The Case of Effective Leadership

Our interesting class discussion about this case has left me even more intrigued about Joanne Stevens’ action.  Specifically, what can she do now to correct the outcome of the group’s decision?  I said in class, she should not admit to her mistake of giving the group authority to develop their own standards, she should instead turn it around by saying it was a test.  I thought to myself, as Iris suggested, this may come as an insult to the group and indeed create some serious implications.  Maybe instead she should clarify what her expectation of the group is.  She clearly explained to them that the case load standards established several years previously were too low.  Instead of asking the group to establish their own standards, what she truly wanted, was for them to establish a way to increase the standards.  A mistake was clearly made in her directions. 

In “Speeding up Team Learning”, by Edmond, Bohner, and Pisano, creating an environment that encourages team learning requires the leader to serve as a “fallibility model” in other words, a leader should admit their mistake to the group to encourage discussion of concerns and errors without fear of punishment.  Clearly, this case was not set in a learning environment, so admitting to a mistake is not conducive.  The participative style is more appropriate in a learning environment or an environment with the leader present, not absent.  So I stick with my initial thought, she should turn it around by saying it was a test, the ultimate decision resides with her since the group is not thinking along her lines.