing laid out the framework (It's a process, involves influence, occurs in groups, and has common goals). That's a good overall definition and starting point. However, when the discussion moved on to the Five Bases of Power, I really took to the definitions and differences of Referent (liking the leader) and Expert (perception of leader's competence). A second point of discussion was that management and leadership should not be used interchangeably. It makes total sense, but I don't believe I had really thought of the differences between those two terms, and maybe more importantly, how differently a person can be perceived. To me, that became the difference between focusing on tasks instead of the followers. Finally, I liked that the module ended with the Ethical component. The two best points I took from that discussion is that Ethical Leadership leads to collaboration and (my absolute favorite) "Allows you to occupy the moral high ground"... Fantastic imagery!
Very well stated. Prior to this lesson, I looked at management and leadership as almost one in the same. I thought the difference and definitions of those was laid out perfectly. My perception changes from thinking they could be interchangeable to how they shouldn't be used in that way.
I also assumed management and leadership were the same for quite a while. It is kind of laughable when I look back at people that have been great leaders and others that were just managers and I used to think they were basically the same.
There was a lot to digest in Module #2. As a new supervisor, I suppose I now fall under the assigned leadership category. I feel I was chosen (promoted) due in large part because I was seen as an emergent leader first. I think that is important when it comes time to promote someone to an assigned leadership position. It would be easy to lose respect among your co-workers if you were thrust in that position without some emergent leadership qualities beforehand. It is also important to have emergent leaders supplement the assigned leaders as long as their goals are similar. Another big takeaway for me was the discussion and definitions of the five common and important bases of power. To have them defined in such a way made sense to me and it was easy to follow. I have come across all five bases of power in my career and throughout my life. Defining them certainly brought back memories and examples of each one. Of those five the one to avoid is the coercive power. I know people that are only interested in their own goals and thankfully, the people in leadership positions with my agency are not any of them. I'm also looking forward to learning more about the different approaches to leadership.
I agree, I am a newly promoted supervisor as well. I like how you used the word "chosen", it is very appropriate. I feel the same way, prior to being chosen I felt as if I was given the freedom to become an emergent leader. I am fortunate to work for an agency that encourages leadership and creative thinking, I feel that this greatly aided in my leadership growth. Having the encouragement to try new ideas, and the safety of knowing that even if these ideas failed I still had the support of my leaders really helped my step outside my comfort zone and grow as an officer.
I agree, it's encouraging knowing that your leaders support you, even though it may have been a positive or negative experience. The only way we learn is from those experiences and definitely help you grow as a person, and as an officer. I am working towards that supervisory level, and its rewarding to know that my superiors support me in order to help me reach those goals. It's great that they provide you with the resources in order to become better.
I had two big takeaways from Module #2 and enjoyed the way leadership terms were presented. First, giving leadership an operational design (I had never heard it explained this way...or I wasn't paying attention in other courses!) really explained the transactional approach how leadership should be. I have always believed that great leadership is interactive, but to hear and see the process laid out; that each step in the process is directly related to its counterparts; really helped me think in a different way. The module helped build on the reading in "the Manual" particularly in chapter 1 where they relate to interaction and the dyadic relationship between power and leadership.
The second thing was the term Authentic Leadership. I don’t believe, prior to this course, I have ever heard of it and its three competencies really hone in on some of the virtues of Magnanimous Officers. I can identify with some of these qualities of this style, but realize this approach may be all-encompassing and it will take effort, devotion and practice to become masterful at this approach and truly find a balance between managing and leading.
The assigned leader will always be in law enforcement. As we progress through our careers we need to make sure that the emergent leaders come to the front and not leading from the back. This may be hard because sometimes the emergent leader does not want to be in the light and is completely comfortable staying in the shadow.
I agree there will always be assigned leaders in law enforcement. I think a different way to look at it would be that those assigned leaders were ultimately chosen, for whatever reason, by, more than likely, the CLEO of that agency. There are some that were assigned their leadership role because of the qualities (either leadership or management) they displayed prior to being promoted. Maybe they never developed appropriately after their promotion because of a lack of leadership, a mentor, or they failed to continually educate themselves? Either way, I agree that we can lead and develop others better in the future. And please don't forget that as much as we wish those emergent leaders would step up to the plate, we need them in those roles as well. We need great people in all ranks, and leading them to find true happiness where they are may sometimes be the challenge in "closing the gap."
After reviewing this module, I would have to agree with the majority of you in regards to management versus leadership. My biggest take away is from this lesson is that there are far more managers than leaders in law enforcement. In being in a supervisory position, I think one of my most significant obligations to not only my department but to my officers, is to learn how to effectively both lead and manage.
I have been with our agency for a combined total of approximately fifteen years and have seen us undergo many changes. We have evolved from handwritten reports to computers, from a promotional system based on seniority to one that factors many virtues, skills, and leadership ability, from being spatially separated from many smaller buildings to consolidating and streamlining operations to a few major buildings. We have had supervisors and administrators who would only have people follow them because of their assigned leadership or rank, many of which would use either legitimate power or coercive power to have others reach their end goal. When I first started with our agency, we provided little to no leadership training to individuals in enforcement positions and none to individuals in support positions; our agency now provides leadership training to all employees.
As attrition occurs, we are requiring those applying for transfers or promotions to successfully complete leadership training. We are molding our practices and polices to reflect our virtues. While some of this training falls on deaf ears, those of us who utilize it, are receiving the training and tools to help us reach our potential as emergent leaders. We have several opportunities for individuals, in both enforcement and support positions, to join various committees that we've created to help our agency to continually evolve with the changing times.
I agree with you regarding how far we have evolved through the progression in policing. It is really quite amazing to look at that progression with technology. However, I feel that in terms of investing in our leadership, there is not a lot of work that has been done. Up until recently, in our department you were simply promoted based on your testing rank and not given any formal training. As a result, there have been several leaders and managers with varied styles and no real understanding of the differences each style brought to the table. Through all of the training's I have attended thus far, I have learned that to be effective in our promoted role, you need to be flexible in your leadership style, recognizing that not one style will fit every follower or situation.
I agree. It's refreshing to see the department taking a more proactive approach to training current and future leaders. Moving away for the old "Congratulations on your promotion! You now know everything." approach.
I have found this to also be the case. Flexibility is important. As we have all experienced, the different generations in law enforcement can make leadership positions challenging. I have worked with supervisors who I refer to as "old school" because they have the mentality of "do as I say, not as I do" and "don't ask questions, just do it". This style does not go over as easy as it used to. You must know your people and adapt to be effective.
This module covered different leadership styles and approaches. The transitional approach is necessary because it is important that every leader understands the needs and motives of followers. I agree that when this approach is used it empowers individual to perform at higher standards. The module reminded me that there are different leadership styles and approaches that are effective. It is important that I remain ethical so I can continue to gain the respect and trust from everyone I encounter.
The department that I work for is in the phase of the senior officers retiring and the new officers taking reigns of the department. The officers are promoted not for their leadership capabilities, but for their time with the department. Our department does have a matrix system that helps, but when only one officer puts in for a position, that person gets the spot. That said person might not have the qualities to be a leader but elected in that role by default. I see that same said person uses coercive power because they do not have the trust and respect from their peers. Our department has begun mandating that for promotion, they must have certain phases of leadership done, depending on the position. I believe this will help to ensure that the new leaders will lead by example and become ethical leaders.
June 23rd of this year has made 20 years on this job for me. During those 20 years, it has been interesting how much this profession has evolved. The individual officer remained hungry to be the best they possibly can be. And that hunger being fulfilled usually depends on how much or how less crap they are fed. Guys also get tired of processes for how they climb the ladder being the very reason they get fed said crap. Many times, a process is smoke and mirrors. Other times, the same process works and they fall victim to not doing what they are supposed to do. Add the leader into this mix, the person who quite simply controls their fate. An emergent leader, regardless of title, is who people look to in order to stay hungry. An emergent leader really has in their heart his or her troops in mind. And during these 20 years, it seems that in many facets, the assigned leader has been in charge, yelling from the back instead of leading from the front. Hopefully as times change so will the type of leader that will be in charge. We should want to be the change.
Darren i feel that no matter what the leader in charge may always be distant from their people. Nine times out of ten the top leader (Sherifffs and Police Chiefs) are assigned leaders. They are assigned by either the Mayor or the public and may not be the necessary leader the department needs. Very rarely is that person the emergent leader.
Wow. I was able to see how my agency has evolved over the past 10 years or so listening to this lecture on Approaches to Leadership, with assigned leaders vs. emergent leaders. For the longest time you applied to a specialized division and basically it was a popularity contest. You had an interview with the current supervisor and possibly was selected. Once there you were assigned a number and did your time, Through attrition, people would move on to other assignments, retire, or seek other job opportunities. As you waited out this time and moved up in numbers, when a supervisor position opened, you were a lot of times, moved into that slot because you had seniority. It didn't matter if you could lead of manage, you had done your time so you were promoted. This has all changed now with a matrix taking multiple things into account, such as testing, interviews done by people from other divisions as well as job performance and evaluations. This has led us to have many more emergent leaders than assigned leaders.
This was truly an enlightening module. I found it no surprise to learn that management may not equate with leadership. I have known a great many managers in my career and most of them are poor leaders. They seem to focus on the process and outcome and care little for the people that in the end will accomplish the goal. Leaders must know how to manage but not allow the process to overtake the objective. There should be no cookie cutter style to leadership. Leaders must be flexible to lead each officer as they need to be lead. When I first became a supervisor, I tried to take a rather simplistic approach. Remember where I came from and try to treat my subordinates as I wanted to be treated when I was in their shoes. But I quickly found that supervision was not that simple. Though this is still my underlaying tenant, I know that every officer is different and what works for one may not work for another.
You couldn't have said it better that there is no cookie cutter approach style to leadership. I would add that you can not supervise everyone the same either. You nailed it.
I would agree 100%- management does NOT equate to leadership. I have been lucky enough to work for both such leaders in my career. I say lucky because I learn just as much from someone who isn't a good leader as I do from the ones who are. I've done many exercises in classes I have taught where we have participants make lists of traits of a good supervisor. By doing so, we move on to ask them if they possess those traits as an Officer. We have to remember that we are the leaders on calls, and when we lead (people) vs. trying to manage (tasks) , the situation often works itself out.
I agree with what you are saying. I will also say that it is important to foster those relationships with great leaders as sounding boards when we are moving forward.
As stated by others, in law enforcement it seems that ethical leadership is how we want to hear others refer to us. Ethical leadership, in my opinion is easy to find in most law enforcement agencies. The first line supervisor is usually the easiest to spot. He/she deals with personnel on a one to one manner and must be seen as ethical to gain the respect of the troops. That respect, once gained helps accomplish goals set forth by higher authority.
Having said this, how many have seen that same ethical leader issue directives in a manner as, Let's just get this done." It becomes easy to blame higher authority for more policies or directives that come out. I have seen others do it and have most likely done this myself. As noted, in the lecture, the creation of management was basically to take care of the administrative duties, such as scheduling, among others.
Let us not forget coercive leadership. I once worked for an agency that the final line of every policy letter or memo was, "or disciplinary action will follow." Several of us joked that we would write a book on police procedure and that would be the title. Just as the human body becomes immune to pain, the rank and file of an organization becomes deadened to a coercive style and it affects performance and perception of the agency. To be honest, it became a badge of honor to be suspended in that organization by a command that was seen as dictatorial. The sad thing is, that leadership thought they were bringing structure to the agency.
I have as someone mentioned in a previous post, used the lecture and reading to review my style and career. There have been great changes over the years and not so great changes. As leaders, we must strive to foster the environment of change for the better, but not forget that the major asset that we have to improve the agency and society are our people.
I found this training module to be very interesting and informative. I think the instructor did a great job of outlining the many different aspects and qualities of being a good leader. While watching the training module I was able to identify several different styles and techniques of “leadership” that I have used over many years, both in the private sector, and in law enforcement. I have always believed that being a “leader” is more than just a title and that leaders must possess a wide range of technical and social skills required to “influence” those around them.
I agree that leaders must possess a wide range of skills to be a positive influence. That is something that is extremely challenging for some and a lot of people are often set in their ways and aren't able to adapt very well to new situations or different personalities of people. Especially in the law enforcement field you must be able to be flexible to all scenarios and the people in your group will notice that type of leadership and will most likely be positively influenced by it, They will learn to trust you as a leader and will be happy to work under you. That is something that I strive for everyday with my team. Great post!
The Approach to Leadership lecture certainly put all management styles in perspective. There are numerous ways to lead depending on the capacity you are in. Ultimately, I have discovered over the years that the transformational approach best suits where I am currently. Being able to empower other supervisors and personnel to take a greater responsibility and to have them view the bigger picture is rewarding. This allows them to have a sense of accomplishment, as well benefitting the department.
Of all the information shared regarding leadership in this module, the statement "Ethical leadership is simply the right way to go" by the author Dr. Normore best sums up our common aim towards desired leadership within every organization. Without question, people want to be led by the highest ethics as well as those who subscribe and live by an ethical life. As we continue on this journey of learning and striving to implement and espouse the highest of ideals, both in our personal and professional lives, let us reach out and be the leaders that we desire to have.
I completely agree and who could argue that building trust and honesty within an organizational are two of the most important elements to long term success. Building and maintaining trust is challenging and takes time but improves almost every area of your personal and work life once achieved.
The "Leadeship" lecture touches upon several qualities that are important to possess. The sub-qualities and elements that the lecturer touched upon are true today as they would be in years past. Having a leader who can connect with personnel, teach, make sound decisions, and receive positive/negative feedback from co-workers is paramount. When leaders, supervisors, or rank and file personnel know that decisions that are made were done with proper insight, everyone benefits. If people that are supervisors, leaders, or other organizational management, their styles should be consistent with the topics and positive elements reviewed in this lecture.
The approaches to Leadership in module 2, shows that Leadership is a process, it involves influence, occurs in groups and involves common goals. It also showed that having Emergent leadership is the most influential person regardless of a title. Learning these things about culture and leadership and competencies at the heart of the skills model, shows that I will need problem solving skills, social judgment skills and knowledge in order to provide great leadership. Also utilizing the five bases of power dictating which power that I'm always using is also good to know when it comes to leading.
I agree that having emergent leadership is the most influential. An agency that only recognize assigned leadership is often less informed and rather not hear the thoughts of anyone without a position/title.
Leadership is important in any business. I agree that leadership is a way to improve our personal, social, and professional lives. Leaders also have to have influence from older leaders in order to evolve in their own leadership styles. As a young supervisor I can remember ruling with an iron fist. Even though I would always “WIN”, it did nothing for my shift as a leader and made them resent me. It didn’t take me long to change and start seeking my deputies options before I made a decision. This made them fieel valued and included. This was a good lecture.
I agree with your response, especially as being a young supervisor, which I am also. I also learned that going to older leadership helped in a way, but I also realized it didn't because they were so use to the old times when in this day and age there're a lot of young departments around who can actually relate to the younger generational supervisors. I find myself having an easier time with my shift then the past supervisor has had because he was an older supervisor who's been around the understanding for him went out of the window. So I do agree with your response in this sense.
was the opposite as a shift supervisor. The military had taught me several things about being a leader so I wasn't in charge of a rifle squad so I went much easier. There were a couple of things that I would stringently enforce, but for the most part I was easy going. I trusted my men and they trusted me. I did not have to show up to every scene because if my troops needed my help they would call. With higher authority, I would not stand for interference with my people. I once "convinced" my Captain to not write up one of my troops due to the possible perception of the Captain. While the men thought that it was great, a couple of problems began to pop up. The officer that did not receive a write up did the same thing, again, and I had to write him up. One officer did not want to be seen as not knowing as much as the other guys and did not ask for help and screwed up an investigation. I failed that officer because I did not see that he needed more training in particular areas. I guess what I am trying to say is that our styles come from learning and some times trial and error. This type of training, geared towards law enforcement would have been a great resource back then.
What I found interesting about this module is it kind of took me on a journey of how my leadership styles have changed over my career. But I think leadership styles have to change with where you are in your career. Starting with being an FTO, then a patrol sergeant, Lieutenant and now as a Captain/District Commander. I have found that as a Sergeant I was there for the deputies in my squad and my emphasis was on them. As a Lieutenant, it changed slightly where obviously my main concern was for the deputies on my watch, but then had to worry about my decisions on an administrated level. Now as a Captain/District Commander that balance seems to have shifted some the other way. Where as before I was more concerned with my little group of responsibility, now is more so of a delicate balance of what's best for my deputies, sergeants and lieutenants compared to what is best for the whole entity. As before I was a much more of a democratic leader where I would usually speak with those under my command and get their suggestions for a particular problem and usually go with the most common solution among the group. While I still reach out to those I trust and respect for their ideas, I know find myself considering many more factors in my decision making. In all this module made me do a lot of thinking and reflection.
I agree. My leadership style changed as I climbed the ranks. I find I started being less involved with my detectives once I became Captain. My role seemed like it switched over night from more of an administrator. After becoming a Major I find I only talk to them when passing in the hallway. I have already made some changes in the way I go about my daily routine. I make time to listen and value opinions more.
I found the lecture Approaches to Leadership to be extremely informative and helpful for me as I continue on my journey as a supervisor. Throughout the lecture, I found myself reliving different times in my career and back to numerous supervisors and their different styles. Some of my supervisors ruled with an iron fist, which completely demoralized the units. I found that supervisors that were more understanding that not all people are motivated the same way and took the time to learn about his subordinates were more effective at reaching the division's peak performance. As supervisors, we were all promoted to become leaders to help mold and lead our respected divisions into a promising future. During the address, I found the supervisory form I related to was the Transformation Approach to leadership. It allows me to challenge other detectives to strive for greatness continuously. I also enjoyed how the address distinguished the difference between a "management" and "leadership" because many times, they are blended.
While this lecture separates different styles of leadership and different approaches there is not a one style fits every leader nor every subordinate. This is the same for levels of power. A great leader must have great morals, but he also must have expert power. Leadership can not be explained and categorized so neatly in a 15 min. video. I look forward to many more discussions on this topic. The best take away is the piece about having the moral high ground when faced with opposition to ideas.
I found this course of lectures extremely interesting and had me reflecting on what type of leader I am, and the different styles i've adopted over time. I associated more with the Developmental style of leadership, due to my previous non LEO job. I was raised by my father to be a more hard lined leader, keep my followers at a slight distance and making sure the task were completed no matter what it took. Now that I'm a Patrol Sergeant, I've learned that style of Leadership is the wrong route to take, and I've had to do some serious self reflection and admit to myself that i eventually became a manager, even though i always had the men and women under my command best interest at heart. I've recently been moved to a new shift and Lieutenant who has a totally different leadership style from mine. I'm learning to embrace the more Interpersonal style where I still lead my shift, but have backed away and let my shift do their job and be there when they need me for guidance. I'm also open to discussion with my shift about their input on scenes and the best course of action. i find i'm able to pull ideas from a much larger pool of knowledge in this regard and I've noticed that it is appreciated , instead of its my way or the highway style of leadership. The role of leader never comes with an instruction manual, not until i joined this course and am excited as to how much more i can learn and introduce to our next wave of emerging leaders.
I really enjoyed learned the different styles of leadership and was surprised about the different styles of power. Looking to the past at the different styles I have used has brought meaning to this lesson. Coercive power should be used as a last resort and when used as the main or first resort, leadership is not effective. The emphasis put on ethics was also great in this lesson. Without ethical leadership, the leader and organization will never reach its potential of being MAGNUS. I’m excited to learn more details on the different styles of leadership.
I would add that when coercive power is used, the leadership is less effective, and in the end, there is contempt towards the one wielding this style of power. This contempt erodes the effectiveness and respect that followers can have towards the one entrusted with power.
I totally agree. Over the years I have had several supervisors who tried to lead by threat and intimidation. I found this to be counter productive and leads to low moral. I know of a particular supervisor whereas every single officer assigned to his watch eventually asked for a transfer due to his coercive and toxic style.
To be an effective leader, a leader must have influence. Without influence, leadership does not exist. It is my belief that when a person is put in a leadership position a certain amount of influence is generated with the position. As an example, a Sheriff promotes a patrol sergeant to lieutenant of his assigned shift. This lieutenant has acquired the influence needed to get the job done. The problem I often see is even with the acquired influence of the position some leaders still struggle and make mistakes. I believe the reason leaders with the acquired influence struggle are because of their inability to influence. Leaders must know how to approach an individual or group. What technique will he/she use? Will it be a hard approach? Meaning he/she doesn't care if they hurt a subordinates feeling, just get the job done. Or, will it be a softer approach? Softer approach gives a subordinate some flexibility in deciding whether to accept the influence or not. More often the softer approach works better than the hard approach.
Through this lesson, one thing that stood out to me initially was the statement by Dr. Nomore, that management while similar to leadership they should not be used interchangeably. This also seems to be a good indication in some instances that while similar in nature the titles of supervisor and leader are also not always interchangeable. As the information continued I heard of various different approaches and began to place different leaders of my own agency into the various approaches. While not all leaders in an agency can be brought in to the same approaches it becomes the agencies goal to place complimenting approaches together to work towards the common goal of ethically leading the agency in the right direction and gaining the public's trust and credibility.
Lt. Jenkins, I found myself doing the same thing, placing leaders in their leadership styles. Unfortunately, sometimes in the past leaders with un-complimenting approaches were put together with bad results. Hopefully, if training like this is brought to masses in the law enforcement community earlier in their career those "bad results" will be a thing of the past.
This module was very informative and I found myself trying to make sure I absorbed all the information. I particularly enjoyed learning about the different approaches to leadership and found myself doing a little self reflection as to which category my leadership approach falls into to. The two approaches I found most useful would be the authentic approach and the transformation approach. Having knowledge of all styles and approaches could only help me as a leader by applying each when it is applicable.
I also believe that using multiple approaches can be beneficial in our leadership journey, while some of us may have been initially brought into the leadership position as emergent leaders, I like to think that i have developed more towards a more transformational leadership approach in an attempt to bring my subordinates up to a level where they can emerge as leaders themselves.
Agree with this post, the various styles of leadership that were named in this lecture are essential. The idea that there is a "one size fits all" style is outdated and incorrect. In the world today, leadership styles and changing concepts are as dynamic as the technology we use today. Constant reflection and reevaluation will help all team members to improve with good effective leadership.
I agree with you, and I was doing self-reflection as well while watching the module. I believe this will help me out because my officers vary from vast range ages. It is essential to be able to connect with your officers and gain their trust and respect.
I am very encouraged by the information that was given in this section as to what we are going to learn throughout this course. I've always believed that we need to spend more time educating our people in leadership. If we educate/mentor subordinates before they take on a management role, we will find them more capable of handling the job. Even the uniformed officer working his beat can be a leader. He is the first face seen by the public. His ability to lead and be a good example only strengthens our office.
I agree with you Burke, that much more time needs to be spent in educating leaders in the area of leadership. (Myself included) Its is genuinely eye opening to learn the different approaches, styles and study of leadership. It sometimes appears that leadership is lumped into one simplistic theory of how to apply it, which couldn't be further from the truth. Educating ourselves on the different approaches should allow us as leaders to apply each approach in the necessary setting. I also agree that the uniformed officer working his beat can be a leader as well. Some of the best leadership qualities I have observed have come from those officers not even in a leadership role by title.
Burke I'm very enthusiastic and encouraged as well with this information given in this section and what we are going to learn throughout this course. I believed leadership has to be shown by everyone in the office, from the lowest one on the pole to top brass on the pole. He/she ability to lead only strengthens and boost the moral of our office.
Throughout the jobs I had in my life, I’ve been afforded the opportunity to work for both assigned and emergent leaders. The assigned leaders often found themselves struggling to control their subordinates because they managed the organization through the use of fear and abuse of their position. They never had the backing of those who fell under them or were of a subordinate rank. They epitomized the thought, “I respect your rank (position) but not you.” They also always seemed to put the blame on someone else if situations went awry. I’ve looked at these leaders and often wondered if it was just a personality flaw or if they were set up for failure, never having the opportunity to improve themselves or to fully learn their position before assuming it.
Then there are the emergent leaders. These are the guys and gals I wanted to follow. Not because they were popular, but because they embodied some, if not all, of the qualities of a leader I wished to assimilate. These leaders always seemed to be in the know and had the ear of those above them. They had new and innovative ideas which allowed the organization to move forward rather than be complacent or worse, just stuck in the mire. These were the ones that if something went badly were the first ones to take the blame and suffer the consequences for the group. This is the leader I strive to be.
I enjoyed this module as it showed many different types and styles of leadership and the approaches to each. I particularly liked the section on assigned leadership and emergent leadership. As supervisors and commanders are assigned leaders within an agency they are placed in a role by the leader of the agency to supervise a group of people or run a unit. As these assigned leaders they can influence the people around them and then begin to see the emergent leaders start to grow which in turn involve the others around them. The emergent leaders, I feel, are the ones who grasp onto the organizations beliefs and ideals and drive from the influence of the assigned leaders. Any thoughts on this?
I like the thought that assigned leaders can evolve into emergent leaders. Someone may be promoted before they are ready to take on the real role of their rank, but while learning to do so, they transform from just a supervisor into a leader, someone that instills trust in the men and women who will then willingly follow them.
This seems to be the norm from what I have experienced. Luckely our profession has a long history of mentorship that eases the transition.
I enjoyed tonight's lecture for several different reasons. I know that I am not the only one who has "used the wrong leadership style" while attempting to lead. During my tenure as a young officer, I demanded respect and for people to follow me. It was hard to lead people when you do not have any followers. This also caused several major employee issues that had to be addressed and cleaned up.
During this health emergency, our leadership style will be tested and stretched by the troops. They will see how we are handling stress and how we keep morale up for our agency. They will look at the harmful policies and COVID-19 response plan and ask you to follow the same as them. How many leaders will be ethical leaders and make the right choices? How many leaders took time off when their troops could not? Little things like taking care of the officers and making sure they have simple supplies will not only keep their morale high but keep them respecting you for your leadership, and they will follow you into battle.
This is the time we can make or help form transformational leaders. This is also the time when we, as leaders, can help our employees and make a difference to them.
Stay safe, and stay healthy to all that are serving.
Chief, leading from the front and by example shows maturity in leadership. Admitting to past mistakes shows the troops that we are human also and helps other powers grow to referent power. I enjoy the different types of power section and think about how a combination or mixture of many will help us grow to better leaders.
I truly enjoyed this block of instruction about “Approaches to Leadership.” This information was extremely beneficial, allowing an individual to understand different facets of leadership. These varying styles could influence various individual(s) or groups pending what approaches work best for the team. I enjoyed the portion where, Dr. Normore, explained the new concept of “Authentic Leader” and “Ethical Leader.” I have found throughout my life whether it was serving in the military and or law enforcement that individual(s) and or groups gravitate towards genuine leaders who, of course, have a moral compass. I enjoyed the part where Dr. Normore provides that if you have opposition and you hold yourself to an ethical standard, then those within and outside of your organization will respect you. This is a belief I hold where a person (leader) must have a solid foundation of discipline not to compromise themselves.
I agree. It is important as a leader to be authentic and ethical. Without being either, the people who serve under a leader will not see that the leader is true to their core and see that there are no morals in place. From there they will not have direction and there will be failure.
This module has enlightened me on the different type of leadership in organizations. It has also taught me that to have effective leadership within an organization, all leaders need to have a clear understanding of the process it takes to influence followers to accomplish the common goals set forth.
The initial explanation of leadership as a process of influence involving a group with common goals gives a great perspective on what leadership is supposed to be. Leadership is often thought of as an individual accomplishment. Without the support of the group, the "leadership" can become poison and lead to failure.
A key component is the difference between management and leadership. While the terms are often interchangeable, their purpose and effects are not. I believe the analogy is one that has often been talked about in football circles but can be used here as well. Quarterbacks can often be categorized as their team leader. However, often times we see quarterbacks who are not called upon to be the leaders of their team placed in a secondary group of "game managers." They snap the ball and are in their position to make sure the right play is called and efficiency stays at a certain level. The manager minimizes loss, but does not lead through influence. True leaders do more than manage, they inspire and push their teams to achieve more.
It is important to note the different types of leadership. While authoritative leadership is easy to recognize when first entering a situation, emergent leadership often has a more lasting and far reaching effect on a group. Leaders who are trusted and have the support of their team achieve more than those who are "leaders" in name only. No single style or skill is perfect for all circumstances. Effective leaders adapt to the needs of their group and the challenges of their environment.
Well said to how you explained the difference between management and leadership utilizing a football perspective. I agree that a leader is an individual who can motivate and influence others to meet a common goal.
While I have long held some of these beliefs about management styles and the reason for their success or failure, it is refreshing to see it in black and white. Additionally, the five bases of power are interesting in the sense that while all can motivate activity and submission to orders, not all seem, in my opinion to be positive motivators.
I enjoyed the approaches to leadership. I looked back over my career while listening and could see myself using every approach at some point. This was very accurate and something that needs to be taught to anyone who is receiving a promotion.
I agree that organizations should input more leadership teaching and classes for anyone receiving promotions.
I agree. Too often we promote someone and throw them to the, "wolves." That person is left to learn how to lead through trial an error and more often error.
i fully agree with your term of being "thrown to the wolves" and to figure it out as you go. That has been my experience since the first day i was promoted. I was fortunate that my previous shift had chosen me as their unofficial leader, so when my time came i thought i was ready. Leadership doesn't come with an instruction manual and through trial and error eventually you find your way and adopt a style depending on what state the shift you were given are at professionally and emotionally.
I feel that anyone up for a promotion should have to attend this course. This course has already been beneficial for me in a short amount of time. I feel that everyone who takes this course will have a better understating of what it takes to be a leader and in turn become the type of supervisor that everyone wishes to work for.
After completing this lecture, I have observed several of the leadership approaches explained. Often in organizations, a person is promoted into a leadership role based on seniority. Lots of time, these individuals have corrosive power and lead with an iron fist. Their subordinates respect them only due to the rank they hold and not regarded as leaders. I have been fortunate in my career to have had leaders with a wealth of knowledge and job experience, yet they requested input and ideas from subordinates. Those leaders gave the line officer confidence in his/ her decision making. In today's environment, it seems there is more micromanaging than ever before.
Incompatible leaders have been an issue at my agency in the past, and designing a promotional process that identifies positive leadership virtues over "knowledge and time" which is unfortunately the traditional way, has seemed difficult. Many people can take a test and pass, but that does not make them leadership or management material. It almost seems to me that a thorough psychological maturity and personality evaluation would have more value for promotion.
I completely agree. I see it currently in the development of "firearms instructors" where I work. The initial qualification to be an instructor has nothing to do with the ability to teach and everything to do with a score. While having the ability to do a task is important, the ability to communicate and inspire others has very little value in the initial selection process.
We are in the process putting some type of leadership training for our command structure in place. There are lots of examples of such courses, but I find too often the stated desire is leadership, but the actual course is about management.
I agree, far too often leaders in many organizations are assigned or promoted to positions based on circumstances unrelated to the actual needs of the organization.
In my time as a police officer I have worked at several different agencies. I have found the one consistent theme was how supervisors were picked for the job. Sadly it was never more than a test that anyone could pass with half a brain. It has taken years for the concept of better supervisors mean better employees but many agencies still adhere to the old ways of doing things. This in the end ultimately cost the tax payers with law suits and mismanaged employees quitting an moving on to more employee friendly jurisdictions.
I found the opening “Policing & Magnus” to be the essential aspect of the overall direction of the lesson provided. The presenter establishes that we not only be technical at our profession but how we as leaders build the foundation for others that we’re surrounded by. I believe we must grow and or extend the virtues of those that we lead, manage, and follow. I advocate to those that I’m surrounded by to have a moral compass within their personal and professional life. I have found through literature or through a direct encounter with others that most grounded leaders and mentors are humble, honest, and are engaged with a high-level discipline. These lesson topics and learned experiences allow me to continue and or revisit paths, which are an essential requirement in my day to day activities with myself and others.
My biggest takeaway from this module was the definition of operational leadership as the process of influencing groups or individuals to attain a common goal. The main part of that definition is influence. Without influence leadership does not exist. Historically, I have personally seen emergent leaders become more successful and influential as assigned leaders. Rather than someone assigned to a leadership position just because based seniority or a relation.
I was glad to be reminded of the difference between leadership and management. Far too often the two are used interchangeably when the traits are vastly different. A person who is great at planning, organizing, and staffing may not be very influential. This makes them great managers but poor leaders.
The different approaches to leadership (skills, style, situational, and transformational) were interesting as well. It made me think of different persons within our organization that excel in the different approaches. Even more so it made me question do I adjust and use these as well in the correct situations.
Well said. I like how you pointed out how influence is the main component in leadership and how that differs between leadership and management.
When comparing the approaches to leadership, what stands out the most to me is managing versus leading. Managers are assigned to plan, organize, and control. Managers cannot necessarily be leaders but good leaders do manage. Success is measured by how the ones you manage respond to you. This is probably a good way to find emergent leaders. They typically respond through initiative. Initiative is something that should only be taught once. A good leader will take it from there. A manager just seems to do enough to get by.
I enjoyed this module. I learned the differences between Assigned leaders and Emergent leaders. The lecture has helped me to recognize those emergent leaders in my department and value them more. I plan to find ways to recognize our emergent leaders and acknowledge their value.
I was reminded of the difference between leaders and managers. I think a lot of people group them together and it’s important to remind everyone of the differences.
I have found emergent leaders tend to show themselves through initiative. Initiative is a fantastic leadership quality that hasn't been discussed much. Those emergent leaders are unafraid to anticipate what is expected to be completed and completes it. They typically predict what a supervisor wants or needs and gets it done with or without assistance. Because of this they tend to be seen much more than assigned leaders.
I agree that in emergent leaders, initiative is of fantastic quality. I feel that an Officer either has it or not. When you see initiative in a leader, that energy is infectious to his/ her subordinates. That leader tends to understand their supervisors and the job that's expected of them. I have witnessed leaders that had initiative and were always under the microscope from their supervisor. These supervisors wanted the leader to lead in a different style. That leader lost that initiative and went from a Policeman to an employee. We, as leaders, need to understand the different styles when dealing with leaders under our command.
Throughout life I have worked for several different employers, mostly in retail. While in retail, I was an assistant manager, who would regularly make the weekly schedule or assist with coordinating the unloading of delivery trucks, and stocking shelves. I would say the type of leadership in this environment usually fell under the Task Behavior style. It was more goal oriented. Everything had to be stocked and filled with in a certain time limit.
Today I work in Corrections. As a Lieutenant, I supervise fourteen very different subordinates. Watching this module, I recognized, I use two different styles of leadership. The most common is the Transformation Approach to Leadership, which allows me inspire followers who want to better themselves and the organization. While other times, I would use the Style Approach to Leadership, to try and lead those followers who are hear for the glory of being a deputy and collecting a paycheck.
This module, helped me realize there are many different styles of Leadership and the complexities that are associated with each style.
I came away from this lecture with two things I felt most connected to.
Management vs Leadership: I feel that any competent person can be a manager. What does it take to organize, delegate and oversee people? Not much in my opinion. A leader, however, accomplishes those things while empowering and inspiring people to be better. It is by far the better approach and more beneficial to subordinates and the organization.
Ethical Leadership: I have practiced this my entire career without having a name for it. I can personally say, it has served me very well throughout my career and in my personal life. I go to bed at night with no regrets. Ever.
Christian Johnson, I agree with your comment. Anyone can be a manager but an Ethical leader empowers their followers. An ethical leader will have more followers willing to help the team and organization, than a manager who oversees and organize them.
In this lesson I learned about the different types of effective leadership, competencies, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences and environmental influences. I learned the five components of effective leadership (competencies, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences and environmental influences). Additionally, I learned the five major leadership styles. I also learned that management is a little different than leadership. Management was created more so for organizational purposes while leadership influences others to achieve a goal. Some people are not sure if they are more management as oppose to leadership. One might believe they are influencing others and this might not be the case. Who will let this person know if they are more managing than leading? This type of training will help others realize if they are organizational or influential.
Roanne, I would have to agree with you. Ever since adopting this new style of leadership and learning differences between leadership and management, I would have to say that our agency is working on converting managers into leaders.
It seems the portion of the lecture that addressed Management verses Leadership resonated with several people who posted in the discussion board, me included. In my experience people appreciate those who are "leaders" and view negatively those who "manage" but fail to lead. This lecture made clear that organizations need leadership to be both managers and leaders and I agree. Management is needed to control disorder and leadership builds effectiveness. Leaders who are influential, courageous and effective in motivating their subordinates are a great asset but they loose credibility if they cannot complete managerial tasks that are required for an agency to function. Just as followers need to be inspired by an influential leader, they also need their payroll completed.
The main takeaway, for me, from this module was the difference between management and leadership. When hearing this, I immediately identified a particular agency that calls the upper echelon “management.” Subordinates also refer to the upper echelon as “management.” It is clear that within the management of that agency there is a distinct difference between those who are managers and those who are leaders. It can be clearly seen that the ethical leaders within that organization are respected more by their subordinates. They are the types of people who are followed because not only of their knowledge but how they treat their people. They have both referent power and expect power. On the other hand, the manager is less respected and their “management style” is often questioned by subordinates. Subordinates will tend not to want to go the extra mile for a manager as opposed to an ethical leader. Agencies need to recognize who the management style leaders are and try to help guide that person into becoming an ethical leader in order to create a better working environment.
Well said David. I think management inspires an "us vs them" attitude while leadership inspires an "us" attitude.
I have seen the full spectrum of leaders that are referred to here. I liked when the narrator spoke about the five components of leadership; Competency, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences and environmental influences. I believe at any time that one of these can affect the way a leader leads. I like and agree strongly with the premise that, "Leadership as a process is not linear (One way,) but interactive.
I thoroughly enjoyed this module and found it very interesting. I caught myself at times identifying people within my agency based on their specific approaches to leadership as they were described in the lecture. I can also admit that I identified specific approaches that are used but are typically met with negative results. The approach that I see most often is the authority with compliance. There have been times when a supervisor may task a subordinate with an apprehensive assignment, which can lead to a feeling of coercive power being exerted. I feel the emergent, and ethical leadership approaches will get the most favorable results when effectively used. Does anyone think differently?
I agree completely.
Ethical Leadership has far too m any benefits, for the leader, the organization and the community, not to be at the top of the list at all times.
I agree Clint and found myself doing the exact same thing picking those people within my agency who fit the specific approaches. The art of getting subordinates to do things they may be apprehensive about based off of authority with compliance is a tricky one. We all know every employee we have has a different personality therefore may require a specific approach to influence the correct action. Most respond favorable to the skills and style approaches. Then there are the occasional ones that only respond to authority which would fall under situational I would assume.
I am in agreement with you Clint. It was a fun journey remembering many of the past supervisors that I have had over the previous decades in law enforcement. I feel we should always lead from the position of an ethical leader. Anytime there is a person in a leadership position coming from a place of trust, honesty, and fairness, you can not go wrong. As Doctor Normore stated "People will follow an ethical leader."
In this module I learned the various leadership styles and approaches. Its very eye opening that there are so many different ways to lead when we all really have the same common goal. There are some out there that don’t lead, they manage and I don’t think most know there is a difference there either. Its also interesting that people look up to some “leaders” that are not in named leadership roles, those being the Emergent Leader. Sometimes we all have that one person we go to for everything.
Laurie, I agree that there are people who are not in a "leader role" but are know as the go-to person. I have seen numerous supervisors tend to gravitate towards certain subordinates when in search of answers. I think that person is an example of an Emergent Leader.
I completely agree. It's clear to see the difference between managers and leaders. Unfortunately, there are some "managers" that know the difference between leading and managing but are unwilling to self-reflect and make the change themselves. It is incumbent upon leaders in positions higher than those "managers" to help guide them into transitioning from a manager to a leader.
Approaches to leadership covered topics of different types of leadership and bases of power. According to the lecture there is no leadership without a group of people (followers). Leaders have influence on how the group meets their goals. There are different types of leadership, such as assigned and emergent. Assigned leadership is based on title and emergent leadership is not based on title but based on their emergence within the group through communication.
The five bases of power was interesting in that I can see the different bases of power held by individuals in my own agency. The referent power holder is the buddy buddy supervisor. The expert power holder is the go to guy or gal for the "right way" to do things. The legitimate and reward power is held by command staff and supervisors. In some cases the coercive power is also held by some supervisors and command staff.
I believe the coercive power will not get good results being that it is punitive. Expert power is a good one.
In this section, leadership, included many different topic such as it being a process, involving influence, occurring in groups, interactive, influential, deriving from power (referent, expert, legitimate, and reward), and more. The thing that stood out most to me though, was the ethical and moral importance. Ethical leaders earn trust. Absent trust, the ability to lead well is affected.
I agree that trust is an absolute when it comes to leadership. The lecture stated there must be a group and there must be influence but there is no influence over people who do not trust. This largely effects organizations inside and out. The employees need to trust the organization and the citizens/patrol must trust in the organization as well. Thus, the organization must trust their employees. It is a fragile circle that needs ethical leaders to keep it together.
In my career what I have struggled with is where to direct my energy. It is interesting to relate where a leader should direct their energy and finding a mutual purpose. In law enforcement it is obvious that our main goal is maintaining the safety and order of our respective communities. However, in exploring how to hone in on a more specific mutual purpose with those at all levels we can reduce burn out and frustration because of a more dedicated energy and directed purpose.
The approaches to the Leadership Module was insightful. I have been in the position to promote people into leadership roles, and I am amazed at the how they preform differently then expected. Before this lesson I never thought of the difference between a manager and leader, and that you can be a manager without being a leader. I agree with this lesson, in that if you pick one approach and use that exclusively in your leadership of the group, you are going to fail. This is because individuals react differently to different leadership approaches. To be a well-rounded leader you must adopt the situational approach.
Great point Chris regarding management and leadership. I too was struck with management being like leadership, but not being used interchangeably.
After viewing the lecture on Approaches to Leadership, several things caught my attention but the five major leaderships styles resonates with me. Having several different supervisors and Chief's of police, they all had different styles of management. Some had team management approach while most had authority-compliance. My supervision style has changed through the years, in 2007 I became a sergeant on Patrol,and took the team management approach. Now i find myself more the authority-compliance which I find is less motivating for the employee.
This was a very informative lecture on leadership. A leader is able to influence a group to achieve a common goal. A positive attitude and leading by example goes a long way. We as leaders should always try to influence our subordinates in a positive manner and bring them up to level they should be functioning on.
Leadership is often thought of as power. I think leadership is the process of influencing a group to achieve a common goal. Therefore, when a leader possess the power of influence then he will be able to guide an organization to achieve the goals.
I agree that we are trying to achieve a common goal...a good leader can lead a group to do that.
The Approaches to Leadership module was very informative. The need for an ethical style of leadership is more important now than ever. I have worked through some of the other styles of leadership discussed in this lecture and I agree a positive leadership style is imperative.
I found the components of operational leadership informative: leadership is a process and leadership involves influence ring true to me. Learning as in leadership is a life time process. The influence we exercise can reap positive and negative results depending on our approach.
I agree with your statement, leadership is a life time process.
I think everyone has been exposed to each of the leadership styles detailed by Dr. Normore. In viewing the lecture, it appears easy to chose which style you wish to be. I think everyone starts out trying to emulate "Authentic Leadership", but some for various reasons drift to one of the other styles. This may be due to personality or lack of effort. I believe ethical and authentic leadership takes effort. I once heard someone say, "I've had a lot of bosses. I've never had a leader, until now."
We have to learn the difference between manager and leader.
I've been fortunate to have 2 true leaders in my career. Unfortunately, the bosses are found more often but I believe the trend is changing with our current administration's push for increased training for up and coming supervisors.
I agree with your comments. People leave managers not organizations.
I agree, I think with today's views on law enforcement it is imperative that we follow the Authentic Leadership style. You are right it takes effort and a lot of persistence, but the reward are out weighs the effort.
I have personally seen this toxic attitude from senior squad members and supervisors ruining the moral and drive of many new officers. My own drive and moral being one of them that was affected for a short time. I eventually realized that those in the leadership roles were more of managers lacking the ability and understanding to actually lead. Other patrolman and myself took the initiative to start leading others by boosting the moral with the “common goal” principle. This not only affected the moral but boosted the work output of the patrolman, while also changing some of the negative ways of those supervisors working above us.
One of the components of operationalizing leadership I liked in the module is “INFLUENCE”. I believe this is the core of the process. How do you conduct yourself to influence others to ensure leadership takes place within your unit? If you show up with a bad attitude and no positive outlook, how are you influencing those that follow you? No matter the situation and heavy tasks you are dealing with on any given day, always find the positive and try to influence others to do the same. Lead by example
Influence appears to be everything. How many times have we seen a senior squad member or even a supervisor infect the others with toxic attitude. How many times has a mediocre group become superstars due to the positive nature of one member?
I have witness this though my career having work under six different chiefs .
This is so true. Sadly, so often in the culture of law enforcement we direct our energy to those with toxic attitudes and values. In directing our energy to focus more on the positives we can lead our group into a culture that encourages success and discourages those with toxic attitudes.
This session re-enforced how all of the leadership management styles have been described. Not all of the styles are identified by the same name as I was originally taught , but they are all same. It takes along time to recognize a true leader and one can be mislead following the wrong person. An ethical leader is someone who in my opinion is that person who is quit but knowledge and is not the life of the party type of person.
After a review of the Components of Leadership I believe one of the most important is the "Leadership that involves Common Goals". If you do not get your officers to "Buy in" they don't have any "skin in the game". If they share a common goal they are more likely to care about the final results.
I agree hundred percent to having subordinates buy into a goal and help make decisions goes a long way for your agency. When you feel like you are involved and have ownership, you are more likely to put forth more effort and care about the out come.
I totally agree with the assessment that we need to have common goals to be vested in a job if at all possible, but along with that I believe that when it gets tough because your officers may not, "Buy in," that is when an authentic leadership approach bridges the gap and helps for the officers to get on board to get the job done.
Most definitely. The entire organization must know the goals and objectives of the department, from the chief to the rookie. The message must be conveyed or it will lead problems with community relations and dissention among the officers.
I totally agree. When there is a common goal that everyone is working toward it helps make everyone work together. When everyone is working together toward the same goal it improves everyone's attitude and outlook about the job.
When your team is part of the planning, it becomes their plan as much as it is the team leader's plan. The team will fight harder to achieve their goal because it is their plan. Jocko Willink speaks about this in one of his books, I believe in Leadership Strategy and Tactics.
In reviewing the lecture for Approaches to Leadership, I reflected upon how my agency has transformed from the management to leadership approach over the last several years. When I began my law enforcement career, most supervisors that I worked for were just managers. I think back at how many of those supervisor's lacked the traits of being an effective leader and how it showed in the quality and productivity of the work that was produced. I was fortunate enough to have a great leader come into our agency when our current Sheriff was elected. That leader transformed me in many different ways. He is a big part of why I was able to accomplish my goals up to this point in my life and career. It is because of that leader's approach and beliefs that I remained in this career field. That leader has left a great legacy in this agency and played a major role in evolving our agency to becoming a better place.
I can relate to the past and working for "managers" during my military career. It seemed at that time if you held the rank then you were put in the position to lead your team. Same goes for some of our law enforcement agencies is sometimes a job is created for that person because they are a better manager than a leader. Once someone gets into the position of leader and understands the many facets it takes to lead the organization to the common goals then a positive change usually takes place. Managers are put in managing positions and leaders are put in their position to lead and make the unit more cohesive and efficient
I agree Captain, our agency has evolved so much in the last decade. We have done a great job of transforming the type of leadership in this department.
The approaches to leadership module is very informative. This module gives me a lot to think about as a supervisor. I can see that I use a few of these methods of leadership. The situational leadership style along with the ethical leadership style I think most often. With the varying ages and backgrounds of staff, different leadership styles I think are necessary. Employees react differently to varying types of leadership. I don't think being stuck to one type of leadership style will allow you to lead all types of people. Having the ability to go back and forth between styles will allow you to lead different people and still attain the common goal for the agency.
I very much agree with needing different leadership styles based solely on the years on the job and generational differences seen among staff. I find that the younger deputies thrive on feedback much more than those who have been doing the job for years.
What i have learned about my self as a leader in this module is that i uses several different styles of leadership. The approach i take as a leader depends on what kind of issue i am dealing with. I find myself leaning lean towards a country club leader when i am with a new supervisor or officer dealing with a issue i do this because i want them to feel comfortable making decisions and not to rely on others making decisions for them and by doing this i am able correct their decisions in the case their wrong and i can explain why the decision they made was wrong or right and this i believe help to build confidence in their ability to make decisions.
What I found to be interesting in this model is learning the differences between leadership and management and how both relate to each other. Coming from the military, I was used to an Authoritative style of leadership. I know there is a place for it in Law Enforcement however in general, I believe people want to be mentored, trained and trusted and they want to have a voice and ownership in what they do. I have learned that as leaders of our organizations, we must remain adaptive and understand where our personnel are and how we best can help them accomplish their organizational and personal goals. I don’t know that a one size fits all for leadership approach would be effective, at least at my agency. In my opinion, as police professionals, we need to have the ability to adapt and have the capacity to be situational leaders.
I agree with you post. Being able to flex with your leadership styles depending on the situation is critical in today's organizations. The old hands understand the "military style" of leadership, Say and do. The younger group that are here to replace us in years to come want to understand the "why" of our leadership. Explaining the reason we do things is where we are going instead of the do what I say leadership.
I enjoyed learning about the various styles of leadership and what they entail. In our organization, and from what it sounds like a lot of others, people are promoted due to a specific trait as opposed to their leadership style. At our agency, we have definitely had managers that "think" they are leading a certain way; however, the officers on the streets do not respect the manager for whatever reason. We have had the authoritarian leader who micromanage everyone and everything. Everything was a fight with this individual and it was rarely effective. On the far contrast, we have the country club leader, who sits back and lets everyone else run the department. I do not think that one specific leadership style is appropriate to qualify you as a leader. I feel a blend and oftentimes switching between the different leadership styles is one of the most important leadership styles one can have. There may be an instance where one leadership style would be advantageous for the task at hand. Then the next day a different style is warranted. The key, I believe, is to be flexible and adapt to the situation at hand.
I agree with you.I think one type of leadership will only get you so far as a leader and you have may have to use different leadership styles to be a productive leader. With law enforcement you have to use different styles of leadership with different people. I think to be a true leader you have to be flexible on your styles of leadership.
During module #2, I learned about the various leadership approached that are out there, along with the meaning of leadership; which is an indivdiual influencing a group of indivdiuals to achieve a common goal. However, I have learned leadership is not that simple. Leadership is a process, which involves obtaining the trust of you followers within a group. A Trait Perspective Leader style will only get you so far. During module #2, I found the Authentic Leadership Approach to be new and interesting along with the three elements; Intrapersonal, Developmental, and Interpersonal. Authentic Leadship contains some welcomed character traits needed in a leader. I also learned the difference between a leader and manager, as a leader influences and a manager plans and coordinates with no true concerns for their subordinates.
I thoroughly enjoyed this lesson on approaches to leadership. Much like in this lesson, I see my organization having leaders who have all five bases of power, Referent, Expert, Legitimate, Reward and Coercive. We have a good leadership base, but in the past, we had all types of leadership, specifically in our patrol division. It was evident that when patrol shift sign-ups were posted, they were usually delayed at the officer level until supervisors signed up. This was due to officers desiring to work for specific supervisors (Corporals, Sergeants, Lieutenants). We had leaders who leaned heavily on Legitimate and Coercive power, while the more popular was due to their base of power lying in Referent, Expert and Reward bases. Not many people wanted to work for those supervisors who relied heavily on their position or abilities to punish. Rather, they preferred working for those supervisors who were good leaders based upon their knowledge, the officer's trust in them and their ability to help them reach their professional goals.
I really enjoyed how this module broke down the five major leadership styles as it caused me to reflect on my personal leadership style. I definitely lean more toward the “authoritative” style of leadership. Having an authoritative style of leadership is probably not the most ideal style in this day and age. However, I don’t think supervisors fall completely into one category, but rather are a blend of influential leaders from their past. They take bits and pieces from past leaders and develop their own style. I personally gravitated to the more militaristic style of leadership since I was former military. I excelled under this style of leadership. So when I was developing my style, I hit some rough patches as I’m sure most new leaders encounter. I found resistance when I emulated the leaders I admired, and quickly recognized the subordinates that had issue with my style of leadership were accustom to a “Country Club” style of leadership. I did not want to give up my values and join the country club, so I had to change my approach to leadership. Over time, my style of leadership eventually blended with an Authority/Team style.
This lesson gave a good overview of the difference between leadership and management. Often we hear supervisors talk about their authority because of the rank they hold. I recently was talking with sergeant about the development of his subordinates and his role he played to developing his personnel. It became clear that his objective was more in line with command and control with outcomes being the objective; i.e., handling of calls in a timely manner, completion of reports, etc.
We discussed the development of his personnel with a focus on what his team members wanted to accomplish and their goals as a police officer. This resulted in our conversation about influence and the essence of leadership. Those in our care and how we mentor and develop our people. This was a teaching moment for the sergeant and a realization on how he could have a positive impact on an employee and the entire department. The positive influence on our people and their development. This comes through being authentic, influence and caring about your people.
I can completely relate to your post and your interaction with your sergeant. Our agency has gone though significant turnover of personnel. We have many new sergeants who don’t understand the importance of mentorship and the development of their people. It was just recently that my agency created a supervisors orientation / mentoring course where new supervisors are being taught the technical aspects of their job and highlighting and reinforcing the need to continually mentor and develop subordinates. Sergeants are required to meet with their subordinates to identify their organizational and personal goals and how the sergeant will commit to help them. The program thus far has been successful in changing the mindset of sergeants and corporal at our agency. Of course not every one buys into it.
In the early stages of my career, I focused heavily on managing my tasks and the operations for which I was responsible, and despite my lack of formal training in leadership, I enjoyed many successes. As I look back on that time with the hindsight of the lessons taught in this module, I see that many of my successes occurred not necessarily because I successfully managed the task at hand, but largely because I used, without knowingly seeking to do so, some of the leadership principles outlined in this module. These practices included being verbally involved, being informed, seeking others' opinions and initiating new ideas. In applying the same review to my failures, I now see that many of my failures were at least partially, if not largely, the result of my inability to be firm yet not rigid. It's also evident to me that as I have promoted, I am less able to address the challenges I face with a management approach, but instead am relying far more on the leadership advice and experiences that are shared with me by leaders in my organization.
I found the Approaches to Leadership lecture to be very informative. The topics discussed touched on some areas that I hadn't previously given much thought, but believe are very relevant and important for leaders to adopt. I was particularly interested in the differentiation between the concepts of management versus leadership. As stated in the lecture, management was created as a way to reduce chaos in organizations to allow for a more effective and efficient workflow. I think people are often misguided in believing that because they are able to manage effectively, they too are also good leaders. However, it is important to differentiate that managing and leading are not synonymous. Leadership is about effectiveness and influence of others. One cannot lead if they have no followers - and followers only choose a path of leadership if the person leading is someone they trust and can relate to in values and ethics. This is accomplished through authentic and ethical leadership, as these leadership styles breed credibility and respect built on a foundation of trust.
I cannot agree with you more on the effectiveness and influence leadership has on others. Managed people won't follow but with guidance, trust and transparency a leader will emerge.
This module regarding various approaches to leadership is very interesting. We often see police officers successfully complete the promotional process and become managers, who truly are not leaders. They assume the role utilizing their positional authority/power to try and lead subordinates. As discussed, the manager may be able to plan, organize, staff shifts/events, and provide an appropriate level of control, but their effectiveness and influence may be limited if they're not a leader. I think it is very important to know your style of leadership (task vs. relationship) and surround yourself with another manager who can take the opposing style. As we attempt to provide leadership in our agencies, I have seen the need to consistently modify the approach when interacting with various dilemmas, people, or cultures. The authentic approach is one I haven't heard prior, but unknowingly align with after learning of its components.
Captain Primicerio makes some good points in the above post about the need to consistently modify your leadership approach when dealing with different people and situations. The "one size fits all" approach definitely does not apply to leadership because of the variety of situations and cultures. These influence the manner in which leaders must behave and react to be effective and maintain trusting and productive followers.
i also agree with Captain Primicerio, age, race, gender, and culture will all play important parts in how you deal with people as an effective leader
I too have seen individuals promoted, in some cases to executive-level positions, because they were very good at the technical aspects of their job, while little or no consideration was given to their leadership abilities. In many cases, these candidates failed to function at an acceptable level and the organization that they led suffered from their lack of leadership ability. I have also seen several such candidates become successful leaders because their superiors, after recognizing that leadership was a necessary area of development, committed to helping them grow and develop their leadership skills through training and mentoring. For me personally, I have, as you suggested, sought the assistance of others either because they possessed a different style or were simply further along (i.e. more experienced or knowledgable) in their leadership journey. Doing so has greatly contributed to my development and overall success.
We also have that issue here where people are promoted without any leadership skills, however it is due to Civil Service Laws that require individuals be promoted if they are next up once they have taken the test.
That is definitely a downfall with Civil Service Laws. If you can pass the test they administer and you are next in line you get the promotion. No leadership skills needed. Law Enforcement definitely has it's challenges ahead. But with leadership training like this we have some hope. Our agency has gotten on-board with this leadership program and has required some other forms of the leadership training as a requirement for promotions and/or transfers. Maybe Civil Service will do the same some day.
I agree. While I understand and appreciate the protections afforded by Civil Service laws, it does promote and environment of management over true leadership.
I have worked under a civil service system and it was a joke. Not only do you have to just pass a test, but then there is the unspoken demographic "quotas" they must fill. I do not think qualifications of the individual was on the list of requirements. This process has destroyed the PD that employs them.
I recognize that Civil Service testing and promotions has flaws, and I agree that a test score and years of service should not be what decides the next promotion. You have the same problems through many elected office as well. I would like to see the future of law enforcement promotion processes place value on the competencies and individual attributes of a candidate.
Yes but if leaders are made not born wouldn't the best solution be to implement better training system? whether it's civil service rules of municipal Dept or "good ole boy" rules of an elected office, it is what it is. only way to fix it is to teach them
Todd I agree with the need for better training for potential leaders. If a person truly wants to be a good leader they they will accept and be eager to obtain training on the topic. If potential leaders were all offered but were not accepting to it then you could weed out people that may not be suitable for the job.
I agree Chris. When I started out I followed people that were good at the technical aspects of the job, because I wanted to learn. Now I surround myself with people that have influenced me to make good changes. True leaders.
I have also seen people promoted into positions based on completing a testing process with no thought as to whether they can do the leadership aspect of the job. The style approach was the overall skill set measured without looking for authentic aspects of leadership. The teams suffered and proved to be dysfunctional in the end as the individual needs and visions were never explored just the tunnel vision on the end product.
I agree that people who promote within a law enforcement agency often become managers and not leaders. After reading your comment, I was trying to think about why this may be the case. Two ideas come to mind - 1. This may be by design in some agencies. Many agencies that I come across appear to have leaders (Chiefs/Sheriff's) who want managers to carry out their directives and to run all decisions by them. As a result, future managers are developed, as opposed to future leaders. To take this a step further, the agencies that develop managers are often the ones that don't allow mistakes (possibly the result of the community/City Council not tolerating mistakes?) which makes the decisions of managers all that much more important (and therefore requiring approval of higher ranking officers). 2. The second thing that comes to mind is with minimal staffing and numerous tasks needing to be accomplished, the manager is a manager of tasks first by necessity and a leader second. While inundated with tasks, finding time to lead (mentor, develop, influence, etc) is difficult or not a priority (either individual or agency priority). As leaders in our organization, it is important to emphasize the need for leadership and foster it's development throughout the ranks.
This is very true in our profession- positional power/authority is consistent because of our quasi-military structure and focus on command and control. Though important, this is really only necessary when responding to a critical incident or major event.
The majority of police supervision should be focusing on development of our personnel and instilling the qualities of a MAGNUS Officer. The virtues of leadership is really about the influence we have on our people, community and society.
I agree that there is a definite correlation between the virtues of a Magnus officer and the elements of effective leadership. The virtues of a Magnus officer and their pursuit of moral goodness are the same building blocks of an effective leader. Serving the agency over self, and possessing a shared vision of the agency are important in selecting leaders and then developing them.
I totally agree that a good leader needs to continually evaluate their style of leadership and make modifications so that they can get the best out of their subordinates. But I've seen "leaders" flip and flop their styles so much, they lose sight of their core values. When this happens, they also lose the respect of their followers.
I agree with your assessment that some leaders gain their position, without having true leadership abilities. How can your agency improve on this? Would a change in the promotional process help with this? I realize with an agency as large as yours it is difficult to know the true leadership qualities of your promotional candidates, however, is there any room to improve so that your agency promotes leaders with qualities the organization seeks?
I could not agree more with your post in reference to indivdiuals completing the promotional process and becoming managers, within the orgainization not leaders. As you stated they can plan, organize, and take care of the administrative duties, but they are not leading the organization or their team of division. We are failing to properly mentor our personnel. However, that is a cultural issue within many of our organizations that we must change as we attempt to become Magnus. I am looking forward to improving my skills and abilities to share with others.
Bonillas - very much agree that the mentoring is not present. My agency will loosely request us to find a mentor. That individual of our choice may be just a friend and not necessarily a good mentor. Shortly following the promotion, the role diminishes and doesn't continue. We definitely need career-long mentors to help us navigate through the constant obstacles.
I was just having a recent conversation regarding a supervisor being a good Manager, but not necessarily a good leader. This is often difficult, especially during times when a leader is really required to do the job.
I agree that some who are promoted may become a successful manager, but still fail to lead. Watching Jocko’s intro video, I could see how some management could immediately look to place blame down the chain. An effective manager, with leadership qualities, will look past this and take ownership of the problems. This will have a positive influence moving forward, and inspire others to learn from mistakes, rather than get hung up on a negative event. Without influence, leadership does not exist.
I also agree with your comment about knowing your style, and to surround yourself with another manager who can take the opposing style. Having opposing styles may be an effective approach to reach out to other officers, where the other style may not be as effective.
I agree with Jared Primicerio that this module is very interesting and explains much of what I have seen in the past within my agency. I notice that, in the past, quite a few of the of the supervisors I have worked for in my career appear to focus on “Coercive Power”. They tend to be interested in their own goals and not the goals and needs of their subordinates.