• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Research on Effectivenes & LSI Profiles - The Case for Blue
 

Research on Effectivenes & LSI Profiles - The Case for Blue

on

  • 725 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
725
Views on SlideShare
708
Embed Views
17

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

1 Embed 17

http://www.navy.gov.au 17

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Research on Effectivenes & LSI Profiles - The Case for Blue Research on Effectivenes & LSI Profiles - The Case for Blue Presentation Transcript

    • Research on Effectiveness & LSI Profiles The Case for Blue
    • Ideal LSI Profile How does this compare with your most effective Navy Leader?
    • Effective Navy Leadership Exercise Data Most Effective Navy Leadership
    • Effective Navy Leadership Exercise Data Least Effective Navy Leadership
    • Effectiveness – Navy Perspective Most / Least Effective Leader Exercise Navy most effective profile Navy least effective profile Effectiveness
    • Sample LSI Profiles
    • Example Managers A Very Effective CEO
      • #4 to #1 (rev & assets).
      • #1 in customer service.
      • World benchmark.
      • ‘ Before his time’ strategy development.
      • Major contribution to Government policy.
    • Example Managers A Very Ineffective CEO
      • Decline in revenue growth.
      • Key executives went to
      • the competitors.
      • Decline in service quality.
      • Decline in share price.
      • Being positioned for sale.
      How does this compare with your least effective Navy Leader?
    • Example Managers Principal of School Winner of Excellence Award
    • Example Managers
      • Director: Health Management
      • Company experiencing 50% staff turnover
    • Example Managers
      • Male supervisor with high blood pressure
    • Example Managers
      • 54 year old Male who has had 5 ulcers
    • Summary Perceptions What the Research tells us…
      • Relate the outcomes to the circumplex styles.
      • What makes some people effective?
      • Top % in outcomes.
      • Bottom % in outcomes.
      • Motivator for change.
      Outcomes - Summary Perceptions
    • Australian & NZ LSI Data 1994 - Present Effectiveness Top 10%: 7,000 Bottom 10%: 7,000 As rated by Others Top 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 6.52 As rated by Others Bottom 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 4.03 Marginal Excellent
    • Australian & NZ LSI Data 1994 - Present Quality of Work Relationships Top 10%: 7,000 Bottom 10%: 7,000 As rated by Others Top 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 6.65 As rated by Others Bottom 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 3.96 Excellent Poor
    • Australian & NZ LSI Data 1994 - Present Ability to Handle Stress Top 10%: 7,000 Bottom 10%: 7,000 As rated by Others Bottom 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 5.42 As rated by Others Top 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 2.15 At ease Tense
    • Australian & NZ LSI Data 1994 - Present Management of Time Top 10%: 7,000 Bottom 10%: 7,000 As rated by Others Top 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 6.47 As rated by Others Bottom 10% for this Question Avg. Response = 3.78 Poorly Effectively
    • Outcomes associated with LSI Factor
      • Managerial Effectiveness
      • Quality of Interpersonal Relations
      • Job Satisfaction
      • Psychological/Physiological Health
      • Problem-Solving Effectiveness
      • Interest in Self Improvement
      • Organisational Level
      • Salary
      Aggressive/ Defensive 0 -- -- -- - -- + + Constructive ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ + 0 Passive/ Defensive 0 + -- - - + -- -- + indicates positive significant relationship 0 indicates non-significant relationship - indicates negative significant relationship Key: