Leading Organizations

Write one paragraph comment for each post at least 125 world:

1) Before reading the article, I viewed consistency more so as leaders being a constant for their team. The team should not have to question the availability or capabilities of their leader. The leader should be the constant variable the team can rely on throughout the changes of a company. As I continued to read, though, I realized I was thinking more of the dependability of a leader, rather than the technical definition of consistency. The authors use consistency to describe a leader's ability to adjust to change, conflict, and decision-making. When applying this description of consistency to leadership paradoxes, I do agree that we should challenge consistency as a desired quality in a leader. As explained in the article, leaders that struggle to adapt to these dilemmas will struggle to find a focus between multiple values, departments, and resources. As Terri Kelly states in her interview, leaders should rather strive to find a balance between them. Kelly, along with the authors of the article, state that consistency can hinder the ability to shift from the either/or mindset to a both/and mindset.At my last job, I held an upper leadership position. During this time we seemed to face a personnel paradox. We had a wide range of ages, with the oldest team members being in their 60s and the youngest being in their teens. The team members in their 60s had been with the company for over 10 years, so they felt a sense of seniority. The teens and young adults, though, were newer to the business. We developed a struggle of power as the younger people moved into leadership. The team members that had developed seniority were having difficulty adjusting to such young people in leadership. This began ongoing conflicts between the team. Initially, the few of us in upper leadership viewed this as an either/or situation. We felt an obligation to either keep our older team members happy or focus on our up and coming leadership. This remained an ongoing struggle for quite some time. Upper leadership would meet about this issue regularly and attempt to find a solution. Eventually, I do think this developed into a both/and situation. As we continued to communicate with both parties, we knew that we needed to emphasize our appreciation for the knowledge that our older team members were able to provide. We also knew that we had to continue to grow our newer leaders. We were able to empower our older team members and enable them to become mentors for the younger leaders. This created a better relationship of respect between both parties. While there were still small conflicts occasionally, the open communication between all parties involved created a healthier environment

2) After readingBoth/And Leadership, and reflecting on leaders that I have had in the past and the present, I do believe that consistency can be challenged as an overall leadership characteristic.However, for me, it depends on what level the leader is at in an origination.A leader in the C-Suite would be one that I would not want to be consistent.An executive or president is faced with a lot larger problems, than a mid or entry-level manager. Executives are going to be challenged on a broad range of issues, all of which may have different outcomes that can be crucial to the long-term business plan and or economic strategy. However, as a leader on a micro level, I would like to remain consistent. Lower-tier or entry-level managers' goals are typically much smaller. Keeping all of his or her direct reports on a path of consistency is key to being a great leader in my opinion. This creates a stable environment.Most of the time a leader of a small team is looking to achieve one goal or one metric. To achieve this goal/metric the team needs consistency. An example could be a production manager on an assembly line. Their goal is to keep the line moving, to generate inventory.Daily rates are typically assessed as minimums.This leader needs to keep the other team members directed to this goal. Thinking only in the short term to complete the shift minimums and keep the line moving. Leading though the same problems over and over. One leadership paradox that was not discussed in the article that I have personally witnessed in my workplace is the thought To get respect, you have to give respect. While I can only compare this to my life in the construction industry. I know that people with lower-level titles in my world are often looked down upon by managers.Managers list them as just the intern or just the laborer.Trash talk and gossip fly around the job trailers. I have found that when my leaders shut down this talk and lead with the and/both paradigm the overall team member experience is better.Leaders deliver this respect in many ways. Typically, this is taking the time to get to know everyone, praising ones for decisions that they made, fostering a positive environment, and promoting the decisions that the company leadership is making to help drive culture.In my opinion, there is no either/or when it comes to respect, it has to be a two-way street. Just because there is tenure in the industry doesnt mean they do not need to give respect.

3) I selected contemporary business leader Mary Barra to discuss in this post. Barra has served as the Chief Executive Officer of General Motors since 2014. Additionally, she has served on the Board of Directors for The Walt Disney Company since 2017. In researching business leaders for this discussion post, I was drawn to Barra's background asExecutive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing and Supply Chain, as I work in the Supply Chain field. Additionally, I admire her accomplishment in being the first woman to lead any major automaker.In my research, I found several examples of Barra's leadership tactics aligning with the four elements of leadership communication outlined in the article "Leadership is a Conversation." In an interview with Adam Grant hosted by the Wharton School of Business, Barra outlined eight insights on leadership. Below are three specific examples of interactivity, intimacy, and intentionality. First, Barra advises leaders to "ask for feedback from staff." In her words, "leaders can continue to improve if they collect accurate information about the current reality." This aligns with Groysberg and Slind's leadership category of Interactivity: Promoting Dialogue. They write: "For many executives and managers, the temptation to treat every medium at their disposal as if it were a megaphone has proved hard to resist." Leaders holding a megaphone are going to miss out on key insights from mid- and low- level managers with boots on the ground. It is important to have an interactive dialogue from both sides. Next, she advises: "win both hearts and minds." The article states, "Her mentor ingrained in her the importance of understanding and appealing to both the intellectual and emotional side of her team." This aligns with the Intimacy: Getting Close category. Groysberg and Slind write: "Organizational conversation, similarly, requires leaders to minimize the distancesinstitutional, attitudinal, and sometimes spatialthat typically separate them from their employees." Strong interpersonal relationships help leaders earn trust and relate with employees well. Aligning with Intentionality: Pursuing an Agenda, Barra's third piece of advice is to "simplify your message." As an example, "GM uses 'zero crashes, zero emissions' to help all employees understand the focus of the organization." Barra's leadership is not merely being friendly with employees and listening to their concerns. Her ultimate responsibility is to steer the organization as a whole to success. By communicating the businesses' long-term strategy as a simple message, employees can clearly comprehend and pursue organizational goals.