Jubo: Going Over My Results; They Were Kind Of Contradictory

Jubo 1going Over My Results They Were Kind Of Contradictory To Each Ot

JUBO 1 Going over my results they were kind of contradictory to each other. My leadership style says that I am an idealist, but the second quiz says that I am authoritarian. The first result as an idealist is geared more towards the liberal leaning companies. The idealist will work better with millennials due to the flexibility and understanding for employees. The authoritarian will work better with the baby boomers due to the high demand and strict leadership from the top.

Employee commitment in my words is basically how serious an employee takes his/her job and organizational effectiveness is how well a group of people work under the conditions they are given. Leadership style has a direct correlation to both employee commitment and organization effectiveness. Blanken (2013) states that someone who is leading well will possess more than one leadership style. Employees will work better and be more committed to a boss if he/she fits well with their personality. For example, some people like myself hate getting micromanaged and the more I am, the less output they get out of me.

With a lack of work from one employee comes about, comes a less effective organization. An effective organization will be a well oiled machine that comes from a style that fits within that organization. An effective organization will delivery results (Kramer, n.d.) A factory would be more likely to need an authoritarian style leader due to the nature of the work and the expected output of product in a timely manner. An office setting such as where I work needs to have more of an idealist because my work is always changing and sometimes we need flexibility to alter documentation and go about writing different styles depending on the task. The leadership style that is present will determine how well the organization performs.

Morale and goals will be achieved through strong leadership that fits the business environment. BESH 1 Employee commitment is considered to be psychological immersion of an individual with his institute through sense of belonging, ownership of organizational goals and being ready to accept challenges. Creating commitment among employees is important because without this it will become difficult for an organization to achieve strategic goals. Organizational commitment mean the involvement of an employee to perform his work with zeal and excitement. Performance of an organization is directly related to commitment level of employees.

Committed employees will be able to perform their jobs more than management expectations. High level commitment is indispensable for increasing output and obtaining sustainable competitive advantages. Organizational effectiveness is a well thought out developmental plan which is based on improving employees’ well-being and organizational growth. It states that effeteness and growth of organization can be used interchangeably because growth cannot be achieved without effectiveness. Effectiveness has a direct link with growth.

Some argued that organizational effectiveness can be measured through its capacity to survive, adapt and maintain itself as a growing organization. For effectiveness and growth, organization needs to have a long term plan to improve its capacity through the effective use of its workforce. Human resource management theory is established on the assumption that employees and organization coexist mutually through exchange relationship. They are reliant on each other. None of them can function effectively lacking the sustenance of the other party.

Both parties mutually coexist by supporting each other for their efficient functioning. This type of relationship is due to two factors, first is the inducement by the organization and the second is the employee contribution. The employee’s contributions to the organization is based on the employee’s commitment, his performance and participation in all important decisions relating to the work of the organization. Division of HIV and STD Programs SAMPLE BUDGET MODIFICATION JUSTIFICATION Instructions: Budget modifications should assist agencies in modifying their budget structure in an effort to benefit client services. Each line item change must include an explanation of how the proposed changes would improve client services for the above funded service. Please include the dollar amount breakdown as specified below, including the percentage of direct service vs. administrative time that is allocated to each line item. Explain changes in detail for each line item. Note why there is a reduction or increase to each line item. Also explain any additional proposed line items. If there are no changes to a line item, please write: “ No changes to this line item.” Budget modifications must not exceed 10% administrative costs. * Agency: Agency Name Term: March 1, 2012 - February 28, 2013 Contract #: H (Contract number), Schedule #: Service: HIV/AIDS (Service Category) Amount: Amount under this contract PERSONNEL - $80,050 –( This is the total amount of this budget category ) $13,000 Social Worker : (Person, Apple, M.F.T.) ($6,500 x 8 mos. x 25% FTE @ 25% administrative service & 75% direct service) The Clinical Supervisor is responsible for providing clinical supervision to staff and for overall monitoring of the program’s progress. This position is now a staff item, moving from the consultant line in order to build more continuity of care between agency programs. This position is also responsible for the documentation, reporting, and monitoring of the program activities of the program. · Approved line item for this contract year: $ 0 · Modified line item for this contract year: $13,000 $28,050 Medical Care Manager : (People, Bee) ($4,675.00 x 6 mos. x 100% FTE at 100% direct service) The Medical Care Manager is responsible for the implementation of all medical management activities, including patient assessment of needs, referrals and medical follow-up activities. This item is being reduced due to staff vacancy for part of the year. · Approved line item for this contract year: $46,500 · Modified line item for this contract year: $28,050 $39,000 Case Worker : (Everyone, Cee) ($3,250 x 12 mos x 100% FTE at 100% direct service) The Case Worker is responsible for assessment of needs, service plan development, referrals and follow-up activities. The increase in time will help serve those clients better. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS @24% - $19,212 Employee benefits calculated at 24.0% of total salaries. (Enter breakdown to make up the percentage requested) This amount reflects a reduction of $348 due to a reduction in staff time. TRAVEL – $1,600–( This is the total amount of this budget category ) $600 Local Travel : ($.25/mile x 200mi/mo x 12 mos.) For project staff traveling between participating agency locations, client home visits, and program meetings. The increase of $500 to this line item is to cover actual costs of staff travel. Previously, there was not enough money allocated to this line item to cover actual costs of local mileage (50% direct service and 50% administrative). · Approved line item for this contract year: $100 · Modified line item for this contract year: $600 $1,000 Out-of-Town Travel : ($500 R/T airfare x 1 staff; $150 x 3 nights lodging; $50 meals) For one case manager’s attendance at the HIV/AIDS Social Work Conference. These expenses include round trip coach air travel, lodging, and meals. This line item represents a reduction in the original total of $1,500 due to agency’s airfare discount rate (50% direct service and 50% administrative). · Approved budget for this contract year: $1,500 · Modified budget for this contract year: $1,000 EQUIPMENT – $0–( This is the total amount of this budget category ) SUPPLIES – $1,296–( This is the total amount of this budget category ) $1,296 Program Supplies : (calculated at a rate of $12.96 per client for 100 clients) Includes cost of program office supplies allocated to this program in order to provide client services such as, pencils, pens, paper, client files, stationary, envelopes, and fax paper (50% direct service and 50% administrative) . (No change to this line item.) OTHER – $25,973–( This is the total amount of this budget category ) $1,104 Printing/Duplication : (Total agency cost is $23,250. Cost allocated to this program is 4.75%. $23,250 x 4.75% = $1,104). Covers the cost of duplication and printing needs of the ( name service category ). This includes forms for clients, client record documentation, printing of correspondence and other photocopying needs. (100% direct service) No changes to this line item. $396 Postage : (Total agency cost is $8,340 Cost allocated to this program is 4.75%) Covers cost of program correspondence with clients and other social service providers. (100% direct service). No changes to this line item. $396 Staff Training : ($396.00 x 1 conference) Includes conference registration fees for the social worker to attend the HIV/AIDS Social Work Conference to enhance program skills and knowledge. ( 100% administrative ). $713 Telephone : (Total agency cost is $15,000 x 4.75% = $713. Cost allocated to this program is 4.75%) For program telephone service to contact clients. (100% direct service). $23,400 Facility Rent : ($2.00/sq.ft. x 975 sq. ft. x 12 mos.; 100% direct service). Program occupies 100% of the direct service space for client services at service delivery site address. The original allocation was not enough to cover actual costs for space utilized by program staff. Amount is increased but, in keeping within the limits of the award, request does not cover full actual costs of program rent costs. · Approved line item for this contract year: $14,050 · Modified line item for this contract year: $23,400

Paper For Above instruction

Contradictions and nuances in leadership styles often influence organizational culture, employee commitment, and overall effectiveness. Analyzing the conflicting results of being an idealist versus an authoritarian reveals the complexity of leadership—highlighting context-dependent effectiveness and their respective impacts on organizational dynamics and employee morale.

Leadership style is fundamental to shaping workplace atmosphere, guiding employee behaviors, and ultimately determining organizational success. An idealist leadership style is characterized by flexibility, openness, and a democratic approach that fosters innovation and collaboration. Such style aligns well with younger generations like millennials, who tend to value autonomy and meaningful work. These leaders emphasize participative decision-making, encouraging employees to contribute ideas and take ownership of their tasks. Studies suggest that organizations led by idealists tend to have higher levels of employee satisfaction and commitment, driven by a sense of purpose and shared vision (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Northouse, 2018). Conversely, authoritarian leadership emphasizes control, strict discipline, and top-down decision-making, which may be more effective in high-pressure, routine, or risk-averse environments like manufacturing facilities where consistent output is crucial (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939).

The apparent contradiction between being an idealist and an authoritarian underscores that leadership efficacy is often context-sensitive. For example, a flexible, democratic approach might enhance motivation and creativity within an office environment where adaptability is needed daily. In contrast, a more authoritarian style could be necessary in settings demanding swift, decisive action, such as crisis management or large-scale production. Leaders often adopt a situational approach, utilizing different styles based on organizational needs, employee characteristics, or external pressures (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). The capacity to switch between these styles reflects the versatility required for effective leadership, especially in diverse or evolving work environments.

Employee commitment is a critical factor influencing organizational effectiveness, defined as the psychological attachment and sense of ownership employees feel towards their organization. Committed employees tend to perform beyond expectations and contribute significantly to organizational goals (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Leadership style directly impacts this commitment; supportive, participative leaders foster higher engagement, whereas overly controlling leaders may breed dissatisfaction and turnover (Kahn, 1992). Moreover, organizational effectiveness, often measured by the capacity to adapt, survive, and grow, depends on fostering strong employee commitment (Kaplan & Norton, 1992). Practices that enhance commitment include transparent communication, recognition, empowerment, and alignment of personal and organizational goals.

The relationship between leadership style, employee commitment, and organizational effectiveness is further elucidated through human resource management theories. The mutual reliance between employees and organizations forms the basis of social exchange theory, highlighting that positive reciprocation from management encourages higher employee effort and loyalty (Blau, 1964). Effective leadership, therefore, entails not only strategic vision but also an understanding of individual motivations and needs. Supporting this, research indicates that transformational leadership, which combines inspirational motivation with intellectual stimulation, results in higher levels of employee commitment and organizational performance (Bass, 1985; Avolio & Bass, 1991).

Organizational effectiveness hinges on long-term strategic planning aimed at cultivating a healthy workplace culture and operating in dynamic environments. Effective organizations adapt through continuous improvement, employee development, and aligning organizational goals with employee motivations. This requires leaders to be flexible, employing different leadership styles tailored to specific situations while maintaining overarching strategic objectives. The capacity to balance authoritarian discipline with idealist flexibility can generate high morale, effective teamwork, and goal attainment (Yukl, 2010). The success of such a balance ultimately demonstrates that effective leadership must be fluid, context-aware, and rooted in fostering genuine employee engagement.

References

• Abbasi, M., & Albrecht, S. (2015). Transformational leadership and employee engagement: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Management & Organization, 21(2), 133–152.
• Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (1991). The Full Range of Leadership Development: Basic and Advanced Manuals. Binghamton, NY: Bass, B.M. & Associates.
• Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press.
• Bass, B., & Avolio, B. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Prentice-Hall.
• Kahn, W. A. (1992). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review.
• Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in children. Journal of Social Psychology.
• Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations (7th ed.). Pearson.