Happiness is a way of travel, 

          not a destination.   

– Roy Goodman

that old time rock 'n' roll ..

Just take those old records off the shelf
I'll sit and listen to 'em by myself
Today's music ain 't got the same soul
I like that old time rock 'n' roll
Don't try to take me to a disco
You'll never even get me out on the floor
In ten minutes I'll be late for the door
I like that old time rock 'n' roll

Still like that old time rock'n' roll
That kind of music just soothes the soul

I reminisce about the days of old
With that old time rock 'n' roll 


<3






.. the good stuff - love a little "old time" inspiration =)

Learning Portal

 Check this site out: www.stumbleupon.com

choose your interests and "stumble" upon sites.  then "like" sites, so you can stumble upon other sites like that in the future. 

i came across this site: www.noop.nl/2010/04/top-150-management-leadership-blogs.html
also, great for leisure, travel, sports, etc. =)


"I make a decision, and if it's the wrong one, I make another one." - Dave Ramsey

Chaos?

         Contemporary leadership theories seem to focus more on a mutual and common purpose between leaders and followers, or collaborators.  As a result, both sides may have a higher level of motivation and morale to reach their goals. 

         It took me a while to really find a theory that I though I identified with, especially because some of the scholarly articles online were difficult to follow.  I used google and the SDSU library website to explore theories (search: contemporary leadership theory/ies).  Once I found theories, I searched those specifically (psychodynamic, attribution, symbolic, charismatic) to identify one I liked.  In the end, I chose..

The CHAOS THEORY.

         So, at first glance, I thought “chaos theory, really?”  How can someone name a theory after a word that means: complete disorder and confusion.  After digging a little deeper, though, I think I identify a lot with this theory.  In a recent post I discussed leadership as a part of nature versus a system or machine and I think this is along the same lines.

         The chaos theory recognizes that events are rarely controlled.  This is seen everyday in life whether it be weather patterns, traffic jams, flight delays, etc., however managers have usually assumed they could control their organizations.  So, the chaos theory suggests that when you give a group of people direction and set them in motion, they will each follow their specific set of a few rules or guidelines, but will also spontaneously self organize into something complex and unexpected.  Although this sounds unappealing, it is realistic- especially in the hospitality industry.  The chaos theory does not suggest the removal of a “leader telling, follower doing” atmosphere completely within an organization, but it allows for the follower to adapt and grow within that ever-changing organization.  It gives them the empowerment to use their best judgment and act as they see needed within the few set of rules and guidelines given to them.

         The chaos theory assumes that the follower has the skills, passion and values that match the organization to help make it successful.  So, it is necessary that the leader has developed the follower to a certain point to be able to use this theory.  The chaos theory is used in very decentralized organizations where there is a high level of relationship and trust.  The chaos theory is very relationship based, with very little task involved at all.

        

         I really identified with this theory because I truly believe that it is impossible for a leader to control every situation, every person, every procedure in an organization.  This is just as it is impossible to control Mother Nature.  But it is possible to set guidelines and rules to meet specific goals and allow a team to reach those goals.  This is just as humans prepare for nature. 

SELF

Yesterday at work I was discussing a new procedure with a supervisor and he said. “these are living, breathing checklists- they are not set in stone.”  Immediately, I thought to myself,  “Wow, I just read an article about leadership being a form of nature, not a machine- how interesting.”  I think this is a good start to talking about how I fell about leadership now because I really connected with the “LEADERSHIP IN LIVING ORGANIZATIONS” article. 

            At the beginning of the semester, I did think of leadership as a machine: a way to get from point A to point B.  However, recently, I’ve realizing that leadership is more of a growing process (as my group expressed in form of a flower for our leadership map).

            I think that I still value the same things in a leader: confidence, honesty and passion, but now I see the bigger picture and appreciate and understand other traits and values as a whole.  I see leadership as a more cohesive process.

            I have noticed a bit of change in my feelings in both trait and behavior theories.  I was very anti-trait theory before, but I now see it as a stepping stone to other theories.  I think that certain traits are necessary for a successful leader, but I don’t think traits alone make a great leader.  Additionally, I was very relationship oriented in the beginning and did not see the value in task related behaviors.  I have definitely altered my view on this.  I know see the value in setting a specific task- because otherwise how would something get completed in a timely manner?  I now see that a leader should be both task and relationship oriented to build trust with their team (I didn’t realize until now, but my new feelings on this are reflected in my “media” of choice).

            I feel that in my future I will utilize task oriented behaviors much more than I have in the past.  I do not think I will ever have a full grasp on how I will practice my leadership in the future because I think it will continue to change based on my position, situation, team and more!

THEORY

I think the midterm helped me learn a lot about the leadership theories as a whole.  Previously, I was able to read articles and have discussions about theories, but I was not able to actually see specific theories in action.  I think it is important to know that leadership is seen everywhere—places that you would never imagine! Leadership is seen in positive, uplifting situations and in negative, heartbreaking situations.  I think it is also very important to note that leadership theories are not “set in stone”, hence being called a “theory”.  Just because someone has created a theory, doesn’t mean other people will act exactly in the square of that theory.  A leader may use bits and pieces of different theories in their everyday roles. 

            Specifically, I think I saw a little bit of the trait-based theory in all the leaders I examined in Apollo 13.  Previous to this assignment, I did not think this way.  I sort of completely ruled out trait theories.  The movie helped me realize though, that most successful leaders have a ‘base’ of traits-- the rest of their leadership abilities sort of stem from these traits. 

            Also, throughout the course so far, I never really thought of the “skills and competencies” as a part of a successful leader.  Now that just seems silly.  A leader must have specific skills and competencies in their particular situation to be successful.  If not, how could they build a trusting relationship with their team?  Or why would their team respect them when they were assigned tasks?  I did not think of skills and competencies as a part of being a leader, but just part of being an individual.  I now see this differently.

            Previously, the path/goal theory was a little gray to me.  Seeing this theory in action in the movie helped me understand the mix between task and relationship that occurs.  As a result, I really appreciate this theory.  Although the task (arriving back to earth safely) was the most important goal, the team still was relationship oriented. 

            Overall, before the midterm I never really tried to apply leadership theories outside of the class room or work environment.  Thus, I only viewed leadership as a hospitality oriented or related concept.  The midterm expanded my knowledge to realize that leadership surrounds me everywhere!

MEDIA

We've studied a lot of leadership theories thus far.  I have found I agree and disagree with parts of each theories.  Also, I have found myself relating these theories to my everyday experiences.  One thing I have noticed is that deadlines must be set to accomplish anything.  A person can practice any theory they would like, however I believe if a deadline is not set to complete a task, build a relationship or reach a goal, it will be difficult to be successful.  That is why I chose this picture that represents one of Walt Disney's famous quotes.

Plus, I'm a big Disney fan =).

Apollo 13

Midterm

The Four Seasons As One

Transformation & Beauty As One.

MIRACLE: The Four I's

Idealized Influence, Inspirational, Intellectual Stimulation, Individualized Consideration

Transforming Leadership Theory: James MacGregor Burns

         James MacGregor Burns was born in 1918.  He has been considered a writer, scholar and professor.  He received the Pulitzer Prize in 1971 for his biography on Franklin D. Roosevelt.  He also wrote “Leadership” in 1978, which is still referenced in leadership studies today.  For this reason, among others, he is referred to as the “Father of Leadership”.  The theory he introduced is transformational leadership.  It occurs when “leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation,” and is a process in which  ”leaders and followers help each other to advance to a higher level of morale and motivation".  It synthesizes all theories and assumes that leadership is morally good and introduces positive change to a situation.  It incorporates changes of leaders, followers and the situation.  His contributions to leadership theory have improved the relationship between leader and follower.  

MISMATCH: Learning from the Negatives

It was difficult for me to identify a clear match or mismatch as a follower as it relates to Blanchard’s situational theory, so I decided to discuss the leader perspective.  For the past year I have been the president of the Hospitality and Tourism Management Student Association and I have learned a lot about others and myself.  The theories we have explored have given me a means and guidelines to actually formulate solid (or not so solid) ideas about the experiences I’ve had throughout the past year as a leader.  Prior to beginning the course, the “stuff I learned” was just a bunch of stuff floating in my head with no real explanations.  That being said, I will use Blanchard’s model to discuss a mismatch that had negative affects in my very general leadership situation.

SITUATION:

         At one point or another all teams have their strong players and their weak players, right?  So, what leadership behavior should the coach use for each player (in regard to their readiness)? 

         My team had both strong and not so strong players.  For the strong players, I used somewhat of a selling behavior, high task and high relationship.  However, for the not as strong players, I used more of a participating behavior, high relationship and low task.  As a result, I would complete tasks that were supposed to be done by other team members and not holding them accountable for not completing these tasks.

         Overall, this created a mismatch because the stronger team players expected me to use the same leadership style on everyone and ultimately hold each team member accountable in the same way.  This had a negative effect because I lost some trust and motivation from my stronger team members.  Why should they work so hard to complete their tasks if they saw someone else would do their job?  So, I thought that completing tasks for others was helping the team get things accomplished, but I learned that it actually was breaking the team even more. 

What's Your Situation?

            The Contingency Model and Situational Leadership theory both examine the particular situation a leader and follower are in, but take very different perspectives. 

            Fred Fiedler’s Contingency Model was very important because it was the first leadership theory to introduce styles and behaviors into the discussion instead of traits and characteristics.  The model says that a leader’s effectiveness is based on situational contingency, or the result of interaction of leadership style and situational favorableness. 

            Fiedler developed the “least preferred co-worker (LPC) scale to measure and identify leadership style.  A person must describe the person they like to work with least and rate that person 1 to 8 on a certain criteria.  These numbers are averaged.  A high score suggests that the leader has a human relations orientation and low score a task orientation.  So, relating to hotels, a front desk manager may need to have a high score with great interpersonal skills, whereas the general cashier could have a lower score and be more task-oriented to completely timely reports, cash flow, etc. 

            Another component of the contingency theory is that there is no ideal leader meaning that a leader is effective if their orientation fits the situation.  This considers leader-member relations, task structure and position power. Fiedler also argues that experience can have either a positive or negative effect in a situation depending on the stress level of that situation. 

            One negative I see about that contingency theory is the assumption that everybody’s least preferred co-worker is about equally unpleasant.  I understand that the test is really not about that co-worker, but instead about the person’s motivations type that is taking the test; however, I’m not convince on how accurate this can actually be.  I really like the situational perspective, but I question the validity.  For example. I would consider myself a relationship oriented leader, but if I took this test I don’t think I would rate my least preferred co-worker in a “favorable light”.I prefer them least for a reason, so the assumption seems a little silly to me. 

            The Contingency Theory implies that a leader must be in the right position or situation to be effective.  The Situational Theory suggests that the leader should use different styles based on the situation.  Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey created four situations and approaches:  telling, selling, participating and delegating. The following diagram summarizes each.

          The task behavior refers to the extent to which the leader spells out duties and responsibilities and the relationship behavior refers to the extent to which the leader engages in two-way communication.  It is important to note that the most effective style depends on the readiness of the group.  For example, a new front desk agent needs to create a new reservation.  The leader would probably need to be selling the process (high task and high relationship) because the new employee needs to know the specific and time sensitive steps to create the reservation, but must also feel like the leader is truly trying to help them.  In contrast, a leader may need to be in the delegating behavior for a seasoned front desk agent to show trust in the agent’s skills and abilities. 
            I find I like the situational leadership theory because it says that a leader can alter both their behavior and their situation, whereas the contingency theory implies only the situation can change.  During the past four years of working in the front office at a hotel I’ve found you cannot pick and choose what situation you would like to be in.  Therefore, I think a situational leadership theory fits operational hospitality leaders and managers versus the controller or director of finance having a more trait-based theory.


So.. what's your situation? 

Central Park (2009)

Our lives are not determined by what happens to us, but by how we react to what happens; not by what life brings to us, but by the attitude we bring to life.  A positive attitude causes a chain reaction of positive thoughts, events and outcomes. It is a catalyst, a spark that creates extraordinary results.  [unknown]

TO ENJOY LIFE & BE HAPPY.. & CONFIDENT

            Tom’s “Leadership and Me” post really interested me because he hit some main points that are strikingly similar to my ideas.  I cannot agree more that being successful means doing what one wants to do and what one is passionate about—what makes them happy.  In fact, in Kaleidoscope 1, my PRINT assessment revealed I was a 7: “to enjoy life and be happy”.  Even more so, Tom recognizes that he needs to work on his confidence to help improve his leadership style.  This is something I work on everyday. 

            Reading more, I realized two of Tom’s “Traits I Admire” are the same as mine: confidence and passion.  I love the point he makes about intelligence as well, “..the ability to do critical thinking, reason and have the right amount of skepticism.”  I have always been the person that assumes people are all good natured and have each other’s best interests in mind, but I need to remember that’s not always the case.  I never related intelligence to skepticism in the way he did and that new connection really sparked a lot of new thoughts for me. 

            Thus far, I am still not a fan of trait-based theory and all I can say about this is SITUATION.  Although, he did make a point about confidence in the pros of the theory, which I think is great because of my focus on confidence in being a leader.  I didn’t really think about it in those simpler terms, but then I can’t help to think about the discouragement someone who doesn’t have those traits would feel. 

            In his PMAI assessment, Tom mentions the confidence to reach for those archetypes that are available to you if needed.  I scored in this range for most archetypes and I automatically thought, “Oh hey, if I want to see things like this or do things like that, I can”.  I did not originally think about needed the confidence to stray from my current path(s) and reach for those certain behaviors and characteristics. 

            I really think that Tom and I have the same general ideas about leadership, but interpret and express them differently.  I look forward to reading his blog throughout the semester.

            In Gia’s introduction post she refers to leadership as a silent, guiding role.  At first glance, I thought “Wow.. No way!” Then I thought about one of my favorite quotes: "A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves." -Lao Tzo.  This is exactly what she is referring to, but I think I’ve always focused on the end result and achieving a common goal, not the process of reaching the goal.  This post made me

            One of the traits she admires is patience and this is really interesting to me.  She says she does not have enough patience, but I am the complete opposite and sometimes allow too much time and lenience.  Just the simple fact of being reminded that there are people on the complete other side of the spectrum when it comes to behaviors and traits reminds me that BALANCE is important. 

            Short and simple: I really like trait-based theory/athlete comparison Gia makes.  As I’ve already revealed, I’m not a fan of the theory, but this is a wonderful way to describe it.

It’s unbelievable how many different ways there are to view and explain leadership.. At the beginning of the semester, I expected many theories, but I did not expect so many interpretations of the same theories… and we are only a class of twenty or so… 

LPI: Leadership Practices Inventory Exploration

After scoring myself on the LPI, I had two others score me: a peer and a manager.  I then compared the scores and chose four leadership behaviors that seemed most interesting based on their similarities and differences.  On random, each behavior I chose to explore further is categorized under a different practice.     

#9: Actively listens to diverse points of view. (Enable Others to Act)

            My Score: 5  Peer’s Score: 9  Manager’s Score: 10

DIFFERENCE: In my archetype blog I mentioned that sometimes I make up my own mind on an issue and mentally block out all other opinions and points of view- that is why I scored myself as only occasionally listening to diverse points of view.  In this situation, I think that this is a positive difference because others do not see that I ‘shut down’.  Or maybe it’s just my inner critic telling me that I don’t listen to other’s views…

#16: Ask for feedback on how my actions affect people’s performance. (Model the Way)

            My Score: 6  Peer’s Score: 9  Manager’s Score: 6

SIMILARITY & DIFFERENCE: I think the scores in this behavior have a lot to do with the setting.  In fact, I think my leadership style/theory varies a lot based on setting.  The two main settings in my life at this time are school and work.  My peer scored me based on how she sees me at school and my manager at work.  This brings up an important point about how setting, and even more situation, matters on how a person uses their leadership skills and how others perceive them. 

#27: Speaks with conviction about meaning of work. (Inspire a Shared Vision)

            My Score: 9  Peer’s Score: 9  Manager’s Score: 6

SIMILARITY & DIFFERENCE:  These scores were opposite of the previous.  Again, I really think this has to do with setting.  My manager’s score kind of surprised me because I am very passionate about the things I do, especially everything involving leadership and the hospitality industry.  This really opened my eyes and made me realize even though I know I’m passionate about something, doesn’t mean the people around me know that—most of the time over communication is better than no communication. 

#28: Experiments and takes risks. (Challenge the Process)

            My Score: 4  Peer’s Score: 6  Manager’s Score: 5

SIMILARITY:  These scores do not surprise me at all.  It’s a consensus—I usually play it safe.  I do not necessarily think that playing it safe is a negative thing, but I think as a leader, myself and my team could miss out on potential opportunities.  Also, I think my lack of risk taking stems from my lack of confidence.  Overall, to develop this behavior, I need find a way to improve my confidence in decision-making.

I feel that my scores on this assessment were all pretty accurate and I think that my peer and manager scored me very fairly and honestly.   This assessment was a great reminder that a leader, or in my case, a leader in training, is not always viewed the same from different people.  

The Nice Guy.. No More?

Last week I had a very interesting conversation at work... interesting for me- probably not anyone else present, but I thought about it again today when Johanna and I scored each other on the LPI, especially because when I was scoring myself I said, "Wow, this really makes me think!"  At that statement, I heard Brandon from across the room laughing at me. =) I know it was a silly comment to say out loud, but it was/is true.. 

Anyway.. back to work.. 

I've been working in the same position for about three years now and one of my manager's really identified a few of my weaknesses as leader and has been helping me improve each and every day.  To make a long story short, most of my weaknesses usually revolved around me being "too nice".  I have always been the "nice one" and the girl that everybody gets along with.

So, last week my manager told me I was in one of her dreams.  At first, that sounds weird, right?  Well, she said something along the lines of "Yeah! I was so SHOCKED because you were a BAD guy!  I've never seen you as a bad guy; you're always the nice one!  Maybe I was channeling the tough side of you that I want to see."  

When she said this, I couldn’t stop thinking about our ongoing exploration and my personal leadership theory.  And then this week when we discussed an outsider’s view of our leadership, my mind immediately shifted to this conversation again.

The point of this particular blog was to help me realize and begin to understand how others view my traits, behaviors and leadership theory.  Yes, I can take as many structured and standardized tests as I want, but I must also remember to listen, understand and act on from the people that surround me.  

My PMAI Results

            Further review of my PMAI results has helped me understand my current stance as a leader.  Below I discuss my interpretation of the archetypes that are most active in my life now, the ones that define the story I am currently living…  

CREATOR: “You assume what can be imagined can be created”.

            I am highly imaginative.  I consistently strive to create a common vision and goal for my team.  I notice the need for various interpretations of a situation.  I do become overwhelmed as a result of taking on so many projects, however very recently I have become better at delegating projects to others that I have confidence in.  Finally, throughout my entire life, I have always had an inner critic that undermines my own confidence.  I definitely agree that I can benefit individually and as a leader from taming my inner critic.

SAGE: “You assume that ‘the truth will set you free’”.

            By nature, I love ideas and the process of thinking.  I love to ask questions and find the real truth behind a decision or an action.  I always try to stay objective and see all sides of an argument.  At times, I can be very cynical in criticizing the efforts of others.  I have found myself making a decision and channeling out all others’ ideas.

            I find it very interesting that the sage can be excellent and dispassionate analysis because through my exploration of leadership assignment I, as well as my group, identified me as a very passionate leader.

RULER: “You assume that you should exercise control”. 

            I know that healthy social situations do not just happen.  I usually can identify the bigger picture and identify how procedures and systems will benefit the future.  I am good at networking because I see how professional relationships can help get things done.  Many times I have taken responsibility for problems I did not create, but usually find a way to solve that problem.  I enjoy solving these problems, but sometimes I think I do not hold others accountable for creating these problems.  This is where having a commitment to governing for the good of all will definitely benefit my effectiveness as a leader.

            I think it is interesting that the ruler can misinterpret differences in opinion because the creator, as discussed earlier, notices the need for various interpretations and new ideas.

Shadow Archetype: Orphan

            This represents the qualities I may have repressed.  The orphan recognizes that not all problems can be solved and is very realistic about what can be accomplished.  I think my current archetypes lack these qualities and, as a leader, I could really benefit from consciously reminding myself these things.

            Overall, I was a little bit surprised in my top three archetypes.  I think that I have recently changed paths (which may be reflected in my scores because most archetypes scored in the “available to me when I need them” range) and I am still getting used to my somewhat altered goals and desires.  I even mentioned in class that I recently moved into my own place so that I could focus on new goals. 

            Additionally, so far I think I identify more with the archetype theory of leadership than the trait based theory because it accounts more for the changes that occur in ones life; it is more situational.

Introduction to Archetypes: the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator (PMAI)

According to Pearson and Marr, the developers of the PMAI, archetypes are psychological structures reflected in symbols, images and themes common to all cultures and all times.   The expression of each archetype differs between each individual because it is influenced by a person’s culture, setting and time in history. 

            Archetypes are important because they describe an individual’s most important desires and goals.  When activated, we tend to see everything in our lives through their lenses; when understood, we can reach higher potentials and accomplish new tasks. 

            Archetypes, combined with the PMAI, can help us better understand our journey and the various stages of our life.  Archetypes are the guides that can help us know when we are following the best path for us.

            Below are my PMAI results, what each score signifies, and a short description of each archetype.  With further exploration I hope to identify and understand my “tour” guides and continue to fulfill my leadership potential.

MY PMAI Scores:

Creator - 25

Sage - 25

Ruler - 24

Jester - 23

Warrior - 22

Seeker - 22

Lover - 22

Destroyer - 21

Magician - 21

Caregiver - 18

Innocent – 16

What the scores signify:

24-30: These are the most active archetypes in your life. If you have no scores in this range,

then the top two to four in the next range are your most active.

18-23: These archetypes are likely to be available to you when you need them, but do not

determine how you see the world (unless they are your highest).

12-17: These archetypes are not often expressed in your life currently, and you may have

difficulty understanding people who express them.

6-11:You may actively disown these archetypes, either because you have internalized a

belief that they are undesirable or because they may have been over-expressed in

the past.

Join me on my journey in my next post as I explore the guides that are current accompanying my travels: the creator, the sage, and the ruler.  

Trait Based Leadership Theory: Pros & Cons

The trait based leadership theory argues that individuals are ‘born’ with attributes that will make them more effective, and thus more successful, leaders then those individuals that do not have these attributes…

But how many leaders are ACTUALLY BORN with the traits that make them stand out from the crowd?

Was Steve Jobs born with the education and knowledge to lead Apple to their worldwide success?  Was Walt Disney born with the imagination, innovation and passion to inspire millions of people for decade after decade?  Was Martin Luther King, Jr. born with the tenacity and charisma to change our country forever? 

Below I've listed some pros and cons on the trait based leadership theory to help one think about these questions:

PROS

1.  As Stephen J. Zaccaro argues, some traits are more cross-situational than others.  These particular traits, known as distal attributes, are more likely to act as a precursor to the development of skills and knowledge.  These traits consist of personality, cognitive abilities and motives values.  I think that one must have the personality, along with the ability and ambition to learn, which can lead to the acquisition of other traits.

2.  The distal attributes provide a foundation for the emergence and growth of the proximal attributes, like problem-solving skills and social skills.  I do believe that the foundation of specific distal attributes is necessary to further develop and learn the proximal attributes through experience.

CONS

1. Is it possible to truly define a leader based on their traits?  Sure, certain traits may usually influence certain behaviors consistent with effective leaders, but is it possible to say this is ALWAYS the case? 

2.  Experience can alter traits, so an individual may not be ready to be a leader today, but after five years experience they could be the best leader their company has ever seen.

3.  The situation an individual is in must be considered because persons who succeed as a leader in one situation may fail in another and vice versa, but this theory does not really address that specifically. 

4.  Limitation & Discouragement: An individual who has great leadership potential could be discouraged from following their instinct of becoming a leader simply because they don’t have a certain trait.

So, are traits enough to base a whole leadership theory on… Or do they just influence leadership performance? 

Traits I Admire in a Leader

There are many great leaders that showcase various traits, however, listed below are those traits that I most admire in a leader:

CONFIDENCE: A leader must be confident in their decision, whether it turns out to be the right one or not.  If not, they should have the confidence to try again.  Even amongst failures, the successes will stand out most.  Also, a team must be confident in their leader and this can only occur when a leader is confident in them self.  Plus, confidence is contagious!

HONESTY: A great leader must be honest with their team to gain their trust and respect. A team must trust their leader’s decisions and know their leader has the team’s best interests in mind.  The mutual honesty of a leader and their team will lead to a comfortable and positive working environment for all. 

PASSION:  I believe a successful leader not only leads their team, but also leads them self.  And to lead oneself, one must be passionate about their work, team and goals.  Also, I believe a team is best motivated by a passionate leader. For example, think of the countless sports movie “locker room scenes” where a passionate coach inspires his team to perform at a higher level.  True passion cannot be duplicated or impersonated.

Leadership & Me: A Snapshot

            I love to travel.  But to be honest, I have not had the time or means to travel as much as I have wanted to during the past four years.  That being said, although I have not physically traveled all that much, I have definitely taken a journey.

            The journey I am referring to is the exploration of myself, my strengths, my weaknesses, my short-term and long-term goals, my interests and my passions.. And where this all fits in to the “big picture”.  Where do I fit into this big picture? 

            I’ve learned about self-development, core competencies and strategic management- just to name a few.  Through the course of this semester and the writing in this blog, I hope to connect everything I’ve learned in the past four years to help me further my understanding of leadership and my personal leadership style.

            Please join my last year of travels at San Diego State University as I continue the process of developing myself as a leader.