Leadership Orientations Self-Assessment Reflective Paper

Esmeralda M. Collazo

EDUC 5380Strategic Operations

Professor Dr. Duckworth

East Texas Baptist University

May 23, 2017

 Introduction

I had never deeply pondered about the importance of how organizations work and what factors

must be in place in order for organizations to be successful until this semester. After reading our

classroom texts and partaking in the classroom discussions I finally understand and appreciate

the intricate features that make up the four frames. These four frames which are the structural,

human resource, political, and the symbolic frame are not only used in the business and political

world. These frames are ever intertwined with the world of education. It is important to

recognize that not any one frame is superior to another. Each frame is composed of essential

pieces to help in the development and success to the organizations. It is also important to realize

that being able to apply all four frames can have significant positive effects in the organization if

they are applied correctly.

Reflections

It came to no surprise that Im more inclined to the human resources frame. I truly believe that

the most important cause for a persons or companys success is the people they associate or

work with. I was surprised that the other frames were in such a close scoring range to each other,

but I was mostly surprised to learn the percentile ranking for my political frame. This frame was

actually higher than I expected it would be. All in all, these scores will be very beneficial to

understanding how I function and what I can improve on as a leader.

Human Resource Frame

As I mentioned earlier, my raw score was highest in this frame. However, it wasnt considerable

higher compared to others using the percentile scores. I was only above 60% of the leaders in

this frame. Nevertheless, since it is my highest frame I will use this strength habitually to better

serve my team. I will seek to invest in the people in my organization or that have a direct effect
in my organization. This will involve growing, retaining, and empowering them so that they feel

valued and find meaning in their work. As a teacher, I understand that I alone cannot grow my

students to their full potential. Thus, I rely on my team, the paraprofessionals, as well as other

stakeholders. For instance, this year I was in charge of being the student council sponsor. One of

the very first items on my agenda was recruiting others who would help build the leaders in this

group and assist me the work load. I looked for people who had the strengths I lacked and who

shared the same vision for the group. Moving forward as an administrator I hope to use this

frame to motivate, coach, and empower subordinates and make my organization successful.

Political Frame

Though my political frame and symbolic frame scored the same raw score, my political frame

was actually higher based on the percentile score. I scored 80-89% higher than other leaders in

this frame. This information basically tells me what I already suspected, Im adequate at building

my network and assembling it when needed. I have to use this structure effectively in order to

ensure that I can solve the issue of allocating scarce resources, setting an agenda, and

negotiating.

Symbolic Frame

In the symbolic frame, Im basically on the 50th percentile as other leaders. I have to say that this

information didnt really shock me. Ive never been the kind of person who has a flair for Drama.

I also lack the creativity to create or use symbols to mobilize others, I do however, have the

ability to create a vision and have others buy into it. I enjoy sharing stories that carry powerful

messages to the crowds that promote action and inspire others. I will have to develop this skill in

order to give people hope and meaning.

Structural Frame

My lowest raw score was for the structural frame. Since this is my weakest frame both in the raw

score and the percentile score I will need to truly develop the skills necessary in order to see the

bigger picture, identify the objectives, and structure the organization effectively. In the book it

gives a great reason why the structural frame is vital to have, it states, Understanding the

complexity and variety of design possibilities can help create formal prototypes that work for,

rather than against, both people and collective purposes. (Lee G. Boleman, 2008) In the past, it

has been quite difficult for me to assign roles. I am the person who thinks if you want something

done right than you must do it yourself. In organization this mindset is totally obscured. It is

important to assign roles, tasks, and responsibilities in order for the organization to function

effectively. I know that if I continue to overload the work on myself not only am I going to fell

burned out, but it might not be as effective and my team would also feel undervalued which in

return could create tension.

Conclusion

A true leader who desires to improve and create a successful organization must invest in

acquiring the knowledge and abilities needed to function effectively in the four frames. They

must understand this unique art and be able to reflect on the pieces of each frame and apply each

when needed. As a future administrative leader, I hope to take all that I have learned and

structure my organization so that it is functioning at its full potential.

 Appendix A

My raw scores for each of the four frames, on a scale from 6 to 24, are:

Structural: 12
Human Resources: 20
Political: 14
Symbolic: 14

Percentile Structural Score HR Score Political Score Symbolic Score

90-100th 22-24 24 16-24 21-24

80-89th 20, 21 22, 23 14, 15 18-20

70-79th 18, 19 21 13 17

60-69th 17 20 12 16

50-59th 15,16 19 11 14, 15

40-49th 14 18 10 13

30-39th 13 17 9 12

20-29th 11,12 15, 16 8 11

10-19th 9, 10 13, 14 7 9, 10

1-9th 6-8 6-12 6 6-8

 Appendix B

Points Self- Instruction

Categories
Possible Evaluation Evaluation

APA formatting / Grammar / Punctuation / Usage /

50 40
Spelling

Reflections Relatable to Frames 25 22

Personal Examples Provided 25 20

Depth of Development 25 22

Insights / Implications for future practice 25 24

Total Points 150 128

Average of the two scores:

 Bibliography
Lee G. Boleman, T. E. (2008). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.