Leadership That Gets Results
www.hbr.orgNew research suggests that themost effective executives use acollection of distinctleadership styles—each in theright measure, at just the righttime. Such flexibility is toughto put into action, but it paysoff in performance. Andbetter yet, it can be learned.Leadership That GetsResultsby Daniel GolemanIncluded with this full-text Harvard Business Review article:1 Article SummaryThe Idea in Brief—the core ideaThe Idea in Practice—putting the idea to work2 Leadership That Gets Results15 Further ReadingA list of related materials, with annotations to guide furtherexploration of the article’s ideas and applicationsReprint R00204
Leadership That Gets ResultsThe Idea in BriefThe Idea in PracticeMany managers mistakenly assume thatleadership style is a function of personalityrather than strategic choice. Instead ofchoosing the one style that suits theirtemperament, they should ask which stylebest addresses the demands of a particularsituation.Managers often fail to appreciate how profoundly the organizational climate can influence financial results. It can account for nearly a third of financial performance. Organizational climate,in turn, is influenced by leadership style—by the way that managers motivate direct reports,gather and use information, make decisions, manage change initiatives, and handle crises. Thereare six basic leadership styles. Each derives from different emotional intelligence competencies,works best in particular situations, and affects the organizational climate in different ways.COPYRIGHT 2000 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.Research has shown that the most successful leaders have strengths in the followingemotional intelligence competencies: selfawareness, self-regulation, motivation,empathy, and social skill. There are six basicstyles of leadership; each makes use of thekey components of emotional intelligencein different combinations. The best leadersdon’t know just one style of leadership—they’re skilled at several, and have the flexibility to switch between styles as the circumstances dictate.1. The coercive style. This “Do what I say” approach can be very effective in a turnaroundsituation, a natural disaster, or when workingwith problem employees. But in most situations, coercive leadership inhibits the organization’s flexibility and dampens employees’motivation.2. The authoritative style. An authoritativeleader takes a “Come with me” approach: shestates the overall goal but gives people thefreedom to choose their own means ofachieving it. This style works especially wellwhen a business is adrift. It is less effectivewhen the leader is working with a team of experts who are more experienced than he is.3. The affiliative style. The hallmark of the affiliative leader is a “People come first” attitude.This style is particularly useful for buildingteam harmony or increasing morale. But itsexclusive focus on praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected. Also, affiliativeleaders rarely offer advice, which often leavesemployees in a quandary.5. The pacesetting style. A leader who setshigh performance standards and exemplifiesthem himself has a very positive impact onemployees who are self-motivated and highlycompetent. But other employees tend to feeloverwhelmed by such a leader’s demands forexcellence—and to resent his tendency totake over a situation.6. The coaching style. This style focusesmore on personal development than on immediate work-related tasks. It works wellwhen employees are already aware of theirweaknesses and want to improve, but notwhen they are resistant to changing theirways.The more styles a leader has mastered, thebetter. In particular, being able to switchamong the authoritative, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles as conditions dictate creates the best organizational climateand optimizes business performance.4. The democratic style. This style’s impacton organizational climate is not as high as youmight imagine. By giving workers a voice indecisions, democratic leaders build organizational flexibility and responsibility and helpgenerate fresh ideas. But sometimes the priceis endless meetings and confused employeeswho feel leaderless.page 1
New research suggests that the most effective executives use a collectionof distinct leadership styles—each in the right measure, at just the righttime. Such flexibility is tough to put into action, but it pays off inperformance. And better yet, it can be learned.Leadership That GetsResultsCOPYRIGHT 2000 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.by Daniel GolemanAsk any group of businesspeople the question“What do effective leaders do?” and you’llhear a sweep of answers. Leaders set strategy;they motivate; they create a mission; theybuild a culture. Then ask “What should leadersdo?” If the group is seasoned, you’ll likely hearone response: the leader’s singular job is toget results.But how? The mystery of what leaders canand ought to do in order to spark the best performance from their people is age-old. In recent years, that mystery has spawned an entirecottage industry: literally thousands of “leadership experts” have made careers of testing andcoaching executives, all in pursuit of creatingbusinesspeople who can turn bold objectives—be they strategic, financial, organizational, orall three—into reality.Still, effective leadership eludes many people and organizations. One reason is that untilrecently, virtually no quantitative researchhas demonstrated which precise leadershipbehaviors yield positive results. Leadershipexperts proffer advice based on inference, ex-harvard business review march–april 2000perience, and instinct. Sometimes that adviceis which precise leadership behaviors yieldpositive results. Leadership experts proffer advice based on inference, experience, and instinct. Sometimes that advice is right on target; sometimes it’s not.But new research by the consulting firmHay/McBer, which draws on a random sampleof 3,871 executives selected from a database ofmore than 20,000 executives worldwide,takes much of the mystery out of effectiveleadership. The research found six distinctleadership styles, each springing from different components of emotional intelligence.The styles, taken individually, appear to havea direct and unique impact on the working atmosphere of a company, division, or team,and in turn, on its financial performance. Andperhaps most important, the research indicates that leaders with the best results do notrely on only one leadership style; they usemost of them in a given week—seamlesslyand in different measure—depending on thebusiness situation. Imagine the styles, then, aspage 2
Leadership That Gets Resultsthe array of clubs in a golf pro’s bag. Over thecourse of a game, the pro picks and choosesclubs based on the demands of the shot.Sometimes he has to ponder his selection, butusually it is automatic. The pro senses thechallenge ahead, swiftly pulls out the righttool, and elegantly puts it to work. That’s howhigh-impact leaders operate, too.What are the six styles of leadership? Nonewill shock workplace veterans. Indeed, eachstyle, by name and brief description alone,will likely resonate with anyone who leads, isled, or as is the case with most of us, doesboth. Coercive leaders demand immediatecompliance. Authoritative leaders mobilizepeople toward a vision. Affiliative leaders create emotional bonds and harmony. Democratic leaders build consensus through participation. Pacesetting leaders expect excellenceand self-direction. And coaching leaders developpeople for the future.Close your eyes and you can surely imaginea colleague who uses any one of these styles.You most likely use at least one yourself. Whatis new in this research, then, is its implicationsfor action. First, it offers a fine-grained understanding of how different leadership styles affect performance and results. Second, it offersclear guidance on when a manager shouldswitch between them. It also strongly suggeststhat switching flexibly is well advised. New,too, is the research’s finding that each leadership style springs from different componentsof emotional intelligence.Measuring Leadership’s ImpactDaniel Goleman is the author ofEmotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1995)and Working with Emotional Intelligence(Bantam, 1998). He is cochairman ofthe Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations,which is based at Rutgers University’sGraduate School of Applied Psychology in Piscataway, New Jersey. His article“What Makes a Leader?” appeared inthe November–December 1998 issue ofHBR. He can be reached at goleman@javanet.com.It has been more than a decade since researchfirst linked aspects of emotional intelligenceto business results. The late David McClelland,a noted Harvard University psychologist,found that leaders with strengths in a criticalmass of six or more emotional intelligencecompetencies were far more effective thanpeers who lacked such strengths. For instance,when he analyzed the performance of divisionheads at a global food and beverage company,he found that among leaders with this criticalmass of competence, 87% placed in the topthird for annual salary bonuses based on theirbusiness performance. More telling, their divisions on average outperformed yearly revenuetargets by 15% to 20%. Those executives wholacked emotional intelligence were rarelyrated as outstanding in their annual perfor-harvard business review march–april 2000mance reviews, and their divisions underperformed by an average of almost 20%.Our research set out to gain a more molecular view of the links among leadership andemotional intelligence, and climate and performance. A team of McClelland’s colleaguesheaded by Mary Fontaine and Ruth Jacobsfrom Hay/McBer studied data about or observed thousands of executives, noting specific behaviors and their impact on climate.1How did each individual motivate direct reports? Manage change initiatives? Handle crises? It was in a later phase of the researchthat we identified which emotional intelligence capabilities drive the six leadershipstyles. How does he rate in terms of selfcontrol and social skill? Does a leader showhigh or low levels of empathy?The team tested each executive’s immediatesphere of influence for its climate. “Climate” isnot an amorphous term. First defined by psychologists George Litwin and Richard Stringerand later refined by McClelland and his colleagues, it refers to six key factors that influence an organization’s working environment:its flexibility—that is, how free employees feelto innovate unencumbered by red tape; theirsense of responsibility to the organization; thelevel of standards that people set; the sense ofaccuracy about performance feedback and aptness of rewards; the clarity people have aboutmission and values; and finally, the level ofcommitment to a common purpose.We found that all six leadership styles have ameasurable effect on each aspect of climate.(For details, see the exhibit “Getting Molecular:The Impact of Leadership Styles on Drivers ofClimate.”) Further, when we looked at the impact of climate on financial results—such as return on sales, revenue growth, efficiency, andprofitability—we found a direct correlation between the two. Leaders who used styles thatpositively affected the climate had decidedlybetter financial results than those who did not.That is not to say that organizational climate isthe only driver of performance. Economic conditions and competitive dynamics matter enormously. But our analysis strongly suggests thatclimate accounts for nearly a third of results.And that’s simply too much of an impact to ignore.The Styles in DetailExecutives use six leadership styles, but onlypage 3
Leadership That Gets Resultsfour of the six consistently have a positive effect on climate and results. Let’s look then ateach style of leadership in detail. (For a summary of the material that follows, see thechart “The Six Leadership Styles at a Glance.”)The Coercive Style. The computer companywas in crisis mode—its sales and profits werefalling, its stock was losing value precipitously,and its shareholders were in an uproar. Theboard brought in a new CEO with a reputationas a turnaround artist. He set to work chopping jobs, selling off divisions, and making thetough decisions that should have been executed years before. The company was saved, atleast in the short-term.From the start, though, the CEO created areign of terror, bullying and demeaning his executives, roaring his displeasure at the slightestmisstep. The company’s top echelons were decimated not just by his erratic firings but also bydefections. The CEO’s direct reports, frightened by his tendency to blame the bearer ofbad news, stopped bringing him any news atall. Morale was at an all-time low—a fact reflected in another downturn in the businessafter the short-term recovery. The CEO waseventually fired by the board of directors.It’s easy to understand why of all the leadership styles, the coercive one is the least effective in most situations. Consider what thestyle does to an organization’s climate. Flexibility is the hardest hit. The leader’s extremetop-down decision making kills new ideas onthe vine. People feel so disrespected that theythink, “I won’t even bring my ideas up—they’ll only be shot down.” Likewise, people’ssense of responsibility evaporates: unable toact on their own initiative, they lose theirsense of ownership and feel little accountability for their performance. Some become so resentful they adopt the attitude, “I’m not goingto help this bastard.”Coercive leadership also has a damagingeffect on the rewards system. Most highperforming workers are motivated by morethan money—they seek the satisfaction ofwork well done. The coercive style erodessuch pride. And finally, the style underminesone of the leader’s prime tools—motivatingpeople by showing them how their job fitsEmotional Intelligence: A PrimerEmotional intelligence – the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively –consists of four fundamental capabilities: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness,and social skill. Each capability, in turn, is composed of specific sets of competencies. Belowis a list of the capabilities and their corresponding traits.Self-Awareness?Emotional self-awareness:the ability to read andunderstand your emotions as well as recognizetheir impact on workperformance, relationships, and the like.?Trustworthiness: aconsistent display ofhonesty and integrity.?Conscientiousness: the abili-?Adaptability: skill at adjusting to changing situationsand overcoming obstacles.?Achievement orientation:the drive to meet an internal standard of excellence.?Initiative: a readiness toseize opportunities.harvard business review march–april 2000Empathy: skill at sensingother people’s emotions,understanding theirperspective, and takingan active interest in theirconcerns.?Social Skill?Service orientation: theability to recognize andmeet customers’ needs.Visionary leadership: the ability to take chargeand inspire with a compelling vision.?Influence: the ability to wield a range of?Developing others: the propensity to bolsterpersuasive tactics.the abilities of others through feedbackand guidance.Organizational awareness:the ability to read thecurrents of organizationallife, build decision networks, and navigatepolitics.ty to manage yourself andyour responsibilities.Self-confidence: a strongand positive sense ofself-worth.Self-control: the ability toSocial Awarenesskeep disruptive emotionsand impulses under control.Accurate self-assessment:a realistic evaluationof your strengths andlimitations.?Self-Management?Communication: skill at listening and at sendingclear, convincing, and well-tuned messages.?Change catalyst: proficiency in initiating newideas and leading people in a new direction.?Conflict management: the ability to de-escalatedisagreements and orchestrate resolutions.?Building bonds: proficiency at cultivating andmaintaining a web of relationships.?Teamwork and collaboration: competence atpromoting cooperation and building teams.page 4
Leadership That Gets Resultsinto a grand, shared mission. Such a loss,measured in terms of diminished clarity andcommitment, leaves people alienated fromtheir own jobs, wondering, “How does any ofthis matter?”Given the impact of the coercive style, youmight assume it should never be applied. Ourresearch, however, uncovered a few occasionswhen it worked masterfully. Take the case of adivision president who was brought in tochange the direction of a food company thatwas losing money. His first act was to have theexecutive conference room demolished. To him,the room—with its long marble table that lookedlike “the deck of the Starship Enterprise”—symbolized the tradition-bound formality thatwas paralyzing the company. The destructionof the room, and the subsequent move to asmaller, more informal setting, sent a messageno one could miss, and the division’s culturechanged quickly in its wake.That said, the coercive style should be usedonly with extreme caution and in the few situations when it is absolutely imperative, such asduring a turnaround or when a hostile takeover is looming. In those cases, the coercivestyle can break failed business habits and shockpeople into new ways of working. It is alwaysappropriate during a genuine emergency, likein the aftermath of an earthquake or a fire.And it can work with problem employees withwhom all else has failed. But if a leader reliessolely on this style or continues to use it oncethe emergency passes, the long-term impact ofhis insensitivity to the morale and feelings ofthose he leads will be ruinous.The Authoritative Style. Tom was the vicepresident of marketing at a floundering national restaurant chain that specialized inpizza. Needless to say, the company’s poorperformance troubled the senior managers,but they were at a loss for what to do. EveryMonday, they met to review recent sales,struggling to come up with fixes. To Tom, theapproach didn’t make sense. “We were always trying to figure out why our sales weredown last week. We had the whole companylooking backward instead of figuring outGetting Molecular: The Impact of Leadership Styles on Drivers of Climatecorrelation with rewards was more than twice that with responsibility.According to the data, the authoritative leadership style has the mostpositive effect on climate, but three others—affiliative, democratic, andcoaching—follow close behind. That said, the research indicates thatno style should be relied on exclusively, and all have at least short-termuses.Our research investigated how each leadership style affected the sixdrivers of climate, or working atmosphere. The figures below showthe correlation between each leadership style and each aspect of climate. So, for instance, if we look at the climate driver of flexibility, wesee that the coercive style has a -.28 correlation while the democraticstyle has a .28 correlation, equally strong in the opposite direction.Focusing on the authoritative leadership style, we find that it has a .54correlation with rewards—strongly positive—and a .21 correlation withresponsibility—positive, but not as strong. In other words, the cPacesettingCoachingFlexibility-. 28. 32. 27. 28-. 07. 17Responsibility-. 37. 21. 16. 23. 04. 08. 02. 38. 31. 22-. 27. 39Rewards-. 18. 54. 48. 42-. 29. 43Clarity-. 11. 44. 37. 35-. 28. 38Commitment-. 13. 35. 34. 26-. 20. 27Overall impacton climate-. 26.54.46.43-. 25.42Standardsharvard business review march–april 2000page 5
Leadership That Gets ResultsAn authoritative leaderstates the end but givespeople their own means.what we had to do tomorrow.”Tom saw an opportunity to change people’sway of thinking at an off-site strategy meeting.There, the conversation began with stale truisms: the company had to drive up shareholderwealth and increase return on assets. Tom believed those concepts didn’t have the power toinspire a restaurant manager to be innovativeor to do better than a good-enough job.So Tom made a bold move. In the middle of ameeting, he made an impassioned plea for hiscolleagues to think from the customer’s perspective. Customers want convenience, he said.The company was not in the restaurant business, it was in the business of distributing highquality, convenient-to-get pizza. That notion—and nothing else—should drive everything thecompany did.With his vibrant enthusiasm and clearvision—the hallmarks of the authoritativestyle—Tom filled a leadership vacuum at thecompany. Indeed, his concept became thecore of the new mission statement. But thisconceptual breakthrough was just the beginning. Tom made sure that the mission statement was built into the company’s strategicplanning process as the designated driver ofgrowth. And he ensured that the vision wasarticulated so that local restaurant managersunderstood they were the key to the company’s success and were free to find newways to distribute pizza.Changes came quickly. Within weeks, manylocal managers started guaranteeing fast, newdelivery times. Even better, they started to actlike entrepreneurs, finding ingenious locationsto open new branches: kiosks on busy streetcorners and in bus and train stations, evenfrom carts in airports and hotel lobbies.Tom’s success was no fluke. Our researchindicates that of the six leadership styles,the authoritative one is most effective, driving up every aspect of climate. Take clarity.The authoritative leader is a visionary; hemotivates people by making clear to themhow their work fits into a larger vision forthe organization. People who work for suchleaders understand that what they do matters and why. Authoritative leadership alsomaximizes commitment to the organization’s goals and strategy. By framing the individual tasks within a grand vision, the authoritative leader defines standards thatrevolve around that vision. When he givesharvard business review march–april 2000performance feedback—whether positive ornegative—the singular criterion is whetheror not that performance furthers the vision.The standards for success are clear to all, asare the rewards. Finally, consider the style’simpact on flexibility. An authoritativeleader states the end but generally givespeople plenty of leeway to devise their ownmeans. Authoritative leaders give peoplethe freedom to innovate, experiment, andtake calculated risks.Because of its positive impact, the authoritative style works well in almost any business situation. But it is particularly effective when abusiness is adrift. An authoritative leadercharts a new course and sells his people on afresh long-term vision.The authoritative style, powerful though itmay be, will not work in every situation. Theapproach fails, for instance, when a leader isworking with a team of experts or peers whoare more experienced than he is; they may seethe leader as pompous or out-of-touch. Another limitation: if a manager trying to be authoritative becomes overbearing, he can undermine the egalitarian spirit of an effectiveteam. Yet even with such caveats, leaderswould be wise to grab for the authoritative“club” more often than not. It may not guarantee a hole in one, but it certainly helps withthe long drive.The Affiliative Style. If the coercive leaderdemands, “Do what I say,” and the authoritative urges, “Come with me,” the affiliativeleader says, “People come first.” This leadership style revolves around people—its proponents value individuals and their emotionsmore than tasks and goals. The affiliativeleader strives to keep employees happy and tocreate harmony among them. He manages bybuilding strong emotional bonds and thenreaping the benefits of such an approach,namely fierce loyalty. The style also has amarkedly positive effect on communication.People who like one another a lot talk a lot.They share ideas; they share inspiration. Andthe style drives up flexibility; friends trust oneanother, allowing habitual innovation and risktaking. Flexibility also rises because the affiliative leader, like a parent who adjusts household rules for a maturing adolescent, doesn’timpose unnecessary strictures on how employees get their work done. They give peoplethe freedom to do their job in the way theypage 6
Leadership That Gets Resultsthink is most effective.As for a sense of recognition and reward forwork well done, the affiliative leader offersample positive feedback. Such feedback hasspecial potency in the workplace because it isall too rare: outside of an annual review, mostpeople usually get no feedback on their day-today efforts—or only negative feedback. Thatmakes the affiliative leader’s positive words allthe more motivating. Finally, affiliative leaders are masters at building a sense of belonging. They are, for instance, likely to take theirdirect reports out for a meal or a drink, one-onone, to see how they’re doing. They will bringin a cake to celebrate a group accomplishment.They are natural relationship builders.Joe Torre, the heart and soul of the NewYork Yankees, is a classic affiliative leader. During the 1999 World Series, Torre tended ably tothe psyches of his players as they endured theemotional pressure cooker of a pennant race.All season long, he made a special point topraise Scott Brosius, whose father had diedduring the season, for staying committed evenas he mourned. At the celebration party afterthe team’s final game, Torre specifically soughtout right fielder Paul O’Neill. Although he hadreceived the news of his father’s death thatmorning, O’Neill chose to play in the decisivegame—and he burst into tears the moment itended. Torre made a point of acknowledgingO’Neill’s personal struggle, calling him a “warrior.” Torre also used the spotlight of the vic-tory celebration to praise two players whose return the following year was threatened bycontract disputes. In doing so, he sent a clearmessage to the team and to the club’s ownerthat he valued the players immensely—toomuch to lose them.Along with ministering to the emotions ofhis people, an affiliative leader may also tendto his own emotions openly. The year Torre’sbrother was near death awaiting a heart transplant, he shared his worries with his players.He also spoke candidly with the team abouthis treatment for prostate cancer.The affiliative style’s generally positive impact makes it a good all-weather approach, butleaders should employ it particularly when trying to build team harmony, increase morale,improve communication, or repair brokentrust. For instance, one executive in our studywas hired to replace a ruthless team leader.The former leader had taken credit for his employees’ work and had attempted to pit themagainst one another. His efforts ultimatelyfailed, but the team he left behind was suspicious and weary. The new executive managedto mend the situation by unstintingly showingemotional honesty and rebuilding ties. Severalmonths in, her leadership had created a renewed sense of commitment and energy.Despite its benefits, the affiliative styleshould not be used alone. Its exclusive focuson praise can allow poor performance to gouncorrected; employees may perceive thatThe Six Leadership Styles at a GlanceOur research foundthat leaders use sixstyles, each springingfrom different components of emotionalintelligence.Here is asummary of the styles,their origin, when theywork best, and theirimpact on an organization’s climate and thusits performance.CoerciveAuthoritativeThe leader’s modus operandiDemands immediatecomplianceMobilizes peopletoward a visionThe style in a phrase“Do what I tell you.”“Come with me.”Underlying emotionalintelligence competenciesDrive to achieve, initiative,self-controlSelf-confidence, empathy,change catalystWhen the style works bestIn a crisis, to kick start aturnaround, or with problememployeesWhen changes require anew vision, or when a cleardirection is neededOverall impact on climateNegativeMost strongly positiveharvard business review march–april 2000page 7
Leadership That Gets Resultsmediocrity is tolerated. And because affiliative leaders rarely offer constructive adviceon how to improve, employees must figureout how to do so on their own. When peopleneed clear directives to navigate throughcomplex challenges, the affiliative styleleaves them rudderless. Indeed, if overly relied on, this style can actually steer a groupto failure. Perhaps that is why many affiliative leaders, including Torre, use this style inclose conjunction with the authoritativestyle. Authoritative leaders state a vision, setstandards, and let people know how theirwork is furthering the group’s goals. Alternate that with the caring, nurturing approach of the affiliative leader, and you havea potent combination.The Democratic Style. Sister Mary ran aCatholic school system in a large metropolitanarea. One of the schools—the only privateschool in an impoverished neighborhood—had been losing money for years, and the archdiocese could no longer afford to keep it open.When Sister Mary eventually got the order toshut it down, she didn’t just lock the doors.She called a meeting of all the teachers andstaff at the school and explained to them thedetails of the financial crisis—the first timeanyone working at the school had been included in the business side of the institution.She asked for their ideas on ways to keep theschool open and on how to handle the closing,should it come to that. Sister Mary spentmuch of her time at the meeting just listening.She did the same at later meetings forschool parents and for the community and during a successive series of meetings for theschool’s teachers and staff. After two monthsof meetings, the consensus was clear: theschool would have to close. A plan was madeto transfer students to other schools in theCatholic system.The final outcome was no different than ifSister Mary had gone ahead and closed theschool the day she was told to. But by allowingthe school’s constituents
Daniel Goleman is the author of Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1995) and Working with Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1998). He is cochairman of the Consortium for Research on Emo-tional Intelligence in Organizations, which is based at Rutgers University’s Graduate School of A
IAS 36 – LỖ TỔN THẤT TÀI SẢN. xxx KHÔNG áp dụngcho Ápdụngcho x Hàng tồnkho (IAS 2) x . Tài sản tài chính (IFRS 9) x . Quyền lợi người lao động (IAS 19) x . Tài sản thuế hoãn lại (IAS 12) x . Hợp đồng xây dựng (IAS 11) x . Bất động s
Sets/gets the join delay on Rx window 2. AT RX1DL. Sets/gets the delay of the Rx window 1. AT RX2DL. Sets/gets the delay of the Rx window 2. AT RX2DR [ datarate] where X [0:7] Sets/gets data rate of the Rx window 2. AT RX2FQ [ freq] where freq in Hz Sets/gets the frequency of the Rx window 2. AT TXP [ txpow] where txpow [0:7] Sets/gets the .
Leadership, Servant Leadership, Situational Leadership, Authoritarian Leadership, and Moral Leadership. Although each of these styles had some very positive characteristics, it was found that Spiritual Leadership allowed for various leadership approaches to be applied as needed and these approaches were designed
The title Million Dollar Habits is a euphemism for habits that lead to positive results. Everyone gets results, regardless of the nature of his actions. A bank robber gets results. A person who refuses to work and goes on welfare gets results. An individual who is inconsiderate and rude get
(1) leadership in self-managing teams and shared leadership, informed by functional behavioral leadership theory, and (2) the emerging literature on leadership in virtual teams. These views of leadership depart from much of “traditional” leadership theory (e.g., trait theory, contingency and situational leadership theories, social exchange
3.2.1 Servant leadership approach 19 3.2.2 Transformational leadership 22 3.3 Servant leadership and Islamic leadership: 23 3.4 Challenges that current Muslim leaders face: 25 4 RESULTS 26 4.1 Theory findings 26 4.2 Interviews findings 32 4.2.1 Interviewees' leadership traits and principles: 35 4.2.2 The moral base of Islamic leadership 38
Napa Recycling – Gets high landfill diversion, lease income, more recyclables, no cost Napa Sanitation Biosolids Site – Gets sustainable nutrient uptake of applied biosolids Napa Sanitation – Gets renewable electricity without utility markup, and recycled water Napa Airport – Gets dramatically reduced odors
Data-Driven Instruction: What Gets Measured Gets Done Dr. Roger Isaac Blanco LEAD Manager of School Partnerships, Florida rblanco@carnegielearning.com 1-888-851-7094 ext. 458 . Guiding Questions 1. What is the meaning of Data-driven Decision Making (DDDM) . Six Steps to Creating a Data-Driven Decision Making (DDDM) Culture
