Throughout the coursework we have done in leadership, I have always found the relationship of a leader to their subordinates to be one of the essential aspects that determined effective leadership. Throughout this chapter, it discusses aspects of the leader-subordinate relationship that offers insight into what leaders can expect from a subordinate's performance. Their theory is that you can easily manipulate your subordinates by altering their perception of what you think of them. in their experiment, they altered 105 Israeli Soldiers' perception of what their commanding officer thought of them. Their conclusion was that a leader's perception of his or her subordinates activates different behavioral traits in the subordinates. What do you feel is the role of a leader to their subordinates? What do you think would work more effectively positive or negative perceived perceptions?Do you feel that a little displaced input could be an effective way to increase subordinate performance? If not, what do you feel is a more effective tool to further develop and increase subordinate outcomes?
Potentially more important than the perception of a leader of his or her
subordinates is the reverse; the perception of the leader as a leader by the
subordinates. viewing leadership from this perspective has always allowed
leaders to view leadership not as a flow of traits from the leader to the
subordinate, but as a social process. One key aspect of this process is the
recognition by subordinates of a "leader", and by this recognition, allowing
the leader to participate in leadership behaviors. What do you think is
the most important aspect that a subordinate has in relation to a leader?
Do you think that the "recognition" phase of leadership process is necessary
before a leader becomes active in leadership behaviors, or are those traits able
to be displayed by a persone before or without the "leader" tag?
