Psychology Answer Note #10

Question 1 Can you summarize article? George et al.: Discovering your authentic leadership' Answer In their article "Discovering Your Authentic Leadership", George et al. (2007) discuss the concept of authentic leadership and its importance in today's ever-changing business world. They argue that authentic leadership, defined as "a pattern of transparent and ethical leader behavior that encourages moral and purpose-driven perspectives" (George et al., 2007, p. 129), is crucial for individual leaders, organizations, and society as a whole. The authors begin by addressing the common misconceptions surrounding authentic leadership, such as the belief that it is synonymous with charisma or that it is only relevant for a select few individuals. They then provide a framework for understanding authentic leadership, which includes four components: self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing. These components work together to form authentic leaders who are able to inspire, motivate, and guide their followers towards a shared vision. To become an authentic leader, George et al. suggest engaging in a process of selfdiscovery, reflection, and personal growth. This requires acknowledging and understanding one's personal values, beliefs, and strengths, as well as being open and transparent with others about one's thoughts, feelings, and actions. Additionally, authentic leaders must possess a strong moral compass and a willingness to consider different perspectives and information before making decisions. The article also highlights that authenticity is not a one-time achievement, but rather an ongoing process that requires continuous self-reflection and adaptation. The authors argue that organizations should create a work culture that encourages and supports authentic leadership, as it can lead to improved employee satisfaction, commitment, and performance. Question 2 5. Compare and contrast transformational versus transactional leadership. When does each of them are preferable? Answer Transformational and transactional leadership are two distinct leadership styles that have been extensively studied in the field of management. While both are effective in their own ways, they have fundamental differences that set them apart. In this answer, we will analyze and compare these two styles of leadership, and discuss when each of them is more preferable. Firstly, let's define the two types of leadership. Transformational leadership is when a leader inspires and motivates their followers to achieve goals that go beyond their selfinterests. This type of leader is charismatic, visionary, and encourages innovation and creativity within the organization. On the other hand, transactional leadership is when a leader uses a reward and punishment system to motivate their followers to achieve a specific set of goals. This type of leader focuses on the task at hand and ensures that goals are met through monitoring and controlling the performance of their subordinates. One of the main differences between transformational and transactional leadership is their focus. While transformational leaders are concerned with the development and growth of their followers, transactional leaders are more task-oriented. Transformational leaders inspire their subordinates to reach their full potential and strive for personal and professional growth. On the other hand, transactional leaders focus on setting goals and ensuring that they are met through rewards or punishments. The two styles also differ in terms of the relationship between the leader and their followers. Transformational leaders build strong relationships with their subordinates through trust, openness, and support. They are seen as mentors or coaches rather than authoritative figures. In contrast, transactional leaders maintain a more formal relationship with their followers and are seen as the sole decision-makers. In terms of when each style is preferable, it ultimately depends on the situation and the goals of the organization. Transactional leadership is more suitable for routine and welldefined tasks, as it ensures efficiency and productivity. It is also effective in crisis situations where a quick and decisive response is needed. On the other hand, transformational leadership is best suited for more complex and dynamic situations where creativity and innovation are required. It is also beneficial for organizations seeking longterm growth and development. In conclusion, transformational and transactional leadership both have their unique strengths and are effective in different situations. A successful leader knows when to use each style based on the needs of their organization. By combining the two styles, leaders can strike a balance between realizing short-term goals and fostering long-term growth and development within their teams. Question 3 Discuss and write the difference b/n Fiedler’s contingency model Vs Hersey & Blanchard’s situational leadership Answer The field of leadership has been extensively studied and various models have been proposed to explain how leaders influence their followers. Two of the most prominent models are Fiedler’s contingency model and Hersey & Blanchard’s situational leadership. While both models aim to explain the relationship between a leader and their followers, they differ in their approach and focus. In this answer, I will discuss the key differences between these two models and provide a comparison of their strengths and weaknesses. Fiedler’s contingency model, developed by Fred Fiedler, is based on the idea that effective leadership is dependent on the match between a leader’s style and the situation they are in. According to this model, a leader’s style can be classified as either taskoriented or relationship-oriented. This style is measured using the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale which measures a leader’s level of task and relationship motivation. Fiedler believed that there is no one universally effective leadership style and a leader’s effectiveness depends on the favorableness of the situation. The three factors that determine the favorableness of the situation are leader-member relations, task structure, and position power. Leader-member relations refer to the degree of trust and respect between a leader and their followers, task structure refers to the clarity and structure of the tasks, and position power refers to the leader’s authority to reward or punish their followers. Fiedler’s contingency model suggests that a task-oriented leader is more effective in highly favorable or unfavorable situations, while a relationship-oriented leader is more effective in moderately favorable situations. On the other hand, Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory proposes that leadership styles should be adapted to the maturity level of followers. The model suggests that leaders should vary their level of direction and support depending on their followers’ competence and commitment. Hersey and Blanchard identified four leadership styles: telling, selling, participating, and delegating. The telling style involves high direction and low support, the selling style involves high direction and high support, the participating style involves low direction and high support, and the delegating style involves low direction and low support. The maturity level of followers is measured on a continuum from low competence and low commitment to high competence and high commitment. The situational leadership theory suggests that a telling style should be used for followers with low maturity, while a delegating style should be used for highly mature followers. In summary, the main difference between Fiedler’s contingency model and Hersey & Blanchard’s situational leadership lies in their focus. Fiedler’s model focuses on the leader-follower relationship and the favorableness of the situation, whereas situational leadership theory focuses on adapting leadership styles to the maturity level of followers. While both models have received empirical support, they have also faced criticisms. Fiedler’s contingency model has been criticized for its simplistic classification of leaders into only two styles and for its reliance on self-report measures. On the other hand, situational leadership has been criticized for its lack of clarity and the complexity of determining followers’ maturity levels. Question 4 The colonisations of our island by the French and British have shaped the Mauritian legal system”. With respect to the above statement analyse the doctrine of Mauritian law and explain which other sources of law takes precedence or primacy over the doctrine. Answer "The colonisations of our island by the French and British have shaped the Mauritian legal system”. The above statement holds immense truth as the Mauritian legal system has been influenced and shaped by the colonisations of French and British. In order to fully understand this statement, it is important to analyze the doctrine of Mauritian law and determine the sources of law that take precedence or primacy over it. The doctrine of Mauritian law is a complex framework that is derived from a combination of sources such as French civil law, English common law, and local customs. These sources have been integrated into a unique legal system that reflects the country's rich history and cultural diversity. French civil law, also known as the Napoleonic Code, was introduced to Mauritius during the French colonization of the island in the 18th century. It is based on the principle of codification, which means that laws are written down in a systematic and comprehensive manner. This code heavily influenced the substance and structure of the Mauritian legal system, especially in matters of civil and commercial law. On the other hand, the British colonization of Mauritius in the 19th century brought with it the English common law system. This system, rooted in judicial precedent and case law, complements the civil law system and is applied in areas such as criminal law, administrative law, and employment law. In many cases, decisions made by Mauritian courts are influenced by English common law principles and precedents. Furthermore, the Mauritian legal system also draws on local customs and traditions, particularly in issues related to family law and land law. These customs and traditions have been preserved and incorporated into the legal framework through legislation and court decisions. It is evident that the doctrine of Mauritian law is a product of the French and British colonizations. However, it is important to note that there are also other sources of law that take precedence over the doctrine. The Constitution of Mauritius is the supreme law of the land and takes precedence over all other sources of law. It establishes the framework for the country's legal system and safeguards individual rights and freedoms. Any laws or actions that contradict the Constitution are deemed invalid. In addition, legislation passed by the National Assembly also takes precedence over the doctrine of Mauritian law. These laws can either be enacted independently or may be influenced by one of the main sources of law, such as French civil law or English common law. Moreover, judicial decisions by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) also hold significant weight in Mauritius. As the highest court of appeal for the country, the JCPC has provided guidance and determined legal principles in various cases, thereby influencing the development of the Mauritian legal system. To illustrate the importance of these sources of law, we can look at the case of Republic v. Alagu Mootoo & Mootoo, where the Privy Council laid down the principle that Mauritian courts have the power to strike down any laws that violate the provisions of the Constitution. This case highlights the supremacy of the Constitution over the doctrine of Mauritian law. In conclusion, the colonisations of French and British have played a crucial role in shaping the Mauritian legal system. While the doctrine of Mauritian law draws upon a combination of these influences, the Constitution, legislation, and judicial decisions hold supremacy over it. Question 5 Outline on Research the KENNEDY v. BREMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 2022 case. From a legal perspective, give your personal analysis of the lawsuit. Be sure to include at least one reference in your answer. Answer Outline on Research the KENNEDY v. BREMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 2022 Case: The KENNEDY v. BREMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 2022 is a legal case that involves the First Amendment rights of public school employees. The case centers around Joseph Kennedy, a football coach at Bremerton High School in Washington state, who was fired for praying on the field after games. In 2015, Kennedy began a tradition of praying on the field after games, often inviting players to join him. He would walk to the 50-yard line and say a short prayer, sometimes alone and sometimes with players. This ritual attracted attention and eventually led to a complaint from the school district. The district initially allowed Kennedy to continue his prayers, as long as they were not disruptive or carried out in front of the students. However, when Kennedy refused to comply with these restrictions, he was placed on administrative leave and eventually fired. Kennedy filed a lawsuit against the Bremerton School District, claiming that his First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion were violated. The case has since been appealed to the Supreme Court, and is set to be heard in 2022. Legal Perspective: From a legal perspective, this case raises several important questions. Firstly, there is the issue of whether or not Kennedy's actions can be considered as protected free speech under the First Amendment. The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of speech, but it also states that the government cannot establish a religion. In this case, it can be argued that Kennedy's prayers were voluntary and not endorsed by the school, thus not violating the Establishment Clause. Secondly, there is the question of whether or not Kennedy's prayers can be considered as protected free exercise of religion. The First Amendment also guarantees the right to freely exercise one's religion, but this right is not absolute. In employment situations, the employer's interest in maintaining a neutral and non-discriminatory workplace may outweigh an employee's freedom of religious expression. This is a delicate balance that the court will have to consider in this case. Another important aspect to consider is the impact of Kennedy's actions on the students and the overall school environment. While his prayer may have been well-intentioned, it could also be seen as intrusive or potentially alienating to students of different faiths or no faith at all. The school district has a responsibility to create a safe and inclusive environment for all students, and this includes their religious beliefs or lack thereof. Personal Analysis: From a personal analysis, I believe that the outcome of this case will have significant implications for the rights of public school employees and the separation of church and state. As a university student, I understand the importance of academic freedom and the protection of individual rights. However, in the case of public school employees, it is crucial for them to adhere to the school's policies and create an environment that is respectful and inclusive of all students. I believe that Kennedy's prayers on the field could be seen as a violation of this principle, as it could potentially make students of different faiths or no faith uncomfortable or excluded. It is also important to note that the school district's initial compromise to allow Kennedy to pray privately on the field did not satisfy his demands, which could be seen as an indication of his intentions to proselytize rather than simply express his faith. In conclusion, the KENNEDY v. BREMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 2022 case raises important questions about the balance between free speech and religious expression, and the responsibility of public school employees to create an inclusive and safe environment. It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court rules on this case and the impact it will have on future cases involving similar issues.