Reapond to each post below in 150-200 words.u Include at least 2 references per post. Post# 1 Structural leadership often evokes images of petty tyrants and rigid bureaucrats who never met a command or rule they didn’t like.  Compared with other frames, literature on structural leadership is sparse, and some structural theorists have contended that leadership is neither important nor basic (Hall, 1987).  Structural leadership can be powerful and enduring, its style is subtler and more analytic than other forms.  Structural leaders succeeded because they have the right design for moment and are able to get their changes implemented.  The following characteristics make effective structural leaders successful: Structural leaders do their homework; Structural leaders rethink the relationship of structure, strategy, and environment; Structural leaders focus on implementation; Effective structural leaders experiment;             Effective structural leaders intuitively saw the need to cultivate understanding and acceptance of major decisions by continually asking for advice and by establishing committees and task forces to address major issues (Bolman & Deal).  Sloan used a simple principle of centralize planning and resource allocation; decentralize operating decisions. This leadership approach is effective when leaders are focused on designing, building an effective organization and developing better ways of managing employees.  I agree with this way of leadership as it deal with a better way of managing people and running an effective organization.                             Reference Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass. Post #2 In the structural frame, an effective leader would be someone who analyzes situations and can be known as "social architects" (Bolman and Deal, p. 356). If the leader is a tyrant, the leadership will be ineffective. But, if the leader focuses on "designing and building an effective organization," the leader can be successful (Bolman and Deal, p. 356). I think this type of leadership works for people who like to do thorough research and can invent ideas based on the research they have done. The downside is that while researching ideas is good, structural leaders tend to forget about building a foundation first and that can be a major point of failure (Bolman and Deal, p. 359). The Structural leader will be more effective during a major organizational change because the business is already established, so a foundation has (hopefully) already been established as well.                               References: Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Post #3 The frame that I have chosen to analyze is the human resources frame.  This frame is routed in psychology and places a significant emphasis on the needs of people (Sasnett, ...

1. Reapond to each post below in 150-200 words.u
Include at least 2 references per post.
Post# 1
Structural leadership often evokes images of petty tyrants and
rigid bureaucrats who never met a command or rule they didn’t
like. Compared with other frames, literature on structural
leadership is sparse, and some structural theorists have
contended that leadership is neither important nor basic (Hall,
1987). Structural leadership can be powerful and enduring, its
style is subtler and more analytic than other forms. Structural
leaders succeeded because they have the right design for
moment and are able to get their changes implemented. The
following characteristics make effective structural leaders
successful: Structural leaders do their homework; Structural
leaders rethink the relationship of structure, strategy, and
environment; Structural leaders focus on implementation;
Effective structural leaders experiment;
Effective structural leaders intuitively saw the need to
cultivate understanding and acceptance of major decisions by
continually asking for advice and by establishing committees
and task forces to address major issues (Bolman & Deal). Sloan
used a simple principle of centralize planning and resource
allocation; decentralize operating decisions. This leadership
approach is effective when leaders are focused on designing,
building an effective organization and developing better ways
of managing employees. I agree with this way of leadership as
it deal with a better way of managing people and running an
effective organization.

2. Reference
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations
artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-
Bass.
Post #2
In the structural frame, an effective leader would be someone
who analyzes situations and can be known as "social
architects" (Bolman and Deal, p. 356). If the leader is a tyrant,
the leadership will be ineffective. But, if the leader focuses on
"designing and building an effective organization," the leader
can be successful (Bolman and Deal, p. 356).
I think this type of leadership works for people who like to do
thorough research and can invent ideas based on the research
they have done. The downside is that while researching ideas is
good, structural leaders tend to forget about building a
foundation first and that can be a major point of failure (Bolman
and Deal, p. 359). The Structural leader will be more effective
during a major organizational change because the business is
already established, so a foundation has (hopefully) already
been established as well.
References:
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013).
Reframing
organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

3. Post #3
The frame that I have chosen to analyze is the human resources
frame. This frame is routed in psychology and places a
significant emphasis on the needs of people (Sasnett, & Ross,
2007). Employee empowerment and strong relationships are
key motivators here, and authority stems from the ability to lead
by example rather than accumulate power. Connecting with
employees, and viewing them as associates, rather than
subordinates, is vital to this management style (Bolman & Deal,
2013, p. 361). Leaders are viewed as activists for change,
seeking to do the most good for the largest number of people.
Researchers have described this leadership style as catalyst, or
servant, noting that the human resources frame relies on
actively serving the needs of the people in the organization, and
using this as an effective mechanism to drive business forward.
Supportive empowerment, and relationship building via
connecting with all levels of employees creates a sense of
extended family, and ideas come from all levels of the
company. This leadership style is effective when the leaders of
a work force whom are effectively empowered and encouraged
are able to creatively problem solve and innovate to create a
business model that adapts to the changes in industry and
environment. Leadership through this frame becomes less
effective and even catastrophic when leadership stops making
strides forward and become viewed as weak and directionless.
Failure to maintain a strong sense of purpose, or abandonment
of responsibilities by management can have the opposite effect
(Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 355), creating a work force without a
strong leader and no effective support to encourage performance
and strategic movement.
References:
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013).

4. Reframing Organizations Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (5th
ed.).
Newark: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated
Sasnett, Bonita, & Ross, Thomas. (2007, Oct. 4).
Leaderships Frames and Perceptions and Effectiveness Among
Health Information Management Program Directors.
Retrieved on: 2018, Apr. 11. From:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2047298/