MSLD 511 Module 5 Midterm Reflection

You have reviewed a number of theories and concepts associated with leadership up to this point in the course. You have likely been associated with individuals who led using some or all of these principles. Therefore, you should have your own opinions about which leadership theories work well and which may be less effective or less representative of those used in the "real world." After watching the TED talk consider the following questions:

How do you interpret Talgam’s ideas?

First, I really enjoyed this TED talk video. There are so many tidbits that can be applied to so many areas of leadership and life in general. Overall I think Talgam is trying to tell the audience that there isn’t necessarily a right way or a wrong way to lead. However, how you as a leader interpret your role will influence how followers interact with you, and the overall outcome or story that is produced. In other words, I think Talgam is calling leaders to ask themselves: What story do I want to tell? Is it my boss’s story, my story, or is it the combined story of the team, organization, myself as a leader, stakeholders and the purpose of the goal itself?

What are the parallels or disconnects between Talgam’s ideas about how conductors lead and what you know now about leadership?

When looking at the example of each conductor I could see the different theories and approaches to leadership that we have learned in class. For example, the first conductor seemed to be a part of the team, he used large, exaggerated motions, the audience was participating; as Talgam pointed out he seemed to be enjoying himself. I think that this is an example of a participative leader characteristic (Northouse, 2016). In addition to this, I would argue that if I were to place the first conductor on the Behavioral Leadership Grid I would say that he is exhibiting the Team Management approach. (Northouse, 2016; Blake, Mouton, 1981). Northouse describes team management as, “stimulates participation, acts determined, gets issues into the open, makes priorities clear, followes through, behaves open-mindedly, and enjoys working.” (2016, p.77). In contrast the second conductor was stern, and exact. Tolgram joked that the conductor saw the musicians as instruments to tell Mozart’s story the way he interpreted it. Although this conductor was able to achieved his end goal the musicians and company staged a mutiny and asked him to leave because his story was the only story that mattered and there was no room for growth or interpretation (Talgam, 2009). As a result, I would say that this conductor is an example of Authority-Compliance Management (Northouse, 2016; Blake, Mouton, 1981). In other words, people are tools to get a job done, (Northouse 2016) and instead of being a leader and providing purpose and visions to the team the conductor is acting more like a manager focusing on tasks instead of development (Zaleznik, 1977).

For the fourth conductor, Tolgram jokes that none of the musicians even know when the conductor wants them to come in on a note. As a result, the musicians have to listen to the first chairs and those around them for their ques. This is similar a delegating approach with a heavy emphasis on interpersonal relationships (Blanchard, 2008; Northouse, 2016). It is as if the conductor is saying, “I trust in your abilities and I don’t care how you get the job done, just as long as you meet the end goal as a team.” Tolgram makes a point to say that this conductor is still in control, but it is a different type of control that is almost spiritual in nature. This made me think about the Path-Goal Theory and that the success of this type of leadership may be dependent on the followers’ characteristics (Northouse, 2016). Some followers may prefer a more direction and a clear path to the goal vs. having vague direction and an almost organic approach to reaching a goal. I remember when I was teaching junior high students I had the students do an open ended assignment in class. I honestly don’t remember what the assignment was, but I remember that I intentionally left it open-ended because I wanted my students to show their own learning and thoughts vs. influencing their thinking and telling them what I wanted to hear. I remember one student saying out of frustration, “Just tell me what you want!” Probably just as exasperated as he was I said, “I want you to think for yourself! I can tell you facts all day, but I want you to think!” 

In the fifth example, Tolgram describes how the conductor produces very large exaggerated movements, but at the same time is in complete control. He goes on to say that the conductor is providing an opening or space for interpretation. In other words, the individual’s voice is allowed to be heard within the team. Tolgram describes the interaction as partners. I think that this example as elements of the Leader Member Exchange Theory. (Northouse, 2016). The conductor has built the trust and a positive partnership with each member. The conductor or leader has, “develop[ed] greater trust and respect for each other. They [the leader and followers] also tend to focus less on their own self-interests and more on the purposes and goals of the group.” (Northouse, 2016, p. 143). In addition to this, the conductor “created the conditions in which [the music] can happen.” (Tolgram, 2009). This statement is almost a word-for-word description of the Path-Goal Theory (Northouse, 2016). This conductor also exhibits the four pillars of the Path-Goal Theory are that a, “leader should create situations in which he or she informs the followers as to what is expected from them and explains to them how to perform the task…Second, leaders need to take the needs of their employees into account…[and] generate a friendly working atmosphere…Third, leaders should remove any sort of roadblocks that are preventing their employees or subordinates from achieving their end goals…Fourth, leaders need to see employees as team members.” (Vandegrift, Matusitz, 2015, p.352-353).  

The last conductor has taken all of the leadership approaches and has combined them to create the ultimate goal of any leader: “Doing without doing” (Tolgram, 2009). It was powerful for me to hear Tolgram say, “If you love something, let it go.” (2009), and then seeing the footage of the conductor barely moving, allowing the musicians to play and enjoying their performance as if it were a gift. This conductor let go of the control, and didn’t even participate in the performance as other conductors did. Instead, the orchestra itself was the highlight. The conductor I’m sure worked very hard behind the scenes to build and motivate the team, but when it came time for the performance… he let it all go. For me, the trust combined with the humility of this example was moving. This conductor allowed all of the stories to be heard and musicians’ task of creating beautiful music went beyond the task to the intrinsic purpose.

Overall Reflections:

In MSD 500 I read an article: Enhancing Customer Engagement Through Consciousness. Although this article mainly focused on how companies can market themselves more effectively to their customers, it still had many elements of leadership. It explained that, “Every business should operate with a higher purpose, along with a deeply held set of core values…[and] be lead  by conscious leaders who mentor, motivate, develop, inspire and serve people in accordance with and through the firm’s purpose and values.” (Grewal, Roggeveen, Siodia, Nordfalt, 2017, p. 55). I think it is human nature to strive for purpose and meaning. As leaders we can give our followers purpose and meaning within their work environment. If I approach my leadership as providing meaning and purpose to those around me, I think I will become a leader I hope to someday be. This made me think about my own purpose within the context of my job. My job is to provide customer service to potential and current to meet enrollment projections. However, my purpose is to assist prospect and current students achieve their education goals in order for them to reach their fullest potential. Although I enjoy my job, my purpose if far more motivating at an extrinsic and intrinsic level. The trick now is, to communicate this purpose to fellow co-workers and to my students!

References:

Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1981). Management by grid principles or situationalism: Which?. Group & Organization Studies, 6, 439-455.

Blanchard, Ken. (2008). Situational Leadership Adapt your style to their development level. Leadership Excellence. 25(5), 19.

Grewal, D., Roggeveen, A. L., Sisodia, R., & Nordfalt, J. (2017). Enhancing customer engagement through consciousness. Journal of Retailing, 93(1), 55.

Northouse, Peter G. (2016) Leadership Theory and Practice 7^th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Talgam, Itay. (July 2009). Lead like the great conductors. Retrieved from: https://www.ted.com/talks/itay_talgam_lead_like_the_great_conductors.

Vandegrift, R., & Matusitz, J. (2011). Path-goal theory: A successful Columbia Records story. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21(4), 350-362.

Zaleznik, Abraham. (1977). Managers and Leaders: Are they different?. Harvard Business Review. 67-78.