How does one define leadership?

To some, an effective leader is someone who is strong,

firm, and inspirational. To others, an effective leader is someone who is empathetic, supportive,

and motivational. There is no one definition for leadership because what may be considered

effective to one person can be different to another.

Leadership is a process that one goes through and influences a group of people who share

a common goal. Prior to this course, I believed leadership had a singular definition and did not

think of it as a process. If there was a singular definition for leadership, followers may be left out

of it; but because leadership is a process, the needs and values of followers are incorporated into

the process. To become an effective leader, one has to listen to their followers’ needs and values.

To me, an effective leader is someone who is able to inspire and motivate their followers

to achieve a common goal, but also listen and empathize with their values and concerns. This is

most similar to the transformational leadership process. Transformational leadership is a process

that occurs between the follower and the leader. The leader focuses on the emotions and needs of

the follower while providing an inspirational vision of the future. Northouse describes,

“Transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of influence that moves followers to

accomplish more than what is usually expected of them” (Northouse, 2018, p. 164). I believe this

to be an effective practice of leadership because it incorporates the followers on an individual

level while simultaneously giving them hope for the future. This leadership process has the

perfect balance between empathy and inspiration that I believe makes an effective leader. My

favorite example of a transformational leader is Walt Disney. In 1923, Walt Disney Studios was

founded by Walt and his brother Roy. After 95 years, it is one of the largest and most successful

multinational media developers and distributors. Walt Disney was an effective transformational
leader because he appealed to his followers’ values and inspired them to work hard towards a

shared goal. This type of leadership resonates with me on a personal level because my goal is to

work for the Walt Disney Company after I graduate. It has been my dream to work for “the

Mouse” since I was in middle school. Walt Disney’s practice of leadership has always inspired

and influenced me and still does to this day.

Although transformational leadership aligns with my philosophies, other types of

leadership that resonate with me are adaptive leadership, the situational approach, and servant

leadership. Adaptive leadership is a transactional process that occurs between the leader and the

follower. An adaptive leader helps their followers adapt to change by supporting them and

meeting their needs. “It focuses primarily on how leaders help others do the work they need to

do, in order to adapt to the challenges they face,” (Northouse, 2018, p. 259). However, an

adaptive leader doesn’t allow the follower to “run away” from the challenges. This is part of the

transaction that occurs between leader and follower. This leadership process resonates with me

because it’s similar to how a shift supervisor works at Starbucks. For example, if a store manager

makes a decision that changes the normal routine of the store, a shift supervisor takes on the

responsibility to ensure the decision is carried out. Baristas may struggle to adapt to the change

and shift supervisors are there to help them by supporting and providing instruction. Another

type of leadership that resonates with me is the situational approach. Similar to adaptive

leadership, this approach is used in certain situations. “The premise of the theory is that different

situations demand different kinds of leadership,” (Northouse, 2018, p. 96). This theory resonates

with me because it allows room for the leader to use different types of leadership processes.

Depending on the situation, a leadership can use directive behaviors and/or supportive behaviors
to reach a shared goal with their followers. I also see this approach used amongst management at

Starbucks. When a task needs to be completed, a shift supervisor or manager will use directive

behaviors to clearly communicate the goal. This is typically one-way communication. If they see

the baristas struggling, they will use supportive behaviors to empathize with their concerns and

emotions. This typically uses two-way communication. Lastly, servant leadership is another

leadership process that resonates with me. Servant leadership is a process where the leader serves

the follower in order to meet the common goal. Servant leaders empower their followers by

meeting their needs and values. A servant leader puts their followers first. An example of a

servant leader is Gandhi. Through his leadership practice, he led India to independence from

British rule. He listened and empathized with his followers, as well as maintained a humble

lifestyle. This leadership style resonates with me because it doesn’t allow room for greed. I

believe there is a sense of greed among CEOs today and while it may make money for them and

keep their shareholders happy, it doesn’t keep their followers’ values in mind. The foundation for

servant leadership are the values of their followers. Adaptive leadership, the situational

approach, and servant leadership are all very similar leadership processes because they can be

used situationally, and they incorporate the followers into the process. However they are different

from each other because they each have a different intended outcome, as well as a different

balance for how influential the followers are in the process.

Two types of leadership that did not resonate with me are the trait approach, and the

path-goal theory. The trait approach states that certain character traits are what make up an

effective leader. I dislike how this approach suggests that leadership is not something that can be

taught or learned; only those born with certain traits can become effective leaders. Another key
reason why this approach does not appeal to me is that it does not factor in situations. I believe

leadership is something that should be fluid and flexible. Certain traits may make an effective

leader in one situation, but not in another. In order to be an effective leader for a long period of

time, one needs to be able to adapt to every situation and use their judgment on what type of

leadership is needed. Another type of leadership that did not appeal to me was the path-goal

theory. This theory does not resonate with me because I find it to be a complex leadership

process. The path-goal theory suggests that a leader take on a certain leadership style to fit the

motivational needs of their followers. Unlike the trait approach, this leadership theory is effective

for situational use. However, it may cause the follower to become dependent on the leader.

Dependance on the leader to help them when challenges arise can not only become a great

responsibility for the leader, but can hinder a follower’s ability to confront challenges on their

own. “Over time, this kind of leadership could be counterproductive because it promotes

dependency and fails to recognize the full abilities of followers,” (Northouse, 2018, p. 126).

I have been working for Starbucks for over two years. I was hired as a barista, then

promoted to a shift supervisor, and then self-demoted back to a barista due to transferring and

putting more focus on school. I enjoy working for the company and have even made a lot of

friends through it. At my current store, I am very close with the store manager and one of the

shift supervisors. We all take great pride in our work ethic, but can joke around during our shifts.

Occasionally, after our shifts, we will go grab a drink, go out to eat, or even go to the gym. At

this store, I am definitely considered what would be the “in-group” my store manager has. The

leadership-member exchange (LMX) theory suggests that a leader will split their followers into

two groups: the in-group, and the out-group. The in-group is composed of those who work hard
and go the extra mile for the leader. The in-group is considered to be more comfortable with the

leader, and vice versa. The out-group is composed of those who do the amount of work that is

expected of them. They may not receive the same treatment or opportunities as the in-group

does. While being a part of the in-group does have its advantages, I find that this theory does

more harm than good. For example, one day at work, I noticed we were starting to get behind on

pre-close, which is taking apart each station and thoroughly cleaning it. Because of my

experience as a shift supervisor, I knew what needed to be done and I was in the perfect position

to start taking apart the stations. Since we were already behind, I started with the station that gets

used the most and is the most difficult to clean. I started with this station first because I knew I

was capable of getting it thoroughly cleaned and put back together without disrupting the flow of

the drinks. Halfway through the station, only a few minutes into cleaning, my manager made a

blunt critique of not starting with that station. I apologized and explained my reasoning, but said

that I would start with the other stations first next time. She continues to make sarcastic

comments about how starting with the station I initially started with was a bad idea and made the

barista panic. At first I understood her point of view, but after these comments which I believe

were intended to be jokes, I was beginning to grow frustrated. I was already doing more than

what was expected of me, but because she felt comfortable around me, she was really blunt with

her critiques. It made me feel like going above and beyond the expectations set for me was

hindering the team. I felt as if our friendship allowed her to critique me using a harsh tone and I

was expected to roll with it. This is an example of how the LMX theory was not effective in this

situation. If our roles were switched and I was the leader, I would have used servant leadership to

either support the barista while half of their bar was missing, or support the barista starting
pre-close. After pre-close was done, I would take aside the barista that started with the wrong

section and discuss why starting with the other sections is more important. I would listen to their

reasoning and try to empathize with it. In a work environment such as Starbucks, or any other

minimum wage job, I believe it’s important for a leader to support their followers by listening

and empathizing with their needs and values. This shows the leader genuinely cares for the

emotions of their followers. This can be motivational for those who are at the bottom of the

company working for minimum wage.

As I browse through photos of the top 200 highest paid CEOs, I notice that a large

portion of them are white males. This motivates me even more to major in leadership because

there are too few women in leadership positions. I also believe it is extremely important to give

the proper support to people of color in order for them to have more opportunities to excel in

leadership positions. I’m excited for what the future holds because I believe in fifty years, that

list will look much more diverse.

Not one single person led our team, but there were more effective leaders than others in

our team. I would say Myles really took the reins on stepping up and reminded everyone to log

in most days and participate in the game. Our group hit a rough patch at the very beginning

because of conflicting schedules. During these rough patches, Myles and everyone else didn’t let

their frustrations show. I’ve been in groups before where two group members will try and fight to

take leadership of the group and it resulted in agitation growing among us. In this group, we

were all very supportive of each other. We all took turns to remind each other to log in and

participate, as well as reminding each other whose turn it was. Working with this group really

taught me about time management within a group. I’ve always worked in groups where we may
not have the exact same schedule but managed to get the work done. I was surprised at how

extremely different our schedules were. After getting behind on our game twice, I told them we

should start each new crisis after we finished the one before. This gave us multiple days to

complete each crisis on time. I was shocked at first because I never turn in assignments late, but

this experience showed me how important it is to communicate with your group, even if it is

everyday. Throughout the game, I made decisions based on how I thought my character would

choose. My character was the Chief Human Resources Officer, and I focused primarily on

supporting and helping the employees through the challenges the company faced. I tried my best

to incorporate different leadership styles with my decisions but mainly used adaptive leadership.

There were a lot of changes and challenges the company faced, and using adaptive leadership I

tried to make decisions that helped the employees adapt. However, I struggled with doing what I

thought was best for the employees and customers, and keeping the shareholders happy. I found

this simulation to be rather tough. It was hard to make financial decisions with a company that

had financial issues. It gave me the opportunity to see how a company runs and the obstacles

they face. The most important thing I learned from the simulation is how important it is to have

effective leaders guiding the company through troubling times. If I had the chance to play the

simulation again, I would not change my decisions. I believe my leadership style was effective

for the character I played in this game.

I have learned a lot from this course. This course may be the most informational

leadership course I have taken yet. I learned more about myself and what type of leader I am, but

I also learned what I value as a follower as well. This course has definitely prepared me to

analyze different types of leadership.

 Reference

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE.