Leadership Vignettes



Leadership Vignette Teaching Notes

These vignettes were designed for use in masters-level leadership courses, specifically a course called “Leading People and Managing Relationships” taught at Duquesne University. The vignettes were used as a learning assessment measure for the course objective: (students will) “utilize interpretive frameworks when exercising organizational leadership.” Secondary objectives that the vignettes supported included “demonstrate effective use of self as an instrument of change” and “integrate current theoretical and practical perspectives on leadership with their own practice of leading people and managing relationships.”

Vignettes were used as follows:

1. First, distribute the “Sample Vignette,” “Sample Vignette Rubric,” and “Response to Sample Vignette” (pages 3 – 6). Students do not write a response to the Sample Vignette – it is merely an example of what they are expected to do: namely, respond to a different vignette while meeting the criteria specified in the rubric.

2. Next, distribute “‘Leading Up’ - Vignette A” and “Rubric for Response to ‘Leading Up’ - Vignette A” (pages 7 - 9). The rubric criteria are identical to those of the “Sample Vignette Rubric” – only the heading on the page is different. Give students the assignment to write a response to the vignette, due in one week. Word count targets for response length were between 1,000 and 1,750 words (i.e., 4-7 double spaced pages).

3. The instructor gives students qualitative feedback on their responses. Feedback is of three types: (a) how well the student did in meeting the rubric criteria; (b) acknowledgement of and appreciation for the student’s using his or her strengths (identified by the student in the response), and (c) affirmations of the student’s choices and reasoning, and/or suggestions for other possible ways of framing the situation.

4. In a second round of vignettes and responses, distribute the “‘Leading Out’ - Vignette B” (vignettes B1 and B2) and the “Rubric for Response to ‘Leading Out’ – Vignette B” (pages 17 – 19). Again, the rubric criteria are identical to those preceding it. Assign students to write a response to one or the other of the two ‘Leading Out’ vignettes (either B1 or B2), using the same guidelines as the previous assignment.

5. When students turn in their responses to the “‘Leading Out’ – Vignette B,” pair them with another student (e.g., a student who wrote the other ‘Leading Out’ vignette), and have them exchange copies of their responses. Assign them the task of giving their partner feedback of the three types that the instructor modeled in (3) above. Guidelines for doing so appear below on p. 29.

Other Notes and Possible Variations

1. The rubric criteria were specifically designed relative to course content. For example, because Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond® model was a primary interpretive framework students were taught in the course, each ‘corner’ of the Diamond was explicitly mentioned in the rubric. Similarly, because Now Discover Your Strengths and Political Savvy were course texts, students had to draw upon the concepts and models presented in those texts. These criteria could be replaced or modified to emphasize different leadership frameworks.

2. These vignettes were originally used in an online section of the course and subsequently used in a face-to-face section. The feedback on the responses and the partnering were accomplished differently in these different mediums, but use of the vignettes was essentially the same.

3. Sample responses to the “Leading Up” and “Leading Out” vignettes (two for Vignette A, pp. 10 – 16 and two for Vignette B1, pp. 20 - 25) are reproduced here for benefit of instructors. They may help alert you to some possible ways that students will frame these situations in terms of opportunities to lead. It is recommended that these responses not be distributed to students.

4. Additional vignettes could be created for “self-leadership,” “leading down,” or “leading across” (i.e., across organizational boundaries, such as with a vendor and/or supplier) scenarios.

5. Students could be asked to write their own vignettes and/or rubrics. This could be especially helpful in teaching students (such as leadership educators) who have responsibility for supporting the development of other leaders.

Acknowledgements and Guidelines for Reproducing These Materials

1. The inspiration for using such “mini-cases” with rubrics came from Maria Kish. See:

Kish, M. H. Z. (2004). Using vignettes to develop higher order thinking and academic achievement in adult learners in an online environment (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University, 2004). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (AAT 3145405).

2. Major credit for authoring the “Leading Up – Vignette A” and “Leading Out – Vignette B1” belongs to Patricia Doherty; for the rubrics, Sample Vignette (with response), and “Leading Out – Vignette B2) to Jim Wolford-Ulrich. Sample responses to the two vignettes were actual responses written by students of Patty Doherty.

3. Permission is hereby given for the reproduction and further distribution of these materials subject to the following conditions:

▪ Inclusion of any of these vignettes, rubrics or sample responses in a published work requires permission of Patricia Doherty and Jim Wolford-Ulrich. Contact them at dohertynh@ and ulrich@duq.edu.

▪ Posting of this document or any portion thereof on the internet is prohibited.

▪ Instructors in accredited leadership education programs may freely use and make copies of these materials in the context of their teaching provided that the copyright notice at the bottom of each page is preserved: “©2006 Duquesne University, Patricia Doherty, and Jim Wolford-Ulrich.”

▪ If vignettes, the rubric, or other materials are modified or adapted for use in a course with different interpretive frameworks or based on different leadership models, we would appreciate (depending on the degree of similarity) inclusion of acknowledgment, such as: “Adapted from materials developed by Patricia Doherty and Jim Wolford-Ulrich of Duquesne University in 2006.”

← Sample Vignette

You are Lee Evans, Manager of Community Relations for a local animal shelter. You have worked there for 8 years and really enjoy the work you do, which includes public relations, special events, some fund raising, and serving as liaison for educational programs with local schools. You report to Pat Knox, the Director, who has only worked in the shelter 2 years, and only has a total of 5 years in animal rescue / animal rights organizations. Pat only has 1 year experience at the Director level.

The animal shelter has nearly doubled in size and capacity in the last 3 years, partly due to your efforts in garnering local support from the community, and partly due to the closure of another nearby facility.

Lately Pat has placed more and more demands on you, even for some things that fall outside your official duties. At first, you pitched in gladly, because the shelter was short on staff. Now, two key positions (Facility Manager and Manager of Animal Services) remain unfilled, and there appear to be no viable candidates being considered for either job. You are working longer and longer hours. Your enthusiasm for your regular job duties is waning. Your assistant asked you recently why you seemed irritable and short tempered. You have begun casually reading the employment ads, wondering if there are other opportunities that wouldn’t be so stressful.

Recently you heard that two other people who also report to Pat have had similar experiences. The Volunteer Coordinator has been asked several times recently to help clean up the facility at the end of the day, and the Veterinary Clinic Manager was asked to help answer the hotline when the phone attendant called in sick.

You had a performance appraisal 3 months ago, and Pat told you you were doing an outstanding job. Two weeks ago, you told Pat you are experiencing near-intolerable levels of stress, and you asked Pat how much longer it would be until the two open positions were filled. She simply answered, “Whenever we manage to find minimally qualified people who will agree to work for what little we can afford to pay them.” Yesterday you told Pat that next month, due to family commitments, you could not work more than your normal 40 hours per week. Pat replied that everyone else was pitching in, and asked, “Why aren’t you a good ‘team player’ like the others?”

The animal shelter is governed by a seven-member non-paid Board of Directors. You are good friends with the current Board Chair. Other Board members are good friends with the Volunteer Coordinator and Clinic Manager.

This morning you see Pat come to work an hour and a half late. You resent the fact that you’re being asked to work overtime, while your boss is coming to work late.

What do you do as a leader in this situation, and why?

Sample Vignette Rubric

1. The response is written in the first person, and the writer (student) identifies with the leader in the vignette.

2. The response uses language of personal responsibility. [Fault or blame is not placed on others. Perceptions are owned as the leader’s reality, not assumed to be how everyone views the situation. The leader seeks to understand his or her contribution to the problem, and moves toward a solution – not away from it. Commitments are not qualified by ‘perhaps’ or ‘maybe.’]

3. The leader’s response includes and is based upon a realistic assessment of the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – reality – or other supporting source]

4. The response suggests and defends a framework (i.e., one of DeLuca’s 9 political styles) for viewing one or more actors in the vignette. [If the vignette does not contain adequate information to identify one style, speculate which 2 or 3 styles best fit the actor(s).]

5. The leader identifies what he or she wants in the situation, what is the vision or desired outcome(s) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond –vision – or other supporting source].

6. The response identifies and explores at least three choices for action available to the leader.

7. The leader’s response acknowledges risks and rewards inherent in the various options (e.g., in choices about how to use power, how to manage anxiety or personal stress, and in accepting the consequences of one’s actions) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – courage – or other supporting source].

8. The response notes at least one area of uncertainty or ambiguity, and identifies one or more ways the leader will act to reduce it.

9. The response gives evidence that the leader is aware of how he or she feels about the situation and about his or her choices in the situation [emotional intelligence].

10. The response refers to results from one or more self-assessment instruments (e.g., Strengths Finder, Learning Style Inventory) and makes effective use of the leader’s strengths, perspectives, and relationships [use of self as an instrument of change]. [To the extent that it is consistent with the way the vignette describes the leader, assign one or more of your own strengths (e.g., obtained from the StrengthsFinder inventory) to the leader in the vignette. In other words, it is possible that two people – each with unique strengths – will respond to the vignette in somewhat different ways.]

11. The leader identifies one or more principles or behavioral guidelines (e.g., ethical considerations) that inform the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – ethics – or other supporting source].

12. The response takes a positive approach, is not overcome by difficulties inherent in the situation, but identifies creative possibilities for action and/or moving the leader’s story forward [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – greatness – or other supporting source].

Response to Sample Vignette

Prolonged vacancies in two key positions have placed stress on the entire work unit. I do not know for a fact that these vacancies are Pat’s fault, as I am not directly involved in the hiring process for either position. Over time, these vacancies could lead to lost productivity, lowered quality, and a damaged reputation in the community, not to mention increased job dissatisfaction and potentially more staff turnover. In the short run, I am angry about what appears to be hypocrisy on Pat’s part, and I am worried about how I am going to meet my family obligations next month

What I want in this situation is for our shelter’s performance to regain its prior level, my boss’ managerial skills to improve, and my own work load to return to normal.

Pat’s two responses to me (both negative, both reactive) indicate she could be what DeLuca calls a Cynic.

One choice I have available to me is (1) to do nothing for now. When my family obligation draws closer, I could just remind Pat of my need, and reaffirm that I will work my regular 40 hours, and that I will be sure to perform my regular duties. I had a recent good performance review, in case Pat tries to take disciplinary action against me.

I could also (2) talk to my co-workers to find out if any of them knows how much longer these conditions will last. They may have additional information.

I could (3) let my friend, the Board Chair, know what is going on and hope that the proper action gets taken – and soon. If it didn’t happen fast enough, I could have my co-workers contact their friends on the Board.

The course of action I plan to take, however, is (4) to talk privately with Pat. I will share my views of the situation and affirm the outcomes I want for the shelter and for myself. Then I will explore how I might help the situation. For example, I could offer to assist with recruitment of one or both of the open positions, or we could explore together how all of us could work together to speed up the recruitment and hiring process. This would be a natural use for my Restorative (problem solver) strength.

I would also share the de-motivating effect on me of being asked to work overtime, but then seeing my boss come in an hour and a half late. I suppose it’s possible the tardiness was work-related, but then I’d be giving Pat an opportunity to explain. Knowing this is important to me because of my Fairness (need for balance) strength.

Choices #1, 2 and 3 are the least risky for me personally. Choice #1 might help me achieve my vision for me personally, but is likely to do nothing to help the center as a whole return to normal staffing levels. Choice #2 could decrease trust between Pat and my-coworkers, and increase my co-workers’ dissatisfaction with Pat. Choice #3 could get Pat into trouble, and even if it led to a change in the situation. It might actually take longer for the staffing situation to be addressed.

Choice #4 will take more courage on my part. Of the four choices, it is the one that would help Pat to trust me more. In fact, it could help correct Pat’s misperception of me as not working collaboratively with the others. I would be modeling (leading by example) open, honest and direct communication that is sensitive to my needs and Pat’s needs and is appropriate to the situation – the kind of communication I want Pat and my co-workers to practice also.

I am not sure what else I can do in the face of Pat’s cynicism. I hope that my strength of Positivity can influence Pat for the better as I model optimism in this situation.

I believe choice #4 would be the most leader-like course of action, given my strengths and other dimensions of this situation.

References

Clifton, D., & Buckingham, M. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: Free Press.

DeLuca, J. R. (1999). Political savvy: Systematic approaches to leadership behind the scenes. Berwyn, PA: Evergreen Business Group.

Koestenbaum, P. (1991). The leadership diamond: Four strategies for greatness. In Leadership: The inner side of greatness (pp. 83-104). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

“Leading Up” - Vignette A

The company in question, Healthcare Fixes, is a privately held manufacturer of healthcare equipment. The company has approximately 400 employees, has yearly revenue of $85 million, and relies exclusively on independent distributors to sell its product.

At issue is the creation of a four-day training program that is being created to train new hires who work for the independent distributors. Three regional managers have been given the task of creating modules that are to be combined for this four day training session. This sales program, once fully developed, would be adopted as the “official training program” and would be used by all eight regional managers in their territories to train new hires that have been brought on board by their distributors.

The three regional managers who have been given the task of creating the modules have all been hired by Stephen Banks, their direct supervisor and the National Sales Manager; all three were hired within the last three years. Stephen Banks has only been with the company for four years. He came to Healthcare Fixes having already established himself in a successful military career and a career in international sales. He has a degree in English.

The three regional managers who are creating this training program all have ten or more years of experience in healthcare sales and are considered experts in the field. Although the three regional managers were given the reigns to create their individual modules for this training session, there is an expectation that all of the information will be reviewed, edited, and approved by Stephen prior to conducting the first training.

The other five regional managers who have not been asked to create this program, but who will benefit by using the training modules in their territories, have been with Healthcare Fixes for a very long time; some have been with the company for twenty to twenty-five years. Although all eight regional managers respect Stephen Banks and they view him as an excellent executive level trainer, lately they have been questioning his ability to communicate with new hires or with people whom Mr. Banks considers less educated or less experienced than he.

The regional managers’ fears are soon realized when they begin to submit their modules for this training session to Stephen. The feedback they are given by Stephen surprises all of them and seems to indicate that the managers and Stephen are approaching this assignment from two different directions. As the editing of the modules goes back and forth, the four regional managers see less and less of their ideas and more of Stephen’s ideas – much of which the managers view as irrelevant and difficult to present. They feel the material seems more suited for advanced sales training.

To complicate matters, Stephen Banks seems to have a real preference for working with the employees that he has hired, and he has been reluctant to take advice from the long-term regional sales managers who were on board before he arrived at Healthcare Fixes. Ultimately, the four regional managers who are creating this training will be executing the first training without Mr. Banks’ presence. Although the five veteran regional managers have not been asked to take part in creating this training, the four regional managers tasked with creating this program have been actively soliciting their input for the material.

Mr. Banks works directly under three senior executives: the VP of Marketing, the Chief Operations Officer (COO), and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Mr. Banks very much wants to fit in with this company and is always presenting the successes of his regional sales team as his own personal success.

You are one of the three regional managers who have been tasked with creating and presenting the first sales training class. Your territory is sending half of the new hires (6 out of 12) that will constitute the first training class. Given the fact that there has been such turnover in your territory, it is imperative to you and to your future income that you provide these new employees with the skills and information they need to open the door for sales in your territory.

As the regional sales manager and the leader of your territory, what do you do in this situation and why?

Use the criteria listed on the rubric on the next page as the framework from which to consider and respond to this vignette.

Rubric for Response to “Leading Up” - Vignette A

1. The response is written in the first person, and the writer (student) identifies with the leader in the vignette.

2. The response uses language of responsibility (avoids attributions, labels, hedge words, etc.).

3. The leader’s response includes and is based upon a realistic assessment of the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – reality – or other supporting source]

4. The response suggests and defends a framework (i.e., one of DeLuca’s 9 political styles) for viewing one or more actors in the vignette.

5. The leader identifies what he or she wants in the situation, what is the vision or desired outcome(s) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond –vision – or other supporting source].

6. The response identifies and explores at least three choices for action available to the leader.

7. The leader’s response acknowledges risks and rewards inherent in the various options (e.g., in choices about how to use power, how to manage anxiety or personal stress, and in accepting the consequences of one’s actions) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – courage – or other supporting source].

8. The response notes at least one area of uncertainty or ambiguity, and identifies one or more ways the leader will act to reduce it.

9. The response gives evidence that the leader is aware of how he or she feels about the situation and about his or her choices in the situation [emotional intelligence].

10. The response refers to results from one or more self-assessment instruments (e.g., strengths finder, Learning Styles Inventory) and makes effective use of the leader’s strengths, perspectives, and relationships [use of self as an instrument of change].

11. The leader identifies one or more principles or behavioral guidelines (e.g., ethical considerations) that inform the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – ethics – or other supporting source].

12. The response takes a positive approach, avoids projection or blame of others for the leader’s situation, and identifies creative possibilities for action and/or moving the leader’s story forward [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – greatness – or other supporting source].

Leading Up Vignette A – Sample Response #1

Realistic Assessment – Koestenbaum’s “Having No Illusions” (88)

Developing a training program for new hires at Healthcare Fixes (HF) has become quite the challenge for me and for the two other regional managers assigned to the task by Stephen, our national sales manager. Stephen has excluded five other regional managers from the development stage even though their employment with HF exceeds ours and his. When we submit material, Stephen rewrites all material to reflect his design. This, along with the exclusion of our colleagues, has caused some anxiety for the three planners. Without Stephen’s knowledge, we have been soliciting input from our other teammates, and this causes guilt and stress on our team. We need to find a way to influence Stephen to see our larger picture and novel pattern, (Koestenbaum, 85), which is to find value in our modular designs, to accept the input of our total regional management group, and to give his regional managers credit for the project.

DeLuca’s Political Styles Applied and Defended

I consider myself a Leader of my group in this venture because I want the best training program for the company and my region, I am willing to take risks in regard to discussing the plans with Stephen, and I wish to operate above board, asking myself the question, “If they knew what you were planning, would they let you?” (DeLuca, 32) The first step needed was for me to be honest with my two colleagues, behave ethically, (Koestenbaum, 90) and lay out the facts as I saw them without impugning Stephen, yet addressing our anxiety and guilt (Goleman). I had read Political Savvy for a course, and I explained that we might discover Stephen’s political style in that book and find a way to influence him positively and creatively. This step satisfies my strengths of Positivity and Arranger (Clifton and Buckingham). They concurred. Unfortunately for us and for the other regional managers, Stephen is a Mach, for he grabs credit for successful ventures for himself and is overly consumed with advancing his own cause with the executives (11). It is clear that Stephen could react with hostility if we either act alone or confront him directly. We are now aware of our reality, and are seeing what actually exists in our corporate social culture (Koestenbaum, 88).

Stephen is not aware that the three of us have been requesting the input of the five other regional managers. I know that we have to take the risk and tell him, and we realize that this could evoke his ire; had he wanted their input he would have asked for it. Knowing that it is easier to work with a Mach by using group tactics (DeLuca, 192), we need to inform Stephen, tell him that the project will be much more vital and alive with the input of the longest-serving employees, and that he will “look good” in the eyes of the executives for approaching the training program using inclusive behavior.

Desired Outcomes

My desired outcome has three parts. First, I want to create a vehicle through which all regional managers have input with Stephen’s blessing. Second, I want Stephen to share credit with all the regional managers. Third, I want the executives to view the new project before we “take it on the road,” and HF adopts it as the official training program. Each of these outcomes is bigger than Stephen has envisioned (Koestenbaum, 85).

Choices for Action, Risks and Rewards, and Accepting Responsibility

Choice #1 is for us to go over Stephen’s head and approach the executives directly. We could ask them to review our training program while Stephen is away from the office. Choice #2 is to demand that Stephen change his ways. Choice #3 is to approach him with his own tactic, that is, to remind him of how good he will look to the VPs if he has utilized the long-term knowledge of five regional managers in addition to our input, and simultaneously suggest that the executives might appreciate a “dry run” of the training program before they recommend it to their bosses.

Choice #1 is extremely risky for all of us, increasing our anxiety. Stephen thrives on looking good to the executives, and this will infuriate him and embarrass him with his superiors. Although Stephen hired all three of us, he can also fire all of us. Even if he does not dismiss us, it is likely that we will erode all trust between us.

Choice #2 will incite him to anger because he does not like his ideas or designs challenged. As a Mach, he would most likely say, “My way or the highway.”

Choice #3 is therefore our best option. Since our leadership involves the health of HF in addition to the health of our own divisions, we are operating with integrity and honesty. The “dry run” for the executives will complement Stephen’s managerial skills, and also give exposure to the designers – all the regional managers.

Uncertainties or Ambiguities

My first dilemma was the buy-in of my teammates, which I solved through the use of my text book and strengths. The greatest ambiguity lay in Stephen’s reaction to our proposal. If he deflected our group concept back to us by saying, “Look. You folks need to do what you were told to do, and do it alone,” our plan would have failed and we would have accomplished nothing. We reduced our anxiety by saying that there is a 51% chance, given Stephen’s need for the limelight, that he would accept our proposal. We recognized that there is no way to reduce our anxiety completely, and that anxiety is always present in leaders (Koestenbaum, 93). By using my strength of Connectedness, I was able to influence my teammates that, in addition to our regional manager colleagues and our own divisions, the good of the company will be addressed through our attempt at influencing Stephen’s behavior. I also highlighted that, as our boss, we needed to be respectful toward Stephen even if we disagreed with his tactics.

Conclusion

We approached Stephen as a group of three, thus diminishing his manipulative streak that works best in a one-on-one situation. He was a bit disappointed that we had solicited input from the other regional managers, but when we mentioned how great he would look to the executives for being so inclusive, his eyes brightened, and he nodded approval. We stated that we were a bit anxious to present the training program without him, and suggested a debut presentation to the executives for approval so that we would not fall on our faces – and neither would he – when the plan rolled out. Never wanting to look unprofessional in front of his superiors, Stephen endorsed this plan, and promised to contact his bosses to set up the presentation.

In summary, we were energized by this challenge and felt great satisfaction in the conclusion (Koestenbaum, 95). We influenced Stephen without adopting his Mach political style, did so with integrity and respect, and created a scenario in which all participants would receive the credit they deserved. For me, I was able to use core strengths, apply emotional intelligence to assess the feelings of others along with my own, understand and explain the political organization of our project and assess the political style of two key members, and apply a variety of critical success factors needed in leadership.

References

Clifton, D., & Buckingham, M. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: Free Press.

DeLuca, J. R. (1999). Political savvy: Systematic approaches to leadership behind the scenes. Berwyn, PA: Evergreen Business Group.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 93-102.

Koestenbaum, P. (1991). The leadership diamond: Four strategies for greatness. In Leadership: The inner side of greatness, pp. 83-104. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Leading Up Vignette A – Sample Response #2

My direct supervisor, Stephen Banks, is causing me stress, frustration and concern because he is not appropriately critiquing the new sales training modules from the perspective of what a new sales employee needs to know. Instead he is assessing the modules and re-developing it based on his executive perspective. If we implement the modules as he has requested, the training will be too complex for new hires. This will lead to higher turnover and decreasing profits. I am also feeling frustrated with Mr. Banks because he has been taking credit for what our regional sales team has accomplished and has presented the information as his own to the three executives to whom he reports.

From working with Mr. Banks I have identified him as a Machiavellian. He “shifts the interests of the organization towards personal winning, he has concentrated on advancing his own personal goals and has forgotten about those of the organization” (DeLuca, 17).

It appears as if Mr. Banks will do whatever it takes to get ahead. I on the other hand will only do what is just and right for the organization. I have concerns about the organization as a whole and care about something larger than myself (DeLuca, 20). I want to progress in my career, but in doing so I must be certain that new employees receive an excellent sales training. I am aware that in order to resolve this situation I must be politically savvy and build a critical mass of support for the idea I select (DeLuca, 112).

I believe that compared to the other regional managers I may have an edge in resolving this situation because I have both masculine and feminine skills and I have strong relationships with my employees, customers and suppliers (Regine, 349). One of my strong suits is that I am a realist. I am able to look at the facts, I am aware of how others perceive me, and I am able to find solutions to this existing problem (Kostenbaum, 88).

I have a vision for both my company and myself and I would like to aspire to take Mr. Banks’ position of National Sales Manager in the future. I would also like the company to be the nationwide leader in manufacturing of healthcare equipment. I believe these goals can be accomplished if the company developed a vision and used courage to accomplish this vision (Kostenbaum, 92).

My short-term desired outcome is for the new sales hires to receive the training we are developing that is based on the knowledge and skills of the eight regional sales managers. This training would include few of Mr. Banks’ current suggestions. I believe that once the new hires are trained with these modules it will eventually lead to an increase in sales numbers, and an increase in profits. If I am able to influence the organization that our modules would be more effective than Mr. Banks’, then I would be viewed in a favorable light. This would then assist me on my path to one day be the National Sales Manager.

The current choices I have to assist me in meeting my short-term goals and long-term vision include: 1) talk to Mr. Banks directly about the managers’ concerns with his changes to the training program, 2) meet with the executives privately and present the regional managers’ dissatisfaction with Mr. Banks’ changes to the training modules, 3) form a coalition with the other regional sales managers to review the issues and then meet with Mr. Banks to review possible solutions, or 4) have a selected group of sales associates critique the training and take the information back to Mr. Banks for review and discussion.

Upon review of my choices it appears that only one option is viable. If I talk to Mr. Banks directly (choice #1) he may view me in a negative light because I do not have as much experience as he does and he may be unwilling to listen to me directly. This will also obstruct me from living consciously, and cause anxiety over losing face in his eyes (Braden, 297).

If I meet directly with the executives (choice #2), I will undermine Mr. Banks and his position. The executives may feel I am unpredictable, and their trust level in me will decrease (Braden, 299). The only way this option would be advantageous to me is if the executives did not look favorably on Mr. Banks and were outwardly looking for his negative attributes. I do not believe this is currently the case.

Forming a coalition with the sales managers and then meeting and presenting the information to Mr. Banks (choice #3) appears to have many merits. This selection would focus on teamwork (Kostenbaum, 90), would build partnerships, and would inspire respect from others (Braden, 293). It would assure that new sales associates get the best training. As a territory manager, I have the responsibility to develop, train, and make my subordinates more marketable (Kostenbaum, 89). This would also help me make others successful (Kostenbaum, 91). If each member of the coalition was able to present the information to Mr. Banks at the meeting it would let each member shine (Secretan, 14), including the managers that have been with the company for many years, on whom Mr. Banks does not look favorably. This option would also assist me in starting to meet my short and long-term goals and would provide me with the follow-up actions to begin to complete them (Braden, 295).

Working with the sales associates for a critique of the modules and then reporting the information to Mr. Banks (choice #4) has both risks and rewards associated with it. One benefit is that it would build on the strength and knowledge of the sales associates by reporting what works best and worst in the field (Secretan, 12). Unfortunately, I do not believe that Mr. Banks would put much faith in the suggestions of the sales associates because of their lack of education and experience.

On initial assessment I believe I am going to select option three, forming a coalition of the managers, reviewing the positive and negative aspects of Mr. Banks suggestions, and then meeting with Mr. Banks as a group to discuss the positive outcomes of the regional manager training program. I believe this option will utilize my current strengths: relator, futuristic, and responsibility. As a relator, I have good relationships with not only the regional managers but also with Mr. Banks. I also have an understanding of the group’s goals, fears, and dreams (Buckingham, 110). My futuristic vision will help me energize others by presenting my plan, raise the group’s spirits in dealing with this issue, and help me provide the group with the inspiration they need to complete the job (Buckingham, 100). Option three will also allow me to use my responsibility strength. Based on my past actions, the coalition is aware that I will accomplish what I set out to do, and the group will know that they can depend on me (Buckingham, 111).

Option three also appears to be the best choice in working within the realm of my emotional intelligence. I know I cannot develop the training program on my own and I need the coalition to make the program well-rounded and effective (self-awareness). This choice will decrease my feelings of stress, frustration and concern (self-regulation). I will be able to meet my goal of providing the best training program to the sales associates (motivation). I will build a stronger relationship with the other sales managers and Mr. Banks (empathy). Lastly, forming a coalition and conducting a presentation to Mr. Banks will form a network between the regional managers and Mr. Banks that was previously not established (social skill) (Goleman, 95).

Based on the analysis of information I believe the best choice is option three. The coalition approach ethically feels good (Kostenbaum, 91). By taking this approach no one will be undermined, team building will occur, and respect will be shown for Mr. Banks and the organization.

In order to make option three occur, I will need to talk privately to each manager about the concerns they have regarding Mr. Bank’s changes to the modules. Once this is discussed I will speak to them about the benefits of the managers meeting as a team and will schedule a meeting time and date. Once all managers have agreed to meet, the coalition will be formed. At the coalition meeting the training program will be finalized, reviewed, and a cost-benefit analysis will be conducted and documented. This analysis will define the financial and personal rewards for utilizing the regional managers’ training program.

I believe that based on my relationship with Mr. Banks, he will attend the meeting with the coalition. Although I do believe he will be pleased with the training, I have concern that he will take the ideas presented by the coalition and present them as his own to the executives. Because this would only reinforce his Machiavellian type, I have decided that at the coalition meeting an assessment needs to occur about the relationships each regional manager has with the VP of Marketing, the COO, and/or the CFO. If relationships exist between the managers and the executives, then the sales managers must briefly mention some basic facts about the training modules to them when they see them informally. These items include: 1) how the training will increase the sales numbers, 2) how the new sales approach will assist in marketing and provide a competitive advantage, and 3) how the new training follows suit with the fact that profit is an indirect result of the organization’s interaction with the public that wants or needs the organization’s service or product (Zigarmi, 32). This approach utilizes the 51 percent guide (DeLuca, 128), as well as systematic informality by using concise communication methods with upper management (DeLuca, 156).

Once the information reaches the executives, it will be shared among their team. Later, when Mr. Banks presents the training information and outcomes as his own, the executives will look more favorably on the sales managers because of the previous discussions that have occurred. They will likely be supportive of the training modules due to the potential increase in profitability and marketability. Once the meetings are complete, the territory managers will be respected for a job well done, and behind the scenes I will have gained respect for taking leadership of this situation. I believe that this action plan for handling this difficult situation encompasses the three key elements of the organization: the personal side, strategy, and culture (Kostenbaum, 103).

References

Branden, N. (2003). “The high self-esteem leader. In Partnering: The new face of leadership, Segil, L., Goldsmith, M, & Belasco, J., (Eds.), pp. 294-295. New York: AMACOM.

Clifton, D., & Buckingham, M. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: Free Press.

DeLuca, J. R. (1999). Political savvy: Systematic approaches to leadership behind the scenes. Berwyn, PA: Evergreen Business Group.

Goldstein, J. (1989). The affirmative core of resistance to change. Organization Development Journal 7(1), 32-38.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 93-102.

Goleman, D., McKee, A., & Boyatzis, R. E. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Ibarra, H., & Daly, K. M. (1995, March 12). Gender differences in managerial behavior: The ongoing debate. Note 9-495-038 Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Koestenbaum, P. (1991). The leadership diamond: Four strategies for greatness. In Leadership: The inner side of greatness, pp. 83-104. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Regine, B., & Lewin, R. (2003). Third possibility leaders: The invisible edge women have in complex organizations. The Learning Organization, 10(6), 347-352.

Zigarmi, D., Blanchard, K., O’Connor, M, & Edeburn, C. (2005). Leaders and change. Chapter 1 in The leader within: Knowing enough about yourself to lead others. Pp 1-35. Retrieved April 25, 2005 from

“Leading Out” - Vignette B1

(Influencing in a horizontal manner)

You work for a major insurance company in the IT department. You are responsible for the day-to-day maintenance and planning for a computer system that 1500 employees rely on to successfully complete their jobs. You are part of a team responsible for setting-up and configuring new computers and for providing ongoing support for printers, network connectivity, installation and trouble-shooting of all software and hardware within the organization. Although you work in the IT group, each member of the group is very focused on their own specific area of expertise; the primary interaction you have with others on your team is when someone needs their expertise.

You are driven for results and have a clear focus on doing things that benefit the department, the organization, and most importantly, internal and external customers. Ethical decisions are extremely important to you and are usually one of the first things you consider before getting into a new project. You feel a great obligation to deliver the best possible service to your customers. You work diligently to document your efforts and to save critical data that might possibly prevent a project from getting off course.

Like many other insurance companies this size, over the last year or two you have witnessed a staff reduction in your employer’s IT Department, and this has been very difficult for everyone in the group to understand. The remaining staff has had to pick up the slack these changes have created. As a result of the “right-sizing,” you have personally taken on more work, and your increased efforts have been acknowledged and generously rewarded by your organization.

You are the only female in the IT group at this site, and you are second in seniority. As previously indicated, you have been highly rewarded based on your annual reviews. The pay increases, bonuses, and special recognition awards have exceeded your expectations.

The problem you face is that the morale of the technicians and the other IT department employees has dropped considerably. You perceive the lowered morale is a result of the “right-sizing,” the subsequent increase in work load, and a probable lack of work ethic among some of your peers. You have concerns with the technicians who appear to be setting their own agendas and who seem unfocused. Ultimately, you perceive that the customer is paying for services which are less than commendable, and this is not acceptable to you. The bottom line is that there seems to be a huge disconnect between your work ethic and your peers’ work habits and ethics. In your opinion, your peers do not possess the desire to perform in the best interest of the company.

Witnessing this low morale has been particularly difficult for you since you have been rewarded by the company for your efforts. Meanwhile, you have received a lot of criticism from your co-workers indicating that they do not understand why you work so hard when your efforts are unrecognized and unappreciated by the company. Your co-workers believe that everyone receives the standard percentage in annual pay increases. The expectation within the organization is that you are not permitted to talk about ratings, compensation, or pay raises with your colleagues. On one level you understand your co-workers’ attitudes and probably would reconsider doing “all that you do” if you were not recognized or rewarded for your efforts; but in your case you are rewarded.

You feel that your drive and your desire to see the department move ahead has only increased the gap between yourself and your peers. You are frustrated by the fact that you do not know how to motivate your peers to understand that the corporation does recognize exceptional performance and to think in terms of working for “the greater good of the company.”

You would like to help them utilize their strengths more, but you honestly feel that money speaks louder than anything else. You want to find positive ways to bridge the gap between yourself and your peers. You recognize the fact that your co-workers have plenty to offer and at some point in the future you will need their assistance to accomplish your, and the company’s, objectives; as they will need your skills.

Given your past experience and the information we have covered in this course, what would you recommend in this case? Respond to this vignette in the same manner you did for the “Leading-up” vignette. Incorporate the criteria for your response as outlined in the leading-up example. Work collaboratively with your partner on this exercise and to let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Rubric for Response to “Leading Out” – Vignettes B1 and B2

1. The response is written in the first person, and the writer (student) identifies with the leader in the vignette.

2. The response uses language of responsibility (avoids attributions, labels, hedge words, etc.).

3. The leader’s response includes and is based upon a realistic assessment of the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – reality – or other supporting source]

4. The response suggests and defends a framework (i.e., one of DeLuca’s 9 political styles) for viewing one or more actors in the vignette.

5. The leader identifies what he or she wants in the situation, what is the vision or desired outcome(s) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond –vision – or other supporting source].

6. The response identifies and explores at least three choices for action available to the leader.

7. The leader’s response acknowledges risks and rewards inherent in the various options (e.g., in choices about how to use power, how to manage anxiety or personal stress, and in accepting the consequences of one’s actions) [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – courage – or other supporting source].

8. The response notes at least one area of uncertainty or ambiguity, and identifies one or more ways the leader will act to reduce it.

9. The response gives evidence that the leader is aware of how he or she feels about the situation and about his or her choices in the situation [emotional intelligence].

10. The response refers to results from one or more self-assessment instruments (e.g., strengths finder, Learning Styles Inventory) and makes effective use of the leader’s strengths, perspectives, and relationships [use of self as an instrument of change].

11. The leader identifies one or more principles or behavioral guidelines (e.g., ethical considerations) that inform the situation [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – ethics – or other supporting source].

12. The response takes a positive approach, avoids projection or blame of others for the leader’s situation, and identifies creative possibilities for action and/or moving the leader’s story forward [Koestenbaum’s Leadership Diamond – greatness – or other supporting source].

Leading Out Vignette B1 – Sample Response #1

Realistic Assessment – Koestenbaum’s “Having No Illusions” (86)

The Information Technology department in which I work was recently down-sized without benefit of good communications from management. The absence of good communication about the right-sizing has caused a great deal of frustration and animosity within my department. Koestenbaum states, “Realism means being connected with your external realities, and that means…above all, other people” (87). The company decision makers seem to have been unrealistic about the problems they created through a lack of information, and the lack of supervision and leadership continues to foster underperformance. My colleagues fear that their extra efforts will go unrewarded, and they have lost the desire to perform with excellence for the company, customers, and each other. I have strong feelings of responsibility toward the organization, our customers and my colleagues, and my achievements have been rewarded monetarily. I am not allowed, through company policy, to discuss my pay increases with them. I recognize that I am experiencing conflict with my department and the company, and need to use my collaborative conflict style to ease my inner turbulence.

DeLuca’s Political Styles Applied and Defended

I am very much aware of the cynical attitudes of my coworkers. As DeLuca states, cynics “…seldom go the extra mile…” (12). And I understand their need for remuneration to validate their work. As I begin these steps, I recognize that I am a Responsible, which DeLuca describes as “…feel[ing] a strong obligation to do what is best for the organization;” despite my technical expertise, I view the organization as “…fundamentally human…” (18) I need to move into a leadership role. While not empowered by my supervisors to do so, I feel compelled to alter the status quo, and open a dialogue among and between my colleagues, our department leaders, and their supervisors.

Desired Outcome

My desired outcome has multiple parts. First, I wish to create a strong team that connects on more than a “need to know” basis. I believe that with the right amount of nurturing, supervision, and professional development, we can become that strong team that values each other, the company, and our customers. I want my colleagues to appreciate Koestenbaum’s words, “…you appreciate the personal enrichment that comes from being of service” (89), as we work together. Second, I want to be sure that my colleagues are rewarded for their extra efforts as we perfect our team and, at the same time, shoulder a greater project burden than ever before. As we work to advance the company’s bottom line, I want the company to advance every team member’s bottom line. Since I am second in seniority, I want to discuss with management the misunderstanding about rewards for a great work ethic. By taking these two steps, I will utilize my Strengthfinders’ Inventory (Clifton and Buckingham) of Achiever, Responsibility, Maximizer, Discipline, and Strategic.

Choices for Action, Risks and Rewards, and Accepting Responsibility;

Uncertainties or Ambiguities

Choice #1 is that I do nothing. I could take a “wait and see” approach and hope that management is aware of our low morale and has a plan, yet undisclosed, to reward my colleagues as I have been rewarded. Choice #2 is to open a dialogue with my direct supervisor and talk about the low morale, reduced attention to customers’ needs, and the reasons behind it. With luck, my supervisor would bring my concerns to management and things would change for the better. Choice #3 requires that I speak openly with my colleagues about the low morale. I could approach this by stating that I recognize that the lack of high performance is because they feel unrecognized and unrewarded, and engage them in a discussion about what their realities are. I could also find a way to tell them, as Duck suggests, “You can visit Pity City, but you aren’t allowed to move there” (114). We could then carefully craft our situational reality along with some direct suggestions to correct the low morale and take it to our supervisor, requesting that the information be passed up to executive management.

Choice #1 is very risky since the company right-sized us without as much as an email announcement; it just “happened.” While I am completely involved in working for the good of the organization, I recognize that doing nothing will produce nothing. Choice #2 may give me an opportunity to air the problems within the department, but, without concrete suggestions for change, I fear my words will fall on deaf ears. My supervisor must know that the department’s morale is at an all-time low, and may be overburdened herself, unable to find time to make a difference for us. Choice #3 is therefore the best option. I have an opportunity to develop a strong team using my emotional intelligence component of empathy and my skills as Achiever and Responsibility; create a situation that is in the best interest of the company, its customers and my colleagues; and stimulate a new kind of organizational culture through collaborative ventures. This will take courage, for I will need to “…take the initiative, to be a self-starter” (Koestenbaum, 92), and create personal power within my group.

While I feel I am up to the task, I am a bit uncertain because I am just beginning to develop into a leader. Of the five components of emotional intelligence listed by Goleman, I recognize that I have self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation and empathy; the success of this challenge will tell me if my social skills are proficient or need to be honed (95). Additionally, I feel some anxiety regarding the reaction of my coworkers to my interest in their well being. I can reduce my own anxiety by paying careful attention to the language I use so that I convey positive concern and not simple curiosity or blatant criticism.

Conclusion

In choosing to be collaborative with my colleagues, we created a strong team, becoming more diligent in our work with customers in order to demonstrate that we all deserved rewards for a job well done. This in turn boosted financial profits and the reputation of our organization. With detailed plans and requests given to our supervisor by the team (not to one single individual), we consolidated our strength and became difficult to ignore.

Our message may also change the way the organization operates internally, correlating with Koestenbaum’s vision: thinking big and new (85). Instead of keeping change close to the vest and ignoring the impact decisions have on others, management may opt to keep the communications flowing. Lack of communications causes, according to Duck, “Managers and workers [to feel]…their concerns and feelings [have] never been considered” (114).

On a personal note, I recognized as I stretched from Responsible to Leader political style that I had accomplished something as a “third possibility” leader: I was able to embrace both the masculine in myself – the analytical; and the feminine in myself – the nurturing and collaborative (Regine and Lewin, 348). I have found comfort in allowing characteristics of both sexes to live within me professionally.

References

Clifton, D., & Buckingham, M. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: Free Press.

DeLuca, J. R. (1999). Political savvy: Systematic approaches to leadership behind the scenes. Berwyn, PA: Evergreen Business Group.

Duck, J. D. (1993). Managing change: The art of balancing. Harvard Business Review, 71(6), 109-118.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 93-102.

Koestenbaum, P. (1991). The leadership diamond: Four strategies for greatness. In Leadership: The inner side of greatness, (pp. 83-104) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Regine, B., & Lewin, R. (2003). Third possibility leaders: The invisible edge women have in complex organizations. The Learning Organization, 10(6), 347-352.

Leading Out Vignette B1 – Sample Response #2

My co-workers in the Information Technology (IT) group are very incentive motivated yet do not possess the desire to perform in the best interest of the company. This situation was brought on after the department went through a right-sizing initiative without much forethought and planning of management. The remaining staff has had to pick up the slack, and they feel unappreciated. Each member of the group now chooses to focus upon their own area of expertise, diluting the more preferred collaborative teamwork required for operational efficiency.

As a result of the downsizing, I have had to pick up more than my share of the slack, which has made me look as though I follow the Machiavellian style when I actually want to practice the style of an advisor. This has frustrated me greatly because I am unable, according to company policy, to tell them that I have been receiving merit-based rewards. As a result the morale of the technicians and the IT department employees has become an organizational problem which I do not believe higher management recognizes.

It is essential that the IT department work together as a team for the good of the company. There are 1500 employees that depend on us for day-to-day maintenance and planning for new computer systems. If the IT department is slacking on their duties then the technicians are unable to meet their production levels. This cross-affect among departments could also cause decreased job satisfaction, potential staff turnover, and a damaged reputation for the company.

What I want in this situation is for the IT department to work together as a team for the good of the company. This way the morale for both the IT department and the technicians will improve.

I feel frustrated with the motivations of my co-workers, yet sense and somewhat understand their frustrations, and the department’s atmosphere because others do not share my motivations. I do not feel I am able to articulate a clear vision of what I feel needs to be done to correct the downward spiral of productivity and morale. I am far from a Machiavellian style leader or worker yet that may be the style other workers view me because I have not been open about my merit rewards. I must move beyond my cynical thoughts and exhibit what I feel my political style is which I feel is an Advisor. I must challenge the mental models and current thinking that may be preventing change. If I want to find true horizontal solutions, then everyone must involved understand what the issues are. I believe it is key that everybody feels and understands each other’s pressures.

My first thoughts are to create a win-win situation and shared vision amongst employees by recommending a transition team comprised of representatives from each department. I understand that this transition is an after-the-fact recommendation but this team is now critical to check the negative morale that exists. This team will form a horizontal network that is empowered and responsible for quality. The team will be collaborative in formation but also must be cross-functional to break down communication barriers that seem to exist between different departments. My vision is to energize employees through the shared vision and have them believe in their value and infinite worth to the company. I understand the realism involved with a proposal such as the one I want to present but I do have a firm grasp on the organization’s mission. As a manager of this of horizontal initiative, I need to maintain contact with vertical structures for the sake of securing accountability, authority and resources.

I understand that productivity is going down due to employees being drained through ineffective downsizing integration. I feel that I must use a proactive approach with a collaborative method. Since my co-workers concept that I work beyond the call of duty without reward is incorrect I must be able to correct this situation and openly communicate my actual standing and merit recognition which I have been receiving throughout.

There are roadblocks that I must address but I feel that I have three options to “right this ship.” Number one (1) would be that I meet with my supervisor to discuss my concerns regarding my co-workers lack of performance due to what I feel is a lack of communication on the company’s part for not imparting a shared vision. I can ask for his/her leadership and for the permission to form teams that will develop recommendations for improvement. I can also ask him/her for their leadership in developing their own with my assistance that will address employee dissatisfaction.

Number two (2) would be to take the lead and from behind the scenes of upper level management form cross-functional teams for the purpose of developing consensus for proposals on a number of issues relating to facilitating restructure and a rewards system based upon merit. I would want these teams to be cross-functional to allow free flow of ideas from different areas of the company and attempt to break down the barriers in communications. These proposals could then be presented to my superior for upper management review and hopefully approval/implementation.

Number three (3) would be to request a meeting with my supervisor for the sole purpose of obtaining approval to form collaborative and empowered teams to recommend methods for change. Prior to the meeting, I will use the Organizational Politics Mapping Tool (OPMT) to gauge key players, their applied influence, and potential supportive coalitions. I would also assess the strong possibility of partnering with an individual within the organization who I feel shares my views and is closer to my motivation and loyalty to the company. I could also assess each team member’s strengths and develop additional strategies to maximize those strengths within coalitions. I have to be able to use what is referred to as “Third Possibility Leadership” balancing the paradoxical through demonstrating both competitive and collaborative leadership during this horizontal initiative.

Number (1) poses obvious challenges and risks to my own integrity and the integrity of my coworkers who are already at risk. By using the power-differential leverage from my supervisor to appear to further my own ambitions and desires for the company, I might confirm the possibly held Mach viewpoint held by my co-workers of my motivation without the possibility of upgrading morale. There is also ambiguity in this choice because I am not basing my concerns upon known facts besides my own perceptions. My supervisor may or may not react in a positive manner and increase the downward spiral of employees’ morale and it may also jeopardize my own good standing with the company. Not a good politically savvy method!

Number (2) has promise because it is an attempt to foster cooperation among those sections which seem to have formed self-centered enclaves. My goal here is to foster team oriented groups to analyze existing problems and formulate recommendations for improved recognition of employees. The inherent risk in my taking the lead without vertical involvement from my supervisor is that the groups would not be empowered and time spent may be without recognition or recommendations dismissed without consideration by upper management.

Number (3) is the most logical choice. Partnership with a fellow co-worker can form a powerful tool within an organization. This scenario allows me to map through the OPMT the political culture of the organization for the purpose of visualizing the realism for the proposal and having a good idea of the potential for success (possibly the 51% rule could apply here), actual culture of the company, and see those with applied influence forming coalitions. Then, being able to approach my supervisor with a win-win situation where he/she could have an option that is well researched represented and supported by employees. I feel that the chances of success communicating this option to management will be well-received and the buy-in by co-workers is already established.

Horizontal management/influence is a valuable tool, but it is not relevant in all circumstances and it comes with risks. These risks include encouraging group think (the road to Abilene), cutting lines of accountability and authority, and pursuing consensus at the expense of serving best interests of the company. I feel, however, that the power of a collaborative workplace with leadership through horizontal influence upon co-workers will have positive affects upon the way we work.

References

Branden, N. (2003). “The high self-esteem leader. In Partnering: The new face of leadership, Segil, L., Goldsmith, M, & Belasco, J., (Eds.), pp. 294-295. New York: AMACOM.

Clifton, D., & Buckingham, M. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New York: Free Press.

Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. (1996). Building your company’s vision. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 65-

DeLuca, J. R. (1999). Political savvy: Systematic approaches to leadership behind the scenes. Berwyn, PA: Evergreen Business Group.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 93-102.

Goleman, D., McKee, A., & Boyatzis, R. E. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Koestenbaum, P. (1991). The leadership diamond: Four strategies for greatness. In Leadership: The inner side of greatness, (pp. 83-104). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Regine, B., & Lewin, R. (2003). Third possibility leaders: The invisible edge women have in complex organizations. The Learning Organization, 10(6), 347-352.

Zigarmi, D., Blanchard, K., O’Connor, M,, & Edeburn, C. (2005). Leaders and change. In The leader within: Knowing enough about yourself to lead others, (pp. 1-35). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

“Leading Out” - Vignette B2

(Influencing in a horizontal manner)

You are Pedro Perez, Marketing Director for the Pittsburgh Powerhouse, a women's semi-professional basketball team. The Powerhouse is one of four teams that recruit and develop players to “feed” National Women’s Basketball League (NWBL) teams. The Powerhouse has enjoyed modest success in having a number of athletes sign on to NWBL teams in the few years the semi-pro league has been in existence. With the overall growth in the sport, and the likely growth of the number of teams in the NWBL, the future appears to be bright for the Powerhouse and the other feeder teams.

Your primary job is to promote interest in the Powerhouse, both among fans in the greater Pittsburgh region and among NWBL fans in general. To do this, you have to identify new audiences in the local market, then target them with effective promotions delivered through appropriate channels. This you are doing very effectively.

Secondarily, your job is to promote interest in women's basketball in general. To do that, you, your counterpart in each of the other three feeder teams, and the NWBL's Marketing Vice President all collaborate to sign up national advertising sponsors and to coordinate local and national media events (including games, charity sponsorships, athlete appearances, and licensing of NWBL team logos and other sports paraphernalia). It is in this context that you have opportunity to “lead out” by influencing others for the greater good of the sport of women’s basketball.

Your counterparts in the other three feeder teams are: Holly Hamilton of the Heartland Hornets, Mike Mulligan of the Midland Movers, and Sandy Somers of the Southfield Stars. The NWBL Marketing VP’s name is Leslie Larson.

There is a marketing advisory board that meets quarterly made up of representatives of each of the feeder teams (yourself and the three people just mentioned), a representative of each of six NWBL league teams, and Leslie. The next advisory board meeting is scheduled for three weeks from now. The primary agenda item is to plan how to market a playoff tournament scheduled to occur in approximately 8 months time (on May 6 & 7 to be exact) in San Antonio, Texas. The top two feeder teams and the top four NWBL teams will be involved in the tournament.

Recent trends you have noticed include:

■ Viewership among NWBL fans has steadily grown both nationally and in all the local markets where there are feeder teams. With the tremendous explosion in women’s college athletics ever since Title IX was passed in 1972, it seems reasonable to be optimistic both about the future of women’s athletics and about the stability – if not growth – of the fan base for women’s sports.

■ Other major and minor sports leagues (like those for Baseball) have had to adjust their thinking to accommodate the demographic shifts taking place across the country. The fan base is not shrinking, it is shifting: fans are increasingly found in sunbelt states, in the southwest, and on the west coast. Sports leagues have to open up franchises and cater to fans in those formerly minor markets.

■ Demographic shifts in the population also indicate that Hispanic markets will be growing in relative importance to white or other minority segments of the population. Their growth rates are higher, median age is lower, and median income is growing faster than African American or white populations in the U.S.

■ Although more Hispanics follow baseball and soccer than other sports like auto racing, football and basketball, they are increasingly attracted to those sports as well. Although the Women’s National Basketball Association (the other female league) has not yet begun targeting Hispanic fans, the NBA (men’s basketball league) has begun to do so in recent years.

The NWBL has not yet begun target marketing to Hispanics. You believe the playoff tournament next May is the perfect time for the league to begin reaching out to Hispanics in a big way. San Antonio is in the South, and has a huge Hispanic population. The tournament will immediately follow Cinco de Mayo celebrations to be held in Mexico and in various U.S. cities, including San Antonio. You have many ideas for maximizing Hispanic viewer exposure to the tournament, including: (1) broadcast of the game on Spanish-language cable channels in numerous U.S. cities; (2) signing up major tournament sponsors such as Cemex, Corona, Aeromexico, or Walmex; and (3) athlete participation in the San Antonio Cinco de Mayo parade, with many free items (T-shirts, key-chain basketballs, Gatorade water bottles, etc.) given away.

You have already talked to your three counterparts on the marketing advisory board. Here are brief synopses of the responses you had from each of these key people:

Holly: “When the WNBA begins marketing to Hispanics, then we’ll know we need to do it too. Right now, resources are just too tight to take a risk on a new target market.”

Mike: “Pedro, that’s great! You go for it. When it comes to a vote, I’ll be on your side, amigo. Let me know if I can do anything to help.”

Sandy: “Southfield has almost no Hispanics living in its local market. There are two other NWBL teams in similar situations, and I will call their advisory board reps to sound them out on this issue. But I don’t think they’ll go for this. We wouldn’t stand to gain much in our markets, even if you’re wildly successful in San Antonio.”

You let Leslie know of your desire to make inroads to the Hispanic market in San Antonio. She was warmly receptive. You asked Leslie whether to approach the board representatives from the NWBL teams in addition to the three other feeder teams. She said she had already heard what you were up to and had begun asking around. She will get back to you if she thinks it would help to talk to any of the others on the board. While Leslie is the final decision maker about any actions to be taken, after all prior board meetings, she has nearly always followed the majority opinion.

Being a Latino yourself, you feel both pride and excitement at the opportunity to reach out to fellow Latino and Latina viewers to interest them in women’s basketball. As a business person, you believe the NWBL has both an historic and strategic opportunity to build its fan base, and you believe the upcoming promotion in San Antonio can strengthen the league and create new partnerships with key sponsors.

What will your strategy be between now and the advisory board’s meeting in three weeks? How will you influence the outcome of this key meeting? What could you do in this specific context to be an “Impact Player” (as described by DeLuca, 1999, pp. 18-20)? What is your rationale?

Guidelines: How to Give Peer Feedback on a Vignette response

(Provide students with Word “template” containing the 12 rubric color-coded criteria.)

If this "template" is a convenient way for you to give your partner feedback, you may use it. Instructions for using it are on page 1. This is optional - you do not need to use this format. Use what is comfortable for you.

Suggested framework for giving your partner feedback:

1. Look for places where they met each of the 12 criteria.

2. Acknowledge and appreciate your partner for using his or her strengths in writing their response. These may be identified by your partner in their response, or you may have observed these in our class environment.

3. Affirm your partner’s choices and reasoning in the way they chose between the different options they identified. If you like, you can suggest other possible ways of framing the situation, or ask them to consider other possibilities.

Instructions for using this template to give your partner feedback on their response to vignette 2:

Paste the text of their response into the boxes on this page and the following pages. Copy about 1 to 1 ½ pages of text at a time. Use the “Edit” > “Paste Special” > “Unformatted Text” option in Word.

Their text should appear single spaced.

1. Look for places where they met each of the 12 criteria on the right. (The full explanation of each criterion is on the rubric sheet.) To indicate that you recognized they met the criterion, first select a portion of the text inside the colored box at the right. Then clock the “Paintbrush” (format painter) icon. Then highlight their text that exhibits that criterion.

If you can, give your partner two other kinds of feedback. You can type these into the end of this document.

2. Acknowledge and appreciate your partner for using his or her strengths in writing their response. These may be identified by your partner in their response, or you may have observed these in our class environment.

3. Affirm your partner’s choices and reasoning in the way they chose between the different options they identified. If you like, you can suggest other possible ways of framing the situation, or ask them to consider other possibilities.

Don’t forget to re-name the file before e-mailing it back to your partner. Please also submit on Blackboard (under “Assignments”) your feedback to your partner. Due _____. Worth 10% of your grade. Points basis: complete / incomplete. Thank you!

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download