Exemplary Leadership (Leadership Challenge)

This widely-applicable theory, created by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner, began as a qualitative study in which middle and senior-level managers were asked to tell their “personal best” stories of leading. These results were collected and the tool developed to measure participants’ responses was the Leadership Practices Inventory. This model is based on the research results which identified that most leaders, and the people they lead, want “leadership that exemplifies honesty, credibility, and vision as well as inspires trust and willingness in others.” The Leadership Challenge identifies five common practices of the most successful leaders.

Model the Way – This practice focuses on leading by example and identifying what you believe in; these two should be in line with one another.
Inspire a Shared Vision – Kouzes and Posner believe that the ability to forward-look and envision the future distinguishes leaders from the rest. If the leader can clearly see the vision for the future, they can inspire everyone in the organization to rally and create the desired change to achieve their goals.
Challenge the Process – This practice is about looking for new opportunities and taking risks. If you can search for innovative opportunities and celebrate successes, while at the same time taking risks and learning from failure, you can be a more effective leader. This also highlights the practice of looking for ways to improve yourself and the organization members.
Enable Others to Act – The center of this practice is that through a foundation of respect for one another and by making members feel more capable, you can enable members to feel inspired, capable, and armed with the necessary tools to take the action.
Encourage the Heart – This practice is a result of research that suggests high-performing leaders are more open, honest, and demonstrate their passion. Through the recognition of members’ contributions and celebrating what everyone brings to the group, you can achieve amazing results.

I believe there are several great aspects of this model. Similar to relational leadership theory, this has a strong emphasis on empowerment, group collaboration (shared vision) and building relationships to cultivate group synergy for change. However, this model doesn’t address potential conflict during any stage. In addition, although this is a model of leadership that experienced leaders could adopt with practice and dedication to each one of the five common practices, teaching this model to students would be time consuming. The practice and commitment it takes – reminding yourself during every interaction to apply an exemplary practice, is possible, but seemingly difficult. Students may find this approach simple to execute within smaller organizations, but with a larger organization, the ability to connect one-on-one with each team member and consistently empower and reward/celebrate with them is unlikely. Although less related to the theory and its practical use by students, it should be noted that teaching this to college students is simplified due to the number of resources and new products developed by Kouzes and Posner. There are accompanying Student Leadership Workbooks and tools geared toward college student leadership development to support a variety of teaching methods and experiential learning opportunities.

6 responses to “Exemplary Leadership (Leadership Challenge)”

You noted that “…this model doesn’t address potential conflict during any stage.” How do you imagine that conflict resolution would come about or be facilitated using the model? Are there any articles which address this issue which you have come across?

Megan Lucsko March 20, 2014 at 1:56 pm · · Reply →

This personally is one of my favorite leadership models for college students. I think the values in this leadership theory can be applied in nearly any situations or setting. If a leader appropriately empowers their organization to effectively challenge the process but also enable others to act, the leader is sharing their “power” with other members to allow them to recognize what isn’t working and make changes to address those issues. Also, by incorporating a shared vision, the organization should have similar lingo, similar mindset, and similar understanding of the long term goals of the organization. Members should trust each other enough to address a conflict when it arises. It is my opinion that not just the leaders but the followers should implement these practices in their every day actions within the organization. By doing so, the organization will develop a strong enough relationship with each other based on trust, respect, and accountability. This will help the organization succeed in the long run.
jonesrk March 20, 2014 at 3:20 pm · · Reply →

I have not come across any articles that specifically address how conflict is best handled with this model. There are a number of conflict resolution models that an individual could apply to complement their chosen leadership theory/model, but are still external to the model itself. Equally important to “resolving” conflict, the model could address embracing conflict and/or how conflict can be used as an opportunity for positive change.

I think this is a good model. I like the leading by example, especially, because you not only have to talk the talk, but also, walk the walk! The five common practices are such, because they appear to work. I like those also. It may be that good leaders may not have or do all of the 5, but all five may not be needed and vary from time to time, or situation. Even if the model does not address conflict, it still adds a lot of positivity and substance to leadership and related. It may be time consuming,and difficult to practice initially, but that may reverse as time and experience with the model increases. I agree, that the model may work better with smaller organizations, but can see it working in others too. Leading by example has a special appeal, and is exemplary in itself. It should work hand in hand with the relational model. Students and all of us would be better off by leading with honesty, credibility, and vision, and inspire trust and willingness.

I don’t know if it is too strong a word to use, but I think I love this model. 🙂 I also believe that I’ve tried to live this model. I feel very strongly that each practice is important when leading and I believe that even though it may be challenging, there are ways to use this with larger groups. It takes implementing those 5 common practices with your officers, chairs, or people who work closely with the leadership, and then having those individuals implement those common practices with committee or team members and so on and so forth. It has to be a trickle down effect so that everyone feels engaged, valued, and aware of what the expectations are because not only does the president model the expectations, but the vp and chair does as well. Again, this may be challenging, but it requires hiring or electing people who share the same vision and beliefs regarding the type of leadership being asked of them to display. This is how this plays out in my head anyways…:)

Food for thought…
Todd wondered if I saw the “Challenge the Process” phase as one in which conflict would/could be addressed within the model. Because of my preference for a social change model of leadership development, I made an effort not to equate the “Challenge the Process” and SCM’s “Controversy with Civility” as one in the same. My interpretation of the “Challenge the Process” is framed more closely to Heifetz’s use of distress, threshold for change, and zone of disequilibrium from Adaptive Leadership theory. Challenging the process would be similar to adding distress to the group – challenging the group to make a change, take a risk, try something new, to get into the threshold for change. Challenging the group to take risks for growth, to me, does not indicate conflict. With this model, specifically for use with leadership development for college students, I think the explicit discussion about controversy/conflict should be emphasized.

tlucas7 March 9, 2014 at 4:15 pm · · Reply →

You noted that “…this model doesn’t address potential conflict during any stage.” How do you imagine that conflict resolution would come about or be facilitated using the model? Are there any articles which address this issue which you have come across?
- Megan Lucsko March 20, 2014 at 1:56 pm · · Reply →
  
  This personally is one of my favorite leadership models for college students. I think the values in this leadership theory can be applied in nearly any situations or setting. If a leader appropriately empowers their organization to effectively challenge the process but also enable others to act, the leader is sharing their “power” with other members to allow them to recognize what isn’t working and make changes to address those issues. Also, by incorporating a shared vision, the organization should have similar lingo, similar mindset, and similar understanding of the long term goals of the organization. Members should trust each other enough to address a conflict when it arises. It is my opinion that not just the leaders but the followers should implement these practices in their every day actions within the organization. By doing so, the organization will develop a strong enough relationship with each other based on trust, respect, and accountability. This will help the organization succeed in the long run.
- jonesrk March 20, 2014 at 3:20 pm · · Reply →
  
  I have not come across any articles that specifically address how conflict is best handled with this model. There are a number of conflict resolution models that an individual could apply to complement their chosen leadership theory/model, but are still external to the model itself. Equally important to “resolving” conflict, the model could address embracing conflict and/or how conflict can be used as an opportunity for positive change.
jbuck122014 March 17, 2014 at 1:28 pm · · Reply →

I think this is a good model. I like the leading by example, especially, because you not only have to talk the talk, but also, walk the walk! The five common practices are such, because they appear to work. I like those also. It may be that good leaders may not have or do all of the 5, but all five may not be needed and vary from time to time, or situation. Even if the model does not address conflict, it still adds a lot of positivity and substance to leadership and related. It may be time consuming,and difficult to practice initially, but that may reverse as time and experience with the model increases. I agree, that the model may work better with smaller organizations, but can see it working in others too. Leading by example has a special appeal, and is exemplary in itself. It should work hand in hand with the relational model. Students and all of us would be better off by leading with honesty, credibility, and vision, and inspire trust and willingness.
l22parker March 20, 2014 at 1:55 pm · · Reply →

I don’t know if it is too strong a word to use, but I think I love this model. 🙂 I also believe that I’ve tried to live this model. I feel very strongly that each practice is important when leading and I believe that even though it may be challenging, there are ways to use this with larger groups. It takes implementing those 5 common practices with your officers, chairs, or people who work closely with the leadership, and then having those individuals implement those common practices with committee or team members and so on and so forth. It has to be a trickle down effect so that everyone feels engaged, valued, and aware of what the expectations are because not only does the president model the expectations, but the vp and chair does as well. Again, this may be challenging, but it requires hiring or electing people who share the same vision and beliefs regarding the type of leadership being asked of them to display. This is how this plays out in my head anyways…:)
jonesrk March 20, 2014 at 4:20 pm · · Reply →

Food for thought…
Todd wondered if I saw the “Challenge the Process” phase as one in which conflict would/could be addressed within the model. Because of my preference for a social change model of leadership development, I made an effort not to equate the “Challenge the Process” and SCM’s “Controversy with Civility” as one in the same. My interpretation of the “Challenge the Process” is framed more closely to Heifetz’s use of distress, threshold for change, and zone of disequilibrium from Adaptive Leadership theory. Challenging the process would be similar to adding distress to the group – challenging the group to make a change, take a risk, try something new, to get into the threshold for change. Challenging the group to take risks for growth, to me, does not indicate conflict. With this model, specifically for use with leadership development for college students, I think the explicit discussion about controversy/conflict should be emphasized.