Civil Air Patrol
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 31

Civil Air Patrol Professional Development PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 127 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Civil Air Patrol Professional Development. Kenneth G. Bishop Major, CAP. Professional Development. Leader Member Exchange Theory Taken from: Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd edition) Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 2004, 343 pages. .

Download Presentation

Civil Air Patrol Professional Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Civil air patrol professional development

Civil Air Patrol

Professional Development

Kenneth G. Bishop

Major, CAP


Professional development

Professional Development

Leader Member Exchange

Theory

Taken from:

Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd edition) Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 2004, 343 pages.


Professional development1

Professional Development

  • Do you know where you stand with the Commander of your CAP Unit? Do you usually know how satisfied the Commander is with what you do?

    • 1: Rarely

    • 2: Occasionally

    • 3: Sometimes

    • 4: Fairly Often

    • 5: Very Often


Professional development2

Professional Development

  • How well does the Commander understand your problems and needs as a CAP volunteer member?

    • 1: Not a bit

    • 2: A little

    • 3: A fair amount

    • 4: Quite a bit

    • 5: A great deal


Professional development3

Professional Development

  • How well does the Commander recognize your potential?

    • 1: Not at all

    • 2: A little

    • 3: Moderately

    • 4: Mostly

    • 5: Fully


Professional development4

Professional Development

  • Regardless of how much formal authority he or she has, what are the chances that your Commander would use his or her power to help you solve problems in your CAP work?

    • 1: None

    • 2: A little

    • 3: Moderate

    • 4: Mostly

    • 5: Fully


Professional development5

Professional Development

  • Regardless of how much formal authority he or she has, what are the chances that your Commander would intercede at his or her expense?

    • 1: None

    • 2: A little

    • 3: Moderate

    • 4: Mostly

    • 5: Fully


Professional development6

Professional Development

  • I have enough confidence in the Commander that I would defend and justify his/her decision if he/she were not present to do so?

    • 1: Strongly disagree

    • 2: Disagree

    • 3: Neutral

    • 4: Agree

    • 5: Strongly agree


Professional development7

Professional Development

  • How would you characterize your working relationship with the Commander?

    • 1: Extremely ineffective

    • 2: Worse than average

    • 3: Average

    • 4: Better than average

    • 5: Extremely effective


Professional development8

Professional Development

  • Leader Member Exchange (LMX) Theory first appeared in the academic literature as Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) Theory in:

    Dansereau, Graen and Haga; A Vertical Dyad Linkage Approach to Leadership in Formal Organizations; Organizational Behavior and Human Performance; 1975; 13; pages 46-78.


Professional development9

Professional Development

  • Prior to LMX or VDL Theory, academic studies assumed “leadership” was how one person [leader] influenced the actions of another/ others [follower(s)] in a collective way using the same or an “average” style.


Professional development10

Professional Development

  • In VDL Theory, academic studies identified two types of linkages or relationships:

    • In-Group: based upon expanded or negotiated role responsibilities.

    • Out-Group: based upon pre-defined or formal role responsibilities.


Professional development11

Professional Development

  • Negotiations involve exchanges in which subordinates perform activities that go beyond their formal job responsibilities.

    • If yes, then In-Group

    • If no, then Out-Group


Professional development12

Professional Development

  • Research shows that high-quality LMX yields:

    • For the subordinate:

      • Better employee retention

      • Better job performance evaluations

      • Quicker / more frequent promotions

      • Greater organizational commitment

    • For the superior:

      • More attention and support for subordinates


Professional development13

Professional Development

  • Leadership making is a perspective approach to leadership that emphasizes that a leader should develop high-quality exchanges with all of his/her subordinates rather than just a few. It attempts to make every subordinate feel as if he/she is part of the in-group and, in doing so, eliminates the inequities and negative implications of being part of an out-group.


Professional development14

Professional Development

  • Leadership Making phases:

    • Stranger

    • Acquaintance

    • Partner


Professional development15

Professional Development

  • Leadership Making phases:

    • Stranger

      • Roles: Scripted

      • Influences: One Way, from L to S

      • Exchanges: Low Quality

      • Interests: Self

    • Acquaintance

    • Partner


Professional development16

Professional Development

  • Leadership Making phases:

    • Stranger

    • Acquaintance

      • Roles: Tested

      • Influences: Mixed

      • Exchanges: Medium Quality

      • Interests: Self / Other Individuals

    • Partner


Professional development17

Professional Development

  • Leadership Making phases:

    • Stranger

    • Acquaintance

    • Partner

      • Roles: Negotiated

      • Influences: Reciprocal, between L and S

      • Exchanges: High Quality

      • Interests: Group


Professional development18

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Strong Descriptive Theory / Model

    • Importance of Communication

    • Concentrates on Dyad

    • Positive Organizational Outcomes


Professional development19

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Strong Descriptive Theory / Model

    • Importance of Communication characterized by:

      • Mutual Trust

      • Respect

      • Commitment

    • Concentrates on Dyad

    • Positive Organizational Outcomes


Professional development20

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Importance of Communication characterized by:

      • Mutual Trust

        Holly H. Brower, F. David Schoorman and Hwee Hoon Tan, A Model of Relational Leadership: The Integration of Trust and Leader Member Exchange, Leadership Quarterly, 2000, Volume 11, Number 2, pages 227-250.


Professional development21

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Strong Descriptive Theory / Model

    • Importance of Communication

    • Concentrates on Dyad versus

      • Characteristics of Leader

      • Characteristics of Subordinates

      • Context of Leadership Situation

    • Positive Organizational Outcomes


Professional development22

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Strong Descriptive Theory / Model

    • Importance of Communication

    • Concentrates on Dyad versus

    • Positive Organizational Outcomes

      • Innovation

      • Organizational Citizenship Behavior

      • Empowerment

      • Procedural and Distributive Justice


Professional development23

Professional Development

  • LMX Strengths:

    • Positive Organizational Outcomes

      • Innovation

      • Organizational Citizenship Behavior

        Yolanda B. Truckenbrodt, The Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange and Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Acquisition Review Quarterly, Summer 2000, pages 233-244.


Professional development24

Professional Development

  • LMX Weaknesses:

    • Unfair; discriminatory to out-group

    • Not fully developed theory

    • Measurement problems

    • Negative organizational outcomes


Professional development25

Professional Development

  • LMX Weaknesses:

    • Unfair; discriminatory to out-group

    • Not fully developed theory

    • Measurement problems

      • Scales lack content validity

      • Unidimensional versus multidimensional

    • Negative Organizational Outcomes


Professional development26

Professional Development

  • LMX Weaknesses:

    • Measurement problems

      • Scales lack content validity

      • Unidimensional versus multidimensional

        Robert C. Liden and John M. Maslyn, Multidimensionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical Assessment through Scale Development, Journal of Management, 1998, Volume 24, Number 1, pages 43-72.


Professional development27

Professional Development

  • LMX 7

    • Designed to measure:

      • Respect

      • Trust

      • Obligation


Professional development28

Professional Development

  • LMX 7

    • Scored as follows:

      • Very High: 30-35

      • High: 25-29

      • Moderate: 20-24

      • Low: 15-19

      • Very Low: 7-14


Civil air patrol professional development

Questions may be addressed to:

Kenneth G. Bishop

1736 Hammock Boulevard

Coconut Creek, Florida 33063

(954) 972-5961

[email protected]


  • Login