When we think of leadership we usually think of it as one person leading a group of individuals towards a common goal. In Chapter 11, we shift that focus to a type of leadership called shared leadership. As defined by the book shared leadership is " a dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both." More simply put by the book shared leadership occurs when group members actively and intentionally shift the role of leader to one another as needed by the environment or circumstances in which the group operates.
The main idea of shared leadership is that the role of leadership does not belong to one person but it belongs to the entire group as they move towards the organization's goal. This is very different from traditional theories of leadership but I really like this theory. I agree that leadership is not always one person's responsibility it can come from any part of the group depending on the certain situation. I feel that if a group limits itself to having only one leader then they are holding themselves back from making any type of advancement. If group memebers know that their voice and opinion will be heard then they will be more motivated to work for their group. I believe an organization or team that has a group of leaders is more powerful than a organization with one leader. For example, if a group has a bunch of different leaders who have different talents then they can put forth their talents when the group needs them. It can depend on the project or situation at hand. What do you guys think? Do you think shared leadership is a good thing?
Finally, have you guys ever been apart of a team, organization, or job where this was happening? If you have then do you feel it benefited or hurt the group?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think shared leadership is good only in certain situations. I feel that in order to really get things done, there needs to be one leader who is taking more charge than the others to make sure things get accomplished. However, in most sports I think that shared leadership is great! The more different talents the team can bring the better the team will be.
ReplyDeleteI was part of a team that had shared leadership and I found it to be very successful. Instead of having the same captains, all the girls rotated and got to be captain at least once. This created a feeling of equality and everyone worked together rather than trying to be better than someone else.
I agree with Jessica. I believe that shared leadership is good in certain citations. Shared leadership should have some constraints and restrictions as far as the number of leaders. I feel if there are too many leaders there is a tendency to put one’s personal goals ahead of the groups. There could be a lot of disagreement and "bickering" among the leaders and team members. However, if there is the right ratio of leaders and team members shared leadership is a great thing and can be very successful. Being a football captain with 2 other team members was the shared leadership i was a part of. Having 2 other leaders to ask for assistance and bounce ideas off of was very useful when making decisions for the entire team. The football team has 120 members. In that situation we had the right amount of leaders (3). I feel if there were any more leaders there would be a lot of disagreement and would be unable to come to a consensus
ReplyDeleteI agree, I think that a group of leaders working toward something is more powerful and highlights more talents and success. In our society we tend to practice leadership as a one person does all however, in other cultures they practice group leadership. This practice is seen in collectivistic cultures such as Asia or Japan. In America we are an individualistic culture so we see more of a leader as being one powerful being working with a group toward a goal. I think that this way is less successful but it seems like our culture starting to adapt and learn the type of leadership that is more collectivistic and highlights more group activity.
ReplyDeleteI believe that shared leadership is important in some situations. I think that it can help a team be motivated since they can give their input and feel as though they make a difference.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe sometimes it really takes one person to push through and "get the job done". At my work, we have multiple managers that all have leadership roles. We have monthly managers meetings and everyone is able to have a "say" and give their input. This provides the managers with high inclusion and feeling of self worth. However, sometimes it is difficult to get things done and pushed through. Lots of times, there are many different opinions and it doesn't allow us to get the task at hand accomplished. In addition, when there are many people, it is hard to give one person the go ahead so we are often left with a "who's going to do it" mentality.
All in all, I think certain situations are okay to have shared leadership, but others are better with one leader. It boils down to situational leadership once again!
Shared leadership seems like it can be a good theory in some situations. The idea that different people can take on tasks that maybe they have better skills or abilities to lead that task than the actual leader with the legitamite power. I think it would work best in groups that are more experienced and have good guidelines and mission statements because you don't want the leaders to not know what the central idea of this shared leadership is for.
ReplyDeleteHowever I also think that this may not be applicable in some situations. It is important to have a single person be able to lead because if you have too many reference points, this can lead to more problems that you want. Instead, leaders should be focusing in on the issues or tasks at hand.
I think shared leadership is a good theory as long as each leader/member is actually putting forth the effort of being a leader. In many cases, there is a group member who "lags behind" therefore isn't cooperating in shared leadership. It depends on the situation whether or not shared leadership will be effective.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I believe that having a single leader may be more efficient, while implementing the shared leadership theory as a secondary leadership method. The main leader will have the most power, but other group members can have their ideas heard.
I can't think of an example of this in my own life. Even though groups/orgs I've been involved with all work together, there is always a "main leader."
I can think of two cases where this is relevant, one is a case where shared leadership failed, and another where shared leadership would have helped.
ReplyDeleteFirst, last year I was the coordinator of a college prep program for students in foster care. I was hired by the American foundation of counseling services, but worked here on campus. In the beginning, there was essentially three of us "in charge" of the program. The representative from AFCS(who hired me), an Americorps Vista who was stationed at SNC, and myself. there was just too many cooks in the kitchen so we had two major problems: I felt like they were constantly micro managing my ideas and decisions, and there was a lack of accountability and miscommunication over who was in charge of certain tasks. Eventually I told them to let me do my thing and handle it all by my self, that worked fantastic, that stayed out of my face and I ran that mother like a boss.
The example that needed shared leadership is the current Student Government. One of our biggest problems this year has been the fact that SGA is somewhere close to the Joe Susag show, we do everything that I want to do how I want it done. If we would have started out with more people stepping up and taking a leadership role in the group, more members would hold more pride in the work we do, and essentially work harder and longer.
I agree that this is a really great theory of leadership. I like that it doesn't centralize leadership and create that stigma of Leader and Follower that can sometimes deter people from participating in groups. In my experience, centralized leadership has sometimes caused gaps in communication, which was the ultimate downfall of that group's success. And even in those situations where we did share the leadership, the leadership wasn't always strong, or certain people were still new to leadership and weren't confident or sure of their abilities yet, and did not do as well as they'd hoped. Even when sharing the leadership, it is important make sure that the leaders are firmly grounded OR that they have adequate support as they are leading.
ReplyDeleteOne successful example of shared leadership I have seen repeatedly is a group project. Usually in the first meeting, there is someone who will initiate brainstorming, and after that, depending on the task at hand, other group leaders will step forward and take charge, whether it is getting in contact with certain people and relaying that information, planning certain aspects of the project, or being that person who can always keep the group on task. Granted,this isn't always the case, but there have been several times where it was evident that different people took the lead in the group at different times, depending on the group's needs.
As much of the group has commented previously I also agree that the idea of shared leadership is good. Although it depends upon the situation if it is the type of leadership that should be used. Sometimes in groups one member may have more knowledge or experience in the specific subject area so it would make sense for him or her to lead. This also goes along with that if the group is all new to an idea and learning as going then it makes sense to share the leadership role as the group learns together.
DeleteI have been in both types of groups, some where at the first meeting it is already clear who the leader will be others where every meeting the leadership role varies. I really think that much like most things in life leadership styles are based on the situation.
I really like this idea of shared leadership. I feel that most leadership theores focus on the individuals, not the group. I think this is a flaw of the leadership practices becuase it takes two to tango doesnt it? I also agree with mike when he says an organizational team can be more powerful and have greater influence compared to one indvidual. I tend to dissagree that this theroy is situaional. first I think we can take any one of the theories we have discussed and say its situational. Ya sometimes their are specfic things that you may do individually but it all comes out to the group and the final product and deciding if you were successful. I also really like this leadership because it highlights that together humans can be strong but indviduals are weak and vaunerable and by having shared leadership I think success would be easier to obtain by using others talents.
ReplyDeleteShared Leadership seems to be the "perfect" style of leadership. Although this type of leadership should be strived for in every organization, I believe few organizations truly meet the requirements of this theory. Individuals in organizations must put the "we" for "i". This is a very difficult task to accomplish in such a competitive world, like it is today. The closest situation that I have been involved in that had the concept of shared leadership was high school athletics team. Although this team I was a part of didn't reach 100% shared leadership status, this is still the closest I have been to being part of a group that had accomplished a true shared leadershop atmosphere.
ReplyDeleteI think that shared leadership is a good thing. Like others have said when shared leadership is present it is a good opportunity for others within the group to show and bring out their special quality's and skills and become a leader. With different quality's and skills the groups goal will most likely be accomplished in a different way than if it were run by one leader. The whole group will feel a sense of accomplishment.
ReplyDeleteI have been involved with many groups that have had the roles of shared leadership. I like shared leadership because if there are different tasks it is easier to distribute them. This will allow the group to handle situations better and hopefully lessen the stress that may occur. The groups I have worked in with shared leadership have been very successful groups and everyone got along and knew their place within the group.