Respond to two discussion 150 each: Discussion 1: Respond 150 words Leadership and the improvement of styles and practices have been the topics of study for many years, Kouzes & Posner’s Five Exemplary Practices of Leadership and Senge’s Five Disciplines are highly regarded sources for improving leadership through similar concepts.  By reviewing the common elements of leadership, the differences and similarities can be highlighted.  Both aim to have individuals invest their human capital by being committed and engaged (Hutton, Ronis, Sheila, & Quindag, 2012).               Values and congruent actions are an important element of good leadership.  Kouzes & Posner’s Model the Way explains that the leader must clarify their personal values and model the way for employees to follow.  Leaders are designers and then teachers (Hutton et al., 2012).   Senge asserts through his Personal Mastery discipline that leaders base their actions on what they know about themselves and how they impact others (Harris, 1990).               Kouzes & Posner’s practice of Inspire a Shared Vision tells leader to communicate passionately to inspire followers.   Additionally, leaders must solidify their own visions to enable them to pass it on and recruit others (Hutton et al., 2012).   Senge’s discipline of Building Shared Visions tell leaders that early in the process of a change to communicate effectively and build a common vision.    This vision grows off each person’s mission and grows into a group shared mission (Harris, 1990).               Questioning the status quo, another element of good leadership, is viewed differently by both Kouzes & Posner, who tell leaders to seek change with new and fresh ideas even if they risk failure.   Senge’s discipline tells leaders to dig deep and surface preconceived values and mind sets and either support or reject them while allocating time for regular self-reflection (Fulmer, Robert; Keys, 1998).               Learning together by working together is common element in solid leadership.  Kouzes and Posner urge leaders to trust others to do their job and not micromanage.  Senge’s discipline, Team Learning, says that learning can only happen when teams commence sharing and thinking together.   Brainstorming freely and discussing different points of view enable active learning (Harris, 1990).               Kouzes and Posner’s practice of integration is to encourage the heart by nurturing through emotional support, having a supportive environment and reinforcing positive values (Hutton et al., 2012).   Senge’s System Thinking discipline asserts that examine the whole group of interrelationships gives a deep examination than breaking things down and examining each individually.  If a holistic approach is taken balance and equilibrium can be maintained (Harris, 1990).                Finally, Kouzes and Posner’s leadership practices give the leader a hero-like persona while Senge’s disciplines encourage a learning organiza.

1. Respond to two discussion 150 each:
Discussion 1: Respond 150 words
Leadership and the improvement of styles and practices have
been the topics of study for many years, Kouzes & Posner’s
Five Exemplary Practices of Leadership and Senge’s Five
Disciplines are highly regarded sources for improving
leadership through similar concepts. By reviewing the common
elements of leadership, the differences and similarities can be
highlighted. Both aim to have individuals invest their human
capital by being committed and engaged (Hutton, Ronis, Sheila,
& Quindag, 2012).
Values and congruent actions are an important element
of good leadership. Kouzes & Posner’s Model the Way explains
that the leader must clarify their personal values and model the
way for employees to follow. Leaders are designers and then
teachers (Hutton et al., 2012). Senge asserts through his
Personal Mastery discipline that leaders base their actions on
what they know about themselves and how they impact others
(Harris, 1990).
Kouzes & Posner’s practice of Inspire a Shared Vision
tells leader to communicate passionately to inspire followers.
Additionally, leaders must solidify their own visions to enable
them to pass it on and recruit others (Hutton et al., 2012).
Senge’s discipline of Building Shared Visions tell leaders that
early in the process of a change to communicate effectively and
build a common vision. This vision grows off each person’s
mission and grows into a group shared mission (Harris, 1990).
Questioning the status quo, another element of good

2. leadership, is viewed differently by both Kouzes & Posner, who
tell leaders to seek change with new and fresh ideas even if they
risk failure. Senge’s discipline tells leaders to dig deep and
surface preconceived values and mind sets and either support or
reject them while allocating time for regular self-reflection
(Fulmer, Robert; Keys, 1998).
Learning together by working together is common
element in solid leadership. Kouzes and Posner urge leaders to
trust others to do their job and not micromanage. Senge’s
discipline, Team Learning, says that learning can only happen
when teams commence sharing and thinking together.
Brainstorming freely and discussing different points of view
enable active learning (Harris, 1990).
Kouzes and Posner’s practice of integration is to
encourage the heart by nurturing through emotional support,
having a supportive environment and reinforcing positive values
(Hutton et al., 2012). Senge’s System Thinking discipline
asserts that examine the whole group of interrelationships gives
a deep examination than breaking things down and examining
each individually. If a holistic approach is taken balance and
equilibrium can be maintained (Harris, 1990).
Finally, Kouzes and Posner’s leadership practices give
the leader a hero-like persona while Senge’s disciplines
encourage a learning organization where the members
continually transform themselves. Also, Kouzes and Posner’s
model stresses relationships and communication while Senge’s
focus on a collective system of communication, dialogue and
teaching.
Discussion 2: Respond 150 words
When reviewing two competing studies based on the Kouzes

3. and Posner's Leadership Practices and Senge's Five disciplines,
it is important to understand the context in which the studies are
being applied. In the study focused on the Kouzes/Posner Model
(KPM) (Waite & McKinney, 2015) the aim was to integrate
program basics into the construct of nursing students, and
develop more effective transformational leadership within the
nursing career field to enhance overall performance. The second
study focused on Senge's Five Disciplines (SFD) (Silva, 2018)
was focused on people understanding of the five constructs and
if they feel they have been adopted into the organization. While
both of them approach leadership in its unique fashion, there is
one universal truth, both studies harp on the importance of
integrating leadership, and passion into the roots fo the
organization. Waite and Mckinney harp on the importance of
transformational leadership skills in the ever-growing, and more
complex healthcare organizations. (p1, 2015) Additionally,
Silva echoes this thought by highlighting the need for
organizations to be flexible, learning, and proactive instead of
reactive. (2018)
The differences in these two studies are the clinical method of
one, vice the education-centric approach of the other. Silva's
study focused on whether or not research administrators had
heard of the five principles, whereas the study by Waite and
McKinney started off assuming they were unfamiliar with the
KPM. Furthermore, where the SFD study focused on
quantitative data, it left very little in the way of "actionable"
items. However, the KPM study provided not just data, but a
clearly defined path to a better, more effective leadership corp
in the Nursing industry.
Ultimately, both studies provide clear context as to the overall
languished nature of the team member, or research administrator
to readily identify, practice, and cultivate the respective
frameworks in their organizations. As the saying goes "Give a
man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach him to fish, and he eats for

4. a lifetime." What is becoming exceedingly more apparent is that
no one knows how to fish and that the fish are faster and
smarter than ever.
There is however an answer to this issue, and the studies above
(while different) prove that at all echelons of academia, and
business, people are putting effort into their employees, and
their leadership ability. As a collective, it is not only a
requirement, but a necessity for the success of leaders today,
and in the future.