Passing Passive Thoughts

The picture above is a good representation of passive people.  As I'm passive myself, I would have to say that a lot of the times, what is going on in our heads is not the same thing that we show to others.  We passives like to avoid conflict, even if it means that our own viewpoints might be overlooked or even ignored.  Minimizing the tension in a situation and a speedy, albeit sometimes incomplete, conclusion is what we strive for.  For example, I personally am very agreeable by nature, and have a hard time saying "NO" to anyone.  The biggest reason for this is, I think, the fact that I hate getting into awkward, tense conflicts, and would much rather agree to something which is in my mind small compared to the conflict that I'd have to go through if I fought for my point of view.  Of course, if the issue at hand goes against my core values, I will usually make my stance known, and if it is an especially strong subject to me, I will defend my view.



As it is, passive people do not run the world.  That is where assertiveness comes into play.  As I just mentioned, I will only be assertive if my core values are challenged, but in a leadership position, that is not enough most of the time.  A leader, in my opinion, needs to assert his power even when his ideology is not at stake.  Whatever the group is, be it a club or a company, for it to be successful, at least some form of direction is needed from the head of the organization.  By putting off conflict, issues would not be resolved in a timely manner, viewpoints that are not necessarily for the greater good might be adopted, and the group as a whole would be aimless.  It would also be unwise to be too assertive of course, as a closed mind would create pretty much the same problems.

In the end, though, one must not let themselves be swayed too much by others, and at least let some assertiveness come into play.  I think I did some of that by putting in the opinions I did in this post!

Evaluating One's Values

Values are a tough concept for anyone to describe, mostly because they are abstract ideas that we don't really think about often.  I think Abraham Lincoln summed it up quite nicely with the quote, "Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing."  In other words, our values are not influenced by outside forces, they are created from within.

Values play a big role in our decision making, and therefore our ability to lead.  Sometimes, when faced with a conflict that pits two values against each other, one has to choose which values they "value" most.  For example, for me, trust in one another and logical reasoning are among my two top values.  If someone I've recently met comes up to me to say something, I would trust their words, almost as a default.  However, if they said something like, "Meet me later in this dark alleyway after school,"  despite my current trust in them, I would have to assess the situation, and look at the logical reason behind the request.   At this point, I'd run into a block based on what I feel would be a tug-of-war between my current trust for this person and what seems to be an illogical request.  This same situation can easily arise in a leadership position as well, where one makes decisions for their group based on what they think is right and what is by the rules.  In either situation, a decision would have to be made over which value is higher.

Ultimately, our values do not make up who we are.  Rather, they steer us in a general direction to self-discovery.

 

The Person in Personality

Abraham Lincoln was a man of many quotes, and this one I think highlights the main idea about personality and how it relates to people as a group: "Human action can be modified to some extent, but human nature cannot be changed."



In a group, it's inevitable that there'll be people with vastly different personalities, such as the extremely social extrovert or maybe the reclusive and meditative introvert.  Also, as a leader, one's own personality will have wide-ranging consequences on both leadership style and how one is perceived by his/her peers.  For example, a leader with a strong leaning towards the feeling side of their personality might be lenient with punishments from mercy and reward minor achievements, whereas a strong thinking leader would instead hand out punishments based on how severe they believe the error was and reward people only based on the amount of work the follower did.  Therefore, it's important that when personalities clash to work around and accommodate each other's differences, which is basically the purpose of personality theory.  For example, an extrovert would allow the introvert more chances to speak their mind, and feelers would remind thinkers to not always adhere to such a rigid style of thinking.

As an interesting side-note, when I was taking courses in Florida Virtual School, I was in the Leadership Service Program, which was basically the high-school version of LEAD.  There, I took a test similar to the personality test taken here.  However, it was different in that the test not only gave you a four letter code describing your personality, it also gave you a total rundown of all your high and low stats, from assertiveness to empathy to even what careers you might be most comfortable with.  That, and it was also slightly longer, consisting of 485 questions.  I've included the link below in case anyone wants to try it out!
http://www.funeducation.com/Tests/CareerTest/TakeTest.aspx

The Power See-Saw

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

I think this quote by Abraham Lincoln really illustrates the way I think power affects not just individuals, but groups as well.  Power is usually associated with, and even synonymous with, leadership, but the important thing to remember is that a leader does not have a monopoly on power.  In fact, depending on the type of power, a follower may have more of it than the leader!

Referent power, the power associated with the popularity of a person within a group, I believe is among the most important.  One might have legitimate power, but if he/she is not popular or is even hated, there is always a chance that their followers will not follow the leader, but instead follow the more popular choice.

A nice example for this is the conflict between Captain Jack Sparrow and Barbossa in Pirates of the Caribbean:

 

Barbossa was the first mate of Jack.  Unfortunately, Jack wasn't as popular as Barbossa was, despite him being Captain.  With Barbossa's referent power greater than Jack's, he was able to convince the crew to lead a mutiny against Jack and assume the position of leader of the crew and the Black Pearl.

Obviously, mutiny is an extreme example to illustrate the effect of referent power, but it at least shows that it's important to have a more or less nice standing with your followers.

In my leadership style, I try to balance out all of the powers.  I keep an open mind, and listen to everyone's ideas, and do not automatically assume that my thoughts are the only correct ones.  However, I try not to be a total pushover, and when it is necessary I will put my foot down.

In conclusion, this is the leader I try to be:

My Ideas of what Leadership is

Hi everyone,  my name is Stanislav and this is my first time ever doing a blog, so it might take some time for me to get used to the different tools here! 

Abraham Lincoln once said, "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a Master."  This basically describes my view on what leadership is.  As a leader, one doesn't just order their followers around and point them to where they need to go, like a farmer would do to his sheep.  Instead, I believe that a leader is more or less an active team member in the group, and in terms of work, is an equal.  Of course, a leader is also not just another one of the crowd, but has to be a role model and at least a guide for any potential followers.

This is the kind of leadership style that I try to follow, one that strikes a middle path between the "dictator" and the "everyone's friend."

So in conclusion:

You don't want this:

You also don't want to be a complete equal:

Instead, you do want this: