diversity paradigms

Thoughts about the diversity paradigms…I thought the case studies were very interesting (too bad they changed the names). The thought I had regarding the first paradigm was the disconnect that occurs between what we think we want and what we really want. I got the feeling that from the example given that they wanted diversity (probably becuase it is politically correct to want it), but the firm didn’t really want to change. Interesting.

With the access and legitimacy paradigm my comment in the margin was…”mirroring the environment”. Mirroring is a term used in psychology and seems to fit here, that firms want to mirror the consumers they serve, which makes sense. It works one on one to gain trust and get information, why wouldn't it work for groups.

But I still have the feeling that seeking to increase diversity is discriminating, because it buys into stereotypes regarding groups. Yes, I am a female, but I don’t think I typify all females any more than my Latin relatives in Miami are typical Hispanics. Who, after all, is really a typical anything? Even the learning and effectiveness paradigm uses the stereotypes and capitalizes on them by knowing that we tend to group ourselves. Won’t it be an interesting world when we just see people and not demographic categories?

Research Topic

Although my last paper was on men entering traditionally female occupations such as education and nursing, that isn't necessarily my true research interest. I just thought it was an interesting spin on gender issues that we all encounter in the workplace. I suppose it kind of gets under my skin that men rise to the top of nursing and education.

My true interest however is examining the multiple pathways into nursing, specifically examining traditional versus second-degree nursing students. Traditional nsg. students are those that go to college right out of high school and major in nursing. They may also include change of major students, but for they most part they are your typical college student today. The other group is the second-degree nsg student. These are nsg students that have a bachelors degree in another field and are returning to college to pursuit a career in nursing. It is speculated that second-degree studnets are different from traditional students and I would like to see if they are. Areas of comparison would include demographics, support systems, learning styles, academeic success (prior, during, and at completion of program of study), licensure (NCLEX) pass rates, and nsg unit entry level upon gtraduation (peds, OB, psych, med-surg, ICU, etc).

Any insight you could all lend me would be appreciated. Have you encountered second-degree students in your professional areas?

I enjoyed having no specific topic to address this week, what a nice break. But we've been a critical friend instead.

My personal reflections on leadership this week are few, but I am seeing where a lack of action, or lack of information shared on the part of leadership can be damaging. I am the type of follower that believes that things are happening that I am not made aware of immediately. I have worked with many over the years that perceive the lack of knowing as a sign that nothing is happening about a situation. I therefore think it is important for leaders to act as information conduits. Lack of information lets imaginations run wild and allows rumors to start.

That's all for now...more student advising to do! Yippee!

My reflections on the 8 symbolic roles

1. Historian: values the "knowing" of a place. As a relatively new faculty member I find myself listening carefully as the history behind processes and programs reveals themselves. As the workforce becomes more transient I think the individuals with history will take on a new role for leaders. Transient workforces might create a less imprinted history and possibly make change less problematic than it is for organizations with deeply engrained historical roots.
2. Anthropological sleuth: uncovers the norms and values of the organization's culture. Getting to know the way they do things. This ties into the historian role I think.
3. Visionary: works with others to develop a meaningful and constantly evolving vision. I think this speaks to earlier discussions we have had about leaders staying in touch with their folllowship and keeping the values of the organization at the forefront. Always working towards making the organization better, not seeking personal glory.
4. Symbol: I see this as modeling the behavior you want to see in others. I do it with my nursing students. The leader's behavior and image must be congruent with the organization.
5. Potter: I see this as developing new symbols through traditions, rituals, etc. Often it is new blood who can creatively infuse new traditions. For example it was the new facutly members at the School of Nursing who successfully got a White Coat Ceremony started for new nursing students. I suspect that over the coming years this will develop into something very important to students and faculty alike.
6. Poet: uses language to reinforce image. I believe that successful and motivating leaders must be articulate and moving speakers. Their actions and words must also be congruent!
7. Actor: improvise in the never ending organization dramas. How true! Where there are people, there will be drama. A leader has to be able to navigate through it and not get caught up in it.
8. Healer: oversees and helps the organization through transitions and change. Conflict resolution is a must in this area. I personally think it is mandatory that leaders face and eliminate toxic followers...I have seen good people move on because troublemakers were not dealt with. What a loss.

Well that is my two cents...I do beleive that these qualities can create positive and transforming work environments that are productive.

Coaching style

Try this style. This seems like the blend I was referring to earlier of affirmative and democratic. A coaching leader would value input from others, and wish to have a harmonious environment in order to bring out the best in others. Situational Leadership Theory also discusses the advantages of a coaching leader, but states that it works best with a capable followership.

Pacesetting style

Setting high standards of performance. I was surprised that this was viewed as negative, because I feel I set high stnadards, but I primarily set them for myself and not as much for others. I try to model high performance to get high performance in return, which I think Dr. K was getting at during class tonight as some point in the discussion.

I suppose the negative aspect of this style is referring to the micro-manager. I actually work with someone like this and we get along really well, but I can see why others would not like working with her. She is a perfectionist and oversees things very tightly, and is hyper-critical of everyone who does not perform to her expectations. I think we get along because we compliment each other...she is extremely well organized (me, not so much) but I am very creative and can see multiple ways of doing things (something she values highly). I think if I were as concrete as she is, we would not work well together at all.

Democratic style

What do you think style. Highly interactive, and probably most likely to bring about support and change if the leader gets the majority to "buy into" a change. The potential downside I see is inertia due to too many opinions (a case of too many indians and no chief). In the end the leader must make decisions, and not everyone will agree that they are the best. I think democratic leaders might be viewed as weak leaders...seen as relying on others too much. This being said, I am probably a mix between the democratic and affirmative leader. I truely value input from others because I know I don't have all the answers. I also really value interpersonal harmony and do not choose to hang around disaggreeable types.