Indicatori PERSONAL LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PLAN For ARIC W HALL Completed in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of OM 7170 – The Developing Leader Capella University August, 2004 Address: City, State, Zip: Phone: E-Mail: Instructor: Ina von Ber, PhD ii Abstract Title Personal Leadership Development Plan for Aric W Hall Abstract This leadership development plan is tailored for its author and is not a research paper in the traditional sense. The author begins with his personal framework for leadership.
Included are the results of several leadership assessment tools, information from coaching and personal feedback, and insights into the author’s goals for career and leadership development. The report concludes with a few thoughts on future development and evaluating the progress of personal development. Hall, p. i Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction Leadership Framework Assessment Assessment Tools EQ In-Action Profile Campbell Leadership Descriptor Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Coaching & Feedback Developmental Activities Evaluating Progress Appendix: My Assessment Outcomes Bibliography i 1 1 4 4 4 6 7 8 9 10 13 14
Hall, p. 1 Introduction Everyone needs to have a career development plan. In my case, that should include a leadership development plan. This particular plan begins with a leadership framework that encapsulates what I value in leadership. I am also happy to report that a large portion of the leadership assessment data incorporated herein is reflective of my true leadership competencies today. There are some areas that I need to watch out for, and opportunities for development that are coupled with career development.
Leadership Framework It is my learned opinion that it is better to start out with a context or environment for leadership analysis, rather than asking what leadership is. Organizational and political leadership are contexts of leadership, but they are far removed from personal leadership or the leadership of individuals. Effective leadership is also a way, though it may not also be ethical leadership, as Hitler proved out. From my frame of reference, the basis for a working leadership framework is looking at leadership on the individual and interpersonal level, leading people.
Also, this perspective of leadership cannot be separated from its ethical dimension. With those two thoughts in mind, I should also mention that servant leadership is my working theory of leadership, considering both people and ethics. From this starting point, I can describe the values, traits, attributes, behaviors, and competencies that are compatible with this frame of leadership. Leadership is not a position. Tom Peters found that excellent organizations had leaders at every level, where some were managers and some were not (Cohen, 2000).
Leadership is not something that executives do, for leadership requires a willingness to sacrifice for others. Peter Drucker stated, “not enough generals were killed” (Hesselbein, 1996, p. xi). Another said, “If Hall, p. 2 you do not have something worth dieing for, you probably don’t have much worth living for either”. Identify those who are willing to die for their cause. It is those that have the potential for leadership. Executives who babble about their authority would not volunteer, because they are often incapable of leadership.
The best leaders reproduce (Maxwell, 2003), creating the next generation of even better leaders. They impart their knowledge and experience, rather than hoarding it, so that learning leaders start out at an even higher plateau of leadership. It is said that “man is here for the sake of other men”. Servant leadership is first a commitment to serve and build up others in the leadership relationship. Einstein said, “Only a life lived in the service to others is worth living (Secretan, 2004, p. 152)”. The servant leader wants to lead, is a servant first, and has a natural feeling to serve (Greenleaf, 1977).
Norman Vincent Peale stated, “The man who lives for himself is a failure; the man who lives for others has achieved true success”. The golden rule, to treat others as you would like to be treated, is applicable to the leadership setting. Leaders must model, motivate, mentor, and multiply (Maxwell, 1997). Leadership is not just a relationship, but a relationship of influence. Through transformational leadership, leaders and followers serve together, raising each other and their organization to a higher level. Relationships keep a team together (Maxwell, 2003b).
Maxwell provides five keys to strong relationships: trust, respect, shared experiences, reciprocity, and mutual enjoyment. My key words on building leadership relationships on the personal level are: trust, respect, dignity, and confidence. Loyalty and integrity are also important to strong leadership. Loyalty shows faithfulness and commitment to team members. Integrity is an inside job, based on character (Maxwell, 2003b). Trust is built when words and actions consistently match (Maxwell, 2003b). Hall, p. 3 Leaders are made, developed by experience, and they learn to lead. A leader must be able and willing to learn more.
The best leaders are students themselves (Valore, 1999), learning from superiors, subordinates, and peers. Leaders give feedback, empowering them to learn from their mistakes. Organizations create learning opportunities and facilitate the learning by its members. A leader must be credible (Kouzes, 1993) in their character, their leadership, and their job competence. A leader has a combination of job competence, people skills, and a vision for the future. Effective leaders have emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998). This includes selfawareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill.
A leader must be positive, have a servant’s heart, follow-through, exhibit growth potential, by loyal, be resiliency, have integrity, see the big picture, be disciplined, and express gratitude (Maxwell, 1995). A leader realizes that he cannot win an argument (Carnegie, 1936). A leader must speak in terms of the follower’s interest and sincerely make him an integral contributor to the organization (Carnegie, 1936). There must be a willingness to understand others and an appreciation for differences in an organization (Maxwell, 2003b). I see myself as being likeable and agreeable.
I try to get along with others, just as I try to build relationships with others. I am strongest in matters of values, character, and ethics. I think as an introvert about matters that will affect other people. I take pride in other people and see myself as being on this earth to serve other people. We do not get there alone. I tend to be motivated by challenging opportunities. Sometimes I want to do too much, like when I enroll in multiple degree programs. In some organizational settings I am motivated by a fight. I seem attracted to fights to defend my personnel, my organization, or to uphold the law.
I am motivated internally or intrinsically to make a difference. I strive to help people, stop Hall, p. 4 crime, fight corporate corruption, and anything else that is unethical. I have seen a trend in my life concerning these areas. Assessment Assessment Tools EQ In-Action Profile The EQ profile was used to provide a snapshot of my core emotional capacities (EQ). This assessment is used to interpret my experience as I relate to others around me. My responses to the assessment scenarios reflect my internalized relationship map, which has been developed throughout my life.
This tool is based on a developmental model of emotional intelligence. It measures intrapersonal and interpersonal capacities, competencies, or traits. The capacities include the capacity for self-reflection, self-regulation, and empathy. These capacities serve as building blocks for emotional intelligence. My ratings on the six dimensions of this profile are discussed next. I am optimally fit on self-other orientation. This implies that I am able to focus on myself and others during an interpersonal exchange. I agree with the assessment on this one. In life, I try to maintain a high positive regard for others.
I am interested in their concerns and their point of view, just as I want them to be interested in what I have to say. As the assessment points out, I respect the experience and intelligence of other members of my team. I am very fit in my ability to access a wide range of feelings. This means that I can cover a variety of emotional feelings while under stress, such as love, sadness, and joy. Emotions are what drive our decisions and actions, so our emotions should be assessed. Though I have not spent a lot of time assessing my emotional health, I do tend to agree with the assessment.
Emotions can determine my perception of another person. They do provide meaning to what I Hall, p. 5 observe, such as whether I am sincerely concerned about a person’s problem or I think they just like to complain. That varies per person, per situation. The assessment says that I have limited access to feelings of love, while having a great deal of anxiety. I do agree with the level of anxiety. Negative experiences are in ample supply. Those experiences create experience which probably biases my opinions of a person or their statements to me.
I have a problem with the assertion on love. I do have a genuine concern for others, especially if they are trying to be a vital part of the work environment. I like teamwork and I encourage creativity. I even pride myself on the ability to build trusting relationships. I have a fit level of reliance on thoughts, wants, and feelings. This indicates that I can understand and communicate with a variety of people. I do agree. Cultural differences, and dealing with people from different professions, can be difficult. However, I have learned to appreciate those differences.
This strength fosters an environment where people can work together, building a relationship of trust and predictability. It is this dimension that provides a balance or a rudder to the game of life when stress gets too much. Within that dimension, I rely heavily on wants. This is probably true. It means I am able to take decisive action, where I am likely to exert command and control. It also means that I have a clear picture of a problem or where I want to take an organization. I am advised that such strength could come across as being pushy. I should be mindful of my consideration toward other people in the process of taking actions.
According to the assessment, I have a high negative orientation, viewing the situation or the involved parties in a negative light. I am warned that I may be intolerant or otherwise hostile to others. I disagree with the findings. It is experience that tells me when to take a negative Hall, p. 6 position on a person or situation. Even the findings of the assessment acknowledge that I may be able to see problems or pitfalls earlier than others would. My profile determined that my empathy accuracy and empathy compassion is hopeless. It opined that I am upset when I erroneously read what others are thinking or feeling.
Personally, I don’t think that I tend to misjudge others. My perceptions of others are usually not formed until I have some reason to form opinions. The assessment suggests that I seek to learn more about others involved, before I end up ruining positive relationships. Similarly, the profile states that I have trouble understanding someone when they appear to be challenging me. That can be true, if I feel threatened in my position. The assessment suggests that I attempt to identify those triggers that set me off. I’m afraid I have to get off the boat with the profile on this one.
I seek to understand others, and I am most interested in building positive relationships. The EQ profile goes on to say that I have a high level of trust in myself and others, and that this is my predominant relationship style. I am able to empathize with and feel compassion for another. I agree with this finding, but it seems to contradict the emotional determinations above. I am open to learning about others, and I have the capacity to welcome differences of opinion. Campbell Leadership Descriptor The Campbell Leadership Descriptor is an entirely subjective assessment tool.
Since I am choosing the answers that describe myself, I have to agree with the conclusions. It is designed to help aspiring leaders think of essential and universal components of leadership, applicable to any setting (Campbell, 2002). This can identify areas that need improvement. Throughout this assessment, I gave myself similar marks to my sample good leader. As it pertains to vision, I see myself as being fairly farsighted, enterprising, persuasive, and Hall, p. 7 resourceful. As a manager, I consider myself to have the highest level of dedication, on being systematic, and being dependable.
I also consider myself good at being focused and having a tendency to delegate. In empowerment, I may not be as trusting of others as I want them to trust me. But, I score highly with encouraging, mentoring, perception, and support. In a diplomatic role, I do see myself as earning the greatest trust, with high marks in being diplomatic, tactful, and well-connected. In giving feedback, I consider myself good at coaching, teaching, listening, and being numerically astute. As an entrepreneur, I consider myself to be adventuresome, creative, and durable.
Under my personal style, I am highly credible and experienced, and I am also good at expressing optimism and being a role model. In personal energy, I am moderately physically fit, balanced, energetic, and publicly impressive. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator The Myers-Briggs assessment is also largely subjective (Briggs, 1998). I personally find it difficult to interpret, due to the questions. Many of the questions I could have answered either way, depending on the situation or circumstances. The assessment considers four categories. This includes extraversion or introversion, sensing or intuition, thinking or feeling, and udging or perceiving. Based on my determined preferences, the assessment then seeks to determine if I am just slightly in that preference or greatly so. I scored just slightly in the introverted category. I agree with this, knowing that I look inside for direction, understanding, and meaning. I also score slightly into the sensing category. This means that I focus on the present and rely on concrete information. I score strongly in the thinking category. It is true that I base my decisions on logic and objective analysis. I score very strongly in the judging category.
Here, I like a very well planned and orchestrated approach to life. Hall, p. 8 With this ISTJ combination, the profile states that I should be quiet, serious, thorough, dependable, practical, matter-of-fact, realistic, and responsible. I should be using logic to decide on a course of action, and then work on it steadily. I also make everything orderly and organized, valuing tradition and loyalty. I do agree with this nutshell assessment of myself. Further, I believe a couple of these elements were affirmed by the other assessment instruments. Coaching & Feedback My personal coach agreed with my own self-assessments.
This is a subjective bias that certainly results from our limited contact. In the peer coaching sessions, I described myself. Between that and my contributions to the discussion, my peer coach provided feedback that sounds like my self-assessments. My coach reiterated my interest and determination in building relationships, working leadership from the individual and interpersonal level. She included my key words of trust, respect, dignity, and confidence. She also made note of my point that organizations are made up of individuals, so leadership should be analyzed on the individual level.
My coach also noted, per our discussions and the Myers-Briggs assessment, that I have little patience with individuals who are uncooperative or who create more work for the rest of us. In a forecast of how my coach would fit in a work environment with me, she stressed that she valued the communication aspects of my leadership style. There was also some discussion in our group sessions. The one key idea that I took away from that experience concerned feedback. The suggestion given was that I elicit feedback from those who work with me, concerning the disagreements I have with the assessment instruments that we used.
In the limited and informal conversations I have had, most individuals agree with my assessments. In other cases there is limited experience in a given area, largely due to a near lack of managerial experience on my part. There is still another side. Those individuals who Hall, p. 9 have fought against me, rebelled against company policies, or committed crime do not agree with my assessments. Though I am not able to ask those individuals, I can make certain assumptions based on past conversations and encounters. In connection with the assessments, I also completed the Life Learning Review (Life).
This is also a self-assessment. I give myself the highest ratings on attention to detail. I also rated myself highly on the competencies of creativity, being dependable, caring, and feeling in control. I do prioritize and finish the tasks I start, but to an outside observer I would appear disorganized because I have too many irons in the fire. I noted that I am trustworthy, though not always trusting. I am quite limited in my willingness to confide in others, though I want others to confide in me. Being a friend to others means that I must be supportive and willing to sacrifice, and I do feel comfortable with that.
I noted my top ten values as: honesty and integrity, individualism, curiosity, competition, respect, responsibility, self-awareness, human relationships, truth, and winning. I do believe that these values are closely tied to my assessments and those of my coach. Further, some of these items were included in the assessments earlier. Developmental Activities I have listed some of the suggestions in response to the EQ profile findings. I should try to identify any events of anxiety, accept them, but let them drift past like a cloud on a windy day (Johnson, 2003).
I should also identify my negative feelings toward others and other situations, and look for ways to stop my negative responses. Similarly, I should deliberately think of positive and encouraging things to say to someone I might have negative tendencies toward. One of the elements of empathy is the need to actively listening to others, with the intent to understand. Another idea to build empathetic understanding, which also serves to strengthen Hall, p. 10 relationships, is to get to know the other person.
The author also advises individuals to use appreciative inquiry, where we move from problem-solving to an appreciation of ourselves and others. As with any effective communication, both parties should communicate and make inquiries so as to understand the other. I need opportunities to realize my career goals, as well as my goals in leadership training and development. I have already attained most of the education, with the PhD notwithstanding. I am interested in obtaining work experiences and job assignments, coupled with the improvements in job competencies. This is a difficult area, having limited experience.
In the near future, I will probably complete an internship that is related to some of my career development goals. Similarly, I intend to begin participating again in one or more volunteer organizations that directly relate to my career interests in university student affairs. Over the course of the next year, I intend to gain full-time employment, either with a university or in a financial management trainee program. These are my two primary career paths. Through the combination of work experience and continuing my PhD program, I believe I will see opportunities to apply my leadership training and values.
My values are subjective, but they reflect my experience, education, training, and my philosophy of leadership. My personal leadership agenda is devoted to others as to myself. I want to develop and train others, through coaching, mentoring, and team work. This is rooted in the spirit of servant leadership. As I am devoted to my people, I am committed to their personal and professional development, and to their contribution in the organizational setting. Evaluating Progress I cannot stress enough the importance of communication and feedback. I usually like to know what the people who work with me think.
I certainly want to know what those under my Hall, p. 11 authority think. I despise yes men, preferring to hear what I need to hear, not what I want to hear. I want to continue to focus on building relationships within an environment of open communication. I need to hear the thoughts, concerns, and complaints of my co-workers. Work experience and career progression must be evaluated every year or two. This is just an informal observation of my work environment, compared to my career plans and goals. If I am not getting the desired positions or job responsibilities, then I might be doing something wrong.
On the other hand, it may just be a matter of collecting the required experience. In any event, career development takes time. In evaluating career progression, the milestones seem to be at three, five, and seven years. This can be extended if there are periods of unemployment or if I work in jobs from more than one career track. Basically, in three years, I can be a mid-level manager or in a well-paying lower level management position. In five years, I could be a director of a small residence life program or be a project director. In seven years, I could be a professor or non-academic department head.
At ten years, I would either be a director in residence life, consultant, researcher, or perhaps seeking a dean’s position. With each progression there is more, and more unique, opportunities to practice, study, and impart leadership. In my personal case, I will likely take a developmental approach that is not the most popular. The best advice for most people is to be a specialist, to do one thing and do it well. That is good and practical, especially starting out. But, I have more than one career interest. My major or primary interests are university student affairs and finance.
Lesser interests include certain civil service jobs, law enforcement, probation, juvenile corrections, investigative work, or intelligence positions. However, most of these jobs I would want only limited experience in. Further, I can tie those experiences to elements of my primary jobs or to my research interests. If Hall, p. 12 I do accomplish a complex career map as that, I would be well rounded in experience. This might prove most helpful for a future role as a professor, consultant, or president of something. Someone who only specializes in a field does not necessarily make a good generalist.
Organizational leaders, executive leaders, or presidents need to be well versed. This is the model career track that I am working toward. The result is that the career development could take twice as long. So, specializing in one or two areas, complete with breadth and depth experience, is still a wise approach to take in the short-term. Hall, p. 13 My Assessment Outcomes Aric W Hall, the leader, leaner, and the creator of my future. Assessment Tool Learning in Action (EQ) Areas of Strength Strong areas: self-other orientation, access to wide range of feelings, reliance on wants, and a high level of trust in self and others
Weak areas: negative orientation, empathy accuracy, and empathy compassion New What I Possibilities for Learned About Stretch Myself I learned that I disagree with the assessment on the weak areas, believing that the difference may be due to experience or situational factors Seek feedback that might offer a dissenting point of view Focus for Learning and Attention Campbell Leadership Descriptor Strong vision, highly dedicated and dependable, fairly strong focus; Strong empowerment where trusting relationship exists Focus on building those relationships built on trust
Little: This is a subjective assessment that reflected my current positive opinions of myself There is always room to improve on listening, even to a dissenting voice, in order to better respond to the needs of people Myers Briggs Type ISTJ: Slightly introverted, looking inward for direction; Slightly into sensing category, relying on concrete information; Strong thinker, using logic and objective analysis; Very strong in judging, seeking a planned and organized life Experience: belief that experience changes perspectives, provides learning, and makes the man.
Integrity/Honesty: foundational characteristics of a positive leader. Introverts may lack the social/people skills to build teams; Thinkers may need more intuition and creativity common to visionary leaders I agree with the findings Look for more open communication and involvement, and seek creative ideas and solutions Values Inventory Power/Dominance: always self-evaluate to make sure that power is empowerment and used constructively. Need career growth and executive opportunities. Experiences change perception; Internalized values determine if I will choose to be a leader for good or for ill.
Values inventory is a self-reflection to assess where I stand. How to apply this in life, behavior, and relationship; Further how to use this in future teaching and consulting in developing others. Life Learning Review Top 10 Values: honesty, integrity, individualism, curiosity, competition, respect, responsibility, selfawareness, relationships, truth, and winning Always ensure that feelings of competition and dominance are directed for a good cause, against external competitors, and against criminal or corrupt forces. My values are closely tied to my assessments, and those of my coach.
Agenda for future leadership development focuses on career and job opportunities that coincide with needed job competencies and leadership skills. Being too busy can result in values not being exhibited, such as when one neglects those around him. Be mindful of commitments and prioritize carefully. Hall, p. 14 Bibliography Briggs, K. C. , & Myers, I. B. (1998). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA. Campbell, D. (2002). Campbell Leadership Descriptor: Participant Workbook. Center for Creative Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Carnegie, D. (1936).
How to Win Friends & Influence People. New York: Pocket Books. Cohen, W. A. (2000). The New Art of the Leader: Leading with Integrity and Honor. Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall. EQ In-Action Profile: A Profile of Your Relationship. (2004). Emotional Intelligence Profile conducted for Aric W Hall. Bellevue, WA: Learning In Action Technologies, Inc. Goleman, D. (1998). What Makes a Leader? Harvard Business Review on What Makes a Leader. Boston: Harvard Business School. Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). The Servant as Leader. Business Leadership: A Jossey-Bass Reader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hesselbein, F. , Goldsmith, M. , & Beckhard, R. (Eds. ) (1996). The Leader of the Future: New Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the Next Era. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johnson, J. (2003). EQ Fitness Handbook: 150 Practices for Daily Living. Bellevue, WA: Learning In Action Technologies, Inc. Kouzes, J. M. , & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People Demand It. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Life Learning Review. Assessment completed in August, 2004. Workwise Coaching & Consulting. Maxwell, J. C. (1995). Developing the Leaders Around You.
Nashville: Thomas Nelson. Maxwell, J. C. (2003). Equipping 101: What Every Leader Needs to Know. Nashville: Thomas Nelson. Maxwell, J. C. (2003b). Relationships 101: What Every Leader Needs to Know. Nashville: Thomas Nelson. Maxwell, J. C. , & Dorvan, J. (1997). Becoming a Person of Influence: How to Positively Impact the Lives of Others. Nashville: Thomas Nelson. Secretan, L. (2004). Inspire: What Great Leaders Do. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hall, p. 15 Valore-Caplan, B. (1999). Leadership Magic: Practical Tools for Creating Extraordinary Organizations. Denver: Wordworks Press.