Questionnaires Reflection Paper Nicole Bammel Leadership .
Running Head: QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPERQuestionnaires Reflection PaperNicole BammelLeadership 481Northwestern UniversityNovember 16, 20141
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER2IntroductionWhat is leadership? Can we really define it? An article I found on MindTools referencedtransformational leadership when explaining leadership, “an effective leader is a person whodoes the following: Creates an inspiring vision of the future, motivates and inspires people toengage with that vision, manages delivery of the vision, coaches and builds a team, so that it ismore effective at achieving the vision” (MindTools, n.d.). Throughout this quarter we learnedmany of different leadership theories and models and it kind of helped us learn what types ofleadership we fit into or someone at our work place fits into. A lot of the chapters hadquestionnaires for us to complete and to learn more about ourselves as leaders and how toimprove our leadership skills. I will discuss my results and what how this affects my leadershipand what aspects I need to work on.Results and AnalysisThe results of my questionnaires are listed in the table below.Leadership TheoryTrait ApproachAssessment NameLeadership TraitQuestionnaireResultAverage: 3.57Technical: 23.00Human: 18.00Conceptual: 16Task: 26Relationship: 37Situation 1: D4, ASituation 2: D1, CSituation 3: D2, CSituation 4: D3, CSkills ApproachSkills InventoryStyle ApproachStyle InventorySituational ApproachSituational LeadershipContingency TheoryLeast Preferred Coworker(LPC) MeasureLPC Score: 108Path-Goal TheoryPath-Goal LeadershipQuestionnaireDirective Score: 16Supportive Score: 20Participative Score: 21Achievement-oriented: 17
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER3Leader-MemberExchange TheoryLMX 7 QuestionnaireLMX 7 Score: 25TransformationalLeadershipMultifactor LeadershipQuestionnaire (MLQ)Transformational Average: 2.8Transactional Average: 3Passive/Avoidant Average: 2PsychodynamicApproachPsychodynamic ApproachSurveyGender-Leader ImplicitAssociation TestWomen and LeadershipPsychological Type: ESFJTest Trial A Time: 30Test Trial B Time: 25Uncertainty Avoidance Mean: 3.5Power Distance Mean: 6Institutional Collectivism Mean: 4In-Group Collectivism Mean: 5Gender Egalitarianism Mean: 3Assertiveness Mean: 5Future Orientation Mean: 3.5Performance Mean: 5Humane Orientation Mean: 4Emotional Healing: 18Creating Value for theCommunity: 13Conceptual Skills: 20Empowering: 19Helping SubordinatesGrow/Succeed: 24Putting Subordinates First: 18Behaving ethically: 19Culture and LeadershipDimensions of CultureQuestionnaireServant LeadershipServant LeadershipQuestionnaireTeam LeadershipTeam Excellence andCollaborative Team LeaderQuestionnaireNo scoring technique provided inNorthouseAuthentic LeadershipAuthentic Leadership SelfAssessment QuestionnaireSelf-awareness: 13Internal Moral Perspective: 12Balanced Processing: 14Relational Transparency: 13Leadership EthicsPerceived Leader IntegrityScale (PLIS)PLIS Summation: 35Leadership Diamond SurveyOverall Score: 3.625Vision Score: 3.5Reality Score: 3.7Ethics Score: 3.8Courage Score: 3.4Leadership Diamond
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER4The table below describes what the scores for each questionnaire mean (Northouse, 2013).Leadership TheoryTrait ApproachAssessment NameLeadership TraitQuestionnaireSkills ApproachSkills InventoryStyle ApproachStyle InventorySituational ApproachSituational LeadershipContingency TheoryLeast Preferred Coworker(LPC) MeasurePath-Goal TheoryPath-Goal LeadershipQuestionnaireLeader-MemberExchange TheoryLMX 7 icApproachMultifactor LeadershipQuestionnaire (MLQ)Psychodynamic ApproachSurveyWomen andLeadershipGender-Leader ImplicitAssociation TestCulture andLeadershipDimensions of CultureQuestionnaireAssessment InterpretationN/A23-30 High14-22 Moderate6-13 Low45-50 Very High40-44 High35-39 Moderately High30-34 Moderately Low25-29 Low10-24 Very LowN/A 57 Low LPC58-63 Middle LPC 64 High LPCDirective Style: common score, 23 28 high, 18 lowSupportive Style: common score28, 33 high, 23 lowParticipative Style: common score21, ?26 high, 16 lowAchievement-oriented style:common score 19, 24 high, 14low30-35 Very High35-29 High20-24 Moderate15-19 Low7-14 Very LowN/AN/ASubtracting time it took to completeTrial A from time to complete TrialB. Positive scores reflect automaticassociations between Female andSupportive and between Male andLeadershipCompare to table 15.4 in book onpage 419
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER5Servant LeadershipQuestionnaireServant LeadershipTeam LeadershipAuthentic Leadership23-28 High14-22 Moderate8-13 Low0-7 Extremely LowTeam Excellence andCollaborative Team LeaderQuestionnaireAuthentic Leadership SelfAssessment QuestionnaireLeadership EthicsPerceived Leader IntegrityScale (PLIS)Leadership DiamondLeadership Diamond SurveyN/A16-20 High 15 Low30-32 High35-45 Moderate46-120 LowN/AThe table below displays the areas of strength and development for each questionnaire.Leadership TheoryAssessment NameArea (s) of StrengthTrait ApproachLeadership TraitQuestionnaireSkills ApproachSkills Inventoryarticulate, persistent,determined, trustworthy,dependable, friendly,conscientious, diligentTechnical skillsStyle ApproachSituationalApproachContingencyTheoryStyle InventorySituationalLeadershipLeast PreferredCoworker (LPC)MeasurePath-GoalLeadershipQuestionnaireLMX LQ)PsychodynamicApproach SurveyGender-LeaderImplicitAssociation TestPath-Goal TheoryLeader-MemberExchange achWomen andLeadershipRelationshipDecent at figuring outthe types of situationRelationship motivatedSupportive andparticipativeArea (s) ofDevelopmentperceptive, selfconfident, self-assured,outgoing, sensitive,empatheticHuman and ConceptualskillsTaskMight get it wrongsometimesNot independentlymotivatedDirective andachievement-orientedIn group memberTransactionalTransformational andpassive/avoidantExtravert, sensor, feelerJudgerNegative number, not asgender specificStill happens though
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER6Culture andLeadershipDimensions ofCultureQuestionnaireSimilar to table'saverage in a few areasServant LeadershipServant LeadershipQuestionnaireTeam LeadershipTeam Excellenceand CollaborativeTeam LeaderQuestionnaireAuthenticLeadership SelfAssessmentQuestionnairePerceived LeaderIntegrity Scale(PLIS)LeadershipDiamond SurveyHelping subordinatesgrow/succeed,emotional healing,conceptual skills,empowering, puttingsubordinates first,behaving ethicallyGood team buildingskillsAuthenticLeadershipLeadership EthicsLeadershipDiamondWays of thinking are alittle different fromtables averages fromeach groupCreating value for thecommunityUnified commitmentBalanced processing haslow number but scoredthe highestNeed to improve in allareasModerate ethicalEngage in someunethical behaviorsunder certain conditionsCourageEthics and realityAs I look at the areas of strength and development, I think that I am still very early in mycareer and have a lot of time to work on improving my areas of weakness. My major areas ofstrength have developed from working in a team and teaching classes. My experiences fromteaching Learn-to-Skate have made be good at teaching and a reliable person to go to for skatinginformation. Being part of a team at my current job has made me learn how to work together toachieve a common goal. My main strengths fall within the trait approach, path-goal theory,situational approach, relationship aspect of style approach, and servant leadership theories. Thereare many aspects of each theory that I need to work on but working with different people at theworkplace will help with this.
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPER7My areas of development outnumber the areas of strength, mainly because I have not hadenough experience being a leader. The current position I am in, I am part of a group and mymanager sees me as a leader but I am not a leader in the terms of some of these theories. Myleadership mainly is with one person and we are equals, I just have a little more knowledge ofthe job and pass it along to the new employees. For transformational leadership, I have learnedand have already knew, that I have a hard time making some decisions, even simple ones. Iusually need assistance from others. They do not make the decision for me, they help me walkthrough the thought process and it helps me come to a conclusion.This assessment kind of confirms my personal leadership philosophy. My personalleadership philosophy was "Thinking on Your Feet." With the situational approach questions, Iwas able to identify the correct situation for all of the questions. The skills approach is mainlytechnical skills but I am working on my human and conceptual skills with my current jobbecause I work with physicians every day. The style approach is where I am more relationshiporiented versus task oriented.ReflectionBringing all of the questionnaires together and seeing what my strengths and weaknessesare makes me think of what I am already a leader of and what can I improve to become a betterleader. It is very hard for anyone to be a perfect leader but you can strive to try to master acertain theory or a couple of ones you are strong in already. I have learned that there are manydifferent leadership theories out there and I have never heard of any of them before. I did noteven know there were leadership theories out there to learn until this class. It has opened my eyesto a different side of leadership. I will be thinking of these theories and trying to apply them tomy everyday life and use them to make be a better leader in the long run. A leader is someone
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPERwho can encompass many of the theories we learned during this quarter. I will work to becomethat leader and use it to the best of my abilities.8
QUESTIONNAIRES REFLECTION PAPERReferencesMindTools. (n.d.). What is leadership? Retrieved from ewLDR 41.htmNorthouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGEPublications, Inc.9
Questionnaire N/A Authentic Leadership Authentic Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire 16-20 High 15 Low Leadership Ethics Perceived Leader Integrity Scale (PLIS) 30-32 High 35-45 Moderate 46-120 Low Leadership Diamond Leadership Diamond Survey N/A The table below displays the areas of strength and development for each questionnaire.
Reflection Product Name Reflection for IBM Reflection for HP Reflection for UNIX and OpenVMS Reflection for Se cure IT SSH Client Reflection for ReGIS Graphics Reflection X Reflection FTP Client Reflection SFTP Client Reflection NFS Client Reflection for the Multi-Host Enterprise, Professional Edition
In the beginning, electronic questionnaires should be relatively concise (not more than 50 questions, preferably closer to 30 for a 3. rd. or 4. th. degree charge). All questionnaires must include standard questions about juror qualifications. Questionnaires must not include questions that seek a juror's individual demographic information.
theory that reflection is necessarily a process embarked on after the event, is a long, ponderous undertaking and also on the content of reflection itself. Schon (1983, 1987, 1991) suggests two levels of reflection: (i) reflection-in-action and (ii) reflection-on-action, partly based on Dewey’s (1933) work.
Reflection coefficient, r 1.0.5 0-.5-1.0 r r 0 30 60 90 Brewster’s angle Total internal reflection Critical angle Critical angle Total internal reflection above the "critical angle" crit sin-1(n t /n i) 41.8 for glass-to-air n glass n air (The sine in Snell's Law can't be greater than one!) Reflection Coefficients for a .
Sec 2 Science - Physics Learning Outcomes Students should be able to: 1. Understand that light travels in a straight line 2. Define the terms used in reflection, including normal, angle of incidence and angle of reflection. 3. State that, for reflection, the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection and use this
naires. When it comes to designing Web-based questionnaires, however, sim-plicity is usually best. Design Principles for Web-Based Questionnaires Dillman (2000) identified a set of design principles that can be applied to Web-based questionnaires. These principles were an extension of
more contemporary nursing practice and the practice en-vironments [19]. Our overall goal was to find questionnaires to measure the work environment in long-term care but in the process of conducting the review, we expanded the cri-teria to include questionnaires that were used in acute care settings, because these questionnaires contain do-
pengantar anatomi dan fisiologi ami rachmi 15 juli 2011 doc.ami.prodi tw.2011. peraturan 1. toleransi waktu 10 menit 2. hp vibrasi 3. tidak makan dan minum 4. pakaian rapih, sopan, tidak memakai sandal 5. bila tidak hadir memberitahu langsung dosen, surat doc.ami.prodi tw.2011. anatomi berasal dari bahasa latin yaitu, * ana : bagian, memisahkan * tomi (tomie) : iris/ potong anatomi adalah ilmu .
