Likert's 4 types of Management systems

Have you ever had a coach or boss that you absolutely hated, but for some reason you still managed to be successful in what you are doing? Whether you’re a coach in the realm of sports of a manager of business, you at one point have to decide how you are going to manage the people underneath you. The theory of Likert’s Four Leadership styles analyses the differences between alternate ways of managing people. Likert designed a questionnaire on a twenty-point scale with four sections, each representing one of the four styles of leadership. These different styles of leadership are very different and can all be effectively used in the proper situation.
If you have a boss that does not let you make any decisions, and motivates you by constantly saying, “hey you better that in on time or your fired!” You have a boss who belongs in the Exploitative Authoritative leadership system. This system involves the employees hating their bosses with mediocre productivity with a result of high turnover meaning people hate their jobs. This model gives the coaches or manager more control over the organization. The employees or players know their roles and are always on the same page.
The next leadership syetem is the Benevolent Authoritative. A coach with this type of leadership style sells his idea to the players give who then give him some feedback, but still ultimately he has the final say. Due to the fact that this leadership style generates better productively and lower turnover, it is favored over the Exploitative Authoritative leadership model.
The third system model is the Consultative leadership model. The leader consults and gathers employee feedback. It features more interaction between boss and employees. Workers who are ruled by this model have good productivity with a much less turnover than the previous two systems.
The fourth system is the Participative leadership model. This model features very frequent interaction and constant communication between coaches and players. Employees or players under this model receive a great amount of satisfaction and do great work with low turnover.
Depending on where you work, or whomever your coach is for whatever sport you play, the leadership model will vary. Considering that the fourth system has that most amount of satisfaction with great work and low turnover, it would make sense that most leaders would apply this model. Although in reality it seems like most bosses and coaches use the either Exploitative Authoritative or the Benevolent Authoritative model. From a sports stand point, if you are a coach, the fact that with these models you are going to experience a high turnover means that a fair percentage of your players are going to quit. This tactic of weeding out the weaker players makes for a stronger, tougher, team.
These leadership models can all be effective in different situations, think about how your boss or coach treats you, what leadership system does he or she fall under?

Conitive Dissonance, The Mind Battle

Your basketball team is down by two with 6 seconds left and you are going up to the free throw line to shoot some foul shots. There is a lot going through your head. The problem is you are terrible and free throws, and you do not have the mental ability to get over this. Half of you wants to make the free throws and win the game, and the other half of you just wants to get out of the high-pressure situation so you can go home. Your mind is telling you how terrible you are at free throws but you try to convince yourself otherwise cause if you think your going to miss, your going to miss. These contradicting thoughts that affect our behaviors and decision-making is called cognitive dissonance and they happen every day.

Cognitive dissonance appears in virtually all evaluations and decisions and is the central mechanism by which we experience new differences in the world. When we see other people behave differently to our images of them, when we hold any conflicting thoughts, we experience dissonance (Festinger 1957). This is the feeling of uncomfortable tension that comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.

If something is really important to you like smoking cigarettes, but you know that it is bad for you, you will cognitively convince yourself that smoking cigarettes are not that bad and that you need them to make you feel good.

Cognitive dissonance can change your behavior based on how strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict with one another. For example, if your boss is really getting on your nerves and is telling you about how much you suck at life and at your job, you will cognitively have an inner conflict in your head. Half of you wants to tell your boss to go jump off a tall building, and the other half tells you to keep your mouth shut and do your work. If these thoughts are very strongly conflicting, the harder it will be to tell your boss what he wants to hear.

Dissonance increases with the importance and impact of the decision, along with the difficulty of reversing it. So if you do decide to tell your boss to “go play hide and go screw yourself” or whatever, these actions have immediately triggered more cognitive dissonance. Half of you is saying how much of a bad ass you are for finally standing up to your boss, and the other half of you just realized that you are big trouble because you really needed that job. Thus more cognitive dissonance begins to occur such as you trying to convince yourself that finding a new job will be easy, even though you know that it is very hard to find one in this struggling economy. Then you try to convince yourself that the economy is not that bad, the cognitive dissonance continues.

Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful motivator, which will lead us to change one or other of the conflicting belief or action. The discomfort often feels like a tension between the two opposing thoughts. To release the tension we will either change our behavior or justify our behavior by changing the conflicting cognition (Syque 2002).

Festinger first developed this theory in the 1950s when he infiltrated a cult to explain how members of a cult who were persuaded by their leader. This “leader” said that the earth was going to be destroyed on December 21st and that they alone were going to be rescued by aliens. When December 22nd came along and this obviously nothing happened, somehow the people actually increased their commitment to the cult. The cognitive dissonance of the thought of being so stupid was so great that instead they revised their beliefs to meet with obvious facts, that the aliens had, through their concern for the cult, saved the world instead (Syque 2002). It would be interesting to find some additional studies on this theory.

“Cognitive dissonance is central to many forms of persuasion to change beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviors. The tension can be injected suddenly or allowed to build up over time. People can be moved in many small jumps or one large one. When you start feeling uncomfortable, stop and see if you can find the inner conflict. Then notice how that came about,” (Syque 2002). How will your respond to the inner mind conflict?

Syque. “Cognitive Dissonance”. Changing Minds. Retrieved April 7, 2010 from http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/cognitive_dissonance.htm#References

Communication Accomodation Theory

In a world without communication theory, I am hanging out with my eighty-year-old Grandma, Mimi. I am talking to Mimi all about the NFL draft and who I think the Cardinals should pick. I then proceed to argue about what actresses have the nicest whatever, and then went on to talk about my picks for the basketball tournament bracket. I talk to my Grandma very fast, I jump from topic to topic and use a lot offensive language. Without Communication Accommodation, my conversation with Mimi about sports and women would sound perfectly normal. Communication Accommodation Theory occurs everyday when we talk with other people. When hanging out with whomever, we will subconsciously change our style of speech and behavior to better accommodate the person we are communicating with. So in the real world when I talk to Mimi, I talk very slow, use simple words, and stick to subjects that she will be interested in. In order to become a successful communicator on the field or in the office, you must be able to accommodate to the needs of your listener.

If you are a manager of company, it is important to maintain good relations with your employees. In order to do this the manager may use less formal speech when he talks to his employees. This allows the employees to relate to him on a more personal level so that they will hopefully do better work. The manager is accommodating his communication to the needs of his employees. If this same manger is having a meeting with his superiors it would be a good idea to speak on a more professional level by using bigger, smarter words, and more formal behavior such as sitting up straight or maintaining eye contact.

If you are on the field or court playing your sport, communication accommodation is also very important to your success. A coach is going to talk to every player differently, keep in mind that these differences are to maximize the performance of that certain player. In a basketball game, you want to keep your players composed and calm, if a player is not calm, they will miss shots and will be more prone to get into foul trouble. In order to maintain the calmness of the team the coach will keep his voice level low, talk slowly, and use reassuring words to get his players relaxed. On the contrary, in a more physical sport like football or boxing, coaches want to keep their players on edge with an anger and aggression complex.

This idea of Communication Accommodation Theory and sports has in fact been studied. This study done by Armstrong & Giulianotti in 2001 studied Northern Irish and Scottish football (soccer) players. They studied how religious, ethnic, political, and regional associations affect the interactions of players both on and off the field of play. They found that players perform better with each other when their communication is similar. This is due to the fact that that similar individuals brought together in the same setting will communicate similarly and ultimately become better teammates and ultimately better players.

http://physed.otago.ac.nz/sosol/v6i1/v6i1_1.html

Uncertainty Reduction

It’s kickoff of the first quarter of a football game, both teams, players and coaches, are uncertain in what to expect. As the game moves along both teams reduce their uncertainties by seeing how the other reacts to certain formations and situations. By the end of the game your uncertainty is reduced because you are more familiar with the strategy of the opposing team. Similar to an unpredictable start to a football game, when people communicate with each other for the first time both parties are uncertain about the interaction that is about to take place. As the game or communication interaction progresses, both sides reduce uncertainty by starting off with simple run plays or small talk, neither side wants to be caught off guard or make a mistake.

According to Berger and Calabrese (1979), “When people interact, they will act to reduce the uncertainty about the other person, seeking ways to predict their behavior. This is particularly true when they first meet and they do not know one another. Uncertainty can be about both what they are thinking and what they might do.”

The most common way of reducing uncertainty to seek information by questioning the other person. At the beginning of a football game you call simple basic plays to become familiar with the opponent’s tendencies so later you can run more complex plays. Similarly, when meeting someone for the first time you want to start out with easy question. This is called small talk and in our culture is always used before moving on to the topic of conversation. We start with the opening small-talk before moving on to the meat of the conversation. Other approaches are to find out indirectly about the person maybe by asking a friend or to passively observe them. (Berger 1979)

Once the small talk is over with, there are seven concepts related to uncertainty:

Verbal output- How does this person talk, what are they saying?
Nonverbal warmth- Do I feel comfortable around this person?
Information seeking- Who is this person? I want to know about them.
Self-disclosure- Information given to the other party in the conversation, what do I want to disclose?
Reciprocity of disclosure- This person just told me all about them, am I comfortable enough to share myself?
Similarity- What do I have in common with this person?
Liking- Do I like this person?

Your relationship with this person will develop based depending on how these questions are answered in your head as you communicate with someone.

The next time I meet someone I will surely think about uncertainty reduction tactics and these seven concepts from myself and the other party. When communication theory is compared to a football game it helps people better understand and better relate to the theory. It would be interesting to compare other sports like a tennis match or baseball game to this theory.

As we compare a football game and uncertainty reduction theory, one can see how they can be related with one another. Neither side wants to make a devastating mistake early like throwing an interception or for some reason asking the other person if their Mom’s feet smell, at first you take it easy with to reduce your uncertainty for success later on. So next time you meet someone important, think about a football game, keep it on the ground at first, get your players comfortable, and then open up your playbook.

Berger and Calabrese. Uncertainty Reduction Theory. March 18, 2010. http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/uncertainty_reduction.htm

Face Negotiation in Sports and Work

Face Negotiation theory examines the differences in human communication across different cultures. Specifically, the theory tries to explain how cultures differ in approaches to conflict. It bases these differences on the differences in cultures, distinguishing between individualistic and collectivist orientations, or what is termed high-context and low-context cultures. Depending on the culture, conflict will be managed differently. In high context, collectivist, cultures such as China or Japan, they stress that the individual represents the group as whole. If there is a conflict you are not just representing your own face but the face of the entire group that you represent. Another aspect of Face Negotiation theory is whether or not someone desires autonomy or inclusion. If someone desires autonomy, they prefer their own personal space, privacy, and noninterference. Autonomy is an individualistic attribute that focuses on being an individual. Inclusion is a collectivist trait that focuses on respect, approval, and appreciation from others. Inclusion is doing something for the benefit of the group as a whole. According to Stella Ting-Toomey, the founder of face negotiation theory, low context cultures will desire autonomy more than inclusion, while high context cultures will seek inclusion. Although, there are exceptions, people can live in low context cultures but can also be collectivist. For example the greatest basketball player ever, Michal Jordan, sought both autonomy and inclusion. Jordan “typified the picture Ting-Toomey painted of Americans and low context by going for autonomy first and foremost, and putting inclusion second. Jordan was a superstar before he entered the league, and he and everyone else knew it. However, his team was terrible. He was the centerpiece, the nucleus of what would eventually become the greatest team ever. he used his unique and uncanny ability to take the game to a new level. he earned respect for himself, and created the type of "face" that he needed to become one of the most marketable people in the world. By marketing his skill, and merging with corporate giants such as Nike and Gatorade, he made a big name for himself. He later would do endorsements for countless companies, while tearing up everything on the court at the same time. His face could, and still can be seen on televisions, magazines, and billboards all over the world. He is known all over the world. Michael Jordan, it's a household name. It wasn't until about two-thirds of the way through his career, when the Bulls won their first NBA title, that Michael showed signs of inclusion, and wanting to be a part of something larger than himself. It was a crucial time, when the right players had formed themselves around Jordan. The team had the right chemistry, they worked like a fine tuned machine, but none of them could function properly without the other. When they were together, they were unstoppable. This shows the inclusion factor, working together, doing something for the benefit of the group as a whole, and concentrating more on others than oneself. Michael Jordan epitomizes the American low context culture,” (C. Whitman 2010).

This is a great example of how face negotiation can be seen in the everyday world. We live in a low context, individualistic culture, but if you participate in team sports you will be inclined to take a more collectivist approach. In our culture today this idea of bring an individual on a collectivistic team has it’s benefits. Being an individual means that you are looking out for your best interests, but if you are on a team your best interests can also benefit the team’s interests.

From this we learn that just because you live in a individualistic culture, you can still be involved in a collectivistic group. This will change how to manage different situations and conflicts. A great example of this an be seen from Michal Jordan who was an individual who’s best interests benefited him and his team as whole. This is important because as you enter the workplace, this concept of being an individual on a team will become a reality just like being on a sports team. It is important to balance your own needs and the needs of the collectivist group. In the future keep this idea in mind, you do want to have a “me” first attitude when you are on a team, but you own personal interests can benefit the team as a whole.

Article can be viewed at http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~cw619696/face.htm

Get a real job

Since you cannot be a college athlete forever, and you will probably not play professional sports, you need to look into getting a “real job”. To find out what job will best fit your needs, a self assessment can be very helpful. Decide what your strengths and weaknesses are. In Great Jobs for Communication Majors the author Blythe Camenson (2-24-10 p. 3) suggests the reader to:

Understand your personal traits, Indentify personal values, Calculate your economic needs, Explore long term goals, Enumerating your skill base, Recognizing your preferred skills, Assessing skills needing further development.

Just like athletics, every person has something unique to bring to the workplace. It is good to find a job where your own unique personal skills can best be applied to the workplace. You should highlight your strengths and unique skills learned from your student athlete experience on your resume. You have an asset on your resume that will help separate you from other potential candidates. You have to remember that most employers are not aware of all the education gained through your college athlete experience. Think about what you did while playing your sport and how can you successfully communicate this to a potential employer. Use strengths such as “team communication,” “leadership,” or “performance under pressure.” Being a college athlete you learn things like how to take orders from superiors, and how to perform under extreme pressure situations, don’t be afraid to highlight these on your resume.

As you research your career, it is helpful to find the appropriate Job Titles that you will hopefully soon acquire. It can be very valuable to network with people to find out different job possibilities. People that are already in the work force may have a good since of what is the right job fit for you.

Why Effective Communication is Imporant in the Workplace

Communication serves one or more of the following functions: to persuade, to educate, to inform, to entertain...professional communicators plan and devise information systems that link the industry with specific audiences.