February 02, 2009

Quick reflection to Kenichi Ohmae Interview

Finally it's finished... the translation was not as tiring as I thought, took me maybe 3 hours all together. I hope the language is easily accesible.

I didnt translate the entire interview because some of it is of little relevance to the class. Only the part on the Economy and devloping our own personal competencies I thought is quite useful to everyone.

When Ohmae talked about developing our own "global perspective", it really resonate with a voice inside me. "That's bloody right!" I thought to myself. The world is changing too fast and if we don't keep up with it, how can we compete with billions of people out there looking for jobs.

In researching world events, Ohmae says "Don't just read books and magazine, find a theme". I also agree with this, reading newspapers and magazine, we are just digesting what other people thinks. We need our own view. If someone ask me "So... Louis, what is your view on the current situation faced by the manufacturing industry?". Which by the way is a perfectly plausible question in an job interview, at least I will already have prepared a unique answer up my sleeve. Because of this, I have decided I will spend every Sunday in researching something. And I will start with the financial crisis....

I also really like what he said about the ability to communicate, organise opinions and execute on decision. This is a major challenge I faced during the PIUSS aeroplane building activity. There was so many "opinions", eveybody has a different view on how to best approach the DMAIC cycle. What does a leader need to do to best accomodate those different voices? One lesson I learnt from Graeme, I think is that a leader sometimes has to prioritise the opinions according to their importance. If an opinion is "useful", it must be made #1. On the other hand, if an opinion is "interesting" but not really "useful", then the leader must learn to say "no" to the group member. A useful thing to say is "Your idea is very interesting, but right now we must focus on the main topic, let's talk about it next". This will give the leader a better leverage in managing the group dynamics which sometimes can be quite tough indeed.

Interview with Kenichi Ohmae – Part 2– On developing Core Competencies

Writing about web page /kangfan/entry/six_sigma_and_1_2/

Writing about an entry you don't have permission to view

From (Taiwan Business Weekly). Translated by Kang Louis Fan 02/02/09. All right reserved.  

The three key skills of Generation Y : Communication, Seeking answer, Global perspective

Q: If we don’t respond immediately to the external environment, then how do we prepare ourselves for the upcoming economic winter?

A: First, Cash is King. Second, now is not the time to change jobs. Invest in yourself; especially carefully examine what you know of the information in front of you, building your own unique view of the world. For example, did you know because US is no longer the powerhouse it used to be, China is also experiencing change but not because of the financial storm but China is redefining its role in the world after the Olympics

My advice for the Taiwan Generation Y is simple. Invest in yourself, so that you can become a strong leader in any nation and situation. Don’t limit your scope to Taiwan.

Q: What kinds of competitive skills are required?

A: Three key skills. First, language and communication skills. Not only language, but the ability to understand others. For example, you could forcibly say “Finish all these readings by Wednesday!” You could also say “Do me a favour, please return these notes back to me by Friday, is that alright?” It’s the same thing, but communicated in different way. In multi-cultural, regulation and situations, having the ability to communicate is everything. Because everybody has a different opinion, so you must be able to organise these opinions, execute, and deliver your goal. This is the only skill you need to develop in the business world.

Second, when you have a problem, you must find the facts, and let the facts talk. Before you confirm the causes, don’t try to do anything. Analyse the root cause of the matter, find the real solution to the problem. This is the golden skill: not relying solely on a single source of information, the skill to find the real answer is the true skill. Sometimes to have insight into a problem you must try to escape from your current company position.

After your acquired the first two skills, the third skills is to know what is going on in the world. Let yourself form your unique perspective on the world events. This third skill is vitally important, because it can shape your career plans and future plans, understand what you really want to do with your life.

Even now I choose a country every year, studies it. Last year it was Romania, now it’s Russia, next year will be Indonesia.

Q: But we must consciously learn to solve problems?

A: Yes, not just read books or magazine. You need a theme. Search on the internet or travel to the locations, then your will have a unique understanding, have your own perspective on world events is very important.

Also, you might find yourself lacking one or two skills, or wanting to develop three skills. Like in addition to Chinese, English and Japanese, you may feel you need another language. But you must have the third skill (Understand the world). Because business opportunities is always out there, if everybody look for opportunities in the same area, there will be none left. Because by then all the rich, the speedy, and the strongest have already exploited it. Later entrants must explore outside the current realms. Because to know these business opportunities, you must make some assumptions. Luckily, now you can also search on the internet, without travelling there necessarily.

Q: International Labour Organisation published in 2009 there will be 2 billion people out of work. For the unemployed, what advice do you give them?

A: You start again. Don’t worry about starting from scratch. Isn’t there an old saying, “don’t cry over a bottle of spilled milk” Because it’s already spilled. If you got laid off, then face it. Relax; you have work hard for most of your life. Now is the time to take a break. You won’t die of hunger and besides, you are free.

Being unemployed is the best time to learn, it is more scary to work for company that will go bust next year

This is a good time to learn. In Japan, if you get laid off you go take classes. In Japan there is a “Hello, Work” program. Many of my friends went to professional training centre. Learn to become a carpenter, sew carpet, learn computer, and continue to work for a company that will go bust is what worry me even more.

Q: So you are optimistic about the problem we are facing?

A: In my life experience, worrying cannot solve anything. But when I try to improve but still it doesn’t help, I worry too. But in my experience, worry does not solve problem, you must do something.

Until now, you have a good fighting spirit. You can always rise from a fall, right? If you stop fighting, stop raising yourself to the next level. You’re finished. If you want to have control of your own life, your must continue to challenge and improve yourself.

Interview with Kenichi Ohmae – Part 1– On the Economy

Writing about web page /kangfan/entry/six_sigma_and_1_2/

Writing about an entry you don't have permission to view

From (Taiwan Business Weekly). Translated by Kang Louis Fan 02/02/09. All right reserved.  

Trend Master –

Japan’s trend master Kenichi Ohmae, witnessed oil crisis and Japan’s bubble economy, comment on how to survive in the next ten years of instability. In face of change, he recommend people not to react too soon to ‘appearance’, wanting to find answers, there should be a ‘systematic thinking’ find the root cause of the problem, then you can spot opportunity and strength, and find business opportunities.

Ohmae point out, the financial crisis make the international situation changeable, USA is no longer the country it used to be. Since Taiwan is a “handler economy”, in the past it has used China’s cheap labour and export, but has not establish a strong foundation, so it is easily affected by the current credit crunch, it must ‘think’ from the crisis, what can be relied on, what to hold on to, so it won’t get washed out.

He also thinks, even though China’s growth rate is now only 4-5%, this giant economy will not go away, Taiwan can still use the interval while China is readjusting it’s economy, learn something from it.

For individuals facing lay off or unpaid work, Ohmae suggests “don’t cry over a bottle of spilled milk”, people should actively seek learning, challenge personal abilities. For fresh graduates, he suggests using internet and your two feet to verify facts, develop your communication, analytical, and discovery skills, develop un-replaceable DNA. The following is the interview

Q: Japan in the 1990 after the bubbling of its economy, went through 10 years of misery. How long do you think Japan will take to rise again?

A: Ten years, maybe worse, because every government are promising what they can’t deliver. You have to recognise all financial crisis goes through three stages. The US credit crisis in Oct 2008 was phase 1. The second phase is banks encounter difficult in accessing credit, because of its low stock share values, it cannot secure additional fund from the share market. Third phase is closing down of business. Only when three problems are solved, there can be resurrection of the economy.

Q: But every government is trying to save the economy, will it really take ten years?

A: Dealing with financial crisis has three principles. First you have to see it as a systematic problem, not one of individual banks. Second, understand what will be the consequence, so you can find the answer at first instance. Third is to establish international bodies to prevent this from happening again.

Spending is not the only answer, because someone has to pay it back

The above three point, US failed them all. The American treasurer Hank Paulson put personal benefits into his financial decisions, reacting only to single phenomenon. He allows Lehman Brothers to fall, but save Citi group, only because his old boss Robert Rubin was Citi’s ex-CFO, it’s all personal. US government, organisations and scholars, until now has only panicked, even Paul Krugman, or other scholars is telling people to spend, spend, spend, we have to learn from “Roosevelt Junior ” policy , this is laughable. This is not the most important task, because reckless spending needs to be paid back.

Q: So, the root cause of the problem is from US, the drive to solve the problem is also in US?

A: This is US’s mistake; it is the same as blaming China for spreading virus, poison milk. US spread viral financial product, set the world in fear and chaos, just like China’s poisonous dumplings. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae sold 5 trillion securities to the world because S&P says it’s an AAA product, they let the financial risk spread the world.

Nobody know what is in these financial derivatives, it’s like the China’s dumpling, nobody knows what is inside, it might be port, beef, rabbit or cat meat. They have to understand, this is US who committed the biggest crime of history, US must admit its mistakes.

Q: If it take tend years to revive the economy, will Taiwan follow Japan’s footstep of 15 years prolonged decline? At the moment Japan has awaken from its decline?

A: Welcome to the club (smile). But if you are like Japan you count yourself lucky, Japan has strong base support, not like a sponge bouncy and unstable (moves his hand up and down as if he is patting a sponge). Japan has huge savings, strong technological and financial support.

Taiwan has not, Taiwan’s economy is “pass through” economy, buy component parts worldwide, assemble in China and sell to the rest of the world. There is nobody who start from the component parts, except for TSMC or UMC, nobody really manufacturer anything, that is why you are eager to use China’s labour and market.

Q: Taiwan’s economy, how does business and individual face?

A: Relax

Q: Relax?

A: Relax a bit, your problem is not serious as Guangdong, go to Guangdong and see, their main export is US, they are affected worse, so is India because their technology product sell to US financial services, now these financial services don’t want it anymore.

In this time Taiwan to think about its root. When crisis strike, what can we rely on, what should we hold on so we don’t get washed over?

China is undergoing a big readjustment; you should focus on China’s readjustment. If I am a Taiwanese, I will use China’s readjustment to find business opportunities.

Q: Like what you mean?

A: Economy like China will not disappear, it will only change its core qualities, change by itself is very difficult, but if the Chinese people lose jobs, they will open up job training classes, retrain the Chinese people. If China lose job they will need to raise their abilities, Taiwanese will set up training schools. You don’t need to worry; I believe Taiwan will find opportunities from China’s problems.

You can also look more deeply into China’s internal demands, transfer product and services to China. This is what Europe and US and Japan wanted to do, but Taiwan understand China better than no one else. Taiwan speaks Japanese, Chinese and English. This is “golden combination”. Nobody else can do that: only person who understand the three main markets is Taiwanese.

Q: You are not worried about China’s housing market setting China’s economy in decline?

A: China’s real estate agents should worry, but not for other people. China’s economy has grown 11% in the past years, even if it lowers 1-2%, it is still a very good economy, and it is beyond what you can have. Even if China’s economy only grows 4-5%, Taiwan can still adjust its pace and redefine the Chinese market and gain from it.

Q: What about the future of other Asian countries?

A: Be aware of Korea. Korea is focusing on GDP growth. Many years ago Japan has given up on focusing on GDP growth, now we are #20, we no longer talk about economy growth, this implies GDP is no longer important, but Korea continues to emphasise that they have 7% growth, GDP as world’s 7th largest economy etc

Every time they grow, they all know its bubble economy, then get pulled back to reality. Putting emphasis on GDP is a big problem because their economy growth has no base support. They have no talent, basic infrastructure, no component manufacturers, and no equipment design. They go to China to manufacture and sell them to other places. This is very empty. Now they are pulled back to reality and discover they haven’t grown much in the past 15 years.

January 24, 2009

What does your business stand for?

I was reading an HBR article on "change management" and in it the authors uses an example of a military equipment manufacturing company to illustrate the idea of "tinkering" or small scale changes. Something he said triggered what I want to say in this entry.

"The company developed a new production strategy, which it called the Barbie doll. It built a base helicopter that could be dressed up with a set of accessories- guns, bombs, avionics - for customers in the military to play with. The strategy allowed the company to reap the benefits of both mass production and mass customization"(Abrahamson, July-August (2000), Harvard Business Review)

You are probably wondering what the hell I am on about. Well, as I read this passage, I was amazed by how the tone and attitude adopted by the author is so innocent and naive, using words like "play" , "Barbie". Especially in the last sentence, I just wanted to add another word "mass destruction".

Considering that these product are going to be used for only one purpose-- extermination of human lives, I can't help wondering how, and what can the purpose of vision of the company be? As the leader of the company, how can he argue what his company is doing is in fact beneficial to the human race?

The same argument probably could go the same way with tobacco companies. How do they justify to themselve and their employees what they are doing is ethical or even moral? Satisfy people's needs? There are demands out there, we just supply the product for that demand? I suppose, at the end of the day, this comes down one's moral propensity of whether the end result (i.e. loss of human lives) should be a consideration of the people who did not directly cause it (i.e. manufacturers).

This is something I really like to get some ideas from you guys, all inputs are appreciated.

Six Sigma and Success Factor

Today team 3 presented our findings from our research as well as ideas about making change which we elicited from members of the group. We thought we captured the idea that Graeme had us to do but somehow we still came out a bit confused about the project/initiative level change effort. The only team that did capture that differentiation was Apinya, Lila, and Mennu's presentation.

When Graeme popped the question about this fine difference to me and Luis, I was a bit taken aback by it. I never thought about change on an project or a personal level. I guessed I have assumed that change takes place in the higher level through the vision, strategy and personal influence of the leaders. But come to think of it, changing the attitudes and behaviors of individuals may require a different approach from one that is directed at  a large group of people.And that seem to need a deeper understanding of the change curve of every individual. As different people may be going through different stages of change (i.e. denial, acceptance, realisation), what is required to change people may differ from person to person. And that would mean different style of leadership should be directed in different situations. What would be interesting is some of the techniques, or motivational tools that are useful for this purpose.

This idea of of people on various stage of change nicely linked with what Graeme suggested about the four dimensions of followers. They were stars, cynical terriost, fan , walking dead. Stars are obviously most desirable. Whereas cynical terrorists are mos difficult to deal with, but they should be respected. But Fans and walking dead I am thinking are probablt not much good if what they lack of interest. Usually I'd rather work with people who may not disagree but still show the passion to care about a particular subject.

A few people including meself, mannu, and alan were a bit sceptical about what Graeme called "appreciative enquiry" which is you tell people to improve but do it in a very non-direct way. By first telling them about their strength (what they are doing right) followed by what they are not doing so well (weaknesses or areas of improvement). Hmm.. what should I say about this. It's a nice idea and probably the more desirable and more easily accepted way. But it really is hard to do in practice. Mainly I think everybody wants to hear other people talk god things about themselves (I would be the first to admit!). But it takes a truly reflective person to see his own weaknesses and for the others it would be difficult when it's not pointed out directly. Well, I guess this just vary from person to person.

January 22, 2009

Six Sigma for business transformation

Follow-up to Six Sigma and Profound Knowledge from Kang's blog

The presentation we had in PIUS was quite interesting. Most groups (except for Amanda,Ahbi,Smiley's group) end up coming to similar conclusions, that is

Six Sigma is somewhat lacking the psychological aspects of business management

Although it has a set of strong process improvement tools, it's relative weak emphasis on "people" issues such as acceptance, commitment to six sigma, making the changes 'stick', overcome complacency, granting exceptions means that it will likely encounter problems before the implementation begins. Preparing the people for this change is therefore crucial to Six Sigma success. And this will be the central topic in tomorrow's presentation.

The second important conclusion which we didn't quite capture in our presentation is that

Six Sigma, as a process tool improves business effciencies yet it is weak on providing effective solutions

Graeme gave the example of floppy disk, CD-ROM. A more touching example for my digital savvy classmates would be "Why continue making ever better CD-Players if you've got an IPOD?". The constantly changing environment such as digital business industry highlights the weakness of six sigma as a total improvement solution.

January 21, 2009

Six Sigma and Profound Knowledge

In the past couple days I have been researching Six Sigma in relation to Deming's system of Profound Knowledge (SoPK). Initially, this was a difficult task because I was not familiar with the Six Sigma methodologies. And for SoPK, although we have studied it before during CBE, I never looked at it from from the angle of process improvement. So quite naturally, I focused on the technical but obvious features shared between the two including

  1. Variation as Normal Distribution versus Variation on a control chart
  2. PDCA versus DMAIC- comparable or quite different?
  3. Variation as common/special cause versus Defect per Million Opportunities (DPMO)
  4. Continous improvement versus Conformance to specification
  5. Even tried to understand the drifting of the distribution and the whole Taguchi loss function, 1.5 sigma drift etc .. but it just lost me...

Even though this has all been rather confusing at first, I did manage to get a better idea of what exactly six sigma is and try to achieve. This has helped me tremendously with PIUS mini project one. I was able to distinguish between the technical (project) level relationships from theorectical (conceptual) level relationships much better.

I resist from the temptation to draw any conclusions prematurely. This will best be left for the presentation tomorrow. I will look forward to it.

January 14, 2009

Leadership is a function

Today I learnt about leadership is a function in which to satisfy three levels of needs (Fig.1).

  1. Task need
  2. Group need
  3. Individual need


Fig1. John Adair's three circles of need. (Source: Sterling)

Some of the leadership theories I read such as trait theory, behaviorist theory, and contingency theory and so on, and the sort of research studies done by Hersey & Blanchard, Fiedler e.t.c, although it helps to see the different leader styles (i.e. task versus people oriented) , it's no so clear what is it that leaders should do. I mean, for example, with Fiedler's theory, is it true that in alls situations with the characteristics of 1) poor  leader-follower relationship 2) high task structure, always mean a soft management approach will be effective? See (Fig 2). How can be sure that a task-oriented appraoch wouldnt work? Maybe this is what his empirical evidences tell us, that there is a certain style for different situation, but I think this kind of conclusion is hard to accept.


Fig.2 Fiedler's Contingency Model. Situation I, II, VII, VIII are suitable for Task-oriented leadership style. Situation III, IV, V, VI are suitable for People oriented leadership style. Source: MBE Leadership and Excellence homepage.

In contrast, I find John Adair's three circles of need much more practical and easy to understand. For starter, he describes leadership as a function to fulfil certain needs which he identifies as the need of the group task, the need of the group, and the need of the individuals. Essentially, he argues, the success of any one need is dependent on how well other needs are satisfied (that's why three circles are overlapping each other). For example, to be successful at a task assigned to a group, is dependent on how well the group is maintained (whether people get along), and how competent/motivated each individual are. Equally speaking,  if task is successfully accomplished, it wil lead to better team maintenance (morale is high), and higher self esteem. Thus forming a virtuous reinforcing cycle, or a destructive cycle- if any one of the circle is severely compromised or missing, then the group can easily disintegrate.

So what is the role of the leader? Adair argues that "leadership resides in the functions not a person"- that is leaders fulfil certain functions that leads to the gratification of these three different needs. Therefore, anyone who perform these functions is potentially a leader. Although he does not explicitly states what functions needs to be performed (my guess is that if he does, the leadership function would be too restrictive), he does lay out the general principles. In terms of the three circles of needs, leaders need to

  1. Have awareness of the content of group discussion as well as (more importantly so) the underlying behaviors or reasons for those behaviors.
  2. Need to understand what those reasons or behaviors mean, and know what need to be done.
  3. Have skills to carry out supportive/corrective actions sucessfully. This can be judged by observing whether group respond to leader's intervention.

An example he gives in the book that shed light on leadership functions is in a group discussion, whoever provides the key functions such as intiatiate, clarify, and summarise the discussion is essentially carrying out the leadership function. But does that mean anyone who provide such function is the leader? Not necessarily, he argues, if the group reject for example, the summary being provided, then the supposed leader is not providing leadership. In this sense then, the approval or recognition by the group is essential for leadership.

John also gives some key characteristics which differentiate leader from group member. Firstly the leader is responsible for the success of the task. Therefore if the task failed, the leader will step down from his responsibility. Secondly, leaders should keep distance from the group members because by being to friendly with the group , the ability to make unwelcoming decisions is compromised. Popularity is not his top concern (this coincide with George W Bush's  leadership view- see my previous blog). Therefore, the leader is often a loner and must satisfy his social need through interacting with other leader at his level.

The last two remarks are particularly interesting because of their practical/pragmatic slant. But whether they are true I am not sure. Is it not possible for a leader to be someone that is highly empathetic and "nice" ? (I am reminded of Ahbi's blog "can leader be nice?" at this point). And second, instead of stepping down, shouldn't leader's get a second chance, as long as he know what went wrong and improve on it?

On the whole, I like John Adair's explanation of leadership as a function to fulfils three levels of needs. To me it seems more useful and provide a better idea what leaders should do to be effective.

January 13, 2009

Bush's farewell

Here is a sneak peek of Bush's farewell press conference. It's not hard detect the tone of regrets and disapointments for events that happened over the past 8 years. Nevertheless being the kind of cheerful person he is, the conference was quite light hearted as he joked with reporters on some very serious and contentious issues such as the foreign policy and financial crisis.

One thing he said strike me as an example of leadership is that he said "popularity" is not really his top concern, what he would be more concerned about is in face of hard decisions, and then being criticised for making it, he would not stand down on what he believes in, and he must do what he thinks is right. 

Bush also highlighted some of the difficulties and dilemma faced by the leaders. as a leader he must make the decisions given the information available at the time. However, how well these decisions turn out to be may not be as good as hoped but it's just the way it is.

What he said I feel set the scene for the president elect Barack Obama, so far the discussions has been centred on his charismatic personality, visionary leadership. But all that will soon be put to test as he moves into the White House. All the eyes of political pundits, american citizen and indeed the whole world will be focused on him, to see whether he has lived up his expectations. The pressure is on.

Sneak peek for the video conference from the Reuters

[media align=center] [/media]

The entire video press conference from the White House

January 03, 2009

Trait theory and Behavioural theory of leadership

I spent some time today reading about leadership theories and find that the subject to be really facinating to study. During the in module work, we touched on some leadership theories but never really got into the details. Talking with Paul today suggest he deliberately leave this part out of the in module work for the PMA. I think Paul made a good call on this. As he said, it would probably be very boring to listen to a lecture on different school of leadership thinking. Reading about it in our own time allow us to think about it in more depth and relate theories to our experience.

Today I did only two theories on trait theory and behaviour theory. They are probably the first two ideas to be studied in leadership research and are probably the easiest to understand given that they are the basis for the leader "'made/born" debate.

Trait theory

When first talking about leadership, we're usually talking about the trait theory, although we often do not think about it in these terms. It's main idea is that leaders have certain traits that makes them leaders. For example Churchill is a 'persistent' leader when fighting against the Nazis or Mandela is 'visionary' leader about the black civil rights. So the raitionale goes that leadership can be identified or even defined if individuals exhibits these so called leadership traits. However, the problem is after extensive research by Stogdill in 1948, he reached the conclusion that there is no single set of universal traits that is predictative of leadership (cited in Northouse 2004). In another word, we couldnt possibly predict if anyone is going to grow up to become a leader by testing if he has got all the leadership traits (presumably through psychological assessment) because there is nothing to benchmark him against. The second important conclusion is that leadership arise from a need for it (situation) and it invovles interaction with other people. All these suggests trait theory cannot be the only way to study leadership. Fortunately, after a period where it was almost discarded , recent research have shown traits theory is important for understanding effective leadership (Northhouse 2004). There are still a set of traits that are consistently found in leaders such as intelligence, determination, integrity, sociability, and self confidence (Northouse 2004). Nevertheless, when we think about leadership in more depth, we would realise when we think about leadership we think about things such as what leaders do, what they say, how they influence people and these are the behavioural things that have little association with individual traits. Not surprisingly, one major limit of trait theory is that it is impossible to see how traits such as intelligence and determination can bring about influence in other people's motivation and performance (Maurik 2001).

Behavioural theory

Logically, behavioural theory complements the flaws in trait theory because putting together what leader are naturally and what they do seem to pretty much encompass every dimensions of leadership. One important appeal of behavioural theory is that if we know what leaders do, then it is possible to teach people leadership. So in theory everyone is capable of become a leader if they learn leadership properly. Now, to discuss about what leaders do is quite a dauting task. Most of the books and journals we read on organisational learning, effective management which talks about listening, empowering, and inspiring people are on this subject. They are all by in large styllistically prescriptive while ignoring the situational aspect of leadership (Maurik 2001). the leadership style that works in one situation may not work at all in another situation. Churchill's great leadership during WWII didnt carry his premiership afloat after the war ended (Maurik 2001). However, despite being limited in this way, behavioural theory can still shed light on how we understand leadership. If you wish to read up more about it, there are two seminal research studies on this subject (Bake and Mouton 1964; Tannenbaum and Schmidt 1958 cited in Maurik 2001). One is by Bake and Mouton in 1964 who defined leadership behaviours in task-relationship oriented dichotomy (cited in Maurik 2001). This is looking at management approaches which are "focused on finishing assigned tasks with little concern for follower's human needs" on the one hand (Task) and "creating a friendly atmosphere of work but fail to deliver on output" on the other (Relationship). Their key findings are that the task/relationship oriented leadership in practice is not a case of either/or scenario. In fact, effective leaders utilise both approaches by fitting to the management needs of given people situation (cited in Maurik 2001). What I find interesting about this is the 'middle of the road' approach which invovles a 'balanced need for task accomplishment and maintaining healthy relationships' style of leadership is depite being "politically expedient" (Maurik 2001 pp12) (in another word makes everyone happy) but is unlikely to initiate changes in the status quo (Maurik 2001).

Maurik, J. v. (2001). Writers on Leadership. London: Penguin.

Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

December 2021

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Nov |  Today  |
      1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31      

Search this blog



Most recent comments

  • totally agree by prestige car hire on this entry
  • Again another example of people being too soft ..what wrong with working for stuff by seo london on this entry
  • WHAT ! This is totally foolish you have to work for job and work either harder to keep them.. with t… by front door on this entry
  • I agree with that too. by news on this entry
  • Good things come to those who wait sounds like the right answer. by cheap seo on this entry

Blog archive

RSS2.0 Atom
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder