Compass: A Journal of Leadership and Service at Birmingham-Southern College

68 Pages·2002·5.6 MB·English

B
U
>
LU
COMPASS
Z
<
Q_
X A Journal ofLeadership andService
oo atBirmingham-Southern College
LU
Q
<
O
U Volume IV. Issue i May 2002

COMPASS
A JournalofLeadership andService
at Birminghain-Southern College
Spring 2002 Volume 4, Issue 1
Editor-in-Chief AssistantEditor StaffAdvisor
CHRISTINALONG ANNA SPRUIELL JEANNEJACKSON
"Statingthat leadershipis acomplexphenomenonrepeats atruismthatispainfullyobvioustoall. . .
Despiteitsinherentcomplexit\', thosewhoseek an understandingofthenatureofleadership andlead-
ershipprocessesarewellrewardedbytheinsightsgeneratedthereby." Intheiressay "Historicaland
ContemporaryContexts ofLeadership: AConceptualModel,' leadershiptheoristsJ. ThomasWrenand
MarcJ. Swatezemphasizetheadvantages earnedthroughinvestigatingthe studyoftheenigmaticcon-
ceptofleadership. As allDistinctioninLeadership Studies studentslearnuponintroductiontothe
program, itisvirtuallvimpossibleto capturethemeaningoftheword "leadership'' inasingle defini-
tionorphrase, histead, themultifacetednatureofleadershipcanonlybeillustratedthroughvaried
approaches.
Compass, themostrecentadditionto studentpublications atBirmingham-SouthernCollege, has
attemptedtoapproachleadershipandcommunityservicein asimilarfasliion. Compassincorporates
the scholastics ofanacademicjournal\\dthmultidisciplinaiyliberalarts,woventogetherbyacommon
tliread: leadership. In somearticles,theleadership componentoftheessayis quite apparent. In oth-
ers, itislessevidentandnotnecessarilyinitstraditionalcontext.
OurSpring2002 editionincludes essays as diverse asthe subjectofleadership itself. In apaperfor
the seniorHistorv^Departmental Seminar, AbigailHoodexaminesthesubtleinfluenceofClementine
ChurchillonherrenownedhusbandWinston; andinherpaper 'OsamabinLaden: AmericanPubhc
EnemyNumberOne,' professorofpoliticalscienceNancyBiggioanalyzestheinterworkingsofOsama
BinLaden'sAl-Quedanetwork. Inaddition, anewleadership theoiy, the ""'LeadershipTriangle,
makesitspublication debut, inanarticleconstructedthroughtheresearchandinnovationofa
Birmingham-SouthernCollegeInterimclass. Additionalarticles include: aninvestigativeessay,wTitten
bvseniorMatthewParrish, intothe symboHcprotestofthepivotalTiananmen Scfiiaremassacre:, senior
KyleNeal's historicalresearchintotheimplicationsofwomen'srefonneffortsinthe Republicof
TurkishleaderMustafaKamalAtaturk; andanarrativeessaybylocalBirminghamleaderandCEOof
SlossRealEstateGroup, Inc. CathyCrenshaw, gi\dnginsightintothecits's reWtalizationprojects.
Myhopeisthatthereaderwill be compelledtoseekouttheleadership componentineachessay, and
perhaps fromthisgainabetterunderstandingofthe 'complexphenomenon" ofleadership.
IwouldliketothankJeanneJackson forheractiveinvolvementas Compassadvisorandthe Student
GovernmentAssociationofBirmingham-SouthernCollege fortheirfinancial and encouragingsupport.
A^ehopeyouenjoythisyearseditionofCompass.
Christina Long
Editor-in-Chief. Compass

Contents
Submissions shouldbe senttothe I TheLeadershipTriangle
Hess CenterforLeadership and Service Angelika Kuettnerand students of "Makin>r
Box549065 aDifference:"Tuentielh CenturyCaseStudies
inLeadership
Birniinghani. Alabama35254
9 MustafaKemalAtaturk's Promotion
OFWomen's ReformintheTurkishRepublic
KyleNeal
[email protected].
17 OsamaBinLaden: PublicEnem\'NumberOne
NancyBiggio
33 Winstonand ClementineChurchill:
The PoliticallyFormatim;Years from 19L4-1916
Abigail Hood
51 From LakeviewtoHistoricDo\^7>jtown:
©Cop>Tight2002 The RemtalizationofBirmingham
CathyCrenshaw
byCOMPASS
aiidBirminghani-SoiitheniCoUeges
OfficeofCominiuiications 54 Symbols ofDefl\nce:AnAn.-vlysis ofthe Role
ofSiTviBOLic ProtestintheTiananmenM\ssacre
PrintedbyEBSCO, MatthewParrish
Biniiiiigham.Alabama
BrandiDahlen,WhitneyGallien,Sar.\hGr,\\t;s,
RuthHodzi,Angeliil\Kuettner,Br.\ndonM\t:rs,
ChristopherNull,KeithR\ndall,DeniseBobbins.
MitchRobinson,SitndayV\nder\t:r,andCamYoitng.
TheclasswastaughtbyDr.V.NUrkh,amLester.
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
Lyrasis IVIembers and Sloan Foundation
http://www.archive.org/details/compassjournalof2002unse
The Leadership Triangle
AngelikaKuettnerandstudentsof"MakingaDifference:"Tirentielli
CenturyCaseStudiesinLeadership*
The Birininghain-Southeni College Interim 2001 class '^Making a
Difference:" Twentieth CentniyCaseStudies in Leadership comcaetl in
orderto studyvarious modern leadersliip theories andapjDlythese theo- TheLeadershipTriangle,
rmieeestitongcsa,sehoswtuedvieers,ofthcahtostehen lleeaaddeerrss.hiIptbtheecoarimeescbleeairngtosutsudaifetder-seTvreariatl, Dirvr.itVt.enMabrykhthaeinstLuedsetnetrs'sof
"Makinga Difference'':
Behavior, Situational/Contingency, Power/Influence, Servant
Leadership, and Cognitive Leadership-independently donotprovide a TwentiethCenturyCase
completemethodtoexplainleadership. Asaresult, wesetouttodesign Studiesin Leadership
our own theoiy that woidd hopefully define the concept of leadership Interim Class, wasedited
more fully. We took the worthwhile elements ofmany theories and con- forpublication byjunior
structed a new combined theory, which we believe demonstrates better AngelikaKuettner. She
the dynamicsofleadershipthan anyoneofthetheorieswestudied. comments, ^Thisproject
providesan innovative
L Previous LeadershipTheories wayoflookingatleader-
ship. Iamnotalwaysin
idemfpiLonereatdatehnirtsshtiloilpuosuiirvselaciovencsco.enpctPe.epotWpiltethahthtahvieseldafisoftrfeiccveuenlrttuartyto,tewemxhppatlteaidmn,atoyydebetesccorabilvblieeoduastnlhdye fhaovwoerveorf,grthoiuspcporuorjseectasn:d
theresultingconception
"scientific studyofleadersliip study' began.
One of the first attempts to systematically conceptuahze leadership oftheLeadership
waswhathasbecome known as Traittheory. First articulatedjustprior Triangleisdefinitelyan
toWorldWarI (Chemers83),thistheoryassertsthatleadersresultfrom eclxacsespwtiaosn.onTehoisfItnhetebreismt
the possession of certam traits in theii- personalities (Kirkpatrick 134).
grouplearningexperi-
Suchtraitsmightinclude,butarenotluTiitedto,driveorambition,intel-
l1e2c9t)u.al Tabhileit}g'o,alanodflweialdleirnsghniepsssttuoditeaskiesrmiesrkesly(Ktioi'ikdpeanttriifcykth1e35l;eaSdteorgsdliiilpl pewanorcrteiksceiidpnavtweehidiy.cwheWlIlehaalvle
"traits and Trait theory- remained the only scientific explanation for
leadership untilthe SecondWorldWar (Kirkpatrick 134). together.*'
In the 1940s, the popularity ofTrait theorybeganto be replacedby
whathascometobeknownasBeha\'iortheoiyfortworeasons (Chemers
83). First, studies by psychologists such as Ralph Stogdill in 1948
showed that the numerous inconsistent and contradictory trait studies
made it mipossible to identifyleadership through traits alone (Chemers
84; Kirkpatrick 134). Second, inalargercontext, thefieldofpsycholo-
gy was now emphasizing behaviorism (Chemers 84). Behavdor theory
places importance solely on the actions of the leaders and how leaders
viewtheirposition. Traittheoristshaveidentifieda spectiaunofleader-
ship behaviors. At one end ofthe spectrum is task-oriented autocratic
stN'le (Hersey "Behavioral'' 144). Onethenmoves to amore democratic
stylewhich stressesmoreconcern forpeople (Hersey "Behavioral' 145).
Finally,attheotherendofthespectiaxmisthe "laissez-faire' style,which
gives complete control to the subordinates and removes the leaderfrom
the decision-makingprocessaltogether (Chemers 84).
Situational or Contingency theor\' began to take precedence over
*BrandiDahlen. WliitneyGallien,SarahGraves. RuthHodzi.AngelikaKuettoer,
Brandon Myers, Christopher Null. Keith Randall, Denise Rohbins, Mitch
Robinson, Simday Vanderver. and Cam Young. The class was taught by Dr. V.
MarkhamLester.
Behaviortheoryinthelatesixtiesandstillmaintains alarge degreeofpopularityamongleadershipthe-
orists (Chemers 83). Thistheoryfocuses onthepowerofthe situationtoallowleaderstoperformtheir
responsibilitiesandexposethestrengthsand/orweaknessesoftheleaderineachindividualcircumstance
(Hersey"Situational""207). Thefocusisontherelationshipsbetweentheleadersandtheirsubordinates,
the levelofclarityatwhichthe leaders communicate the tasks andgoals to their subordinates, andthe
extenttowhichtheleadershavetheabilityandauthoritytopunishorreward(control)theirsubordinates
(Chemers 86).
Focusedmoreontheactualbehaviorsofleadersinmotivation,recenttheoristshaveworkedtodevel-
optheconceptsofpowerandinfluence. Powerandinfluenceformthefoundationoftheleadershipthe-
ory,inwhichpowerhasbeendefinedas "thecapacity...orthepotentialtoinfluence" (Hughes339;Yukl
95).TheoristssuchasRichardL.Hughes,RobertC. Ginnet,GordonJ.Curphy,andGaryYuklarguethat
there are five bases of power by which a leader can exert influence (Hughes 340; Yukl 197). First,
accordingto these theorists, expertpower, orthe power ofknowledge, enables leaders to influence fol-
lowersbytheirexpertise. Second,referentpowerreferstothepotentialinfluencealeaderhasbecauseof
the strength ofthe relationship withthe followers. Third, legitimatepowercomes fromone's formal or
officialauthority,andallowsleaderstoexertinfluencebyvirtueoftheirroleandposition. Fourth,reward
powerinvolvesthepotentialtoinfluenceothersbecause ofone'scontroloverdesiredresources. Finally,
coercivepower, theopposite ofrewardpower, isthe abilitytocontrolothersthroughthefearofpunish-
ment or the loss of valued outcomes (Hughes 340-3, 245). Likewise, according to the Power and
Influence theory, bothleaders and followers can use "influence tactics" as the actualbehaviors to exert
influence to achieve desired results (Hughes 348; Yukl 193). Various types ofinfluence tactics include
rationalpersuasion, inspirational appeals, personal appeals, exchange, coalitiontactics, pressuretactics,
andlegitimizingtactics (Hughes349; Yukl225).
Acontrastingleadershipperspectiveis ServantLeadership, describedbyRobertK. Greenleaf,which
comes fromthe leadersnatural desireto serveothers. Thistheoryofleadership marks a sharp contrast
withothertheoriesbecausethedesiretoleadissecondary,meaningthatleadingcomesasaresultofserv-
ing. Servant leadership embodies the principle that one cannot successfully lead without setting the
examplefirst.Aservantleaderascertainsthatthefollowers'greatestneedsarebeingmet,essentiallytak-
ingcareofthefollowers (Greenleaf22). Inmanycases,theservantleaderworksalongsidethefollowers
to accomplish tasks, serving the followers while leadmg them. Therefore, this relatively modern theory
marks a dualistic approach to leadership in which serving and leacUng are combined in order to exert
influenceonthefollowers (Spears3, 1).
Anotherapproachto leadership theoryis transactional and transformational leadership, as found in
thewritings oftheorists JamesMacGregorBurns andRichard Couto. This theory, like Situationallead-
ership, defines leadership in such aswayas to indicate the inseparabilityofleadership fromthe follow-
ers. Yet,thistheoryfocusesonthetypeofactual "exchange" thatoccursbetweentheleaderandfollow-
ers. Two levels ofleadership are discussed: transactional leadership, described simply as an exchange
betweentwoormorepeople, andtransformationalleadership, inwhichthe exchangecreates a situation
ofupliftingthemoralcharacterofthepartiesinvolved (Burns 100, 101). Actualtransformationallead-
ership,foundinsuchleadersasLenin,Mao, Gandhi, andLuther,israre (Couto 106). Thefocusofthis
theoryisthetypeandeffectivenessofinteractionbetweenandleaderandthefollowerswithbothparties
necessarilyconsciousoftheother'sneedsandwantsfromtheexchange (Burns 100).
The leadership theoryatthe forefrontofcurrent studycomes fromHowardGardner's bookLeading
Minds. Gardner's Cognitive theory of leadership centers around the leader's ability to relate his/her
"story"tothefollowers. This storyistheleader'smessage-whathe/shecommunicatesinordertogain
followersandpracticeleadership. Theleader'sstorycanbeoriginalorthatofthefollowers. Theimpor-
tanceofthestoryliesintheideathatthestoryiswhatbringstheleadertopower. Gardnerdescribestwo
differenttypes ofleaders as well, direct andindirect. Directleaders, suchas politicians, personally deal
withtheirfollowers,whereas,indirectleaders,suchaswritersandpainters,leadthroughtheirworkwith-
outbeingin frequentcontact withtheirconstituents. Gardnerstresses the ideathatleadership is prac-
ticedinparticular "domains" or disciplines, andaleaderin one domainmayormaynotbe aleaderin
another (Gardner 14, 10-11, 6).
We arefastapproachingthepointwherethere arealmostasmanytheories ofleadership asthereare
leaders. After examining various leadership theories, our class concluded that no one theory seemed
equippedtopull togetherthe numerous worthwhile elements each inriivifiual theor\- had tooffer. While
thetheories we studied offered insight into particularfacets (jfleadership, thereappearedto be noover-
archingmodeltobringtheseinsightstogether. Theverychallengeof—stndyingleadershi|)isitsva.stscope.
Not only are t—here leaders in all the many areas ofhuman endeavor from politics to religion to acade-
mics tosports on andon, but alsothe leaders within each field seem to displavan nnlimited varieJyof
traits, behaviors, and other characleristics. The challenge is to find, for example, whal l{,instein had in
conmion with Hitler, what Picasso had in common with Lenin, what Keller had in conunon wilh Ilenr\
Ford, and, most importantlywhattheyallhad inconunon.
In attemptingtofindthis "'commonthread' ofleadership, we kept comingback towhat seemed to
beacoreelement-power. Powerwe defined asthe abilitytoinfluenceothers, whetherthrough direct
wordand action, aswithapolitician, orthroughaleader's indirect influencethrough a creation, such
as an artistwitha painting. Thepowerand capacityofaleaderto influenceotherswe find tobea
universalcomponentin leadership. Thus, theproblemisto discoveranddefinethesourceofthis power.
Whatessential elementshavetobeinplaceforsomeonetoreachthepointofhavingthe abilityto
influenceothers? Moderntheories alone donotofferthe answertothis question, butthey dooffer
individual clues andhelpfulinsights. Canthepiecesofthepuzzle (thevarioustheories) be fitted
togetherin a unifiedmodelthatmight beastep forward inexplainingthewhole? This is whatour
class setoutto do.
II. TheLeadership Triangle
As a first step afterourreviewofthe literature, werealizedthatmostofwhat the theories addi'essed
couldbeunitedvmdertlireebroadcategories; trait, situation andtechnique.
Traitsarethepersonalattributesweassociatewithleaders. WeconcludedfromareviewofTraitthe-
OTyresearchthattherearethreemaintraitsinidentifyingleadersandleadership;intelligence, drive,and
risk-taking.
Byintelligencewe mean a high degree ofexpertisewithin an area ofinfluence, as well as being alert
totheirsurroundings; havinggoodjudgment,verbalfacilityandoriginality.
The second trait is drive. We define drive as an internal force impelling leadership, making them
proactive,creatingakeendesireforachievement,andmaintainingafirmtenacitytoovercomeobstacles,
andapresence ofenthusiasticenergyanden—duranceintheirendeavors.
Finally,byrisktakingwemeanjustthat leaderscanonlyleadbytakingrisks. Theyarenotriddled
withindecisiveness,butarefocusedandreadytotakenecessaryactionstomakethingshappen.
Wecannowbegintoillustrateourmodel: TheLeadership Triangle. Webeginatasinglepointwhere
powerandleadership are absent. This pointrepresents a total absence oftrait, technique and situation.
Traitcanbeillustratedas alineemanatingfromourstartingpoint (Figure 1).
Technique is an independent element from trait, and is denoted by a separate Ime, again emanating
fromtheoriginalpointinthemodel (Figure 1). WeseeTechnicfue asthetoolsusedbyleaderstosignifi-
cantly influence members ofa group. Forthe most part, what we have calledtechnicjue represents not
onlyBehaviortheory, butalsoincludespowerandinfluencetechniques. This linerepresentsbothbehav-
iors suchastaskorpeopleorientationaswellasinfluencetecliniques suchas rationalpersuasion, inspi-
rationalappeals, consultation, andingratiation.
The third component is situation. Once again, this aspect can be illustrated as a Ime on our model
(Figure 1). The situation is determined by the general enviromnent such as an economic recession or
boom, politicalcrisis, war, orongoingresearchin afield andbythereceptiveness ofthe foUowerstothe
leaders andtheirideals.
Trait
Figure 1
Situation •^ >i Technique
Thesethreeprinciplepointsofleadershiparereallynothingmorethanawayofsummarizingmostof
theexistingtheories ofleadership studies. But, whatis needednowis awaytoconnectthesepoints, to
describetheirrelationshipstooneanotherandtheiressentialdynamicnature. Inourexaminationwedis-
coveredthatthelinkingofanytwooftheprinciplepoints, leadstothe descriptionoffurtherleadership
phenomena. Wehavetermedtherelationsbetweentheprinciplepointsconnectors.Theseconnectorsare
thedescriptionoftherelationshipbetweentwoprinciplepointsandthereforedependwhollyupontherel-
ativemeasurementoftheleader'sprinciplepoints.
Thefirstconnectorwetermisskill.,whichisthesynthesisofthetechniquesandtraitsofaleader. Skill
is thetotalleadership abilityoftheindividual, relative to the leader's domain. The leader's beliefs, per-
sonality,charisma,intellect, andphysicalfeaturescoalescewiththeirpersonalleadershiptechnique(s) to
createleadership skill. Ifthetraitsortechniqueoftheleaderarewelladaptedtothe situation, thenthe
leader'sskillcorrespondinglyincreases.Asfortheoverallframeworkofourtheory,theimportanceofskill
liesinthefactthatthelevelandnatmeofanindividual'sleadership skillcanactto separatethemfrom
others andaidthemintheiremergenceasaleader.
The next connectorterm is whatwe call action. Actionis createdwiththe interaction ofteclinique
andsituation. Actionisthe cause andeffectrelationship existingbetween aleader'stechniques andthe
situation. Action becomes the metaphorical "two-way street" with the leader influencingthe situation,
andbeinginfluencedbythereactionemergingfromthesituationduetotheleader'stechnique. Thusthe
termaction canbe sub-dividedinto leadingaction, the influenceoftheleader'stechniqueonthe situa-
tionandcounteraction.,theinfluenceofthesituationontheleader'stechnique. Actionhereincludesboth
indirectanddirectaction.Anychangesintechniqvieand/orsituationwillcauseachangeintheleveland
intensityofaction.Action'sroleinourleadersliiptheoryiscriticalbecauseitnotonlyillustratestherela-
tionship between aleader's technique and the situation; it also illuminates how the situationinfluences
andchangestheleaderaswell.
Thefinalconnectortermistheconceptofoutlook. Outlookisthecombinationoftraitandsituation.
Wehavedefinedoutlookastheinfluenceoftheleader'sbeliefs, personality, intellect, andothertraits on
theirperception,assessment,insight,awareness,andsensitivitytoagivensituation. Outlook,inessence,
istheleader'sabilitytoviewthe"bigpicture"withsomelevelofobjectivity. Italsoincludesthedegreeof
self-reflectionaleaderhas. Anyincreaseordecreaseintraitand/orsituationcausesasimilarincreaseor
decreaseoftheleader'soutlook. Thisconceptofoutlookisperhapsthemostcriticalofthethree-connec-
torconcepts, foritiswithinoutlookthat leaders have someformofdirectionorgoal. Attempts atlead-
ership withouta sizable outlook tendto degrade intotheproverbial "blindleadingtheblind," as direc-
tionandgoalsarelost.
Thestructurethatis created, whichwehavenamedtheLeadership Triangle., unifies existentleader-
shiptheories. Itrecognizeseachofthethreeprinciplepointsascrucialtotheestablishmentofpowerand
explainstherelationshipsthatexistbetweenthem.
Trait
Figure 2 %
Power
Situation • • Technique
Aact.•ion
"leadingaction"
'coimteraction''
Figuratively speaking, the area ofthe triangle formed represents the amount ofpower a leaderpos-
sesses (Figure 2). While no one can quantifiably measure power, one may relatively gauge a leader's
power in context within a particular triangle's domain. The domains in which leadership exists are as
diverse as the leaders themselves. Aleader canpossess powerandinfluence in more than one domain.