Kansas State University Barriers to Effective Leadership Discussion 3 paragraphs discussion and then 3 paragraph response. i will attach the instructions a

Kansas State University Barriers to Effective Leadership Discussion 3 paragraphs discussion and then 3 paragraph response. i will attach the instructions and the response seperatly. CJ 455
Agency Administration
Discussion Board Assignment #5
Barriers to Effective Leadership
Submission Instructions:
Due Date: Last day of the current learning module.
Points Possible: 30 points
Mode of Submission: Assignment must be submitted through the course discussion board.
Instructions:
In the current assigned readings, we are examining a variety of different factors pertaining to
organizational leadership and the management of criminal justice institutions. One of the most
important topics that we will be examining, at least insofar as it applies to the leadership aspect
of our discussion, will pertain to the barriers and challenges that leaders face. We have
previously discussed the harm that inept or ineffective leaders can have on criminal justice
organizations. While the harm that bad leaders can impose is significant, knowing this is not
sufficient for us as students of organizational leadership. Instead, we must attempt to examine
the factors that contribute to ineffectual leadership if we are to be both fully informed and better
able to effectively implement change. The ability to implement positive change is important
from both an organizational and individual perspective as the barriers that leaders face are both
internal and external. In the readings for this week, barriers to effective leadership are examined
from a variety of different perspectives. These readings conclude with an evaluation of some of
the traits and characteristics of those who have successfully been able to navigate and overcome
the pitfalls that have snared other well-meaning leaders. If we are to assume that leaders start
with good intentions, then we must try to understand what goes wrong along the way causing
noble motivations to go awry and organizations and employees to suffer as a result.
For this discussion forum assignment, you will be required to describe your perceptions of the
various barriers that confront those who desire to become effective leaders. More specifically,
you will be responsible for identifying some of the specific behaviors, actions, and contexts that
undermine the leadership function and the means by which these might best be overcome. Begin
your response be evaluating the Morris, Ely, and Frei reading. Do you agree that the factors they
identify undermine the efficacy of the leadership function? Why or why not? Have they missed
anything that you feel is importance? If so, what have they missed? The factors that the authors
identify are primarily targeted towards leaders in private companies. Do you feel they are
equally applicable to the criminal justice environment? Why or why not? In closing, compare
and contrast the George and McLean and the Casse and Banahan readings. What differences
exist in the way they describe leadership pitfalls and what similarities can you identify? What
common elements in the two readings can be used to better understand what differentiates
successful and unsuccessful leaders? Finally, use the readings for the basis of making a personal
leadership assessment. Which aspects of the these readings speak to you most strongly about
your being able to become a more successful leader, either now or in the future? Why is this the
case? Make sure to provide a detailed and robust overview of the questions raised while
integrating the requirements that are noted below.
Discussion Board Requirements:
#1.) You must post one primary response to the question asked above that is a minimum of 350
words in length, but can include additional as much additional information as you would like.
#2.) You must reply to the posts of at least two other students. The responses to other students
must be a minimum of 150 words in length, but can include additional information.
#3.) A minimum of at least two academically rigorous sources must be incorporated into your
primary post, one of which can be an assigned textbook. All sources must be appropriately cited
following American Psychological Association (APA) style guidelines
#4.) All postings must be made to the appropriate discussion board. If you are having problems
understanding how to access the discussion board contact your instructor immediately.
#5.) No points will be awarded for posts submitted after the identified submission deadlines and
no makeup assignments will be allowed.
#6.) All postings must be directly related to the discussion board topic. Please do not deviate
from the designated discussion topic and limit your responses to that topic only.
#7.) All postings must be appropriate. Any postings deemed inappropriate will be removed
from the discussion forum resulting in the forfeiture of any points earned for the assignment.
Critical responses are acceptable, but be professional and courteous when making them.
#8.) All postings must be substantive and add new meaning to the information that has already
been identified. Simple responses such as “great idea” or “I agree” are not sufficient and will
result in significant point reduction.
Grading Considerations:
Primary Post: 20 points possible
The primary post will be evaluated in regard to a number of factors, including but not limited to:





Post meets minimal length requirement.
Post is free of grammatical and structural errors.
Post focuses on identified topic and includes all necessary information.
Post includes a minimum of three appropriate external sources that are all correctly cited.
Post includes a quality of writing that is expected from graduate level coursework.
Reply Posts: 5 points possible for each
The reply posts will be evaluated in regard to a number of factors, including but not limited to:




Posts meet minimal length requirement.
Posts are free of grammatical and structural errors.
Post provides meaningful feedback directly applicable to original post.
Post includes a quality of writing that is expected from graduate level coursework.
Response
Danielle Outlaw seemed to be rather arrogant. She started her speech
off with all of her intersectionality. That is great. I’m proud of you. It had
absolutely nothing to do with her argument as to why we should embrace her
“Humanity in Authority” narrative. I have a feeling that, although her speech
about embracing the “21st damn century” was awe inspiring to some of those
that fancy the de-policing of America, it left this crusty old veteran with
animus. I understand that there have been injustices. I, as a practitioner of
community policing for over 12 years, can agree with her that it is only
community policing in name only. Community policing is a philosophy that
we cannot implement nationwide for some reason or another. There are
always issue with implementing community policing. I find it hard for a chief
to sit on a stage and demand it and simply state that crime will decrease as a
result. There is such certainty in her words. I think she tried to cast empathy
into her leadership, but I can attest that this is only at the surface. When
community policing and the lack of embracing the idea of community policing
as a philosophy by some will only end in her becoming stymied or frustrated
and start demanding of her officers to do so.
Portland, at the time of this speech, was being infiltrated by a group of
anarchists. They would block the streets and walkways of the citizens of
Portland. Due to her inefficiency as a leader, she has reduced her police staff
to having a feeling of not mattering. When encountered by her staff about
her tactics and strategies, Berrien (2019) notes that, “Outlaw dismissed
accusations from Portland’s police union president that Mayor Ted Wheeler,
who is also the city’s police commissioner, has “handcuffed’’ the police
response to demonstrations.” An administrator has to listen as well as
speak. At times, your best experts are the ones in the field. At this time, she
neglects to listen to her people. I would not follow the teachings and
leadership of this chief. I would hold my mouth shut as an administrator
under her reign. I can only assume that no one says what needs said through
fear of termination or isolation from her.
Russell however speaks to the truth of all matters. He points to some
of his intersectionality, but utilizes them to add ethos to his argument of
compassion, dignity, and love. He mentioned that he was a pastor. This also
adds to his toolbox as he is able not only to serve and protect, but to aid the
soul. He is a loving leader that believes in his work. He wants others to
believe in his work as well. I feel that he is completely dedicated to his idea
and brought substantial statistics to back up that work. He also points to his
faults as well. Instead of dwelling on the faults, he sees them as strengths to
be better in reducing the fear and isolation of certain communities. The part
I appreciated with him is that he pointed out a flaw that a lot of
administrators do not do out of fear of angering the crowd. He pointed to the
community of citizens in that they have to do better too. In a community, all
members have to work to the common good of the community to make it
well. Some officers fear the community more than the community fears
them. That creates a dangerous situation. I feel as if I could follow the
Russell in his philosophy and teachings.
Berrien, H. (2019, July 04). Portland police chief after antifa attacks: We Need
ANTI-MASK Law. Retrieved April 20, 2020, from
https://www.dailywire.com/news/portland-police-chief-after-antifaattacks-we-need-hank-berrien

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Submit a Comment