Response to Lecture 3

Lecture 3 was mostly about two contrasting styles of leadership, transactional and transformational leadership. Transactional leadership is about getting a job done before the deadline by either punishing or rewarding the workers based on their productivity. Transformational leadership, in contrast, is about inspiring the workers to go beyond their job routines and make their shared vision a reality.
     Both leadership styles have its own pros and cons.  Transactional leadership works best in an environment where there isn't just enough time to develop a trust based relationship of the transformational leadership. For instance, students in RPI classrooms have to change their groups every day, weeks or months.  Moreover, meeting short deadlines and keeping the projects economical also discourage the transformational leadership. This is when the transactional leadership is more advantageous than the transformational leadership. Despite the lack of time and resources, transactional leadership manages to motivate the workers to keep up to the basic standards set by the managers. It is, however, unrealistic to expect the best quality of workmanship out of each individual worker. The transformational leadership, on the other hand, can motivate workers to perform beyond their individual limits and accomplish something that is normally not possible under the transactional leadership. The leader inspires the workers by showing empathy to each worker and serving as a role model for hard work, highly ethical behaviors, respect and trust. This makes the workers feel that what they are doing truly matters. Thus the workers take greater ownership of the project they are working on and work at their full potential to achieve the group goal set by the leader. The workers trust their leader and the leader trusts the workers to do their jobs to make their vision a reality.
      As stated in the last blog, every leadership style has its own pros and cons. It is the leader's job to determine which leadership style suits the situation the best and dynamically adapt to the situation to get the best results out of the group.

Response to Chapter 1 Reading

        Mass Communication is needed whenever a leader in charge of a large group must convey his/her ideas or goals to other group members. But to do so, the leader must be aware of both the constantly evolving technologies of today, as well as cultural diversities of his subordinates. Chapter 1 of this book describes the evolution of mass media technologies throughout the history of mankind as well as the cultural caste system developed in United States.
         The Modern media technologies have developed alarmingly fast ever since the beginning of the 20th century. From electronic telegraph of early 1900s  to ipad of today the media technology advanced too quickly for some people to catch up with the pace of technological evolution. Over a period of just 2 decades, internet and small electronics such as smartphones, ipod, ipad ,etc. revolutionized the ways people communicate with one another. Letters that would otherwise take days, weeks or even months to be delivered would now take only minutes to be sent to its recipients. It is important for the leader to be aware of such technological advances and modify his/her means of communication accordingly to ensure that the leader stays in touch with his/her group members. For example, if you are unable to use the online communication services such as facebook or Twitter, you will always lag behind the others and the lack of communication between you and other team members would be detrimental to the teamwork.
         Another important thing we need to learn from this chapter is "cultural tastes". So called "cultured elites of the society" have different cultural tastes from the middle class or the working class people. For example, some wealthy, educated people prefer to listen to classical music, read classic literature such as Shakespearean plays, and appreciate antique artworks made by Renaissance artists.  The leader must be aware of such cultural tastes to communicate with his/her group members effectively without offending them or making them disinterested.
        It is interesting to note just  how much consideration must be made for to effectively communicate with other group members. The leader must be willing to take advantage of both technologies and cultural backgrounds of his/her team members to consolidate the teamwork necessary to achieve the group's goals.

In response to the lecture# 1


It is not for me to judge which one of the leadership theories is the most valid of all. Teamwork I've had so far has undermined my creativity, enthusiasm, efficiency, quality of worksmanship and relationship with other students. Thus, I had neither opportunities or ambition to be a good leader. But based on my observation of successful leaders in the world, I found the "Situational Theory" to be the most agreeable.
         Each leadership style has its own pros and cons. It is paramount for a leader to change his or her style to meet the demands of a situation. For example, in a life or death situation, it would be utterly foolish to democratically debate over which course of actions to take when you have only minutes to save a person. In this case, the authoritarian style of leadership is needed to take a fast decisive course of actions to save the dying person. But the authoritarian leadership style limits freedom, creativity and enthusiasm of each member. Thus, it is most likely plagued with mutinies and hatred between the leader and the subordinates. Most of the time, however, the democratic style of leadership is the most just and effective way to encourage the group members to work together. But the democratic leadership style is not flawless either. Individual member of the group must constantly compromise with other members with differing opinions. In the process, the individual has a risk of losing enthusiasm, efficiency and creativity due to criticisms made by other members.The Laissez-faire style of leadership works the best, if each group member is highly skilled and capable of making his/her own decisions without any intervention from the leader. It allows the most freedom, creativity and enthusiasm. However, the laissez-faire leadership style is the most time consuming of all three leadership styles. Therefore it is important for the leader to assess the situation and make appropriate leadership style adjustments to get the best result out of the group.