Individual Analysis of Personal Competencies - Essay Example

Title: Assignment 2: Individual Report Student Name: Student No: Course Name: BUSM1162-Managing People Tutor’s Name: Individual Analysis of personal competencies Executive Summary Competing Value Framework has been widely been used in organization development. Managers and leaders have a role in balancing different concepts and styles of leadership in order to ensure efficiency in accomplishment of organizational objectives. The introduction provides an overview of the content of the report and sets the pace for other sections. The method explains the procedure that I used in gathering information, self-assessment tools used and the process of compiling and interpreting the findings. The analysis section presents a summary of the findings including the competing values framework and other assessment tools. The section further discusses the concepts and theories emanating from these findings. The discussion section provides an explanation and interpretation of my current competencies as a manager using the various self-assessment tools. The conclusion describes the competencies that I need further development for effective management of people. The action personal plan gives my strategies that I will use in developing the competencies that are less developed. The report also has the referencing and appendix section. Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Introduction 4 Method 4 Analysis 5 Discussion 10 Conclusion 13 Personal action plan 13 References 14 Appendix 15 Introduction Analysis of personal competencies as a manager and a leader is important in order to chart the way forward with regard to career growth and skills development. This report is a critical analysis of my management competencies using the Competing Value Approach and other competency framework like the communication style survey and situational leadership questionnaire. The report presents the procedure, analysis and interpretation of the competencies as a manager and discusses chances for growth personal action plan. Theories and concepts of leadership and communication style have been used to discuss my management competencies. Method My research comprises of broad search literature review with regard to organizational leadership and exploring leadership competencies, management skills and knowledge from secondary sources. I compared different authors who have written on the important subject of organizational leadership and proposed achievement of effective leadership. In self-assessment, I used tools from the Competing Values Framework and other assessment tools like the situational leadership style questionnaire. The procedure involved the completing and analyzing the competing Values competency questionnaire and the situational leadership styles questionnaire. I filled out the competing values competency questionnaire where the values for each question were marked 1 to 7. A score of 1 represent almost never while a score of 7 represented almost always. Consequently 4 was the moderate value in the score. After completing the questionnaire I went ahead to interpret the results comparing it to established literature about competing value framework. I had to compare my score with the four profile quadrants that represented collaboration, creation, controlling and competing. For the situational leadership styles questionnaire the values were numbered from 1 to 5 which represented the following: 1. To almost no extent 2. To a slight extent 3. To a moderate extent 4. To a great extent 5. To a very great extent. The values were places alongside the questions in the questionnaire where I had to pick a value that represented how I will react to situations in the statement. I answered the questions fairly quickly after thinking on how I would react to such situations. The scores for various statements were grouped into managerial functions’ quadrants of facilitating, coaching, delegating, coaching and directing. I interpreted my scores alongside the detailed description of the four functions. I further completed the communication style questionnaire in order to analyze my communication style. In this communication survey I scored an item with a value of 1 if I felt it described me and 0 if did not describe me. The highest score described the style of communication. I incorporated my findings with the knowledge from existing concepts, theories and explanation about effective leadership. Analysis Using the leadership style questionnaire I scored highly on delegating and coaching with a score of 22 in both. My score in directing was 19 and was 17 in facilitating. Delegating involves leaving broad responsibilities to workers and expecting them to handle the details. The staff is expected to find as well as correct their own errors and proceed to the next task. Delegating requires the follower o have high competence, high commitment and should be motivated. The leader of the manager exhibits low task focus as well as there is low relationship focus within their circle. The follower should be able to do the job and has to possess the necessary motivation to do the job. The leader can leave the follower to perform his duties while he just observes for direction is necessary. Both have to keep a distant eye on things to make sure everything goes according to plan. Followers at the delegation level less require support or frequent praises to motivate them, however, occasional recognitions goes a long way at boosting their morale (Sanchez & Levine, 2009). From my scores I encourage autonomous units with self-drive that do not need constant supervision but occasional direction and guidance. Directing comprises of offering detailed instructions to staff and providing specific goals and objective. The workers are checked frequently under directing to ensure everything is on track. The followers have to demonstrate the steps that are involved in doing a certain job. Followers under directing demonstrate low competence as well as low commitment and sometimes feel insecure. The leader has to demonstrate high task focus while maintaining low relationship focus. When the subjects cannot do the job and are afraid or unwilling to try, then the leader has to take up a highly directive role and has to dictate to them what to do and should not consider the relationship important (Dulebohn et al, 2009). The leader or manager can also offer a working structure for the job and with regard to how the person is controlled. It is task of the leader to establish the reasons why the person is not motivated and if there anything limiting his ability. When the follower believes is less equipped to tackle a certain task and as a result demonstrate lack of self-confidence. My directing score were less that of facilitating and delegating meaning that I lead a workforce that is motivated and focused on performing its duties with little supervision. Facilitating requires the followers to have high competence, commitment that is variable and are able but unwilling to perform their functions. The manager has more focus on the relationship with the follower and less focus on the trust since the workers can accomplish it without help. They only need facilitation. In many cases the follower is able to do the task but he is showing insufficient commitment. The leader has the responsibility of finding out the reason behind the follower’s attitude (Lengnick-Hall et al, 2009). My least score was in facilitating meaning my staff were full committed and need much need to be facilitated. For coaching, the follower is not fully equipped to perform his functions and shows variable commitment. The follower is motivated and willing but needs to be shown how to go about the task. My score for coaching was high at 22 equal to delegating. The manager has focus on both the task and the relationship. The manager explains and clarifies decisions and allows the follower to work on his own. The leader engages in listening and advising and equipping the follower with vital skills though coaching methods. The Competing Values Framework refers to a strategic blueprint developed from more than 25 years of academic research which identifies and solves specific innovative challenges. The framework has been applied as the game-changing innovation playbook by many organizations across the world. By analyzing and identifying four different types of innovation, the Competing Values Framework helps in understanding the underlying tension between competing forces-like the concurrent pursuit of customization and standardization-in creating a positive movement. The Competing Values Framework is a practical means of assisting organizations come up, implement and ensure sustenance of change as well as in innovation (Deadrick & Stone, 2009). Competing Value Framework is a unified theory of practice which integrates and aligns different kinds of leadership, competencies, and culture together with situational elements such as markets, dynamics, and financial valuation. It permits aligning of organizational practices together with strategic factors that lead to growth which is the key towards cultivating innovation. Figure 1: Innovatrium According to competing values management practices instrument I score 6.1 under the collaborate quadrant, I scored 5.2 in the control quadrant, 5.75 in the create quadrant and 5.4 in the compete quadrant. The value towards 1 indicated almost never while the values towards seven indicated almost always. Figure 2: Competing Value Framework scores My values under control and compete were close to each other only separated by a gap of 0.2. They were slightly above the moderate value but low than the perfection level. My score values in the collaborate and create quadrants were inclined towards 7 where I score 5.75 for create and 6.1 for collaborate. The Collaborative profile illustrates the kind of people who believe in something that is greater than the business itself. The individuals are committed to their community hence focusing on shared values as well as communication. Their goal is to nurture a group of individuals that are empowered. At extreme levels the collaborative profile becomes a party. The leaders are credited with creating and sustaining cohesion and commitment. It is encouraging to have scored highly under collaborative profile since it shows my focus towards commitment and cohesion. In the communication style survey my highest score was that of a driver. It means I am fast paced and prioritize tasks. I am also analytical since I scored 14 for being analytical. It is means that I prioritize tasks and go about issues step by step without rushing through. I score fairly for being amiable with a score of 14. This means that I prioritize relationships although I do not trust easily and prefer to go slow. The least score was for being expressive where I scored 6. It requires a balance among the different styles of communication in order to be effective in the workplace (Hartman & McCambridge, 2011). Discussion Traditional models have always divided the popular domain of leadership into contrasting categories. The majority of illustrations from the leadership literature result into dichotomies such as participative verses autocratic, transformational verses transactional, and Theory X verses Theory Y. There has been little development to merge existing dichotomies into a bigger synthesis or explore the level to which multiple forms of leader behavior are needed. Applying a single model of the various dichotomies models can lead to ineffective and limited way of conceptualizing leadership (Hooijberg, 1996). Robert Quinn is among authors who advocated for balancing and mastery of seemingly paradoxical or contradictory capabilities for effective leadership. Some of these capabilities comprise of reflectiveness and decisiveness, attention to detail and broad vision, incremental adjustment and bold moves, and a performance and people orientation (Cameron et al, 2014). Model of leadership advanced by Quinn is based on competing values framework proposed for organizational analysis. Competing values framework was initially developed as a result of a research conducted by the faculty members of the University of Michigan on the key indicators of effective organizational performance (Swafford, Ghosh, & Nagesh, 2006). It is an extremely useful model for understanding and organizing a broad variety of individual and organizational phenomena such as leadership competencies, organizational effectiveness’ theories, organizational design, organizational culture, leadership roles, organizational quality, information processing; brain functioning and financial strategy. The framework’s robustness is one of its major strengths (Belasen, 1998). The framework has been singled out as one of the top forty crucial frameworks in the business history. In the competing value framework assessment the create profile stands for individuals who normally pursue radical breaks from the past as well as breakthrough ideas. They are visionaries and artists who place much importance on speculation and experimentation. They try as much as possible to orient their services, products and ideas to the future (Denison, Hooijberg & Quinn, 1995). However when taken to an extreme level the create profile develops to become chaotic. There should be a balance to avoid such eventuality occurring. My create profile score was 5.75 which way high above average and moving towards almost always score. This reveals my tendencies to be innovative and map the practices of the business to the future of the market by exploring any emerging opportunities. The control profile is for people who believe in incremental change which is careful, practical and systematic. They often look for efficiency and predictability and are inclined to implement innovation through elaborating or extending products that already exist with only minor variations (Adams, 2003). An extreme level of the control profile develops into a bureaucracy. My score value for control profile was 5.2 hence it is above moderate but far from being extreme. This means that I encourage creativity and innovation while maintaining some kind of control in the business units within the organization. It is important to encourage order while allowing autonomous units to brainstorm for new ideas. There is a balance between the create profile and the control profile. Too much of each profile can be unhealthy for the development of the organization (Yu-Ting, 2010). A score of 5.2 for the control profile is fair because it indicates that I maintain some of control while allowing people to be innovative as indicated by a score value of 5.75 for create profile. The collaborate profile indicates that I maintain a cohesive team that is creative and has an element of control to ensure that they do not lose track. The compete profile are for the kind of individuals who recognize the level of competition and achievement. They often motivated towards profitable and speedy outcomes and recognize the discipline needed to achieve them (Cardya & Selvarajanb, 2006). At extreme levels the compete profile can turn into a sweatshop. I scored 5.4 in the compete profile indicating by appreciating for competition and achievement was above average and realistic. It is important to ensure that while people are focused on achieving results they should not be overworked at the expense of their own development. Conclusion After thorough analysis of my management competencies it is clear that I need further development in my facilitation as a manager and being expressive in my communication. I have to provide more space for creation with regard to competing value framework. It is important to focus on my areas of weakness while striving to perfect my strong areas. Personal evaluation is crucial for any meaningful achievement to be attained in my personal career growth. Although my score the create profile was above average, I have to create more room for people to be innovative and find new ways of solving problems at the workplace. Lack of expressive ability on my part can hinder my communication with other people. Personal action plan I plan to allow my staff to have more time to experiment and speculate in order to increase my score for the create profile. I have to be more involved in facilitation by researching more and providing advice to my staff on how to about certain tasks. I will have to allow the staff more space to be creative about allowing divergent ideas and experimenting new things. I will organize for bonding sessions and retreats to give me the opportunity to be more expressive and find out what are the workers are facing in order to know what to do in an effort to facilitate. I recommend further training for employees who are not self-assured in their performance in order to boost their confidence. References Adams, S. J., (2003). The Emerging Management School of Safety: SH&E professionals must develop business skills to succeed, Professional Safety, 48(9), 18 – 21. Belasen, A. 1998, Leading the learning organization: Communication and competencies for managing change, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. Cameron, K., S., Quinn, R., E., Degraff, J., Thakor, A.V. 2014, Competing Values Leadership: Second Edition, Edward Elgar Publishing, Melbourne. Cardya, R.L., & Selvarajanb, T.T., 2006, Competencies: Alternative frameworks for competitive advantage, Business Horizons 49 (3): 235–245 Deadrick, D.L. & Stone, D.L. 2009, Emerging trends in human resource management theory and research, Human Resource Management Review19 (2): 51–52 Denison, D.R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R.E. 1995, Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership, Organization Science, 6(5), 524-540. Dulebohn, J.H., Molloy, J.C., Pichler, S.M., & Murray, B. 2009, Employee benefits: Literature review and emerging issues, Human Resource Management Review, 19 (2): June, Pages 86–103 Hartman, J.L. & McCambridge, J. 2011, Optimizing Millennials’ Communication Styles, Business Communication Quarterly, 74 (1): 22-44. Hooijberg, R.1996, A multidirectional approach toward leadership: An extension of the concept of behavioral complexity. Human Relations, 49(7), 917-947. Lengnick-Hall, M.L., Lengnick-Hall, C.A., Andrade, L.S., Drake, B. 2009, Strategic human resource management: The evolution of the field, Human Resource Management Review 19 (2): June 2009, Pages 64–85 Sanchez, J.I., & Levine, E.L. 2009, What is (or should be) the difference between competency modeling and traditional job analysis? Human Resource Management Review, 19 (2):, Pages 53–63 Swafford, P.M., Ghosh, S., & Nagesh N. M. 2006, A framework for assessing value chain agility, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26 (2): 118 - 140 Yu-Ting, L. 2010, Exploring high-performers’ required competencies, Expert Systems with Applications 37 (1): 434–439 Appendix Situational leadership style questionnaire Leadership styles descriptions Competing Values Management Practices Self-Assessment Comulative score questions What communication style are you survey? Communication style score: Communication style quadrants: Communication style scores: Read More