Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
The MLQ was developed in the 90s to evaluate the level of transformational leadership, the level of transactional leadership and the level of laissez- faire (nontransactional) leadership, encompassing thus the three important dimensions of leadership. In the end, the MLQ is supposed to make assumptions about the leadership style one may have.
The MLQ-6S is a smaller version of the original questionnaire and has a total of 21 statements, judged according to their frequency on a scale from 0 to 4 (not at all to frequently, if not always). In my opinion, the first factor shows whether you have true leadership qualities, including the charisma that any efficient leader must possess. You have scored your highest score here, 11 (I think it should be11 and not 23, since there are only three statements to be summed, 1, 8 and 15), as you have scored highest on the statements relevant here.
This factor shows one of the most important and relevant things for a leader: your subordinates have faith in your decisions and they show respect, both for your person and the decisions you make. Indeed, statement 8 is obvious in this sense: "frequently, others have complete faith in me." This means that you are able to take decisions and impose them on your subordinates, who will perform them efficiently, as they trust they are the correct ones.
On the next three factors, you have scored an 8, which is somewhat above average and it means that you perform these actions fairly often, anyhow, more than sometimes. Factor 2 measures the level of inspirational motivation that you give to your subordinates. Fairly often, you provide a vision for them and impose standards that the others understand and feel that are relevant in a way that they understand the significance of their work.
Factor 3 indicates the level of intellectual stimulation. Do you, as a leader, get the best out of your subordinates' intellect? In other words, to you make them ask questions, stimulate their analytical thinking and create an environment where such discussions are encouraged? From your score, you do this fairly often.
Factor 4 refers to the amount of time that you spend on individuals in your group. The team that you are leading can either be seen as a unitary block or as formed of individuals, each with their own challenges, who are pooling their resources to reach a common goal. Your score reflects the fact that you prefer to regard your team as more individuals working together. This means that you are conscious of the fact that each individual in your team may, at times, have certain difficulties in tackling the tasks and that you solve these problems with each individual in part. It also means that you are close to your subordinates on a level that makes you respected for the dedication you show (as Factor 1 pointed out).
You have scored high scores in factors 5 and 6, both showing levels of transactional leadership. Factor 5, where you scored 9 points, shows that you believe in rewards as a way to motivate your subordinates and make them reach their goals. Not only that, but you seem to have a mechanism set in place, a mechanism where you define the goals, let the subordinates know what the accomplishment of these goals would bring and the level of rewards and then you proceed to check their work and give out the promised rewards. Factor 6 emphasizes this: you are a strong believer in setting standards and in controlling that those standards are reached. Once the mechanism is set in place and is functioning, there is no reason to change it (you are a firm believer in the principle "as long as things are working, don't change anything."
Finally, the low score that you have obtained for factor 7 was somewhat a result of the scores previously discussed. As a person setting standards, watching that they are getting done, focusing on tasks, you are not a laissez-faire leader. Coordination is the key word in your case.
2. Team Excellence Questionnaire
The Team Excellence Questionnaire was developed to evaluate the level of team performance, both from the team members' point-of-view and the team leader's point-of-view. The complete survey is designed to cover eight key categories of factors that have been discovered by experimental work within highly performing teams to be the essential ones in terms of team cohesion and team effectiveness. The questionnaire we have at hand here has sample questions and covers both team excellence and the degree of collaboration within the team.
The scale is classified from 4, meaning true, to 2, meaning false, and it is designed to evaluate the degree to which the person taking the test believes key issues regarding the workgroup are either true or false. In this sense, it seems to me most reasonable to start with the three questions to which you have scored 2, which means that you believe these statements are rather false than true. This will lead us to some useful appreciations about things that you believe should change within your workgroup. These are statements 7, 8 and 13.
Statement 7 refers to the amount of resources that are provided for you by the team leader or the organization for the purpose of reaching the team's objectives. Your response (more false than true) lets me believe that the external support for your goals and your tasks is minimal or less than the level you are expecting to receive. This can mean several things. First of all, it means that resources coming from outside your team are not high enough to support your particular tasks. This may be because the management team does not believe they are a priority or because they bring less profit, etc.
Second of all, we may have a problem of resource allocation and resource management. Indeed, the resources may be coming in, but may be wrongly or unevenly distributed by your team leader or they may be distributed in a way that does not support your objectives. Let's have a brief look at the possible courses of action. If we are in the first situation, then it is likely that your team leader should bring this problem in front of the parties responsible for resource distribution within the organization. If we are in the second scenario, then your team leader should improve the way he allocates resources within your workgroup.
The second statement with a more false than true answer, statement 8, shows that your team leader is keener on the team members getting the job done. He emphasizes the how rather than the why. In my opinion, this may prove a case where efficiency will decrease rather than increase within the group. General experience has shown that you tend to be more motivated when you are able to include your objective or your task in a bigger framework, one where you also understand why you are asked to perform that certain task.
Additionally, statement 13 has received a more false than true grade from you. This is directly related to performance evaluation and performance management. In general, it is believed that you can also learn a great deal from the mistakes you or the other team members make. This may happen when these lower performance indicators are analyzed and it is decided where the respective person went wrong. This will help both him and the other team members avoid the problem in the future. This is not the case here.
For the other questions you have scored 3 or 4, which means that you believe they are rather true than false. The fact that you have scored 4 on five questions out of thirteen may indicate that the more…[continue]
"Managerial Leadership" (2004, September 26) Retrieved December 7, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/managerial-leadership-177135
"Managerial Leadership" 26 September 2004. Web.7 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/managerial-leadership-177135>
"Managerial Leadership", 26 September 2004, Accessed.7 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/managerial-leadership-177135
Managerial Leadership Identification of the problem The company has decided to create an intermediate position in the company, somewhere between the management team and the employees. In this new position, the person that will be occupying it will report directly to the owners and will have a free hand conducting performance reviews for the managers involved in the respective system. The main issue in discussion here is whether to choose between two of
Managerial Leadership Problem identification In my opinion, finding a problem in such a case study is strictly related to whether you agree with the LMX theory or not. In this sense, stimulating a certain part of your personnel may be considered efficient or less efficient, in which case there may be a problem. However, there several issues that should be discussing when referring to the way Jim is applying the LMX theory. First
Most of these historical leaders were usually from the upper classes with a few of them from lower classes having the opportunity to lead. Consequently, this led to the idea that leadership had something to do with proliferation. This theory was also based on the assumption that leaders are born and not made (Cherry n.d.). This is the belief that leaders are excellent people, born with intrinsic qualities and
This brings about a certain superiority from all Islamic people, here including the Algerian one. On the other side, the current Algerian government is a laical one, which does not limit the individual creed of the Algerians. This superior air that may characterize Islamic culture in general may sometimes be considered a weakness if we sustain the idea that underestimating your opponent or your partner may be one of the
The benefits of high-quality relationships come from relational resources (Wright, et al. 2005) they create. Such resources include durable obligations (e.g., arising from feelings of gratitude, respect, and friendship), network contacts and connections (including privileged access to information and opportunities, social status, and reputation of influential others), and the ability to have open information exchanges with those around them (Valle & Halling, 1989). Relationships that do not develop so well are
Leadership Hong Kong Leadership Developments in Hong Kong Hong Kong is one of the great business centers of the world. As such, its business and leadership cultures have been subject to many of the paradigm shifts and economic trends that are attendant to the globalizing world economy. This makes this a useful context within which to examine some of the more important recent developments in leadership theory. Included among them, the discussion
However, Avery points out an important shift in managerial leadership styles. She sees it as a shift in the balance of power within an organization, rather than a shift in the way managers perform their daily tasks. She states, leadership involves letting go of conventional notions of control, order, and hierarchy, replacing them with trust and an acceptance of continual change, chaos, and respect for diverse members of the