This is a log of my work in an online graduate criminal justice program. My program focused on homeland security, while the courses themselves had a focus on organizational concerns. There are my papers, discussions, notes, and references. There are additional posts on the conferences and seminars I have attended. Finally, there are some essays I have written re: criminal justice and homeland security.
Homeland Security: The Sworn Duty of Public Officials The United States has a unique position amongst the countries of the world;...
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Transition of Leadership Styles in Bay Harbor
2 Assignment 4 Transition of Leadership Styles in Bay Harbor
leadership style of a criminal justice leader, such as a police
chief, may have some bearing on the effectiveness of that
the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory be used to describe the
relationship that Murray and Johnson shared with their subordinates?
Why or why not?
the term “favorites” was used in the description of Murray's
relationship with some officers, the benefits that those officers
received was not greater then the other officers in the department.
If one looks at the difference between the treatment between the
“favorites” and the non-“favorites” on a transactional basis,
then LMX theory can't be used. LMX theory is predicated on a “mutual
reciprocation of rewards within the relationship” (Barbuto Jr &
Gifford, 2012, p.19). Since the rewards that both set of officers
received was the same, there is no basis to consider this as a LMX
situation. On the other hand, if one discounts the notion of
“favorite” officers, one could see the application LMX theory as
Johnson “traded” professional latitude for personal loyalty and
team commitment in regards to the entire department
a similar analysis, LMX theory cannot be used to describe Johnson's
relationship with the department. All officers are subject to
Johnson's directive style of leadership, and there is no description
of rewards flowing in either direction, much less of a mutual
exchange. If one were to describe Johnson's style in terms of LMX
theory, it would have to be described as “low-exchange”, at best.
Johnson's style differ from participative leadership? If yes, why? If
no, what level of participative leadership does he appear to use?
uses a directive style of leadership with no appearance of
participative leadership. Instead of giving officers “influence
over decisions that will affect them” (Yukl, 2012, p. 52), a major
component of participative leadership, Johnson is described as making
all decisions except those that officers have to make in emergencies.
are the potential benefits and pitfalls of hiring someone with Chief
Johnson's style for the position at Bay Harbor? Why?
prime benefit of Johnson's leadership style, which may also be
described as directive or authoritarian, is that there is one point
of responsibility. If there is an issue with the way a program or
policy is handled, the city can turn directly to Johnson for
corrective action. The second benefit is that decisions can be made
quickly; Johnson does not need to get feedback from clients or
officers, he does not need to wait on a committee to research an
issue, he does not need approval from a second level of command.
are two major problems with this style; the first is that it has the
potential for alienating employees, as some of the members of the
committee noted. The potential is that some employees may lose trust
in Johnson's leadership if they find it to be abusive; “If abusive
supervision takes place frequently or lasts for a long time, it
invariably causes employees’ antipathy and then brings about
subordinates’ distrust.” (Xiaqi, Kun, Chongsen, & Sufang,
2012, p. 260) The second is that in areas in which Johnson is
lacking expertise, he is likely to make mistakes in his
do Murray and Johnson use the normative decision model according to
their styles of leadership? What are the differences in their
approaches in adopting this model?
used the consult(individual) model and encouraged informal
communications. Johnson uses the decide model. It appears from the
description that neither chief varied from their chosen model
depending on the situation, in other words, that they continued to
use that model of decision-making in all situations.
could be reasons for Chief Johnson's lack of delegation? What
approach should he use to delegate and empower officers at Bay
is likely that Johnson chooses a directive leadership policy based on
his personality and experience. It is also possible that Johnson
chooses to use this model to deflect responsibility for officer
actions which are undertaken outside the sphere of Johnson's sphere
participative leadership more effective depending on the size of the
department? Why? How does Murray's delegation and empowerment of his
subordinates benefit a police department?
is not the size of the organization that affects the effectiveness of
the participative leadership model as much as it is the competence of
the people doing the job. Participative leadership requires
participants that can make effective decisions, even if that decision
is to call in a supervisor to make the call. The prime example of a
benefit that the Bay Harbor PD received from the effective use of
this model was the high level of employee satisfaction. In addition,
the department enjoyed the respect and trust of the citizenry.
principles of dyadic relationships should Johnson use for correcting
performance deficiencies at Bay Harbor? Why?
Johnson wishes to be an effective leader, he should use the following
guidelines that Yukl describes: gather
information about the performance problem; try to avoid attribution
biases; describe the deficiency briefly in specific terms; explain
the adverse impact of ineffective behavior; stay calm and
professional; mutually identify the reasons for inadequate
performance; ask the person to suggest remedies; express confidence
that the person can improve; express a sincere desire to help the
person; reach agreement on specific action steps; summarize the
discussion and verify agreement. Yukl explains that “Effective
managers take a supportive, problem-solving approach when dealing
with inappropriate behavior or deficient performance by a
subordinate.” (2012, p.28)
Jr, J. E., & Gifford, G. T. (2012). Motivation and leader-member
exchange: Evidence counter to similarity attraction theory.
Journal of Leadership Studies. 7(2).
Retrieved November 10, 2014 from
G. A. (2012). Leadership in Organizations, 8th Edition. [VitalSource
Bookshelf version]. Retrieved November 16, 2014 from
D., Kun, T., Chongsen, Y., & Sufang, G. (2012). Abusive
supervision and LMX. Chinese