Summer Internship Case and Teaching Notes
Ethan Smith
LDSP 491
4/24/2012
CASE
“Welcome to Rockyroad Baptist Church youth group; we’ll date you and then hate you.”
Such seemed to be the unofficial theme of the youth group at Rockyroad Baptist Church during the summer of 2010. During that time Evan was serving as the Male Intern with the youth group along with Jan, the Female Intern, under the supervision of the youth pastor, John. Of course, “dating and hating” wasn’t the official theme, but it certainly seemed to be an accurate description of all of the middle and high school drama that had gone on. In actuality, Evan, Jan, and John had no theme that summer, which Evan felt led to a bit of its chaos. Without a vision from the leadership team, the youth group was left to navigate its own course for the summer. When Jan and Evan were brought back by John to intern once more for the summer of 2011, they were faced with the choice of how to take advantage of their summer of second chances concerning the direction in which to guide the youth. The following is that journey.
Rockyroad Baptist is a church long established in the community. Founded in the early 1800s, Rockyroad has historically marked the community, founding Alpha Baptist Church in 1890 (now one of the biggest churches in the area), and subsequently throughout the years Beta Baptist Church, Cappa Baptist Church, and Delta Baptist Church. Yet in recent years Rockyroad has stagnated both in activity and growth, losing much of the vibrancy it seems to historically have had. Much of this is owed to the leadership structure of Rockyroad. As it grew, Rockyroad accordingly took on a number of associate pastors; for students, for worship, for missions, for discipleship, etc. Titles and responsibilities of those positions have shifted over the years, but the problem lies in the lack of fluidity amongst the staff, which has crippled the momentum and movement of Rockyroad as a whole. Each pastor and his duties are compartmentalized rather strictly into an understood realm of responsibilities and not really affiliated in any way with any of the other pastors and their respective domains.
This leadership structure of almost total individualization had permeated into every aspect of Rockyroad’s decision-making culture, including the youth group and Jan and Evan as interns. As a leadership team in that first summer of interning in 2010, they had not been very involved in what the others were doing. Jan did her thing with the girls, Evan did his with the guys, and John did his summer series with College Students and Parents. This was natural and fit right in with the way things were done and accomplished at Rockyroad, yet resulted in an atmosphere of unrealized visions and a lack of unity on both the leadership side of things, as well as on the part of the followers, the youth group.
The issue, therefore, facing the leaders in the summer of 2011, was how to rise above the adequacy of the status quo which had plagued their internship of the previous summer, and establish an atmosphere of unity and shared vision, and to inspire their followers to join them in adopting a more elevated sense of community and teamwork within the youth group and even the church body as a whole.
OBJECTIVES OF CASE
Type of Case
This is a Decision-Focus Case, using facts and theories to create action plans for the situation.
Learning Objectives
Develop Competency in:
- · Analyzing information
- · Evaluate leader decisions based on theoretical assumptions
- · Situational analysis
- · Utilize concepts and theories
- · Problem solving
- · Development of an action plan
This case involves the issues a college intern faced when followers looked to the intern for leadership and there was a lack of vision or direction from the supervisor.
Author Objective
My objective in using this case is to demonstrate the difficulty and complexity in attempting to change long-standing leadership structures in well established organizations, as well as emphasizing the importance of creating and inspiring vision in leadership styles.
COURSE INFORMATION: SUITABILITY FOR USE
Intended Course
Leadership Theory, Values, Change, Group Leadership, Leadership with Youth, Church Leadership
Course Level
Undergraduate
Position in Course
Can be used in the middle or towards the end of the course.
Prerequisite
Leadership Theory
Timeframe
50 minutes
Proposed Session Plan
0-5 minutes Introduction of Case
5-10 minutes Reading of Case
10-20 minutes Discussion Question 1
20-30 minutes Discussion Question 2
30-40 minutes Discussion Question 3
40-50 minutes Wrap-up and Conclusion
CASE SUMMARY
“Welcome to Rockyroad Baptist Church youth group; we’ll date you and then hate you.” - Such seemed to be the unofficial theme of the youth group at Rockyroad Baptist Church during the summer of 2010. During that time Evan was serving as the Male Intern with the youth group along with Jan, the Female Intern, under the supervision of the youth pastor, John. Of course, “dating and hating” wasn’t the official theme, but it certainly seemed to be an accurate description of all of the middle and high school drama that had gone on. In actuality, Evan, Jan, and John had no theme that summer, which Evan felt led to a bit of its chaos. Without a vision from the leadership team, the youth group was left to navigate its own course for the summer. When Jan and Evan were brought back by John to intern once more for the summer of 2011, they were faced with the choice of how to take advantage of their summer of second chances concerning the direction in which to guide the youth.
KEY ISSUES AND KEY THEORIES
Key Issues
1. Leadership Organizational Structure
2. Teamwork/Relations between Leaders
3. Vision
Key Theories
1. Situational Leadership Theory
2. Transformational Leadership Theory
3. Functional Theory
4. Group Leadership
THEORETICAL LINKS
Leadership Organizational Structure
The leadership structure of Bethel was established as a system of solitary function. Leaders were expected to fulfill their responsibilities on their own and were not really encouraged to seek advice or help from those in other positions. The structure hinders the quality of work which could be accomplished if it were a more open environment.
Situational Leadership Theory
- “Situational theory suggests that because different scenarios require different leadership behaviors, leaders act differently depending on context and it is the situation itself that determines who will emerge as a leader” (Smith & Tapscott, 2010, p. 38).
- Famed author Leo Tolstoy even argues that the forces outside of the leader are the most influential factors in any situation.
- Modern theorists are more measured in their descriptions, understanding situational theory as a leadership method which conforms appropriate leadership behavior as a result of the relation between follower competence and the task or goal.
- Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Model (Northouse, 2007)
- The Situational Model has been developing with the notion that leadership is understood as being on a spectrum between two dimensions, Directive and Supportive.
- Directive behaviors involve setting clearly defined goals, expectations, and limits. They “clarify, often with one-way communication, what is to be done, how it is to be done, and who is responsible for doing it” Northouse, 2007, p. 93).
- Supportive behaviors involve developing more of a reciprocal relationship with followers by demonstrating emotional support and being receptive to follower input and opinion. They include “two-way communication and responses that show social and emotional support to others” (Northouse, 2007, p. 93).
- There are four labels provided to describe the different leadership style found along the spectrum.
- S1 – Directing: Directing leaders are high directive/low supportive. This means that they emphasize the importance of the task, narrowing their communication to instruction and supervision.
- S2 – Coaching: Coaching leaders are high directive/high supportive. Coaches emphasize both the task and the wellbeing of the followers, expanding their communication to develop follower moral, while still making decisive decisions.
- S3 – Supporting: Supporting leaders are high supportive/low directive. This means that they emphasize the importance of the wellbeing of the followers, limiting their communication to listening to and involving followers, while allowing followers to make their own decisions.
- S4 – Delegating: Delegating leaders are low supportive/low directive. Delegators take a hands-off approach to leadership, emphasizing personal responsibility and providing autonomy.
- There are likewise four styles of followership which can influence the proper style of leadership to develop.
- D1: Low competence/high commitment. D1 followers are energetic about their work, despite not being obvious experts.
- D2: Some competence/low commitment. D2 followers have developed a certain amount of skill, but do not still have the same level of energy that they did when they began.
- D3: Moderate to high competence/lacking commitment. D3 followers can effectively and consistently accomplish their tasks, but have little to no dedication to the work.
- D4: High competence/high commitment. D4 followers are professionals in their field and are motivated to do their work.
- Because follower position on the spectrum is in a constant state of flux, leaders must then adapt the proper leadership style to fit with the follower disposition.
Transformational Leadership Theory
- The reciprocity of Transformational Leadership finds its roots in the teachings of Lao-tzu, who contended that leaders should avoiding interfering with their follower, a practice which creates dependence, and to ultimately do less and be more.
- Since then, Transformational Theory has developed into a system which recognizes that both leaders and followers share power and goals and both should work to raise the morality of the other.
- The role of a leader, then, according to the Transformational approach, is to identify issues of morality and subsequently work to increase awareness and sympathy among his or her followers.
- Komives (2007), Northouse (2007), and Yukl (2006) all describe Transformational Leadership as being the ideal leadership style for a leader to achieve on a continuum of three actual leadership styles, visualized best by Bass & Avolio’s Full Range of Leadership Model.
- Nonleadership: This is a Laissez-Faire style of leadership; essentially “the absence of leadership… This leader abdicates responsibility, delays decisions, gives no feedback, and makes little effort to help followers satisfy their needs” (Northouse, 2007, p. 186).
- Transactional Leadership:
- Management by Exception: This leadership style “involves corrective criticism, negative feedback, and negative reinforcement” (Northouse, 2007, p. 185). These leaders either watch closely for followers to make mistakes (Active) or only take action after serious problems happen (Passive).
- Contingent Reward: This leadership style is truly transactional; an exchange of hard work for specified rewards. It bolsters no true commitment, but at least is not as negative as Management by Exception. (Northouse, 2007).
- Transformational Leadership: This leadership style involves Individualized Consideration, Intellectual Stimulation, Inspirational Motivation, and Idealized Influence/Charisma (the 4 “I”s of Transformational Leadership). (Northouse, 2007). “The end goal of transforming leadership is that both leaders and followers raise each other to higher ethical aspirations and conduct. Burns believed that transforming leadership could be practiced at all levels of an organization and by both leaders and followers” (Komives, 2007, p. 54).
- A transformational leader, therefore, would attempt in some way to work with both supervisors and followers to change the system within which the organization currently operates.
Teamwork/Relations between Leaders
Due to the leadership structure, leaders had very little communication or interaction with each other. But there was also a lack of clarity as to what goals had been established for the leadership team. A lack of interaction inevitably leads to a lack of accountability, and the failure of the leadership staff to interact with those in lower position in the leadership team has the potential to lead to disastrous results. John’s lack of involvement in the internships of Evan and Jan is certainly an issue, particularly when addressing origins of fault for the failures of the first summer.
Transformational Leadership Theory:
- Again, in the spirit of this theory’s commitment to stressing moral equality and accountability between leaders and followers, according to Komives (2007), Northouse (2007), and Yukl (2006), a transformational leader would look to discover ways in which those in the organization could augment the bonds of working relationships. This leader would attempt to redefine relationships within the organization.
- Functional Leadership Theory understands leadership as more than an individual, but as a selection of behaviors which aid a group in effectively achieving their mission. John Adair (1973) categorizes group needs as task, team, or individual and divides leader response behavior between three types.
- Substantive: Behaviors immediately applicable to the task at hand (ie: identifying the problem and searching for relevant information and solutions).
- Procedural: Behaviors which focus the team (ie: developing consensus).
- Maintenance: Behaviors that elevate connections between team members (ie: support and unity).
- Hackman & Wageman (2005) and Hackman & Walton (1986), on the other hand, would take a less one-size-fits-all approach and try to discover and subsequently provide for the needs present in each individual relationship.
Group Leadership Theory:
- All groups, according to Tuckman (1965), go through a four-stage process of development. Groups which handle the important issues present in each stage will remain vibrant and healthy and may even develop beyond a group into a team.
- Forming: This stage “is the group’s initial stage of coming together, which includes such tasks as member recruitment and affiliation… The forming stage of development is when team building initially occurs and trust is established” (Komives, 2007, p. 219).
- Storming: This “is the stage in which the group starts to get in gear and differences of opinion begin to emerge. If the group is not clear about its purposes and goals, or if the group cannot agree on shared goals, then it may collapse at this stage” (Komives, 2007, p. 219).
- Norming: This is the stage in which the group “establishes patterns of how it gets work done. The group sets up formal or informal procedures for… who is involved in what and how people intertact” (Komives, 2007, p. 220). In this stage, members deal with intimacy and identity as the culture of the group is nurtured and developed.
- Performing: In this stage, “the group now cycles into a mature ‘stage of equilibrium’ – getting its work done” (Komives, 2007, p. 220).
- Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy (1993) describe the difference between simple groups of individuals and healthy, effective teams with dedicated members. While “both have the characteristics of mutual interaction and reciprocal influence, teams have a stronger sense of identity and common goals or tasks; in addition, task interdependence is higher within a team than in a group, and team members usually have more distinctive roles than group members” (Komives, 2007, p. 236).
- Parker (2003) identifies three common types of teams: functional, self-directed, and cross-functional.
- Functional: These “teams tend to resemble hierarchal organizations, in which power and authority are contained at the top” (Komives, 2007, p. 238).
- Self-directed: These teams are “typically a group whose members possess all the technical knowledge and skills to accomplish a task or goal, with a certain degree of power delegated to it from a leader or manager” (Knomives, 2007, p. 238).
- Cross-Functional: These “teams usually are composed of individuals form a variety of skill sets, departments, or areas that combine skill sets that no one person possesses” (Komives, 2007, p. 238).
- Barthelemy (1997) and Bens (2006) study the dynamics of leadership groups, identifying characteristics of well-functioning teams.
Issues of structure and relations ultimately stem from the atmosphere created when an organization lacks vision. Not communicating a vision speaks to followers just as strongly as stating one, if not more so. The lack of vision not only held the leaders at a distance from each other, but also alienated and devalued the followers. A lack of vision can communicate a lack of perceived worth in the followers, or a lack of importance in the organization or its mission.
Transformational Leadership Theory:
- Since Transformational Leadership, as described by Komives (2007), Northouse (2007), and Yukl (2006), is so concerned with establishing expectations and goals for both leaders and followers, especially in terms of morality, the casting of a vision is an inherently integral aspect of this approach.
1. What would be some differences or challenges of working at a religious institution, such as a church, as compared to more secular or corporate organizations?
2. What were some of the problems with the leadership structure of the church?
3. How important is unity in group leadership situations? Explain your answer.
4. What would be key parts of an action plan for developing a summer internship in this organization?
5. How much difference do you believe an intern could make in such a situation?
SUGGESTED RESPONSES
What would be some differences or challenges of working at a religious institution, such as a church, as compared to more secular or corporate organizations?
Leadership is intimately connected with morality. This is especially true when considering leadership from a Transformational perspective. Yet the understanding of morality can differ from organization to organization and even from individual to individual. Establishing shared values and navigating areas of uncertainty can be all the more difficult when operating within an organization centered on beliefs as polarizing as religion can be. Conflict management can also differ from belief to belief. Situational theory also helps leaders identify styles of leading appropriate to both the context of a religious location and also to the interactions with religious individuals.
What were some of the problems with the leadership structure of the church? How important is unity in group leadership situations? Explain your answer.
Obviously the lack of communication between the various levels of leadership made it difficult for the interns to understand their responsibilities or to fully anticipate the totality of the expectations placed upon them. The leadership structure inhibited cohesion within the leadership group, which then contributed to a lack of cohesion between leaders and followers and between followers and followers. This is important, because identifying problems is an initial step in Situational, Transformational, and Functional Leadership Theories.
What would be key parts of an action plan for developing a summer internship in this organization?
Key parts of a Transformational Leadership style would include establishing a vision which established goals and guidelines of achievement and morality for both leaders and followers. This would include an emphasis on developing relationships and would most likely mean a total restructuring of the leadership organization (or at least of the mentality of the leaders). Situational Leadership would attempt to find ways of working within the existing structure, so key parts would be to identify the ways in which the leader could take advantage of the autonomy of the system to better serve followers. Key parts of Functional leadership would include attempting to alter the environment of the followers in an attempt to serve their needs. Lastly, important aspects of Group Leadership would include alterations to the environment of the leaders and the development of their relationships and expectations.
How much difference do you believe an intern could make in such a situation?
The entire sentiment of the field of leadership is concerned with identifying the ways in which leaders find success, so it stands to reason that a leadership theory or style exists, in all likelihood a number of approaches, which could effectively equip an intern to make a difference. Transformation leadership in particular supports this concept, since everyone involved in this approach can influence both followers and supervisors.
WRITER OPINION
Ultimately, while the historic traditions of Rockyroad did set the standard for a Delegating, Transactional style of Leadership, in the end it has always fallen on the shoulders of the youth minister, John, to establish the environment and norms of the internship for Evan and Jan. Because of the top-down, hierarchal nature of the power structure at Rockyroad, it would be safe to say that John may not have had the ability to enact sweeping transformations across the entirety of the church. However, it was entirely possible for John to set his own standards within his department, especially because of the autonomy that each ministry is given.
Therefore, it was John’s responsibility to develop more of a Coaching style when leading Evan and Jan. Perhaps if they had been more united as a team, rather than a disengaged group, not only could they have more effectively rebounded from the problems of the first summer, the issues encountered during that first year may have been foreseen and totally prevented!
The biggest issue in John’s leadership style was his inability or unwillingness to cast a clear vision for the student ministry team. Had Evan and Jan been given more direct and apparent goals for the summer, the entire process of coming together as a team, establishing norms of behavior, and achieving success would have been much smoother.
That being said, Evan and Jan showed true leadership in the second summer. They returned to a broken organization ready and willing to be truly transformational. By revisiting the forming and storming stages of group development, thusly creating more open lines of communication up the hierarchy and securing a bit of power distribution in their willingness to revolutionize the internship, Evan and Jan, together with John, were able to create an actual leadership team and affect real change among their student subordinates. Overall, they showed that with enough courage, a little leadership theory know-how, and some real-world experience, anyone can rise up to the challenges and expectations of being a really effective leader of true change.
TEACHING TIPS
Materials
Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Model:
Bass & Avolio’s Full Range of Leadership Model:
John Adair’s Action Leadership Model:
Tips
- Additional Questions to Facilitate Discussion:
- Whose responsibility should it have been to restructure the leadership style of the summer internship?
- What role does the trait of charisma play in utilizing each of the theories/approaches we have discussed
- John Adair’s Action Leadership Model is to be used when discussing Functional Leadership Theory.
- The case can be summarized by emphasizing that the second summer of internship was a reaction to the first summer. This will help students understand leadership as a constantly evolving phenomenon and also help them think of times when they learned from their mistakes.
EPILOGUE
After the second summer, Jan made her way to seminary, while Evan went back to his university and took up a leadership role with a Christian organization on campus. John, meanwhile, is still at Rockyroad and is enacting sweeping changes that Evan and Jan only dreamed of. Somehow he has managed to cut through the red-tape of Rockyroad and secured backing to plant his own church, with Rockyroad’s help. The church he is planting will actually be a campus church at Evan’s university and they have been meeting regularly to vision-cast and to figure out how they can achieve in the new church what good leaders do best: enact true and lasting change, transforming the hearts and lives of followers. Clearly the lessons learned in the past two summers have prepared each of them for the next phases of their lives.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adair, J.E. (1973). Action Centered Leadership. Columbus, Ohio: McGraw Hill.
Action Centered Leadership, by John Adair, a foremost authority on leadership, outlines a number of Adair’s principles of leadership. This primarily includes the three types of group needs (task, team, or individual) and three types of leader responsive behaviors (Substantive, Procedural, and Maintenance). Adair goes into detail about the relationship between group needs and leader response behaviors, providing an insightful commentary on the dynamic nature of Group Leadership.
Barthelemy, Bart. (1997). The Sky is not the Limit: Breakthrough Leadership. Boca Raton, FL: St. Lucie Press.
In his book, The Sky is not the Limit, Dr. Barthelemy discusses how leaders can best maximize the potential of their teams. To do so, Dr. Barthelemy studies the common limitations and constraints which often plague teams and then analyzes which leadership techniques are best equipped develop a competent leadership team. He identifies six key concepts of effective Group Leadership, drawn from interviews with over 20,000 individuals from the workplace.
Bens, Ingrid. (2006). Facilitating to Lead. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
In Facilitating to Lead, Bens names facilitation as the most essential skills for effective group leaders to develop and put into practice. Bens discusses the benefits of facilitative leadership as it applies to the group setting. A Transformational leader at heart, Bens emphasizes empowerment of the follower through a four-level model.
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A Theory of Team Coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 269-287.
Harvard University’s J. Richard Hackman and Dartmouth College’s Ruth Wageman propose a model of team coaching in their article which focuses on the function of coaching in a team, identifies the situations in which coaching is most appropriate, and describes the conditions under which team-focused coaching can effectively facilitate achieving performances.
Hackman, J. R., & Walton, R. E. (1986). Leading groups in organizations. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 72–119). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
In Chapter 3 of Goodman’s “Designing Effective Work Groups,” Hackman and Walton introduce a new leadership theory which looks at task-oriented groups. They identify three major characteristics of these groups: clear engaging direction, an enabling performance situation, and adequate material resources. Their interest in task-performing groups is essentially a product of the Functional Approach to leadership, which they describe as having high potential as it is a relatively unexploited theory.
Heider, J. (1997). The Tao of Leadership: Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching Adapted for a New Age, page 113. Atlanta: Humanics Limited.
The Tao of Leadership takes the classic Tao Te Ching and adapts it for a new age of leadership, taking such classic proverbs and mantras and applying them to leadership theory and application. In particular, The Tao of Leadership is an interesting collection which has a unique focus on Transformational Leadership.
Komives, Susan R., Lucas, Nance, & McMahon, Timothy R. (2007). Exploring Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Exploring Leadership is a classic go-to guide for leadership students everywhere. A collection of facts and commentary on existing leadership theories and practices, Exploring Leadership has insights on a range of topics, from Situational Leadership, to Group Leadership, to Transformational Leadership. It has relevant information for just about every leadership context.
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and Practice, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Leadership by Northouse is another useful tool for scholars of Leadership Theory. The book outlines basic leadership principles, but accompanies them with real-life, relatable examples. It too covers the full spectrum of Leadership Theories, making it a relevant tool in any leadership situation.
Smith, Ethan & Tapscott, Lauren. (2010). Historic Ideas into Contemporary Leadership Theories. Undergraduate Leadership Review, Volume 3, Issue 1, pages 38-39. Christopher Newport University.
Smith and Tapscott outline the history and development of leadership theory and then challenge the notion that there has been an evolution of leadership practice. Pointing to examples throughout history, Smith and Tapscott note that the progression of leadership theory does not indicate a similar progression of practice; that newly developed theories can be seen in ancient examples thousands of years ago and older theories are still put into practice today. The article is a relevant source for historical information of Leadership Theories.
Tolstoy, Leo. (2007). War and Peace, Volume 3, Part 1, Chapter 1, page 606. New York: Random House Inc.
War and Peace is generally regarded as one of the most important works of literature ever written. While it is a work of fiction describing the events of the French invasion of Russia, Tolstoy used this work to develop an insightful understanding and commentary of leadership, using Napoleon as a particular example. Specifically, Tolstoy seems to be a propagator of the Situational Leadership Theory.
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in Organizations, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Like Exploring Leadership (Komives, 2007) and Leadership in Theory and Practice (Northouse, 2007), Yukl’s Leadership in Organizations serves as a go-to guide for most prevalent leadership theories, incorporating relevant examples into the mix so as to increase reader comprehension and speak to just about any leadership scenario.
No comments:
Post a Comment