Fluent Essays

Please Follow directions or I will dispute  Please answer original forum with a minimum of 250 words each and respond to both students separately with a minimum of 100 words each  page 1 Original Forum with References  page 2 Jason response with references  page 3 Judith response with references  Original Forum  What do neuroscience, positive psychology, and organizational development have in common, and how can those in leadership roles utilize these three disciplines to effect positive change in organizations? Note: Neuroscience is the study of the body's nervous system and how the brain works. Recent advances in the field of neuroscience have led to the discovery that our brain influences how we view change. This is why people, more often than not, possess a natural resistance to change Jason Hello Dr. Elgohary and class,             Neuroleadership is an interesting study, it focuses on leaders and tapping into their employees, as well as their own, neuro pathways to help them better lead people.  According to our weekly lesson, “Leaders must coach their followers from a cognitive perspective by getting into their heads and convincing them that the change is to help, not to destroy” (Week 7 Lesson).  I agree with this, especially when it comes to changes within an organization, and most especially if the changes are unpopular.  Few employees would be opposed to pay raises, this is a change that will more than likely not require a leader to convince their employees, via neurological means, that the change is needed.  However, for something like work schedule changes or employees having to work more hours, this is when neuroleadership could be critical in ensuring a smooth transition to upcoming changes. According to Boyatzis (2011), “inspiring and supportive relationships are important - they help activate openness to new ideas and a more social orientation to others” (para 1), I agree with this as well.  I have personally worked with leaders who truly inspired their subordinates, these subordinates would do whatever the leader asked just because they had so much respect for the leader.  I have always said that the biggest mistake that leaders make is not getting to know their employees.  By simply taking the time to get to know the employees who work for them, this instills confidence of the leader in the employees, they are therefore more willing to continue working hard even when the work is unpopular.  According to Pace (2012), “Applying the principles of neuroscience - the study of the brain - to leadership development programs enables leaders to behave in harmony with how the brain works, improving the way they motivate and communicate their employees” (p. 20).  Motivation and communication are two big things when it comes to inspiring employees and leading them.  As previously mentioned, when employees are more motivated and have good relationships with their leaders they are more willing to work hard, even when the work is not satisfying. On the subject of neuroleadership at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Williams (2010) wrote, “The defining factor between good and great systems engineers was indeed the effective implementation of the softer sciences, such as the ability to engage and motivate employees, build effective teams, communicate well at all levels and think systemically” (p. 9).I imagine there is a big difference between managers and leaders at companies such as NASA and, say, a local McDonald’s.  Without a doubt, managers at NASA are taught how to manage people through training provided, or at the very least supported by, the organization.  Does this mean that NASA has more resources to provide these types of training?  Maybe, but maybe more than that is the organization wanting to provide these types of training to ensure its employees, at all levels, are trained and prepared for most situations.  Granted, does NASA have a slightly more important “mission” than McDonald’s?  I would go out on a limb and say yes but this doesn’t mean that McDonald’s managers should not be trained on how to properly engage their employees. I write all of this to get to the questions… I would say that neuroscience, positive psychology and organizational development all relate to how managers and leaders lead their people.  By getting to know their employees, managers are going to have a much easier time in incorporating changes within an organization, especially if these changes are unpopular.  Leaders and managers can use these in a leadership role to build rapport and confidence within their employees, thereby affecting positive changes within the organizations. V/r, Jason References: Boyatzis, R. (2011). Neuroscience and leadership: The promise of insights. Ivey Business Journal (Online), 1. Retrieved from https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/trade-journals/neuroscience-leadership-promise-insights/docview/852766997/se-2?accountid=8289. Pace, A. (2012). Brain-based learning for leaders. T + D, 66(12), 20. Retrieved from https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/trade-journals/brain-based-learning-leaders/docview/1240342007/se-2?accountid=8289. Week 7 Lesson. “Week 7: Neuroscience in Leadership”. American Military University, MGMT603: Organizational Development. Williams, C. R. (2010). Applying neuroscience to leadership development: Designing learning with the brain in mind. People and Strategy, 33(4), 9-10. Retrieved from https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/trade-journals/applying-neuroscience-leadership-development/docview/845621487/se-2?accountid=8289. Judith Guys,  I hope everyone is having a great day! I have been so busy I just realized it is already week 7. I am not going to lie, I look forward to not having to take overtime in order to get my assignments done (ha ha!) and actually getting to catch up on sleep. However, I know I will miss this at the same time. (Go figure!) Anyway, I hope you all are staying safe and well.  What do neuroscience, positive psychology, and organizational development have in common, and how can those in leadership roles utilize these three disciplines to effect positive change in organizations?       This week has had some pretty interesting discussion points. There is much to be said about Neuroleadership as it is becoming a new way to address leadership as a whole. I personally have seen a lot of changes and approaches within my organization regarding how change is facilitated. It has changed drastically over the past 5 years alone. I want to start by discussing organizational development, this is a huge aspect to organizations regardless of what profession. Organizational development produces changes within a culture. In order to change things within an organization there has to be a process that facilitates among all employees. This could look like a huge change or it could appear as a small change. In order to facilitate the necessary changes it is as we have discussed paramount for the employees to identify with this change as a positive thing. This is when positive psychology comes into play. In my opinion all have in common the factor that they are necessary components of change. Not understanding one or the other can lead to implementing change and not having the support of employees.       I like to use examples, so I will use modern issues we face today. Plain and simply put COVID mandates. Learning what we have so far it has been quite interesting to watch how people have been reacting to the newly issues mandates, which have varied now state by state. This has caused employees to quit and is causing a lot of issues within our justice system. I think when it comes to these mandates, neuroscience and positive psychology have next to not been present. I think this has contributed to the massive push back of employees and citizens in general. Not much transparency has been shared and there is a reluctance to listening to officials regarding the importance of vaccination. Positive changes means listening to what people have to say and those who you employee are able to share their concerns. The outcome of side stepping much of these changes and now forcing employees hand one way or another are negatively affecting businesses and health care facilitators in general. The necessity to share information, being mindful about the concerns and practicing communication from the top to the bottom and the bottom to the top needs to be continuous not just a rarity, especially when implementing organizational development and changes within. Motivating employees via open channels and open communication, reinforcing with positive psychology can facilitate the changes in a more dynamic and team oriented manner.  J. Abregano References Ellis, R. K. (2014, March 26). Neuroleadership: Applying Neuroscience to Leadership Development. Retrieved November 14, 2017, from https://www.td.org/Publications/Blogs/Human-Capital-Blog/2014/03/Applying-Neuroscience-to-Leadership-Development Hannah, S., Balthazard, P., Waldman, D., & Jennings, P. (2013). The psychological and neurological bases of leader self-complexity and effects on adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 393-411. Retrieved