Searching for "leader"

7 Words to avoid as a Leader

7 Toxic Words You Should Never Say as a Leader

 June 8, 2018
https://learning.linkedin.com/blog/learning-tips/7-toxic-words-you-should-never-say-as-a-leader
https://www.linkedin.com/learning/management-tips-weekly

7 Toxic Words a Leader Should Never Use

They are:

  1.     Can’t
  2. No
  3. Wrong
  4. Fault
  5. Never
  6. Stupid
  7. Impossible
https://www.linkedin.com/learning/management-tips-weekly/5-phrases-to-avoid
+++++++++++++

leaders employees

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leaders-who-dont-listen-eventually-surrounded-people-say-oleg/

Complexity A Leader’s Framework

Complexity: A Leader’s Framework for Understanding and Managing Change in Higher Education

George Siemens, Shane Dawson and Kristen Eshleman
Monday, October 29, 2018

https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/10/complexity-a-leaders-framework-for-understanding-and-managing-change-in-higher-education

The relationships between jobs, locality, families, housing, work and government policy, tax processes, crime, psychology, environment, access to education, and urban planning interact and converge in what is known as a Complex Adaptive System (CAS).

definition: Complexity can be understood as a theory of change and adaptation that details how change occurs within systems as well as the principles and mindsets needed to flourish in turbulent environments

he complexification of higher education is an intentional goal of engaging with complexity rather than attempting to reduce it to its constituent parts. Effective vision generation, planning, and goal achievement in the modern uncertain economic-social-technical environment benefits from embracing complexity and the utilization of strategies and actions that reflect a CAS.

ive principles of complexity science are of particular relevance to the higher education system. These attributes—networks, emergence, self-organization and social coordination, feedback sensitivity, and agility—are sufficient to provide higher education leaders with an entry into complexity science as a means of observing, understanding, and interacting with change.

++++++++++++
more on leadership in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=ed+leadership

hi ed leader team

5 SECRETS TO DEVELOPING A HIGH-PERFORMING TEAM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Patrick Sanaghan & Jillian Lohndorf

https://www.academia.edu/8335887/Ways_to_Improve_Teams_in_Higher_Education

6 POTENTIALLY DESTRUCTIVE MYTHS
#1: THE MYTH ABOUT TALENT
A variety of skills, experiences,and perspectives are necessary,along with high levels of trust, open communication, emotional support, and mutual accountability—all of which arevery hard to establish and maintain. One differentiator of an exceptional team is a high level of curiosity where questions(not hidden criticisms) are prized.

#2: THE MYTH ABOUT FOCUS

stellar teams allocate their time in an unexpected way. They spend two-thirds of their time on thetask at hand (gettin’ ‘er done) and a full one-third on the “process” or relational aspect of the team’s functioning

#3: THE MYTH ABOUT CONFLICT

Exceptional teams see conflict as a resource, not something to be avoided.

Leaders need both the skill and the courage to deal with conflict on their team, as well as the understanding that everyone on the team needs to be involved in its resolution. 

#4: THE MYTH ABOUT OPENNESS

  • the “ seduction of the leader ” syndrome frequently seen in higher education.  Due to the “collegial” and polite nature of most campuses, people simply don’t feel comfortable providing honest feedback,especially if it is negative or critical. 
  • Many people are reluctant to be honest, because it might hurt someone’s feelings. 
  • People don’t want to “lose their seat at the table” and fear that they risk doing so if they are truly honest.
  • People realize that the leader really isn’t open to honest feedback, even as the leader professes to want it

#5: THE MYTH ABOUT SAMENESS

One of the pervasive team dynamics that every team leader needs to be aware of is
“comfortable cloning.”
 This happens when we select people to be on our teams who have similar backgrounds to ours.

#6: THE MYTH ABOUT MOTIVATIONAL METAPHORS

One of the best ways to build a realteam is to have each team membershare their own metaphor for how theywould like the team to operate.

5 STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING A STELLAR TEAM

1. Make your team a learning team, by creating an internal article or book club.

2. Define the rules for decision making.

3. Create working agreements or“ground rules” for the functioning and support of the team.

4. Establish a mechanism for regular, anonymous evaluation of team meetings.

5. Conduct a leadership “audit.”

++++++++++++++++++++++
more on leadership in higher ed in this IMS blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=ed+leader

Fear and leadership

What is the Function of Fear in Leadership?

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/what-is-the-function-of-fear-in-leadership
by James Heskett 31 OCT 2018

Amy Edmondson, The Fearless Organization, argues that fear is not a useful tool in a leader’s toolkit when it comes to managing interpersonal relationships in a workplace.

Psychological safety is the antidote to fear.psychological safety is not about being nice or lowering performance standards.

++++++++++
more on leadership in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=leadership

Data Use and School Leaders

Five Questions About Data Use for School Leaders

https://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rick_hess_straight_up/2018/08/five_questions_about_data_use_for_school_leaders.html

Anna Egalite, assistant professor of leadership and policy at NC State. Previously, Anna taught elementary school and did a postdoc at Harvard. She’ll be writing about education-leadership research—what we know, where we have good intuitions, and where we’re still very much in the dark. 

It’s back-to-school time and education reporters are highlighting stories about how school leaders are “leaning on data” to promote student learning, making administrative decisions that are “supported by a data-driven process,” and drawing on their experience in “data-driven instruction.”

++++++++++++++
more on data use and ed leaders in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=data+ed+leaders

how to leaderboards

How to Create a Leaderboard for eLearning with Google

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16GvzEQmnZRTx02yzCi5E8aNbZL7QTDomqu9nmaLk35s/edit#gid=0

https://community.articulate.com/discussions/articulate-storyline/how-to-create-a-free-leaderboard-for-elearning-with-google

https://support.geckoboard.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005738248-Create-leaderboards-using-spreadsheets

++++++++++
more on leaderboards in this IMS blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=leaderboards

hi ed leaders and blockchain

3 steps higher ed leaders should take before investing in blockchain

Aug. 9, 2018
  • Blockchain will have the biggest value in higher education in areas where trust is essential to the value chain in institutional operations, such as evaluation of student transcripts, processing of applications and maintenance of articulation agreements, said Oral Roberts University CIO Michael Mathews, at The Blockchain in Education Conference hosted by the institution in May, reports Campus Technology.
  • From an infrastructure standpoint, Mathews said institutions have to establish a secure digital identity by investing in software that allows the credential recipient and granter to have a seamless and trusted connection, allowing for students to have a diploma that is stored safely within their digital wallet. This could mean working with a third-party application developer or developing the capability in-house.
  • But before fully investing in blockchain, higher education leaders must take these steps, said Mathews:
    • Spend a significant amount of time researching how the technology is impacting the industry and educate staff about it;
    • test the technology to see if it follows validation and security procedures; and
    • collaborate with other institutions to share best tips and practices.

++++++++++
more on blockchain in education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=blockchain+education

7 qualities for a leader

7 Qualities That Define a Great Leader

Bill RosenthalCEO at Communispond & Logical Operations

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-qualities-define-great-leader-bill-rosenthal/

  1. Integrity and Honesty –
  2. Enthusiasm and Empowerment–
  3. Competent –
  4. Personality –
  5. Decision Making –
  6. Communication –
  7. Loyalty –

+++++++++

more on leaders in this IMS blog

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=leader

Incompetent Leader

The Most Common Type of Incompetent Leader

Scott Gregory  MARCH 30, 2018

https://hbr.org/2018/03/the-most-common-type-of-incompetent-leader

Researchers have studied managerial derailment — or the dark side of leadership — for many years. The key derailment characteristics of bad managers are well documented and fall into three broad behavioral categories: (1) “moving away behaviors,” which create distance from others through hyper-emotionality, diminished communication, and skepticism that erodes trust; (2) “moving against behaviors,” which overpower and manipulate people while aggrandizing the self; and (3) “moving toward behaviors,” which include being ingratiating, overly conforming, and reluctant to take chances or stand up for one’s team. The popular media is full of examples of bad leaders in government, academia, and business with these characteristics.

Absentee leadership rarely comes up in today’s leadership or business literature, but research shows that it is the most common form of incompetent leadership.

Absentee leaders are people in leadership roles who are psychologically absent from them. They were promoted into management, and enjoy the privileges and rewards of a leadership role, but avoid meaningful involvement with their teams. Absentee leadership resembles the concept of rent-seeking in economics — taking value out of an organization without putting value in. As such, they represent a special case of laissez-faire leadership, but one that is distinguished by its destructiveness.

Having a boss who lets you do as you please may sound ideal, especially if you are being bullied and micromanaged by your current boss. However, a 2015 survey of 1,000 working adults showed that eight of the top nine complaints about leaders concerned behaviors that were absent; employees were most concerned about what their bosses didn’t do.

Research shows that being ignored by one’s boss is more alienating than being treated poorly. The impact of absentee leadership on job satisfaction outlasts the impact of both constructive and overtly destructive forms of leadership. Constructive leadership immediately improves job satisfaction, but the effects dwindle quickly. Destructive leadership immediately degrades job satisfaction, but the effects dissipate after about six months. In contrast, the impact of absentee leadership takes longer to appear, but it degrades subordinates’ job satisfaction for at least two years. It also is related to a number of other negative outcomes for employees, like role ambiguityhealth complaints, and increased bullying from team members. Absentee leadership creates employee stress, which can lead to poor employee health outcomes and talent drain, which then impact an organization’s bottom line.

Because absentee leaders don’t actively make trouble, their negative impact on organizations can be difficult to detect, and when it is detected, it often is considered a low-priority problem. Thus, absentee leaders are often silent organization killers. Left unchecked, absentee leaders clog an organization’s succession arteries, blocking potentially more effective people from moving into important roles while adding little to productivity. Absentee leaders rarely engage in unforgivable bouts of bad behavior, and are rarely the subject of ethics investigations resulting from employee hotline calls. As a result, their negative effect on organizations accumulates over time, largely unchecked.

Constructive leadership creates high engagement and productivity, while destructive leadership kills engagement and productivity. 

+++++++++++++++
more on what makes “great leader” in this IMS blog

leader charts

alternative leaderboards

Gamification: Alternative Leaderboards

https://elearningindustry.com/gamification-alternative-leaderboards
Wanting to win’ versus “wanting to avoid losing” is a subtle yet crucial distinction; Murayama and Elliot’s (2012) set of meta-analyses found the effects of competition depend on this distinction in the minds of players. When someone wants to perform better than others, they tend to benefit from competition. But when they want to avoid performing worse than others, competing tends to reduce their performance.
Senko et al’s (2017) meta-analysis found that “wanting to win” improves the performance of participants only when it’s accompanied by strategies that support feelings of mastery. So “wanting to win” alone is not enough to inoculate players from the downsides of competitive social environments.

There are 2 principles of design to support the outcome:

  1. Workplace performance is more complex than a single number on a leaderboard.
    Let’s show the major competencies that drive the performance, instead of one single number.
  2. Don’t just compare yourself to others. Compare your performance against your own history!
    Let’s show the trajectory for driving competencies!

Imagine a leaderboard more like a performance dashboard where your overall performance is broken down your top competencies with your historical data points. You can see the trajectory of where you’re heading. Then, you can show the company average and top performers’ numbers on each competency. You can identify your strength and opportunities. Then, you can apply AI to give you guidance on how to change your trajectory based on top performers’ data points.

++++++++++++
More on leaderboards in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=leaderboards

more on gamification in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=gamification

1 2 3 4 5 32