Human Capital Model (HCM)

In business you may hear the term “human capital” used in relation to building and maintaining an organization. A human capital model is the pattern employed by an organization to best use the human capital at their disposal. Let’s briefly look at these terms.

Webster (2005) defines capital in part as, “wealth (money or property) owned or used in business by a person, corporation, etc… wealth, in whatever form, used or capable of being used to produce more wealth… any source of benefit or assistance.”

To speak of “human capital” is to express the value of human beings to the success of an enterprise, and hence the importance of investing in their training, education, and well being. Human capital theory is rooted in the work of British economists Sir William Petty and Adam Smith. “It postulates that expenditure on training and education is costly, and should be considered an investment since it is undertaken with a view to increasing personal incomes” (Becker, 1964). Marshall (1998) asserts that, “Human capital arises out of any activity able to raise individual worker productivity.”

Too often leaders see human resources as a commodity to be used up rather than to be cared for. Bolman and Deal (2003) place the emphasis of “human resources” as seeing human beings as a valuable resource to be nurtured and cared for, not just expended as a means of production. The assumption is that there is a symbiotic relationship between employees and the organizations that employ them. They suggest a human resource perspective should embrace the following core assumptions:

• Organizations exist to serve human needs rather than the reverse.
• People and organizations need each other. Organizations need ideas, energy and talent; people need careers, salaries and opportunities.
• When the fit between individual and system is poor, one or both suffer. Individuals are exploited or exploit the organization—or both become victims.
• A good fit benefits both. Individuals find meaningful and satisfying work, and organizations get the talent and energy they need to succeed (p. 115).

As to my organization, since my organization is the Church, our primary emphasis (our HCM if you will) is upon the value and worth of every human life—created by God with intention and purpose. God has made the supreme investment toward the salvation of humankind. However, from a capitalistic point of view, being a non-profit organization, we are not as concerned with people being productive toward the accumulation of more wealth as we are of people realizing their God-given potential toward their own personal fulfillment and the building of His kingdom.

_____________

References:

Becker, G.S. (1964). Human Capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special

reference to education. New York. Retrieved Sep 7, 2009 from http://economyprofessor.com/economictheories/human-capital-theory.php

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2003). Reframing Organizations. Artistry, choice and

            leadership. San Francisco: Jose-Bass

Marshall, G. (1998). Human capital theory. A Dictionary of Sociology.

Retrieved Sep 7, 2009 from Encyclopedia.com:

http://www.encyclopedia.co./doc/1O88-Humancapitaltheory.html

Webster’s New World College Dictionary (4^th ed). (2005).

Cleveland, OH: Wiley Publishing, Inc.

Authentic Leadership –Part 5

This is the fifth in a series of blog posts examining the subject of “Authentic Leadership.”

Part 1 was posted on June 6, 2016; Part 2 was posted on June 13, 2016; Part 3 was posted on June 20, 2016; Part 4 was posted on June 27, 2016.

Abstract

What does it mean to be authentic? What does authentic leadership look like? What are the qualities and characteristics of an authentic leader? What deterrents are there to being authentic? Is authenticity a help or deterrent to strategic communication? What is the place of vulnerability and truthfulness in being authentic? To what leadership models should authentic leaders be compared? In this series of blog posts we will address these questions along with the postulation that authentic leadership must be measured universally against the servant leadership model exemplified by Jesus Christ, and individually against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator.

Authentic Leadership – Part 5

In previous posts in this series on authentic leadership we have defined what it means to be authentic. We have offered the servant leadership of Christ as the model to be emulated. We have examined how a lack of social awareness and a misuse of power are deterrents to authentic leadership. And we have suggested that as leaders truthfully and honestly make themselves vulnerable, authenticity is enhanced and power need not be relinquished. Today we will conclude this series by looking at qualities and characteristics of authentic leaders.

What are the Qualities and Characteristics of an Authentic Leader?

The qualities and characteristics of an authentic servant leader after the model of Christ include following after such traits as humility, love, joy, peace, generosity, strength, courage, integrity, honesty, and an organizational system built on interdependent relationships.

Eisenberg, Goodall and Trethewey (2007) define a system as, “a complex set of relationships among interdependent components or parts” (p. 106). An organizational system of interdependence “refers both to the wholeness of the system and its environment and to the interrelationships of individuals within the system” (p. 107). A portion of scripture that is particularly apropos when building and leading teams, is found in the book of Romans in the Bible. The Apostle Paul gives a wonderful illustration of interdependence. He writes…

³ For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. ⁴ Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, ⁵ so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. ⁶ We have different gifts, according to the grace given us (NIV Bible, Romans 12:3-6).

Paul’s exhortation to leaders in Christ’s Church is to recognize and appreciate that each individual has a place in the whole and that the whole cannot operate properly without all of its parts working interdependently.

As to the question of what traits, characteristics and qualities a leader must possess to work within an organizational system of interdependence, Paul starts by stating one important trait: “Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought” (v. 3). But then, after explaining that every individual will be gifted somewhere within a list of seven different categories of natural gifts and talents (vv. 6-8, a fascinating and enlightening study in itself), Paul goes on to list more traits we should embrace:

⁹ Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. ¹⁰ Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. ¹¹ Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. ¹² Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. ¹³ Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality (NIV Bible, Romans 12:9-13).

So leadership traits, characteristics and qualities will include:

1.                  Keeping our egos in check (don’t think too highly of yourself, v. 3)

2.                  Sincerely caring for team members (love sincerely, v. 9)

3.                  Maintaining high ethical standards (hate evil, cling to good, v.9)

4.                  Being committed to your team members (be devoted to on another, v. 10)

5.                  Seeking recognition for the team above yourself (honor one another above yourselves, v. 10)

6.                  Maintaining zealousness (never be lacking in zeal, keep your fervor, v. 11)

7.                  Being joyful, hopeful, patient, faithful and hospitable (vv. 12-13)

These traits and characteristics speak to the heart of the leader. Wayne Cordeiro (2001) suggests that building teams, forging relationships, and communicating effectively does not begin with a certain kind of technique; it begins with a certain kind of heart. Such a heart, he states, “constantly asks, How can I include others? It anticipates the joy of sharing experiences, struggles and victories, realizing that, like the body, we work best in teams—the way God designed us to function” (p. 77).

Leaders may be authentically good, authentically mediocre, or authentically evil, depending upon what model they strive to emulate. If more leaders would seek to become authentic servant leaders after the model of Christ Jesus, strategic planning, organizational health and operational efficiency would certainly be enhanced.

_______________ 

NOTE: Please visit this blog site each week (a new blog is posted every Monday). This blog entry is part 5 of a series of blog posts examining the subject of Authentic Leadership. Part 1 was posted on 2017-07-10, Part 2 was posted on 2017-07-17, Part 3 was posted 2017-07-24, Part 4 was posted on 2017-07-31.

References:

Eisenberg, E.M., Goodall, H.L. & Trethewey, A. (2007). Oganizational Communication,

            Balancing creativity and constraint. Boston, MA: Bedford.st Martin’s

Holy Bible, New International Version (NIV) (1984). International Bible Society,

            Zondervan Publishing House

Cordeiro, W. (2001). Doing church as a Team. Ventura, CA: Regal Books/ Gospel Light

Authentic Leadership –Part 4

This is the fourth in a series of blog posts examining the subject of “Authentic Leadership.”

Part 1 was posted on June 6, 2016; Part 2 was posted on June 13, 2016; Part 3 was posted on June 20, 2016.

Abstract

What does it mean to be authentic? What does authentic leadership look like? What are the qualities and characteristics of an authentic leader? What deterrents are there to being authentic? Is authenticity a help or deterrent to strategic communication? What is the place of vulnerability and truthfulness in being authentic? To what leadership models should authentic leaders be compared? In this series of blog posts we will address these questions along with the postulation that authentic leadership must be measured universally against the servant leadership model exemplified by Jesus Christ, and individually against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator.

Authentic Leadership – Part 4

In parts 1 and 2 of this series we have defined what it means to be authentic: Conforming to, copying, reproducing or having the same characteristics as an original. We have suggested that the best model of leadership to be emulated and conformed to is the selfless leadership exemplified by Christ. Last week, in part 3, we looked at a lack of social awareness and the misuse of power as deterrents to authentic leadership. In regard to the use of power in leadership, this week we will consider whether truthfulness and vulnerability are a help or a hindrance.

Is Being Vulnerable and Truthful Prerequisite to Being Authentic?

Does a leader lose power in finding their authentic voice as leader if this includes actions such as truth-telling and being vulnerable? Being open and honest, especially about your feelings, certainly opens you up to vulnerability. Whenever we drop our defenses and approach another person with open arms, we risk the chance of being hit with a cheap shot. The opposite, keeping ourselves behind a wall of protection, renders us incapable of meaningful interchange with other people. Simon and Garfunkel (1965) recorded a sad song titled I am a Rock that expresses the feeling of vulnerability that causes one to hide from relationships with others. The lyrics in part go like this:

            I am a rock.

I am an island.

            I’ve built walls;

A fortress deep and mighty,

That none may penetrate.

            I have no need of friendship; friendship causes pain.

Its laughter and its loving I disdain.

I am a rock.

I am an island.

I am shielded in my armor,

Hiding in my room,

Safe within my womb.

I touch no one and no one touches me.

I am a rock.

I am an island.

And a rock feels no pain,

And an island never cries.

To seal oneself off from relationships with others for fear of the pain is to relegate oneself to pain of another kind—the pain of loneliness, lack of joy, and want of purpose.

Cloud and Townsend (2003) profess that successful confrontation always involves balancing grace and truth. “Grace is your being on the side of, of ‘for,’ the other person as well as the relationship. Truth is the reality of whatever you need to say about the problem” (p. 42). Jesus Christ was the perfect balance of these two elements. “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (NIV Bible, John 1:17). People need both grace and truth in relationships with God and with each other. With Christ-like authenticity, power is not lost, but gained through truth and vulnerability.           

(to be continued)

_______________ 

NOTE: Please visit this blog site each week (a new blog is posted every Monday). This blog entry is part 4 of a series of blog posts examining the subject of Authentic Leadership. Part 1 was posted on 2017-07-10, Part 2 was posted on 2017-07-17, Part 3 was posted 2017-07-24.

Next week: Part 5 - “What are the Qualities and Characteristics of an Authentic Leader?”

References:

Simon, P. (1965). I am a Rock [Recorded by Simon and Garfunkel].

On Sounds of Silence. Retrieved June 26, 2016, from http://sglyrics.myrmid.com/sounds.htm#track11  

Cloud, H. & Townsend, J. (2003). Boundaries Face to Face.

How to have that difficult conversation you’ve been avoiding.

Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan

Authentic Leadership - Part 3

This is the third in a series of blog posts examining the subject of “Authentic Leadership.”

Part 1 was posted on June 6, 2016; Part 2 was posted on June 13, 2016.

Abstract

What does it mean to be authentic? What does authentic leadership look like? What are the qualities and characteristics of an authentic leader? What deterrents are there to being authentic? Is authenticity a help or deterrent to strategic communication? What is the place of vulnerability and truthfulness in being authentic? To what leadership models should authentic leaders be compared? In this series of blog posts we will address these questions along with the postulation that authentic leadership must be measured universally against the servant leadership model exemplified by Jesus Christ, and individually against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator.

Authentic Leadership – Part 3

In parts 1 and 2 of this series we have defined what it means to be authentic: Conforming to, copying, reproducing or having the same characteristics as an original. We have suggested that the best model of leadership to be emulated and conformed to is the selfless leadership exemplified by Christ.

What Deterrents Are There to Being Authentic?

Since authenticity is relative to a model of some kind, it should be noted that not all models are good. There are leaders who are authentically bad or even evil. However, since we are examining authenticity against the model of Christ and our created purpose, we will consider deterrents to being authentically good. There are many ways and means by which authentic Christ-likeness may be deterred. Anything that separates one from God has the capability to keep them from being authentic. We will touch on only a few potential deterrents.

A lack of social awareness can be a hindrance. Albrecht (2006) observes that those who are self-centered, preoccupied with their own feelings, needs and interests, and not open to the needs, feelings and interests of others, will find it difficult to gain acceptance and cooperation from others (p. 34). Albrecht also points out that extreme narcissism that renders one incapable of engaging in two-way relationships of mutuality, sharing and support is certainly a hindrance (p. 98). Perhaps one of the greatest deterrents is the misuse of power by a leader.

Power can be viewed in many different ways from corruptive power to benevolent

exertion of influence. Eisenberg, Goodall & Trethewey (2007) cite French and Raven with describing, “five types of social power, following the assumption that person A has power over person B when A has control of some outcome B wants” (p. 168). These five types are listed as: Reward power, Coercive power, Referent power, Expert power, and Legitimate power. Research conducted by McClelland & Burnham (1976) finds that managers that have a high “power motivation” achieve better results, as judged by the morale of those working for them. But they note that “power motivation” does not refer to dictatorial behavior but rather a strong desire to exert influence and to have impact (p. 120).

J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings is a study in the corruption of power. The narrator of the story bemoans, “Nine rings were gifted to the race of men who, above all else, desire power… The hearts of men are easily corrupted and the ring of power has a will of its own” (Walsh, 2001, Fellowship of the Ring). Bolman and Deal (2003) state, “There is no guarantee that those who gain power will use it wisely or justly” (p. 201). They further state, “there will always be temptation whenever gargantuan egos and large sums of money are at stake. Top managers too rarely think or talk about the moral dimension of management and leadership” (p. 219). That’s where the greatest potential for destructive use of power lies, when the moral dimension is ignored and personal egos and selfish gain are at the forefront. What is the antidote? If it is true that the moral dimension is “too rarely” thought about or talked about, then it should be brought to the forefront and addressed. Again, this is where the selfless model of servant leadership exemplified by Christ must be championed and continuously rehearsed to maintain authentic leadership. Strategic planning, effective communication, sound team building, achievement of goals, and accomplishment of objectives will only be enhanced when this model of authenticity is adhered to.   

(to be continued)

_______________ 

NOTE: Please visit this blog site each week (a new blog is posted every Monday). This blog entry is part 3 of a series of blog posts examining the subject of Authentic Leadership. Part 1 was posted on 2017-07-10, Part 2 was posted on 2017-07-17

Next week: Part 4 - “Is Being Vulnerable and Truthful Prerequisite to Being Authentic?”

References:

Albrecht, K. (2006). Social Intelligence. The new science of success.

San Francisco: Josey-Bass.

Eisenberg, E.M., Goodall, H.L. & Trethewey, A. (2007). Organizational Communication.

 Balancing creativity and constraint. Boston, MA: Bedford/St Martin’s

McClelland, D.C. & Burnham, D.H. (1976). Power is the great motivator. Harvard

Business Review. Jan 2003, Reprint RO301J. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing

Walsh, F., Boyen, P. & Jackson, P. (2001). The Lord of the Rings. Fellowship of the ring.

            Screenplay. New Line Cinema, Wingnut Films Production.

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2003). Reframing Organizations. Artistry, choice, and

leadership. San Francisco: Josey-Bass