Great Man and Trait Theories

Two of the topics discussed in last week’s class were ones that peaked my interest were emotional intelligence and McClelland's Achievement Motivation Theory. Emotional intelligence describes your overall ability to work well with people. It is measured by what is called an emotional quotient (EQ), which is the ratio of four different characteristics in proportion to one another; the four characteristics are self-awareness, social-awareness, self-management, and relationship management. McClelland's Achievement Motivation Theory “attempts to explain and predict behavior and performance based on a person’s need for achievement, power, and affiliation.” According to McCllellland, a certain combination of achievement, power, and affiliation in a person result in a person who is an effective leader. The are several different types of tests ad studies that may tell a person whether or not they are emotional intelligent or an effective leader, but I personally believe that a study or test does not determine whether or not a person is an effective leader or emotionally intelligent; I believe that a person’s actions the ones that truly indicate whether a person is emotionally intelligent and/or are an effective leader.

One person that I believe has high emotional intelligence would be my mom. In her team at work, she interacts well with all of her colleagues. She also is aware of how her current emotions affect others around her; if she is depressed, others in her team are, so everyday she tries to put her “best foot forward” when it comes to her attitude. She is able to empathize with others around her who are having a hard time, and help them come to a better mind set about their predicament. Overall, My mom shows that she has self-awareness of how her emotions affect others, social awareness in her ability to relate to her colleagues, self-management skills when it comes to altering her attitude, and relationship management skills when it comes to working with others. 

Personally, I believe that my TRACK an Field coach from high school is an effective leader, not because a study or test proves that he is, but because I have seen him demonstrate a need for achievement, power, and affiliation. One of the things he most wanted to achieve was a Sierra League Championship title in the years that I was his athlete. He also wanted each of his athletes to enjoy the sport and succeed in their chosen field. He also demonstrated the power he had in his role as a coach; you respected him and, moreover, you trusted him. He had the ability to pull a person out of a race, as well as put a person into one.  He did not abuse his power, and he use it when necessary. He also like being affiliated with the school team he helped coach; he was proud to be the coach of the Saint Lucy’s Reagents, and never regretted his coaching position. Because he wanted to achieve a goal for his team, display his power as a coach, and be affiliated with a school he supported proudly, I believe he is a role model for an effective leader, simply because he displayed all three characteristics that are prevalent in McClelland's Achievement Motivation Theory.

Definitions of Leadership

     In HED 201 last week, our class discussed different definitions of leadership and how the definition of leadership changes due to various types of circumstances that occur throughout different times in history. A couple examples used in class show this idea to be true. One such example of a definition of leadership during the 1960's is as follows:"[Leadership is] acts by a person which influence other persons in a shared direction." This definition of leadership is influenced by current events that were prevalent in this era; one such event was the Civil Rights Movement. Several leaders, such as Martin Luther King, Jr., W.E.B. Du Bois, Booker T. Washington, Rosa Parks, and many others helped lead a movement that inspired many other African-Americans to pursue their legal rights provided for them in the Constitution.  In this case, the leaders performed acts that encouraged others like them to move forward for a similar cause(much like the definition above states). Another definition of leadership, instead in the 1950's, states that, "Leadership is the result of an ability to persuade or direct men, apart from the prestige or power that comes from office or external circumstance." This definition was inspired in part by the actions taken by world leaders in World War II. Adolf Hitler, ruler of Germany and other surrounding provinces, was able to persuade many men to believe that the Jewish people and current government were the cause of all the economic problems that had developed in the country during the decade. He then lead the men help him take control of the country, all the while  persuading them that he was to be their leader, one to which they could go to for all their troubles to be solved(much like the definition stated for the 1950's). As one can see, the definition of leadership greatly depends upon certain key actions taken by other people throughout a specified time period.

     In my personal experiences, I find that the definition of leadership changes for me depending upon the setting and circumstances that are surrounding me. When I was captain of my TRACK and Field team, my role as a leader meant to organize a group to obtain a common goal. The goal, in this case, was having the most girls possible compete at the C.I.F League Prelims in either varsity or junior varsity. My role as a leader was to instruct them as to 1) how to warm up, and  2) how to compete, while inspiring them, so that each girl could reach her full potential. I find that my role as a leader changes when I am put into a laboratory setting with three other people an told to perform an experiment to gather certain information. Instead of teaching and inspiring others, I am now trying to learn alongside my lab partners, while all of us are orchestrating what steps we should take to further gather information. My role is not necessarily to teach, but to be more of an integral part of the group. I also find that my attitude and my outlook changes with the different types of responsibilities as a leader. As a captain, I took my role very seriously, as if it were a job I was being paid to complete. In the lab group setting, I am more likely to openly state my mistakes made throughout the experiment, as well as successes. Although I try to be a role model for both the lab group and the TRACK team, more pressure is put on me for later, because I am expected to model, perform, and do well; in my lab group, mistakes are likely to happen, simply because we are all learning, and trying our hardest not to mess the experiment up. Overall, I find that both positions of leadership have different definitions assigned to them and require different attitudes when being performed.