Leadership Paradox and Inter-team Relations
A. What is the leadership paradox? Give some reasons why a leader can encounter difficulty in newly formed teams or groups using a participative management system. Support your discussion with at least two (2) external sources.
B. Present a discussion of the strategies for encouraging participative management in the workforce, and how to implement each of these strategies. Support your discussion with at least two (2) external sources.
C. What serious biases or misassumptions do groups that are involved in inter-team conflict sometimes experience? How do these biases and prejudices affect the ability of teams to accomplish their goals? Support your discussion with at least two (2) external sources.
Respond to at least 2 of your colleagues' postings
• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues' postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Campbellsville University Library
• Make suggestions based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues' postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
The initiative oddity is clarified in the article (Maccoby, 1996) when pioneers were addressed why they encounter troubles in changing the current condition. A large portion of the pioneers replied likewise "I've clarified our issues and the need to change, yet I would prefer not to be a tyrant. You can't simply arrange these specialists to change. On the off chance that I do that, I'll lose believability". Initiative mystery is where a group comprehends that change is required, and administration is imperative. Be that as it may, the group feels threated by the change and vulnerability that is an aftereffect of the change. Participative administration is clarified in the article (Ewing and Banks, 1977) with Donnelly Mirrors Inc. model, where the organization increased gigantic benefits by giving expert to the workers to settling on essential choices. In the article (van, Curseu, Marius, and Meeus, 2014), a field ponder was led among 94 applicants who worked with various groups and discoveries has come about that contention circumstances among the colleagues were viably settled with the group's joined exertion. Clashes among groups are exceptionally normal and each group attempts to help their colleagues and safeguard their contentions. In any case, basic feeling and aggregate work can resolve group clashes (van, Curseu, Marius, and Meeus, 2014).
Leadership paradox, participative leadership, and inter-team conflicts:
Organizations with customary practices may not be effective, they should stay aware of the pace of the business. Change is unavoidable to maintain a strategic distance from bottlenecks. Along these lines, initiative is required to assist the current representatives with working towards the change, learn and adjust new methods to all the more likely serve the client, create and enhance the items and administrations. Administration oddity (Maccoby, 1996) is where solid pioneers are expected to enhance existing procedures in any case, the quality ought not be overwhelming that may make an obstruction of doubt between the devotees and the initiative. Participative administration requires significant investment and exertion to execute as a result of the freshness and exclusive focus the representatives may have as they work in their particular line of business. Be that as it may, a compelling path is to be intuitive and recognize smart thoughts, clarify the outcomes of the methodologies and the usage and helpful criticism (Ewing and Banks, 1977).
"Managers and leaders are central to employees' experience of work and their experience within the organization. Leaders are always part of a broader organizational culture and the overall culture will outlast any individual leader's efforts. Over time, leaders will shape the culture, but this takes years and affecting this type of change is more similar to steering a tanker - slow and deliberate (Mehrabi, J.2015).
Promoting Learning and Career Development
Using participative management strategies, effective leaders encourage their employees to identify performance gaps and set their own career path using company resources, including formal education, workshops and self-paced courses. Employees use assessment tools to identify their strengths and weaknesses in achieving company goals. Then, they create a development plan and review it with their managers. This enables the employee to create a customized action for improving her skills over the coming year. By empowering the employee to assess her own competency and establish a plan, the leader guides the employee and provides a supportive atmosphere in which to develop the skills necessary to achieve the company's strategic goals (Somech, A.2009) .
Causes of Intergroup Conflict
One of the most prominent reasons for intergroup conflict is simply the nature of the group. Other reasons may be work interdependence, goal variances, differences in perceptions, and the increased demand for specialists. Also, individual members of a group often play a role in the initiation of group conflict. Any given group embodies various qualities, values, or unique traits that are created, followed, and even defended. These clans can then distinguish "us" from "them." Members who violate important aspects of the group, and especially outsiders, who offend these ideals in some way, normally receive some type of corrective or defensive response. Relationships between groups often reflect the opinions they hold of each other's characteristics. When groups share some interests and their directions seem parallel, each group may view the other positively; however, if the activities and goals of groups differ, they may view each other in a negative manner. When trying to prevent or correct intergroup conflict, it is important to consider the history of relations between the groups in conflict. History will repeat itself if left to its own devices (Thompson.2008).