Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


This week’s readings centralize around the concept of leadership, its qualities, its effectiveness, different styles and how it can make or break an organisation. The first reading by Collins (2005) emphasizes the value of a level 5 leader within an organisation. The readings goes into great depth detailing the characteristics of a level 5 leader as a humble, simple character that are wholly determined to the organisation and the people around them. This means that rather than focusing on personal efforts and personal welfare, the level 5 leader downplay their role within an organisation and instead focus their abilities in the uplifting of an organisation as a whole. This is further reinforced by the concepts put forward by Sprier, Fontaine and Malloy (2006), they found certain leaders who tend to focus on their personal abilities while at the same time alienating the role of others not only stifle their organisation but potentially hinder their personal progression on the corporate ladder. These readings are of particular interest of me as I have seen time and time again the spotlight of certain individuals that attribute their success to their personal efforts i.e Donald Trump, yet as recent years have proven, while being purely charismatic, he they may have improved his their personal ratings, his companies has failed multiple times but their companies are constantly in the danger zone (O'Connor, 2011).

As interesting as this concept is, it is not fully applicable in our current situation as students of MGMT 300. Although the point of collaborative responsibility and dedication is echoed through the readings, it is difficult to apply it directly to a leaderless group as we have established. However, Kelley (1988) would argue that these concepts are not mutually exclusive. Kelly (1988) pointed out the false dichotomy of the leader-follower dynamic and argues that most people have attributes of both, as there is always someone above you and below you on the corporate hierarchy. The argument thereby puts forth the notion of role mastery between the different tasks we are confronted with and therefore change our behaviour to meet said expectations. Kelley then goes to argue that an organisation is essentially a huge collection of efficient followers who are capable of independent thought that are working together for the common good. This is a direct reflection of what we are doing in mikes bikes. We are effectively trying to be a group of efficient followers that contribute actively and engage in critical thinking. This is again reflected in the basic expectations as passive, anti-social behaviour is frowned upon and punished.