The Experts below are selected from a list of 33360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Alex Jordan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
behavioral traits that define social dominance are the same that reduce social influence in a consensus task
bioRxiv, 2020Co-Authors: Mariana Rodriguezsantiago, Paul Nuehrenberg, James Derry, Oliver Deussen, Fritz Francisco, Linda Karen Garrison, Sylvia Fernanda Garza, Hans A Hofmann, Alex JordanAbstract:In many species, cultures, and contexts, social dominance reflects the ability to exert influence over others, and the question of what makes an Effective Leader is pertinent to a range of disciplines and contexts. While dominant individuals are often assumed to be most influential, the behavioral traits that make them dominant may also make them socially aversive and thereby reduce their influence. Here we examine the influence of dominant and subordinate males on group behavior in different social contexts using the cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni. We find that phenotypically dominant males display behavioral traits that typify Leadership across taxonomic systems - aggressive, social centrality, and movement Leadership, while subordinate males are passive, socially peripheral, and have little influence over movement. However, in a more complex group-consensus task involving visual cue associations, subordinate males become the most Effective agents of social change. We find that dominant males are spatially distant and have lower signal-to-noise ratios of informative behavior in the association task, potentially interfering with their ability to generate group-consensus. In contrast, subordinate males are physically close to other group members, have high signal-to-noise behaviors in the association task, and visual connectivity to other group members equal to that of dominant males. The attributes that define Effective social influence are therefore highly context-specific, with socially and phenotypically dominant males being influential in routine but not complex social scenarios. These results demonstrate that behavioral traits that are typical of socially dominant individuals may actually reduce their social influence in other contexts.
-
socially dominant aggressive males are poor influencers of group consensus in a social fish
bioRxiv, 2019Co-Authors: Mariana Rodriguezsantiago, Paul Nuehrenberg, James Derry, Oliver Deussen, Fritz Francisco, Linda Karen Garrison, Sylvia Fernanda Garza, Hans A Hofmann, Alex JordanAbstract:In many species, cultures, and contexts, social dominance reflects the ability to exert influence over the behavior of others. Yet the behavioral attributes of those in dominant positions, and the behaviors of actually influential individuals may not be the same, and the behavioral attributes that generate influence in one social context may reduce influence in others. The question of what makes an Effective Leader is therefore not straightforward, and has many answers depending on the context in which Leadership and influence is to be manifested. Most importantly, social dominance cannot always be assumed to be equivalent with social influence. Here we examine whether socially dominant males in the cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni are more Effective in exerting social influence than socially subordinate males. Using machine-vision based automated tracking of behavior, we find that dominant males in this species display behavioral traits that typify Leadership across taxonomic systems - they are aggressive, occupy central social network positions, and lead group movements, whereas subordinate males are passive, socially peripheral, and have little influence over typical group movement. However, in a more complex group-consensus task the influence of dominant males breaks down, and subordinate males become more Effective agents of social change. In a more sophisticated group consensus task involving a visual association task, the behavioral attributes that define male dominance - aggression, rapid movement, and increased physical distance to others - interfere with the ability of dominant males to generate group to consensus. Dominant males occupy more spatially distant positions, and had lower signal-to-noise ratio of informative behavior in the association task, while subordinate males are typically is close physical association with their group members, have high signal-to-noise behaviors in the association task, and equal visual connectivity to other group members as dominant males. The attributes that define Effective social influence are therefore highly context-specific in this species. These results demonstrate that in this and many other species including humans, behavioral traits that are typical of socially dominant individuals may be the same that reduce their social influence in other contexts.
Craig Bullis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
developing the professional army officer implications for organizational Leaders
Military review, 2003Co-Authors: Craig BullisAbstract:ARMY CHIEF of Staff Eric K. Shinseki stated, "We are about Leadership; it is our stock in trade, and it is what makes us different. We take soldiers who enter the force and we grow them into Leaders for the next generation of soldiers. We invest today in the Nation's Leadership for tomorrow." Shinseki recognizes that developing Leaders is the core competency of the U.S. Army. Leaders are the most significant element of combat power and are necessary to fight and win the Nation's wars. Developing and conducting Effective Leader development programs is a critical issue for organizational success in the new millennium. Research indicates that Leadership can account for up to 45 percent of the variance in organizational performance outcomes.(2) Some believe that Leader development should be focused almost exclusively on developing of technical and tactical expertise--the ability of a Leader to motivate subordinates to engage and destroy the enemy. However, Leadership doctrine portrays Effective Leadership as being much more.(3) Army doctrine identifies necessary interpersonal and conceptual skills as well as technical and tactical competencies. Today's Effective Army officer must be warrior and peacemaker, thinker and doer. Leadership doctrine requires a focus not only on short-term results, but also on long-term requirements to improve the organization. The professional commissioned officer embraces four overlapping identities: warfighter, servant to the Nation, member of a profession, and Leader of character. Perspectives on Leader Development The concept of Leader development for a professional Army officer could be approached in several ways. The Army's institutional framework, outlined in Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 350-58, Leader Development for America's Army, presents three pillars that support Leader development: institutional training, operational assignments, and self development. Some scholars have recognized that the Army's commitment to this three-pillar model of Leader development sets a high standard for professional development of the officer corps.(4) A second perspective for approaching the concept of Leader development is to concentrate on the individual. In other words, development should focus on how the individual should act to model behaviors desired in a professional military officer. These behaviors, discussed in Army Field Manual (FM) 22-100, Army Leadership, consequently propose a new set of behaviors here would be redundant. These two models of looking at Leadership--the three-pillar model and the Leader as role model--are informative and important. They also provide a solid background for further discussion officership. By its professional nature, officership is owned by the Army's officers and is passed from generation to generation through the action of those within the officer profession. The regimen, of professional development within the Army has nearly always been formulated and passed from generation to generation by members of the profession itself--officers who recognize and act on the need to maintain a corps of professional officers.(5) The senior officer's responsibility is to develop professional subordinate Leaders in organization. This critical senior-officer responsibility, to develop subordinate officers who understand and personally commit to the tenets of the profession, could be the most important task any officer performs.[6] The focus on the professional includes not only what the officer knows or does, but also who the officer is and how he or she embodies all the professional identities in his or her life. The Leader's responsibility is to develop an organizational culture whose foundation embraces the officer's professional roles. Personal and Professional Leader Development Every Leader has the responsibility to assess each of his or her systems to determine its relevance for the professional development of subordinate Leaders. …
-
officer Leaders development developing the professional army officer implications for organizational Leaders
Military review, 2003Co-Authors: Craig BullisAbstract:Military Review concludes its series on officership with two articles that provide a theoretical framework for that discussion. Bullis writes that the culture of the military organization to which the officer belongs should encourage officers to be warriors and peacemakers, thinkers and doers. Schwartzman also argues that the military organization plays a central role in officer Leader development by encouraging officers to be life-long learners. ARMY CHIEF of Staff Eric K. Shinseki stated, "We are about Leadership; it is our stock in trade, and it is what makes us different. We take soldiers who enter the force and we grow them into Leaders for the next generation of soldiers. We invest today in the Nation's Leadership for tomorrow."1 Shinseki recognizes that developing Leaders is the core competency of the U.S. Army. Leaders are the most significant element of combat power and are necessary to fight and win the Nation's wars. Developing and conducting Effective Leader development programs is a critical issue for organizational success in the new millennium. Research indicates that Leadership can account for up to 45 percent of the variance in organizational performance outcomes.2 Some believe that Leader development should be focused almost exclusively on developing of technical and tactical expertise-the ability of a Leader to motivate subordinates to engage and destroy the enemy. However, Leadership doctrine portrays Effective Leadership as being much more.3 Army doctrine identifies necessary interpersonal and conceptual skills as well as technical and tactical competencies. Today's Effective Army officer must be warrior and peacemaker, thinker and doer. Leadership doctrine requires a focus not only on short-term results, but also on long-term requirements to improve the organization. The professional commissioned officer embraces four overlapping identities: warfighter, servant to the Nation, member of a profession, and Leader of character. Perspectives on Leader Development The concept of Leader development for a professional Army officer could be approached in several ways. The Army's institutional framework, outlined in Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 350-58, Leader Development for America's Army, presents three pillars that support Leader development: institutional training, operational assignments, and self development. Some scholars have recognized that the Army's commitment to this three-pillar model of Leader development sets a high standard for professional development of the officer corps.4 A second perspective for approaching the concept of Leader development is to concentrate on the individual. In other words, development should focus on how the individual should act to model behaviors desired in a professional military officer. These behaviors, discussed in Army Field Manual (FM) 22-100, Army Leadership, consequently propose a new set of behaviors here would be redundant. These two models of looking at Leadership-the three-pillar model and the Leader as role model-are informative and important. They also provide a solid background for further discussion of officership. By its professional nature, officership is owned by the Army's officers and is passed from generation to generation through the actions of those within the officer profession. The regimen of professional development within the Army has nearly always been formulated and passed from generation to generation by members of the profession itself-officers who recognize and act on the need to maintain a corps of professional officers.5 The senior officer's responsibility is to develop professional subordinate Leaders in organizations. This critical senior-officer responsibility, to develop subordinate officers who understand and personally commit to the tenets of the profession, could be the most important task any officer performs.6 The focus on the professional includes not only what the officer knows or does, but also who the officer is and how he or she embodies all the professional identities in his or her life. …
Brian D Lyons - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is the full range model of Leadership really a full range model of Effective Leader behavior
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 2011Co-Authors: John W Michel, Brian D LyonsAbstract:A field study was conducted to compare the three meta-categories assessed in the Managerial Practices Survey (MPS) with the “full-range” taxonomy assessed in the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). Dyadic and group-level analyses found that subordinate job attitudes and boss-rated managerial Effectiveness were predicted better by the MPS meta-categories than by the MLQ meta-categories. Results also suggested that at least one of the three meta-categories from the MPS was more important in predicting each Effectiveness outcome than any of the meta-categories from the MLQ. Implications germane to Leadership theory and research are further discussed.
Mariana Rodriguezsantiago - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
behavioral traits that define social dominance are the same that reduce social influence in a consensus task
bioRxiv, 2020Co-Authors: Mariana Rodriguezsantiago, Paul Nuehrenberg, James Derry, Oliver Deussen, Fritz Francisco, Linda Karen Garrison, Sylvia Fernanda Garza, Hans A Hofmann, Alex JordanAbstract:In many species, cultures, and contexts, social dominance reflects the ability to exert influence over others, and the question of what makes an Effective Leader is pertinent to a range of disciplines and contexts. While dominant individuals are often assumed to be most influential, the behavioral traits that make them dominant may also make them socially aversive and thereby reduce their influence. Here we examine the influence of dominant and subordinate males on group behavior in different social contexts using the cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni. We find that phenotypically dominant males display behavioral traits that typify Leadership across taxonomic systems - aggressive, social centrality, and movement Leadership, while subordinate males are passive, socially peripheral, and have little influence over movement. However, in a more complex group-consensus task involving visual cue associations, subordinate males become the most Effective agents of social change. We find that dominant males are spatially distant and have lower signal-to-noise ratios of informative behavior in the association task, potentially interfering with their ability to generate group-consensus. In contrast, subordinate males are physically close to other group members, have high signal-to-noise behaviors in the association task, and visual connectivity to other group members equal to that of dominant males. The attributes that define Effective social influence are therefore highly context-specific, with socially and phenotypically dominant males being influential in routine but not complex social scenarios. These results demonstrate that behavioral traits that are typical of socially dominant individuals may actually reduce their social influence in other contexts.
-
socially dominant aggressive males are poor influencers of group consensus in a social fish
bioRxiv, 2019Co-Authors: Mariana Rodriguezsantiago, Paul Nuehrenberg, James Derry, Oliver Deussen, Fritz Francisco, Linda Karen Garrison, Sylvia Fernanda Garza, Hans A Hofmann, Alex JordanAbstract:In many species, cultures, and contexts, social dominance reflects the ability to exert influence over the behavior of others. Yet the behavioral attributes of those in dominant positions, and the behaviors of actually influential individuals may not be the same, and the behavioral attributes that generate influence in one social context may reduce influence in others. The question of what makes an Effective Leader is therefore not straightforward, and has many answers depending on the context in which Leadership and influence is to be manifested. Most importantly, social dominance cannot always be assumed to be equivalent with social influence. Here we examine whether socially dominant males in the cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni are more Effective in exerting social influence than socially subordinate males. Using machine-vision based automated tracking of behavior, we find that dominant males in this species display behavioral traits that typify Leadership across taxonomic systems - they are aggressive, occupy central social network positions, and lead group movements, whereas subordinate males are passive, socially peripheral, and have little influence over typical group movement. However, in a more complex group-consensus task the influence of dominant males breaks down, and subordinate males become more Effective agents of social change. In a more sophisticated group consensus task involving a visual association task, the behavioral attributes that define male dominance - aggression, rapid movement, and increased physical distance to others - interfere with the ability of dominant males to generate group to consensus. Dominant males occupy more spatially distant positions, and had lower signal-to-noise ratio of informative behavior in the association task, while subordinate males are typically is close physical association with their group members, have high signal-to-noise behaviors in the association task, and equal visual connectivity to other group members as dominant males. The attributes that define Effective social influence are therefore highly context-specific in this species. These results demonstrate that in this and many other species including humans, behavioral traits that are typical of socially dominant individuals may be the same that reduce their social influence in other contexts.
Jennifer M George - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Emotions and Leadership: The role of emotional intelligence
Human Relations, 2000Co-Authors: Jennifer M GeorgeAbstract:This paper suggests that feelings (moods and emotions) play a central role in the Leadership process. More specifically, it is proposed that emotional intelligence, the ability to understand and manage moods and emotions in the self and others, contributes to Effective Leader- ship in organizations. Four major aspects of emotional intelligence, the appraisal and expression of emotion, the use of emotion to enhance cognitive processes and decision making, knowledge about emotions, and management of emotions, are described. Then, I propose how emotional intelligence contributes to Effective Leader- ship by focusing on five essential elements of Leader Effectiveness: development of collective goals and objectives; instilling in others an appreciation of the importance of work activities; generating and maintaining enthusiasm, confidence, optimism, cooperation, and trust;encouraging flexibility in decision making and change; and estab- lishing and maintaining a meaningful identity for an organization.