1

MGMT 6200 Leadership Assessment and Development

Fall 2019 0.5 Credits

General Course Information

Instructor: Dr. Michèle Bowring

Email mbowring@uoguelph.ca Please put MGMT6200 in the subject line so that I may prioritize my response accordingly

Office Location Macdonald Hall, room 224 Office Hours TBA Department/School Department of Management

TA:

Class Schedule:

Zahra Bhojani zbhojani@uoguelph.ca MAC 217 Mondays, 8:30 – 11:30 Macdonald Hall, room 218

Pre-requisites: N/A

Restrictions: Students in the MA in Management program

Course Description

This course provides a conceptual overview of the leadership competencies that lead to leadership performance. Students will explore and learn a method for assessing their own leadership competencies. They will learn a process for developing in themselves those knowledge and skills relevant to effective leadership. Topics include managerial competencies models, assessment models, learning styles, intentional change process, and personal development plan. This course emphasizes those techniques most frequently used in personal development and coaching individuals and teams.

Course Learning Outcomes

Upon successfully completing this course, you will:

Knowledge and Understanding:

1. Demonstrate familiarity with some of the major concepts, principles, and research findings related to

leadership and critically apply this knowledge.

2. Understand better the nature of leadership and the role of leadership in fostering individual, group and

organizational success

2

3. Be better able to analyze and evaluate information about leadership and leadership development.

4. Read, understand, and evaluate empirical research and essays on leadership.

5. Craft oral message in such a way as to have persuasive impact and generate willing followers

6. Communicate ideas effectively in writing.

Discipline/Professional and Transferable Skills:

7. Appreciate how to lead a team, including managing conflict well, fostering effective decisions, and

creating a desirable culture

8. Implement tactics that effectively foster one’s own leadership development

9. Tailor your own leadership behaviours to the demands of the situation.

10. Understand the nature of politics and effectively implement political tactics

Attitudes and Values

11. Understand the nature of ethical leadership and some ethical controversies in organizations.

12. Demonstrate intellectual independence.

Summary of Course Content and Materials

Each week there are three or four papers that are required reading. It is recommended that you read these articles in the order in which they are listed. Also listed are a number of reading that are recommended for anyone who would like to research the topics further. The recommended readings are not compulsory.

Week of Topic Readings

Sept 9 Introduction: Who are you, and how does this affect your leadership style?

No readings this week

Sept 16 What is leadership?

Van Vugt et al (2008). Leadership, followership and evolution: Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63, 182-196.

Barker, R. A. (1997). How can we train leaders if we don’t know what leadership is? Human Relations, 50, 343-362

Yukl, G., & Lepsinger, R. (2005). Why integrating the leading and managing roles is essential for organizational effectiveness. Organizational Dynamics, 34, 361-375.

3

Further reading: Podolny, J. M., Khurana, R., & Hill-Popper, M. (2005).

Revisiting the meaning of leadership. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 1-36.

Ancona, D. A., Malone, T. W., Ortlikowski, W. J. & Senge, P. M. (20070. In praise of the incomplete leader. Harvard Business Review, 92-100.

Drath et al (2008). Direction, alignment, commitment. Toward a more integrative ontology of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 635-653.

Uhl Bien (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654-676.

Dansereau et al (2013). What makes leadership, leadership? Using self-expansion theory to integrate traditional and contemporary approaches. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 798-821.

Ciulla (2011). Handmaiden and queen: what philosophers find in the question: “what is a leader?” In Harvey & Riggio (Eds.), Leadership Studies: The Dialogue of Disciplines (pp. 54-65). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Eberly et al (2013) An integrative process model of leadership: Examining loci, mechanisms and event cycles. American Psychologist, 68, 427-443.

Sept 23 Leadership Development

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: a review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 63-82.

McCall, M. W. (2010). Recasting Leadership Development. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 3-19.

Kaiser, R. B., & Curphy, G. (2013). Leadership Development: The failure of an industry and the opportunity for consulting psychologists, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 65, 294-302.

Further Reading: McCauley, C. D., Eastman, L. J., & Ohlott, P. J. (1995).

Linking management selection and development through stretch assignments. Human Resource Management, 34, 93-115.

Benjamin & O’Reilly (2011). Becoming a leader: Early career challenges faced by MBA graduates.

4

Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10, 452-472.

Arvey et al (2006). The determinants of leadership role occupancy: Genetic and personality factors. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 1-20.

Avolio et al (2009). A meta-analytic review of leadership impact research: Experimental and non-experimental studies. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 764-784.

De Neve et al (2013). Born to lead? A twin design and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 45-60.

Van Velsor (2008). A complexity perspective on leadership development. . In Uhl-Bien & Marion (Eds.), Complexity Leadership, Part 1: Conceptual Foundations (pp. 333-346). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing

McCauley et al (1994). Assessing the developmental components of managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 544-560.

Day & Dragoni (2015). Leadership development: An outcome-oriented review based on time and levels of analysis. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 133-156.

Sept 30 Self-leadership Van Velsor, E., & Brittain Leslie, J. (1995). Why executives derail: Perspectives across time and cultures. Academy of Management Executive, 9, 62-72.

Stewart, G. L. Courtright, S. H., & Manz, C. C. (2011). Self-leadership: A multilevel review. Journal of Management, 37, 185-222.

Nesbit, P. (2012). The role of self-reflection, emotional management of feedback, and self-regulation processes in self-directed leadership development. Human Resource Development Review, 11, 203-226.

Millman, Z. (2017). Taking control: Training in verbal self-guidance to enhance one’s performance. Organizational Dynamics, 46, 182-188.

Further Reading: Quinn, R. E. (2005). Moments of greatness. Harvard

Business Review, 83, 74-83. Kaplan, R. S. (2007). What to ask the person in the mirror.

Harvard Business Review, 85, 86-95. Drucker, P. (1999). Managing oneself. Harvard Business

Review, 77, 64-75.

5

Boyce, L. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Zazanis Wisecarver, M. (2010). Propensity for self-development of leadership attributes: Understanding, predicting and supporting performance of leader self-development. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 159-178.

Reichard, R. J., & Johnson, S. K. (2011). Leader self-development as organizational strategy. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 33-42

Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 3-34.

Neck, C. P. & Houghton, J. D. (2006). Two decades of self-leadership theory and research: Past developments, present trends, and future possibilities. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 270-295.

Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 11, 585-600.

Oct 7 Leading Teams Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. Journal of Management, 36, 5-39.

Zaccaro, S. J., Rittman, A. L., & Marks, M. A. (2001). Team leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 451-483.

Hackman, J. R. & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30, 269-287.

Further Reading Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E.,

& Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 288-307.

Komaki et al (1989). Definitely not a breeze: Extending an operant model of effective supervision to teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 522-529.

Haas, M., & Mortensen, M. (June, 2017). The secrets of great teamwork. Harvard Business Review, 71-76.

Urch Druskat, V., & Wheeler, J. V. (2004, Summer). How to lead a self-managing team. MIT Sloan Management Review, 65-71.

6

Rousseau, V., Aube, C., & Savoie, A. (2006). Teamwork behaviors: A review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Research, 37, 540-570.

Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for Human Resource Management. Journal of Management, 20, 503-530.

Kozlowski, S. W., Gully, S, M., McHugh, P. P., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1996). A dynamic theory of leadership and team effectiveness: Developmental and task contingent leader roles. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, vol. 14, pp. 253-305. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Lepine et al (2008). A meta-analysis of teamwork processes: Tests of a multidimensional model and relationship with team effectiveness criteria. Personnel Psychology, 61, 273-307.

Marks et al (2001). A temporally-based framework and taxonomy of team process. Academy of Management Review, 26(3). 365-376.

Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of the relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29-54.

Oct 14 Leader Behaviour and Adaptability

This week, the class is online. Instructions will be provided in class.

Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones: The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 36-51.

Yukl & Mahsud (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81-93.

Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (2007). The role of the situation in leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 17-24.

Kaiser, R. B., & Overfield, D. V. (2010). Assessing flexible leadership as a mastery of opposites. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62, 105-118.

Further reading Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological

flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 467-480.

7

Bonnano, G. A., & Burton, C. L. (2013). Regulatory flexibility: An individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 591-612.

Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., Hedge, J. W., & Borman, W. C. (2002). Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human Performance, 15, 299-323.

Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S. Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 612-624.

Oct 21 How leaders create a culture of positivity and performance

Brown, F., & Dodd, N. G. (1999). Rally the troops or make the trains run on time: The relative importance and interaction of contingent reward and transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20, 291-299.

Latham, G. P. & Locke, E. A. (2006). Enhancing the benefits and overcoming the pitfalls of goal setting. Organizational Dynamics, 35, 332-340.

Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 123-136.

Cameron, K., Mora, C., Leutscher, T., & Calarco, M. (2011). Effects of positive practices on organizational effectiveness. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47, 266-308.

Further Reading Judge & Piccolo (2004). Transformational and

transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755-768.

Antonakis (2012). Transformational and charismatic leadership. In Day & Antonakis (Eds.), The Nature of Leadership (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Wang et al (2011). Transformational leadership and performance across criteria and levels: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of research. Group & Organization Management, 36, 223-270

Kozlowski, S. W., & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Integration of climate and leadership: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 546-553.

8

Serrano, S. A., & Reichard, R. J. (2011). Leadership strategies for an engaged workforce. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 63, 176-189.

Oct 28 Leader problem solving and decision making

Shaw, J. D., Zhu, J., Duffy, M. K., & Scott, K. L. (2011). A contingency model of conflict and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 391-400.

Vroom (2000). Leadership and the decision-making process. Organizational Dynamics, 28, 82-94.

Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist, 64, 515-526.

Brousseau, K. R., Driver, M. J., Hourihan, G., & Larsson, R. (2006). The seasoned executive’s decision making style. Harvard Business Review, 84, 110-121.

Further Reading: Tichy, N. M., & Bennis, W. G. (2007). Making judgment

calls: The ultimate act of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85, 94-102.

Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720.

Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 799-823.

Zajac, E. J., & Bazerman, M. H. (1991). Blind spots in industry and competitor analysis: Implications of interfirm (mis)perceptions for strategic decisions. Academy of Management Review, 16, 37-56.

Yaniv, I., & Chosen-Hillel, S. (2012). Exploiting the wisdom of others to make better decisions: Suspending judgment reduces egocentrism and increases accuracy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 427-434.

De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingert, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741-749

Nov 4 Leading creativity, innovation and change

Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33-53.

Furr, N., & Dyer, J. H. (2014). Leading your team into the unknown. Harvard Business Review, 92, 80-88.

9

Hannah, S. T., & Lester, P. B. (2009). A multilevel approach to building and leading learning organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 34-48.

Burnes, B. (1996). No such thing as… a “one best way” to manage organizational change. Management Decision, 34, 11-18

Further Reading: Tierney (2008). Leadership and creativity. In Zhou &

Shalley (Eds.), Handbook of organizational creativity (95-124). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Anderson, N., Potocnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40, 1297-1333.

Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2011). What does it take to implement change successfully? A study of the behaviors of successful change leaders. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47, 309-335.

Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. (1990). Why change programs don’t produce change. Harvard Business Review, 68, 158-166.

Todnem By, R. (2005). Organizational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management, 5, 369-380.

Senge, P. (2007). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48, 65-71.

Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 705-750.

Mumford, M. D. (2000). Managing creative people: Strategies and tactics for innovation. Human Resources Management Review, 10, 313-351.

Nov 11 Communicating like a leader

Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sense-making. Organization Science, 16, 409-421.

Shamir, B., Arthur, M. B., & House, R. J. (1994). The rhetoric of charismatic leadership: A theoretical extension, a case study, and implications for research. Leadership Quarterly, 5, 25-42.

Den Hartog D. N & Verburg, R. M. (1997). Charisma and rhetoric: Communicative techniques of

10

international business leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 8, 355-391.

Murphy, C., & Clark, J. R. (2016). Picture this: How the language of leaders drives performance. Organizational Dynamics, 45, 139-146.

Further Reading Emrich, C. G., Brower, H. H., Feldman, J. M., & Garland, H.

(2001). Images in words: Presidential rhetoric, charisma, and greatness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 527-557.

Conger (1998). The necessary art of persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 84-95.

Conger, J. A. (1991). Inspiring others: The language of leadership. Academy of Management Executive, 5, 31- 45.

Carton, A. M., Murphy, C., & Clark, J. R. (2014). A (blurry)

vision of the future: How leader rhetoric about ultimate goals influences performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1544-1570.

Clark, T., & Greatbatch, D. (2011). Audience perceptions of charismatic and non-charismatic oratory: The case of management gurus. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 22-32

Guadango, R. E., Rhoads, K. v. L., & Sagarin, B. J. (2011). Figural vividness and persuasion: Capturing the “elusive” vividness effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 626-638.

Den Hartog, D., & Verburg, R. M. (1997). Charisma and rhetoric: Communicative techniques of international business leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 355-391.

Naidoo, L. J., & Lord, R. G. (2008). Speech imagery and perceptions of charisma: The mediating role of positive affect. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 283-296.

Walker, I., & Hume, C. (1999). Concrete words are easier to recall than abstract words: Evidence for a semantic contribution to short-term serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25, 1256-1271.

Darioly, A., & Schmid Mast, M. (2014). The role of nonverbal behaviour in leadership. In R. E. Riggio & S. J. Tan (Eds.), Leader Interpersonal and Influence Skills (pp. 73-100). Ney York: Routledge.

11

Nov 18 Exerting influence: Power and politics

Leadership Development Papers due by midnight, Sunday of this week.

Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Perrewe, P. L., Brouer, R. L., Douglas, C., & Lux, S. (2007). Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33, 290-320.

Sturm, R. E., & Antonakis, J. (2015). Interpersonal Power: A review, critique and research agenda. Journal of Management, 41, 136-163.

Anderson, C. & Brion, S. (2014). Perspectives on Power in Organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 67-97.

Further Reading: Cialdini, R. B. (1991). Harnessing the science of

persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 79, 72-79. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence:

compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621.

Pfeffer, J. (2010). Power Play. Harvard Business Review, 88, 84-92.

Buchanan, D. A. (2008). You stab my back, I’ll stab yours: Management experience and perceptions of organization political behavior. British Journal of Management, 19, 49-64.

Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Pfeffer, J. (2010). Power: Why some people have it – and others don’t. HarperBusiness.

Landells, E., & Albrecht, S. L. (2013). Organizational political climate: Shared perceptions about the building and use of power bases. Human Resource Management Review, 23, 357-365.

Ferris, G., & Treadway, D. C. (2012) Politics in organizations: Theory and research considerations. New York: Routledge/Taylor Francis Group

Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Drory, A. (2006). Handbook of organizational politics. Northampton, MA. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Guinote, A. (2017). How power affects people: Activating, wanting and goal seeking. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 353-381.Treadway et al (2004). Leader political skill and employee reactions. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 493-513.

12

Nov 25 Leadership Ethics

Den Hartog, D. N. (2015). Ethical Leadership. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 409-434.

Carr, A. Z. (1968). Is business bluffing ethical? Harvard Business Review, 46, 143-153.

Abela, A. V, & Shea, R. (2015). Avoiding the separation thesis while maintaining a positive/normative distinction. Journal of Business Ethics, 131, 31-41.

Further Reading: Anand, V., Ashforth, B. E., & Joshi, M. (2004). Business as

usual: The acceptance and perpetuation of corruption in organizations. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 39-53.

Trevino, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A Review. Journal of Management, 32, 951-990.

Brown & Trevino (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595-616.

Palmer, D. A. (2013). The new perspective on organizational wrongdoing. California Management Review, 56, 5-23

Schaubroeck et al (2012). Embedding ethical leadership within and across organizational levels. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1053-1078.

Mayer et al (2012). Who displays ethical leadership and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequence of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 151-171.

Stouten et al (2013). Can a leader be seen as too ethical? The curvilinear effects of ethical leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 680-695.

This course is designed to require 10-12 student effort hours per week, as suggested of .5 credit courses in the University of Guelph Graduate Calendar. Note: This schedule and syllabus are subject to change. Students are responsible for staying informed about any and all changes. Any changes will be announced in class and/or on the Courselink site. Grades in the course will follow the grading procedures outlined in the U of Guelph undergraduate calendar. It is expected that the average grade in the course will be in the B range.

13

Grade Range Description

A+ 90+ Outstanding. Performance exceeds that of most scholarship students

A- to A 80-89 Very Good to Excellent. Performance warrants scholarship consideration

B 70-79 Acceptable to Good. Adequate performance.

C 65-69 Minimally Acceptable. Performance lower than expected.

F 0-64 Failing grade. Inadequate performance.

Course Assessment .

Associated Learning Outcomes

Due Date/ location

Assessment 1: 50% Leadership mini Assignments

LO 1 – 7, 9 – 12 Each Week

Assessment 2: 30% Leadership Development Paper

LO 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 See course schedule

Assessment 3: 20% Class Participation LO 2, 3 Each week

Total 100%

I. LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PAPER

The purpose of this assignment is to perform a detailed and thorough assessment of two areas in which you believe your leadership ability needs to improve. You are free to select any qualities you believe require development in order to foster your competence as a leader. Examples of competencies and/or qualities you could select are conflict management, humility, assertiveness, political acumen, negotiation, strategic thinking, motivating others, patience, tolerance, stimulating innovation, promoting change, planning, problem solving, providing feedback, empowering others, networking, or anything else you consider a deficit in your skill set or make-up as a leader. You will then develop a realistic, actionable plan to improve in both of these areas.

Your paper will comprise five sections. The first section is a brief introduction. The second section is a thorough review of the academic literature related to the first competency or quality you’ve selected. Your objective in this section is to present a relatively comprehensive overview of what research and scholarship have to say about the 1) nature (what is this competency?), 2) antecedents (what leads people to have this competency) and 3) outcomes (what are the effects of this competency?) associated with the quality you’ve selected (include separate sub-sections, with associated sub-headings, on each of these topics). This will provide an overview of the topic. Cite only academic articles (no magazines, trade journals, websites, etc). It is very important that this section not feature material you casually happened to find on the topic after a single, initial literature search. Instead, your goal is to carefully present an accurate and thorough picture of the most relevant details of the competency/quality under consideration. This means you will need to read a lot on the topic (e.g., 20 high-quality papers per competency) so you’re able to ultimately discern what

14

information is central and what is peripheral. This will likely require multiple literature searches stimulated by the growth of your knowledge of the topic as you start reading the literature. This will take a lot of time to do properly. Start early. Hint: start your research by seeing if there are any review papers on the topic.

The third section will present a development plan to improve in this area. Your ideas for development should be based explicitly on the literature on leadership development you’ve read in this course and any supplemental literary research you do to flesh out your understanding of leadership development and provide a foundation for your developmental plan. Also, the ideas for development should follow logically, explicitly, and clearly from the overview you presented in section 2. For example, if in section 2 your overview of “negotiation” surfaced “appropriate assertiveness” as an antecedent of effectiveness in this area, your section 3 should cite and build on what the research tells us about assertiveness training. In this respect, if your paper is well-written and flows well, at least some material in section 3 will refer back to at least some of the material in section 2. In this section you may also build on any research papers you find that discuss training on the primary competency/quality more broadly (e.g., negotiation training). Do not present bland generalities in this section (e.g., “I will be sure to enroll in training”). Instead, based on the research you find, discuss specific, concrete, actionable, steps that you can implement to promote your development. Your objective is not to simply generate thoughts about how to develop this competency/quality, but to generate evidence-based thoughts grounded in the literature and the research that has been done specifically on building the competency under consideration. Do not simply provide an overview of research in this section. Build an actionable plan of how to improve. For example, if you’ve noted that goal setting is important to be able to motivate others, explain how you intend to implement a plan to improve at goal setting – don’t just present an overview of research on goal setting. It is actually wise to present some research on goal setting to show that it works and that you understand the process, but don’t stop there. Build a plan to get better at it. So, this section may include some of your own research-based thoughts. Also, provide one behavioural indicator (an operational definition) that can be used to measure your progress (see details below). Your behavioural indicator should not be a scale you’ve found in the literature. It should be your own thoughts of an effective measure of improvement.

The fourth section will parallel the second section, but be on a different quality, and the fifth section will parallel the third. The paper must be not more than 11 pages long, excluding references and title page. A summary of the sections and suggested lengths is presented below. The grading rubric that will be used to evaluate the Leadership Development Papers is available on the course website.

VERY IMPORTANT: Note that this paper is meant to be an academic treatise, not a personal essay. You should provide an anecdote or describe in one paragraph the reason you believe you need to improve in each competency, but then focus on writing an analytic, conceptually and empirically grounded paper. When you present the overviews of the research on each competency (after providing an anecdote or personal paragraph), there's no longer any need to interweave personal material. In the sections where you present your development plans you should discuss how you will personally apply the concepts and research findings, but again your personal thoughts should be based on the literature. –the papers must be firmly based on theory and research (about 80% of the paper) with a bit of personal thoughts thrown in (about 20% of the paper). What I am primarily assessing in this paper is your ability to research, analyze, and integrate a large body of scientific literature for the purpose of application. Note that the amount of reading required to complete this paper successfully means that if your reference section contains less than 50 papers or so, you didn’t do enough research.

Note: In order to encourage you to put all thoughts into your own words, you may use a maximum of four quotations in your paper. I suggest you reserve these for definitions. All other writing must be your own.

15

Papers are expected to be of very high, graduate-level quality. Start working on them early and make regular progress. I caution you that students often ignore this advice, start working on the paper a few weeks before it is due and end up submitting an undergraduate-quality, insufficiently researched paper, which results in them failing the assignment. Remember, you are in a graduate course and your work is expected to be of considerably higher quality and thoroughness than the work you produced as an undergraduate.

What is a Behavioural Indicator?

A behavioural indicator is any specific behaviour that can be observed and measured and provides an objective indication of some ability (in the field of psychology this is often referred to as an operational definition). Behavioural indicators move beyond mere impressions to provide people with objective, quantifiable evidence that they are skilled or weak in a certain area. For example, if you were interested in trying to become a more approachable individual you might choose to count the number of times people visit your office/cubicle on a daily basis. It is reasonable to suspect that, all things being equal, if you improve in this area more and more people will come to visit you. You can count this and it could thus serve as an objective indicator of your approachability.

Consider another example. Imagine that you are unskilled at time management. A poor way to try to determine if you are improving would be to note whether or not you possess an agenda, or introspect to determine whether or not you are trying hard to manage your time well. Neither of these things provides you with any measurable indication of your ability. A better measure could include something such as noting the percentage of projects you complete before deadlines have arrived (this should increase as your skill improves). Note that this can be counted, it is specific and realistic, and provides an objective indication of progress. When you are trying to develop leadership skills, establishing behavioural indicators ensures that you can observe change, improvement, and do so in an unbiased manner.

Overview of the Structure of the Leadership Development Paper

Section Topic Approximate Length

1 Introduction 1 page

2 Overview of quality #1 (including antecedents, nature and outcomes)

3 pages

3 Developmental plan #1 2 pages

4 Overview of quality #2 (including antecedents, nature, and outcomes)

3 pages

5 Developmental plan #2 2 pages

Total Length Max. 11 pages, excluding references

& title page

So, although this paper has a practical angle, it is meant to be thoroughly academically-grounded. This means all of the ideas you discuss must be firmly rooted in science (theory or research) and all ideas must be

16

appropriately referenced. Put another way, although your paper should include some of your own independent thoughts, these thoughts must be explicitly based on the foundation provided by academic research and theorizing. Provide an academic justification for all of the ideas you present.

The deadline for the Leadership Development Papers is indicated in the course schedule.

Please see the ‘Policy on Format and Length of Assignments’ in this syllabus for details on these matters.

II. LEADERSHIP MINI-ASSIGNMENTS (11 - COUNT THE 10 BEST@ 5% EACH)

The Leadership mini-assignments (minis) are meant to allow you to bring all of the lessons of the course together. Collectively the mini’s can be assembled into a sort of leadership recipe book, and can contribute to your e-portfolio. The minis will allow you to apply some of the lessons learned each week, test the applicability of the material, and further develop your leadership acumen. Each week, you will have one small leadership mini-assignment to complete. The purpose of each mini is to drive home the lessons from that week’s readings and solidify the week’s readings in your mind. The mini-assignments will be presented online in each week’s topic overview. Each mini-assignment will have specific instructions and a strict page limit.

Note that in the mini-assignments your objective is to demonstrate mastery of the week’s material. Although you may on occasion be asked for your thoughts or opinions on various matters, those thoughts and opinions should integrate the week’s lessons contained in the readings. With rare exceptions which will be noted, the mini-assignments are not diary entries. They are academic assignments. Be sure to explicitly draw on the week’s readings in your minis to show that you have read and understood them.

Each mini is due at midnight on Sunday each week. The grading rubric that will be used to evaluate the minis is available on the course website. The mini grades will be posted within 7 days of their submission. Students have one week from the time each mini grade is posted to contest the grade (see Grading Policy below). Eight days after each grade is posted adjustment of that grade can no longer be considered. Please be sure to check your mini grades on a regular basis.

An Important Note About Grading

Students often have an implicit belief that assignments that are completed properly warrant a grade of 10/10 (assuming the grade is out of 10), and when they don’t receive such a grade will e-mail to ask where they went wrong. The problem is they often didn’t do anything wrong at all. They simply didn’t do anything particularly special. The issue here is that some students’ implicit beliefs about grading are mistaken. Here’s the scoop: Adequately completed assignments earn a default 7/10, not 10/10. 7/10 represents feedback meaning “you did fine – good job.” Per the University Guidelines, 8/10 or 9/10 means you did something that made the assignment extra special (e.g., particularly insightful, connected previously discrepant ideas, took appropriate initiative to add to the assignment’s learning objectives, etc.). 10/10 is reserved for outstanding work. So, when you get grades back, if you did the assignment properly, followed instructions, and invested the necessary amount and direction of effort, expect a solid 7/10. III. CLASS PREP AND IN-CLASS DISCUSSION (20%) The hallmark of a graduate seminar is engagement with the readings followed by a robust discussion that helps participants think through the readings in a critical manner. By this I mean that we will read and evaluate the material: what are its strengths, its weaknesses, what possibilities for future research do the readings open up etc.

17

Each week we will begin with a discussion and critique of the required readings for that week. One student will be responsible for being the primary discussant for each class. They will start the class with a 15-20 minute “Opener” and lead the class in a discussion of that week’s readings. Further instructions for the primary discussant role are provided below. Those not presenting will complete a prep sheet (details below), upload it to the Dropbox by 11:59 PM the Sunday night before each class and bring a hard copy to class with them. Both are required – please don’t come to class and say that you haven’t been able to print the sheet due to a technical problem – good advance planning is a critical aspect of success as a graduate student – and in life in general, so please don’t leave the printing of this sheet to the last minute. There are two components to this class participation: Component 1 – Class Facilitation (12%): Students will be required to facilitate the discussion of the course material. Each week a student will be assigned to lead the discussion and try to achieve predefined objectives. Specifically, the student is expected to read that week’s material especially carefully in order to be able to 1) highlight the week’s main learnings, 2) stimulate discussion about key ideas, 3) generate lively debate, 4) draw out research implications, and 5) help the other students integrate the week’s readings into their management knowledge base. To help structure the classes they lead, students should arrive in class with approximately 7 written questions aimed at accomplishing the objectives above. However, these questions should serve as a guide, not a rigid constraint; students should facilitate, not dictate, the discussion. Grades will be awarded based on how well these objectives are achieved. Students should provide the instructor with a hard copy of the 7 questions before class begins. You may also incorporate activities and video into your discussion and create discussion questions around those. The quality of class facilitation will be based on the student’s ability to successfully achieve the objectives above in addition to a) the sophistication of the written questions and corresponding discussion, b) the degree to which the student has focused on the key points from the readings, and c) the overall value of lessons drawn out. A good facilitator will avoid:

• Simply summarizing the readings

• Asking general/vague questions such as o What do you think of this paper/author’s argument/methods? o Do you agree with this author? o Do you agree or disagree with this or that point?

Rather, a good facilitator will:

• Integrate the readings using an analytical framework

• Highlight key learnings from the readings – individually and as a whole

• Identify and make explicit the commonalities and differences in implicit assumptions that underlie the various readings

• Where possible, discuss gaps in theory and ways in which these gaps may be addressed in future work

• Engage the seminar participants in a discussion by taking a stand or position on the readings

18

If you need advice or help in preparing for your class facilitator role, please feel free to connect with me in advance of our class. These requests should not be made last minute. Component 2 – Discussion Questions/Thoughts (8%): All students who are not facilitating a class are required to submit 3 discussion questions/thoughts on each week’s readings. An electronic copy should be submitted to the Dropbox by11:59 the Sunday night before each class. A hard copy of these is also due to the instructor at the start of the class each week. These discussion thoughts should not be summaries of the readings. Instead, they should be critical reflections and questions pertaining to the readings. For example, you might discuss a) gaps in the research and ways in which they may be addressed, b) key questions about the readings/content and how to apply them to research, and/or c) how the readings challenged your assumptions. The best way to come up with these thoughts/questions is to work through them as you do the readings. You should be fully prepared to discuss your thoughts/questions in class. The facilitator will go around the room in the latter part of the class and ask all students to share their thoughts. The quality of your discussion thoughts/questions will be based on a) the sophistication of the written questions/thoughts, and b) the degree to which the student has focused on critical reflection and integration of the readings.

Teaching and Learning Practices

Seminar-style Discussions The class will operate as a graduate seminar. Students are expected to have read the required readings before each class and submitted their prep by 11:59 PM the Sunday before to the appropriate Dropbox with a hard copy to the instructor at the beginning of class.

Each week a student will be expected to lead a discussion and critique of that week’s readings. Participation in these discussions is an integral part of the course.

Course Resources

Required Text:

All required readings are indicated in the course schedule.

Recommended Text: TBA

Other Resources:

Course Policies

Availability Policy

I will be on-line most, but not all, weekdays. I will try to respond to every e-mail /direct question within one business day, and will always respond within two business days, barring unforeseen circumstances. I won’t respond on weekends. Please understand if, on rare occasions, I take slightly longer to respond.

19

Grading Policies

All assignments must be submitted on time to the appropriate Dropbox on the course webpage. No extensions will be offered and no exceptions will be made. If assignments are handed in late, 20% of the total marks will be deducted for every day they are late (including weekends). If you get an assignment back and are unhappy with your grade, you're welcome to have the assignment formally re-graded (please see the instructions below). You can also request informal clarification or more feedback on your work, but please avoid emailing with any variant of “where did I lose marks?” or "What did I do wrong?". Those questions are too broad to be answered efficiently. If you're unhappy with a lower-than-expected grade and would like more feedback (nobody ever e-mails to say their grade is too high), you undoubtedly feel that specific issues/points/arguments/etc. that you included were, perhaps, overlooked or misunderstood. Therefore, you must specify clearly and precisely what these points are. Before emailing the instructor or TA about grades, please re-read the assignment instructions, re-read the assignment you submitted, and then pose any specific questions you may have. If you are dissatisfied with a mark you earn you have the option of having your work re-graded. However, the following procedure must be followed: Within 7 working days of the marks being posted or handed back, submit a one-page written document explaining exactly why you think your work should be re-graded. The document must include a very detailed argument outlining why you think your grade should be higher and include all pertinent information that you believe bears on your case. Only pursue this course of action if you are certain that your grade should be higher. If you decide to submit your work for re-grading, the entire assignment will be re-evaluated. This means that it is possible to lose points as well as gain points through re-grading. Therefore, be very confident that an error in grading has occurred before submitting a request for re-grading. Unless you have discussed an extension well ahead of the due date with the instructor, late penalties of 5% of the total grade earned per day (including weekends) will be assigned to any assessment (i.e. deducted from the total mark). Extensions will only be granted on the basis of valid medical or personal reasons, and need to be requested via email to the instructor as soon as possible. Late assignments will not be accepted once graded assignments have been returned officially to the class at large, unless circumstances permit and alternative arrangements have been made. Students who find themselves unable to meet course requirements by the deadlines or the criteria expected because of medical or personal reasons, should review the regulations on academic consideration in the Academic Calendar and discuss their situation with the instructor, program counselor or other academic counselor as appropriate. http://www.uoguelph.ca/registrar/calendars/undergraduate/current/c08/c08-grds.shtml Missed Assignments A grade of zero will be assigned if you fail to submit an assignment, unless you are ill or have other compassionate reasons. Please read your Undergraduate Calendar for the regulations regarding illness and compassionate grounds. Please note, vacation travel, moving house, or outside work commitments will not be accepted as valid reasons for missing deadlines.

20

If you have religious observances which conflict with the course schedule or if you are registered with Student Accessibility Services, please contact the course instructor in order to make arrangements for your assessment if appropriate.

Course Policy regarding dissemination of course material

All course material and comments made in class and in online discussions in this course (including the professor’s comments) are confidential, and are available for the express benefit solely of the people enrolled in the MGMT*6200 course in the MA Program at the University of Guelph. Transmission of posted comments or posted material to anyone not currently enrolled in the course is prohibited, both during the course and once the course has been completed. This includes broadcasting, summarizing, elaborating, condensing, or otherwise disseminating any of the postings made throughout the duration of the course to anyone not currently enrolled in the course. Allowing people other than those currently enrolled in the program to access the course website to view postings is similarly not permitted. General Policy: If you are experiencing difficulties that may interfere with your studies speak with the professor immediately so that possible solutions can be considered. Do not, for example, wait until a deadline has passed and then ask for accommodation. Accommodation will not be considered for difficulties that arose with enough time to be handled but were not discussed with the professor until time had expired. Policy on Assignment Review: All assignments submitted will be subject to review using Turnitin. Policy on Format and Length of Assignments: American Psychological Association (APA) Style must be used in all assignments. This applies to formatting and referencing. If you are unfamiliar with APA style please consult with the library or see the link below. All assignments must be typed, double-spaced, have standard kerning, a minimum of 1-inch margins all around the page, and use 12-point Times New Roman font. Do not adjust the character spacing or anything else that can affect the amount of words that can be included in the documents. This is to ensure an even playing field and truly equal assignment lengths. Anyone submitting a document with improper formatting will have the document returned to them and be asked to re-format it correctly. Standard penalties for late assignments (see above) will apply in this case. We stop reading papers when we reach the assignment length limit. For example, if an assignment page limit is 12 pages, and someone has submitted 15 pages, we stop reading at the end of page 12 and grade the assignment accordingly. http://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/APA

University Policies

Academic Consideration

When you find yourself unable to meet an in-course requirement because of illness or compassionate reasons, please advise the course instructor in writing, with your name, id#, and e-mail contact. See the academic calendar for information on regulations and procedures for Academic Consideration:

https://www.uoguelph.ca/registrar/calendars/graduate/2018-2019/genreg/sec_d0e2502.shtml

21

Academic Misconduct

The University of Guelph is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and it is the responsibility of all members of the University community, faculty, staff, and students to be aware of what constitutes academic misconduct and to do as much as possible to prevent academic offences from occurring.

University of Guelph students have the responsibility of abiding by the University's policy on academic misconduct regardless of their location of study; faculty, staff and students have the responsibility of supporting an environment that discourages misconduct. Students need to remain aware that instructors have access to and the right to use electronic and other means of detection. Please note: Whether or not a student intended to commit academic misconduct is not relevant for a finding of guilt. Hurried or careless submission of assignments does not excuse students from responsibility for verifying the academic integrity of their work before submitting it. Students who are in any doubt as to whether an action on their part could be construed as an academic offence should consult with a faculty member or faculty advisor.

The Academic Misconduct Policy is detailed in the Graduate Calendar:

https://www.uoguelph.ca/registrar/calendars/graduate/2018-2019/genreg/sec_d0e2952.shtml

Accessibility

The University of Guelph is committed to creating a barrier-free environment. Providing services for students is a shared responsibility among students, faculty and administrators. This relationship is based on respect of individual rights, the dignity of the individual and the University community's shared commitment to an open and supportive learning environment. Students requiring service or accommodation, whether due to an identified, ongoing disability or a short-term disability should contact Student Accessibility Services as soon as possible.

For more information, contact SAS at 519-824-4120 ext. 56208 or email sas@uoguelph.ca or see the website: https://wellness.uoguelph.ca/accessibility/

Course Evaluation Information

Please refer to the Course and Instructor Evaluation Website

Recording of Materials

Presentations which are made in relation to course work—including lectures and seminar discussions—cannot be recorded or copied without the permission of the presenter, whether the instructor, a classmate or guest lecturer. Material recorded with permission is restricted to use for that course unless further permission is granted and may not be posted online anywhere at any time - ever.

Drop date

The last date to drop one-semester courses, without academic penalty is November 29, 2019. For regulations and procedures for Dropping Courses, please see the Graduate Calendar for Policies and Procedures.

https://www.uoguelph.ca/registrar/calendars/graduate/current/sched/sched-dates-f10.shtml

22

Date Submitted to Chair:

Chair Signature (Approval):

Sandra Scott

Date Approved by Chair:

26 August 2019