Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

Running head: THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 1

Case Study: Arizona State University, Scaling the New American Research University

Alyssa Arroyo

Loyola University- Chicago


THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 2

Brief Overview of Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Leader-member exchange theory is built on the interactive relationship between a leader

and members making the relationship between a leader and a member the focal of the leadership

process (Northouse, 2015, p. 137). The interactive exchange between the leader and the member

can potentially design the path to successful advancement within an organization. Northouse

(2015) believes that leader-member exchange theory not only describes leadership, but

prescribes leadership (p. 144). Descriptively, leader-member exchange theory explains that

when using interaction as a focal point, social and personal interaction with a leader can cause a

members relationship to link in two different forms. One form is considered the in-group

which is when a member and leader create a productive relationship in which it motivates the

member to go above and beyond for the advancement of the groups goals. The other form is the

out-group in which a member and a leaders interactions do not produce the same effect and

the members do only the work that is essential to their role. However, there are benefits to the

in-group such as additional time, support and opportunities for growth by the leader.

Prescriptively, leader-member exchange theory suggests that when interaction is a focal point, it

is extremely important to create a positive or high quality relationship with members

(Northouse, 2015, p. 145). By creating high quality relationships with members, it fosters a

culture of support, confidence, trust and encouragement.

Deconstructing and Reconstructing Leader-Member Exchange Theory

There are four tools I will be using to deconstruct leader-member exchange theory. The

first tool I will be using is an ideological critique, which questions how ideology and hegemony

contribute to normative assumptions perpetuating dominant narratives (Dugan, in press, ch. 2, p.

4). I appreciated that leader-member exchange theory is not a dominant narrative in that this
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 3

specific theory is focused on a member working with a leader as opposed to the traditional

leadership style of a member working for a leader. However, cultural context matters when

deconstructing the theory as it does not give support or reference to how this may look across

gender, race and ethnicity, age, culture, sexual orientation or ability.

The second deconstruction tool I will be using is commodification, which examines the

negative effects that can occur when production and consumption are pursued regardless of costs

(Dugan, in press, ch. 2, p. 5). The descriptive aspect of the leader-member exchange theory

creates a hierarchy of subgroups which send you back to elementary school either sitting at the

popular table, or not. By creating a divide, unintentional or not, the production of this theory can

cause a negative effect on the social dynamic and productivity of the workplace. Depending on

intersectionality, some may see the production of in-groups and out-groups as favoritism, while

some may see it as discrimination.

The third deconstruction tool I will be using is flow of power which address the mutually

constituting relationship between knowledge and power (Dugan, in press, ch. 2, p. 5). This

theory is heavily based on social interaction and exchange thereby creating flow of power to a

member that is essentially more likeable. This discerns a mutual relationship between

knowledge and power. The leader-member exchange theory explains that a need for a high-

quality leader is imperative for the exchange between a leader and a member to be effective.

However, the theory does not explain criteria for what a high-quality leader-member exchange

may look like, but bases the exchange off of preference such as personality, interpersonal skills,

or job competencies (Northhouse, 2015, p. 147). Essentially, the flow of power is based off of

the leaders social preferences. This can discount individuals who may not be personable or

social which can hinder confidence, inadequacy and motivation in their work.
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 4

The final deconstruction tool I will be using is willful blindness, acknowledging ways we

become complicit in maintaining inequitable systems by failing to acknowledge or act when

something is harmful (Dugan, in press, ch. 2, p. 7). I can largely see willful blindness being used

to oversee the negative divide and focusing on the social interaction and relationship with the

entire in-group. Northouse (2015) explains:

In-groups members are willing to do more than is required in their job description and

look for innovative ways to advance the groups goals. In response to their extra effort and

devotion, leaders give them more responsibilities and more opportunities. Leaders also give in-

group members more of their time and support (p. 144).

Due to this theory being based on interaction, someone who utilizes this type of theory may be

willfully blind to the out-group. While out-groups do not receive any special treatment, they do

only what their job is intended to do. We can assume that a leader who uses this type of theory

may be willfully blind to those they are not interactive with and only focus on the growth of the

in-group members.

To reconstruct this theory, Id suggest disrupting normatively and have the leader be

culturally competent, as well as the individuals who work in relation with the leader.

Furthermore, Id suggest that the leader not give special opportunities to someone who they may

have a better relationship with but give opportunities with those who may have the skill level.

Building interest convergence is extremely important as the leader-member exchange theory

breaks down in-groups and out-groups. It is important that both groups and the leader are

equally advocating for the same goal as opposed to individuals partaking in a greater purpose

than others, which can show elitism. This particularly also cultivates agency and a common goal

in the work place. Reconstructing this theory, I would also suggest that the leader member
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 5

exchange creates relationships to hold the leader accountable in regards to reconstructing

commodification and flow of power. Its important that there isnt flow of power only being

received by the member but delegating the responsibilities and opportunities across all staff.

This is important to create healthy dialogue and differing viewpoints and stocks of knowledge.

Analysis of Arizona State University, The New Research University

In reading the case study, there were many pieces that resonated with. Majority of the

case study talked about the accomplishments that the institution created, however largely

attributed to Michael Crow. This was interesting to me as the case study set the tone for Crow to

take ownership of the accomplishments. However, when it came to difficult decisions without a

desirable outcome, he handed that decision to his leadership team. This leadership team was

addressed twice in the case study; when discussing how he built the leadership team and when he

needed them to address budget cuts. Leader-member exchange theory is interactive, meaning

that the leader should be creating relationships with his team. However, in making his leadership

team, the case study references, if you weren't on board with where he was going, it was widely

known that you would surely be left behind (Higgins & Magnuson.2016 p. 7). The leader-

member exchange theory calls for a partnership however, he [Crow] had a perspective about

what to do, but was anxious about the decisions that needed to be made and how they would

impact the enterprise when it came time to make a budget cut (Higgins & Magnuson, 2016, p.

15). This creates a lack of support within the leader and the member which should have been

made within the leadership team together. Furthermore, the makeup of the leadership team came

from backgrounds heavily similar to Crows which gave his team overlapping priorities, not

giving a vision of diversity or discourse. While the decision to make the budget cuts is not
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 6

revealed, I have to question what priority certain funds held as the lens that the budget was

viewed through seemed to be homogenous (Higgins & Magnuson, 2016, p. 7).

Brief Overview of Transformational Leadership Theory

Transformational leadership is used as a way to empower members and foster a culture of

growth and inspiration leading to members feeling supported, valued and purposeful. The most

crucial role of transformational leadership relies on the leader itself. Leaders should not only be

role models for their members but evoke a of vision that creates trust and contribution to the

greater good. According to Northouse (2016), Transformational leaders are effective at working

with people and help build a trust and cultivate collaboration with others to ultimately create a

self-efficacy within not only the members but the greater good they are creating within the

organization (p. 176). In order for transformational leadership to be successful, the leader should

be engaging, involved, descriptive and articulate. In return, members should have a strong sense

of purpose and understanding of how they contribute to the greater good of the organization.

Members should have a sense of community and support to create a positive transformation.

Deconstructing and Reconstructing Transformative Leadership Theory (2)

I will once again be using the four tools utilized to deconstruct transformative leadership theory

that Dugan (in press) references throughout Chapter 2. When using ideological critique as a tool,

Northouse (2015) and I have similar views in regards to who may qualify as a transformational

leader (p. 126). There are not specific guidelines or criteria that need to be met to be considered

transformational. In fact, some may argue that the characteristics needed to be a

transformational leader are characteristics that cannot be taught but are behavioral. This critique

concludes that the underlying belief of transformative theory is to be socially engaging and

influential by your behavior and presentation.


THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 7

When using commodification as a tool for deconstruction, the question that particularly

arises for me is, who is doing the leading and to what extent? While I do see some benefits to

transformational leadership, the leader is transforming an individual to believe in a movement

they believe in. This type of leadership does not delegate, this type of leadership does not work

collaboratively to make decisions, however, this type of leadership has made the decision and

grooms others to believe in the decisions they want to see.

Commodification leads me to my third deconstruction tool of flow of power.

Transformational leadership results in people feeling better about themselves and their

contributions to the greater common good (Northouse, 2015, p. 176). This statement

particularly is the most concerning. We understand that through willful blindness, individuals

can be susceptible to purposeful ignorance when it benefits themselves. What happens when the

greater common good is biased? What happens when we start questioning, the greater common

good for who? If individuals feel better about themselves, and their contributions, are they more

likely to stand up if its not benefiting the common good and they know that? Power is in the

hands of the leader, which can very easily be abused. Individuals such as Jim Jones, Hitler, Steve

Jobs or my sorority sister who sells Herbalife come to mind. Steve Jobs, and my sorority sister

who sells Herbalife genuinely want to better their community in which they serve. They want to

promote their lifestyle and be a role model. However, there are many who can easily abuse this

type of power. Jim Jones and Hitler are great examples of how this type of power can be abused.

They have great characteristics and personal traits of motivation and creating a vision, however

if targeting a vulnerable population of followers, leadership then becomes manipulation.

In reconstructing this theory, I would suggest that to be a transformational leader,

individuals needs to prove themselves as an informal leader as opposed to being a formal


THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 8

authority figure with a vision in mind. In reconstructing this theory, I would suggest creating

trust and relationships with individuals different to my social and cultural identity. Furthermore,

while transformational leadership is about creating a vision and wanting people to not only see

and embrace that vision, it is about being a role model and reflection of that vision. To

reconstruct this theory, I would alter the flow of power so that the flow of power was a shared

vision, not a transformed vision through structural leadership. This would then delegate a person

from each field or department a role on their leadership team.

Analysis of Arizona State University, The New Research University

With the reconstructed theory, transformational leadership would have not only

transformed the university into a vision, but it would have done so with a common vision in

mind. The vision of The New Research University would have been modeled through

structural leadership by creating teams that all have the same vision in mind. With the

reconstructed transformational theory, Crow would have created a vision that he wanted to instill

in the university. This vision would not have been a pitch to make everyone understand what he

was doing, but a rally to be on board with his idea. Once individuals were on board, he would

have started to develop a leadership team. Like the reconstructed theory states, his leadership

team would have been individuals from different cultural and social identities unlike his team of

all males with business and science backgrounds (Higgins & Magnuson, p. 7). Thus, when

having a crisis that includes cutting a budget that is more than expected, he would be able to sit

down with his leadership team that represented different lenses of the community and define

what needs to be restructured. While this may be difficult, Crow would not have left the meeting

and left it in the hands of his leadership team. Furthermore, the leadership team would be
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 9

looking out for the vision and also the common good of the students because of the diversity

within the leadership team.

Conclusion

I would like to start off with what leadership is. While there are many types of leadership

and ways we can define leadership, Heifetz (2010) states as the ability to gain informal

authority: gaining the respect and admiration with which to influence people in informal,

persuasive ways without having to use the coercive mechanisms of formal authority (p. 13).

Would I consider Michael Crow a leader? From the evidence shown in the case study, Michael

Crow did not understand the concept of leadership, he understood the power of formal authority.

He was described as someone who could become intractable when he believed his way to be

right (Higgins & Magnuson, 2016, p. 7). If I were to approach the major leadership issue, I

would address the growth of the community relations over the rapid growth of the vision. While

the vision had many goals, I would have suggested the goals to my staff and rallied for them to

be on board, instead of having it be widely known that you would be left behind if you

werent. (Higgins & Magnuson, 2016, p.7). With these changes, I believe that the core group of

his leadership team would not have been the team to recommend budget cuts. But as a group, we

would have discussed and had a civil discourse with what may make sense, instead of what

would impact the enterprise. (Higgins & Magnuson, 2016, p.15). I believe that if I could have

had a staff who admired my work ethic, trusted me, and had my respect; there would be a civil

discourse about what the budget cuts may look like. I also would not be anxious about these

decisions. I would hope my staff and faculty would trust me and know that their best interest is in

mind, not the enterprise or vision that I worked to create.

References
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS PAPER 10

Dugan, J. P. (in press). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass. [Due February 2017]

Higgins, M. & Magnuson, N. (2016). Arizona State University Scaling the New American

Research University. KC23ARIZ. Cambridge, MA: The Harvard Education Publishing

Group.

Heifetz, R. (2010). Leadership. In R. A. Couto (Ed.), Political and civic leadership: A reference

handbook (pp. 12-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Вам также может понравиться