Conducting An Evaluation Of Personal Leadership Effectiveness
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Conducting An Evaluation Of Personal Leadership Effectiveness
For this task, you will conduct an evaluation of your personal leadership effectiveness. You will write a paper evaluating your own leadership using a scholarly leadership theory. To help you refine your own leadership skills, you will develop at least two SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound) goals as part of your evaluation.
- Write the paper in firstperson
- Follow APA format and style when organizing your paper. You are encouraged to create a cover page, headers, and sub-headers throughout the paper.
- The paper should be 6-10 pages, not including the cover page and references.
- Please be both descriptive (who, what, when, and where) and explanatory (why and how).
- Evaluators assess your paper based on the specificity of your response, not on the generalizations.
- This section is an analysis of your leadership.
- Refer to your results from the CliftonStrengths assessment.
- You must upload your PDF version of your Signature Themes report when you submit your final paper.
Explain what the results might indicate about you as a leader. You must explain your top five categorical strengths results. Be descriptive and provide examples.
LEARNER, RESTORATIVE, ACHIEVER, INPUT, DISCIPLINE
- Your explanation shouldinclude:
- a separate paragraph for each strength category,
- the category title,
- your results, and
- your reflection on the results including both descriptive and explanatory examples.
- This reflection is not related to theory.
- Provide citations where needed.
- Write a paper (suggested length of 6–10 pages) by doing the following:
- A. Provide a PDF copy of your “Signature Themes” report after completing the CliftonStrengths assessment.
- 1. Reflect on the results of the five categorical strengths from your CliftonStrengths assessment, including what those results might indicate about your leadership.
- B. Evaluate your leadership, using one of the scholarly leadership theories below, by doing the following:
- • transformational leadership
- • transactional leadership
- • situational leadership
- • participative leadership
- • servant leadership
- • behavioral leadership
- • trait theory of leadership
- Evaluate three strengths of your leadership, using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, including how each strength relates to the theory. Support the evaluation of your strengths with at least one scholarly source. (Please use a different scholarly source)
- Evaluate three weaknesses of your leadership, using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, including how each weakness relates to the theory. Support the evaluation of your weaknesses with at least one scholarly source. (Please use a different scholarly source)
- Recommend three actionable items to improve the effectiveness of your leadership, including how each actionable item relates to the chosen scholarly leadership theory. Support the recommendations of actionable items with at least one scholarly source. (Please use a different scholarly source)
Note: A scholarly source could be a reputable journal, a published book, or any source from a university faculty member or business leader. Scholarly sources also include any article or book in the online WGU library.
- Discuss two short-term goals that will help improve your leadership. Adhere to the SMART criteria for each goal: specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound.
- Discuss at least two specific actions you will take to reach each of the SMART goals discussed in part C.
- Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.
- Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
COMPETENT
A PDF copy of the “Signature Themes” report is provided.
The reflection on the results of the 5 categorical strengths from the CliftonStrengths assessment is supported by specific details of each strength and includes what each may indicate about personal leadership.
The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership strengths using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, and the evaluation includes specific details of each strength and specific examples to support how each strength relates to the chosen theory. The evaluation is supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source.
The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership weaknesses using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, and the evaluation includes specific details of each weakness and specific examples to support how each weakness relates to the chosen theory. The evaluation is supported by at least 1 scholarly appropriate source.
The submission recommends 3 actionable items to improve personal leadership effectiveness, and the recommendations align to the chosen scholarly leadership theory and includes specific examples to support how each actionable item relates to the chosen theory. The recommendation is supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source.
The discussion includes 2 short-term goals that will help improve personal leadership, and the goals adhere to each of the SMART criteria (i.e., specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound).
The discussion includes specific details of at least 2 actions to reach each of the SMART goals discussed in part C.
The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style.
Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Conducting An Evaluation Of Personal Leadership Effectiveness