Use your week one case write up to analyze the case using the Political and Symbolic frames. The organization of this analysis is flexible but a few criter

Matthew Leteff

Personal Leadership in a Military Context

LED 604

September 8, 2024

This case study explores a challenging leadership experience within a military demographic, focusing on the dynamics of power, conflict, and diversity. The primary adaptive challenge and the mental models of stakeholders are examined to provide a comprehensive analysis.

The key problems and issues in this case revolve around the complex interplay of power, conflict, and diverse perspectives within a military setting. The primary adaptive challenge involves managing these dynamics to foster an inclusive and effective organizational environment. Various mental models held by stakeholders, including hierarchical power structures and cultural differences, play a significant role in the unfolding of the case.

The case is set within a military unit where diverse demographic backgrounds contribute to both the richness and the tension within the team. The situation became particularly challenging during a mission where conflicting viewpoints and power struggles surfaced, affecting team cohesion and performance. This experience highlighted the need for adaptive leadership strategies to navigate the complexities of diversity and conflict.

During a critical mission, the team faced a situation where differing cultural perspectives led to a conflict between team members. As the leader, I found it challenging to mediate the conflict while maintaining the mission's objectives. The power dynamics within the military hierarchy further complicated the situation, as some members felt marginalized due to their demographic background.

Structural Frame: The rigid hierarchical structure of the military often exacerbates power imbalances. In this case, the lack of flexibility in roles and responsibilities contributed to the conflict. A more adaptive structure that allows for input from diverse team members could mitigate such issues (Bolman & Deal, 2017).

Human Resource Frame: The diverse backgrounds of team members are valuable assets. However, the conflict highlighted the need for better cultural competence and communication skills. Investing in training that fosters understanding and respect for diversity can enhance team cohesion (Northouse, 2018).

Political Frame: Power dynamics played a crucial role in this case. Recognizing the informal power structures and addressing the concerns of marginalized members can help in resolving conflicts. As a leader, leveraging political skills to balance power and give voice to all team members is essential (Pfeffer, 2013).

Symbolic Frame: The military culture often emphasizes uniformity and discipline, which can overshadow the unique contributions of diverse members. Creating a culture that celebrates diversity, and inclusivity can transform the symbolic meaning of the organization and foster a more cohesive team.

This case study underscores the importance of adaptive leadership in managing power, conflict, and diversity within a military context. By applying the four frames, leaders can develop strategies to address these challenges and create a more inclusive and effective organizational environment.

References:

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.

Pfeffer, J. (2013). Power: Why Some People Have It and Others Don't. Harper Business.

,

Week Three Assignment

Use your week one case write up to analyze the case using the Political and Symbolic frames. The organization of this analysis is flexible but a few criteria to keep in mind include.  

· Papers are to be between 4–5pages, use APA format, and include a brief abstract of the original case to help remind the reader. 

· Begin with a thesis statement (assertion) about the case based on your analysis this week and identify for the reader how you will go through a supportive discussion of that assertion.  

· The the analysis must be packed with the application of course readings AND utilize data from the case study itself. Be sure to use good citations and referencing. Balance the application of multiple frames covered in a particular week. 

· Tell the reader how the frame helps you understand something new about the case. Is there a way in which the frame is not helpful? 

· What central inquiry questions are you now left with as a result of the analysis?

Rubric

A four-level rubric for the Week Three Assignment.
A: Outstanding Achievement (Integral)	B: Commendable Achievement (Analytical)	C: Marginal Achievement (Adequate)	D / F: Unsatisfactory Achievement (Below Standard)
Mastery of concepts and ideas, answer demonstrates application of theory. Evidence that learning is applicable to personal experience and internal understanding. Creativity and originality. Sophistication of expression. Communicates reasoning.	Mastery of concepts and ideas, answer demonstrates synthesis of ideas and includes an example or illustration of concepts. Expression is competent and communicates ideas clearly. May lack sophistication but clearly communicates mastery of the course material.	Understanding of concepts and ideas. Attempt to illustrate or provide an example of concepts though may lack sophistication and clarity. Demonstration of learning and comprehension though significant gaps in demonstrated understanding.	Limited understanding of concepts and ideas. Description is used versus analysis or illustration. Use of tacit knowledge versus course concepts.