Running head: THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Theoretical Analysis: Northeasternish State University Case Study

Kristin Ramey
Loyola University Chicago

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

We need people to lead who dream well, but who also plant their feet in reality and test
reality daily for new information that demands midcourse correction, and sometimes a revision
of the overall mission and strategy (Heifetz, 2010, p. 21). While there are many definitions of
leadership, a leaders ability to view leadership as a process is critical to their success and the
success of their followers. At Northeasternish State University (NSU), Dr. Raymond Nguyen
has not created an environment which allows the staff, students, and institution to thrive.
Throughout this paper, I will analyze NSUs Multicultural Student Affairs unit and its campus
partners utilizing the leader-member exchange theory and team leadership theory. Through the
theories deconstruction and reconstruction, I will provide further insights into my understanding
of the case and how theory can be applied to address the situation. Ultimately, I will share how I
would approach this issue to better the NSU community in its attempt to increase students
perceptions of advocacy, support, and engagement.
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
According to Northouse (2015), effective leadership is contingent on effective leadermember exchanges (p. 146). The leader-member exchange (LMX) theory is a process-centered
theory which focuses on the relationship between leaders and followers in relation to effective
leadership. This dyadic relationship results in two linkages, those within the in-group and those
within the out-group. The in-group and out-group can be differentiated between followers
relationships with the leader in terms of compatibility, communication, and influence. Those
within the in-group are more involved and have a higher satisfaction rate than those within the
out-group. Within LMX theory, it is important to recognize the positive correlation between ingroup followers and effective leaders.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

These exchanges between leaders and followers are applied to the leadership making
approach which emphasizes the importance of creating positive relationships to achieve a
cohesive environment (Northouse, 2015). Through the three phases, the dyadic relationship has
the ability to transform from a stranger to a mature partnership. In the final phase, both the
leader and follower are bound by mutual respect and trust to reach a common goal. Through
application, the theory provides leaders an avenue to reflect on their own leadership behaviors
and improve upon them. The theory illustrates the positive effects of building deep and trusting
relationships with those that you work with and recognizing that both leader and follower
success is linked.
Team Leadership Theory
The Team Leadership Theory is a process centered theory which aims to allow team leaders and
members to determine the state of their team and ways in which they could improve upon it
(Northouse, 2015). The Hill Model for Team Leadership provides leaders the necessary
framework to assess the team and make decisions about necessary action for improvement. This
model looks closely at the eight conditions that reflect team effectiveness. These conditions, a
clear goal, results-driven structure, competent team members, unified commitment, collaborative
climate, standards of excellence, external support and recognition, and principled leadership, can
be used to measure the teams strengths and weaknesses (Northouse, 2015). After assessing the
effectiveness of the team, it is important for the teams leadership to make decisions about ways
to move forward. These leadership decisions could include: 1) continuing to monitor the team or
take action, 2) whether to intervene to meet task or relational needs, and 3) whether to intervene
internally or externally. By providing a model for team leaders, the process of analyzing the
teams inputs and outputs is much easier to accomplish. In application, team leaders can utilize

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

assessment tools to determine what the state of the team may be. By viewing results from a
questionnaire, the team leaders and its members can move forward to create more effective
relationships and results.
Deconstruction of Process-Centered Theories
According to Dugan (2016), deconstruction is the process of deeply examining taken for
granted assumptions related to stocks of knowledge, ideology/hegemony, and social location that
exist in leadership theory (p. 9-10). When engaging in deconstruction, it is important to utilize
several tools. Ideological critique questions the underlying assumptions of the theory (Dugan,
2016). Willful blindness will determine what aspects of the theory were left out and/or ignored
purposely. Flow of power will look out how a theory describes power and its functions. These
tools will provide an avenue for each theorys initial critiques to be examined and questioned.
Deconstruction of LMX Theory
When looking at the LMX theory, there are several criticisms that are important to
acknowledge: 1) the theory creates inequalities through the use of in-groups and out-groups, 2)
there is no explicit guidelines to create effective leader-member exchanges, and 3) context is not
looked at (Northouse, 2015). While these criticisms are valid, it is important to go deeper.
When deconstructing through a lens of ideological critique, it is critical to identify the
assumptions that the LMX theory presumes. The theory presumes that the reader shares the
same ideology of what the characteristics of an effective leader are. In order to be an effective
leader, the theory assumes that you must have positive relationships with your followers yet does
not mention any other attributes that could lead to their effectiveness. If the dyadic relationship
makes it to a mature relationship, what factors could result in the relationship reverting to a
previous phase? On the other hand, once a leader and follower create a mature relationship, how

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

do they maintain it without abusing their positional authority? This makes it difficult to assume
that a leader is effective if they solely maintain positive relationships.
The LMX theory also presumes the dyadic relationships are genuine as they continue to
grow. What happens when a follower simply fakes a partnership so that they are able to gain
more positional authority? Having seen this happen in an institutional context, it is important to
determine whether or not these leader-follower relationships are genuine. If they arent, does
that negate the theory? Looking at the underlying assumptions within the LMX theory, it seems
that there are a lot of questions that go unanswered.
By assuming that there is a universal definition of a high-quality leader and their
followers, it is allowing readers to inform their definition based on their stocks of knowledge.
Stocks of knowledge, which are an individuals assumptions that reflect how they understand the
world around them, are critical to consider when understanding how we define and engage with
particular language (Dugan, 2016).
As mentioned in the criticisms for the LMK theory, context is not addressed. This is
representative of willful blindness in that the theory ignores the importance of context in
leadership situations. By not acknowledging the importance of context when creating
relationships, the theory overlooks that some environments may need different considerations
than others.
Deconstruction of Team Leadership
Initial criticisms of Team Leadership Theory include: 1) lack of contextual
considerations, 2) the assumption that the leader is skilled and equipped to lead a team, and 3)
omitting an extensive list of necessary leadership skills required to be successful using this

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

model (Northouse, 2015). To deconstruct this theory, we will look at every deconstruction tool
that Dugan addresses (Dugan, 2016).
Ideological critique is useful in identifying the theorys assumption that anyone is capable
of leading a team. In my experience, leading a team requires a much different skill-set, yet the
theory does not recognize this. This is lending to the idea of Born versus Made leadership
which discusses that leaders are born with the necessary traits as opposed to building the
necessary skill-set (Dugan, 2016). Additionally, the assumption that one individual will know
what to do to make a team effective is not reasonable. There may not be a time when everyone
on the team is able to be effective due to learning styles and the environment they are in. Similar
to the LMX theory, the lack of contextual change is a result of willful blindness. Contingent on
the context and the individuals identities, members of the team may not have what they need to
be successful. Flow of power is especially interesting to look at with Team Leadership because
the theory does not address the circumstance that two individuals may disagree over who is
capable of being the team leader. The theory does not define power or how individuals on the
team may navigate through and with it.
Reconstruction of Process-Centered Theories
While deconstruction is important, it is equally as important to reconstruct.
Reconstruction is the ability to utilize ones own stocks of knowledge, power, and identities to
rebuild a theory and provide ideas to enhance it in the direction of social justice (Dugan, 2016).
Similar to deconstruction, there are several tools that facilitate the process of reconstruction.
Disrupting normativity is a tool that addresses the assumptions within a theory and attempts to
remove them (Dugan, 2016). Attending to power looks at power structures within a theory and
identifies what it is, how it operates, and ways to navigate it. Cultivating agency provides an

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

avenue to reposition who has authority and how to re-center it. Building interest convergence
recognizes the need for mutual benefit and how that can lead to change. These tools of
reconstruction, when used with deconstruction, allow us to hold two things constant.
Reconstruction of LMX Theory
While deconstructing the LMX theory was relatively easy to do, reconstructing it will
definitely lend to its usefulness. As previously stated, there are several underlying assumptions
that weaken the theory. Ways to disrupt normativity include: 1) making it clear within the theory
that while positive relationships lead to effectiveness, there are several other factors that come
into play as well, 2) updating the framework to address the process if individuals revert back to a
previous stage, 3) providing explicit definitions of what leadership in different contexts may look
like, and 4) naming that each individuals stocks of knowledge will determine how they navigate
the theory. When addressing the assumptions of language in leadership, it is important to note
that we are also attending to power by defining what a leader is and/or what a particular
individual or institution needs from a particular leader.
Building interest convergence can occur within the LMX theory by asking followers what
they want out of the relationship as opposed to solely focusing on the leaders. By providing
more information on the mutual benefit of the relationship, the theory could be utilized by more
individuals.
The context of leader-member exchange is extremely important in determining whether
or not a mature relationship can develop. To eradicate this issue, I would include additional
questions in an assessment model relating specifically to different environments to represent that
all relationship building will not look the same. Throughout the phases of LMX theory, I would

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

also indicate that the relationships and their process may look differently dependent on the
context, social identities, and stocks of knowledge that are held.
Reconstruction of Team Leadership
In an attempt to reconstruct the team leadership theory, we can disrupt normativity by
providing specific attributes that a team leader should possess that would make them successful.
By including this in the Hill model, we are not simply assuming that anyone who identifies as a
leader can lead a team effectively.
It is important to attend to power in this theory, because although it is named team
leadership, it is focused on a team that has a leader. This can be accomplished by allowing both
the team leader and the members to ask questions about effectiveness. It is important to note that
these questions may look different. Effectiveness may look different depending on if you are the
team leader or simply the team member. By have a tool that would allow the entire team (both
team leaders and members alike) to assess their effectiveness at one time, the outcome could be
greater. While assessing effectiveness, it is important to acknowledge how social location and
identity may alter an individuals responses.
By addressing the importance of delegation and equal participation in a team, we can
cultivate agency amongst the members. It is important for team leaders to provide an
opportunity for members to feel as those they are an equal participant, yet no examples are
provided on how to accomplish this. Providing these examples within the model allows us to
reconstruct.
For the team leadership theory to be effective it must build interest convergence and
cultivate agency amongst the members. Context is critical and addresses that while a team, each

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

individual may need specific things to be successful, is extremely important in the theorys
implementation.
Case Analysis
Using the reconstructed theories, lets analyze the situation at Northeasternish State
University. While the current aim of the institution is to provide resources for students of color,
the issue lies with the leadership and its inability to make positive change.
Dr. Raymond Nguyen, through his hiring process and his methods of exercising power,
has created in-groups and out-groups among his staff and campus partners. His newly hired
staff, who he tapped internally, are within the in-group. Individuals who have previously worked
in the area and campus partners have been placed in the out-group. We can see that those within
the out-group are within the stranger phase of their relationship, as they do not yet trust
Raymond or the decisions that he is making. This isolation between the leader-member
exchanges is correlated to the lack of team effectiveness which can be viewed through the Team
Leadership theory. Due to the grouping of followers, the team is not cohesive and not meeting
the eight conditions of effectiveness. Raymond could make change by assessing his own
leadership and how he could improve it to create a more positive environment. However,
Raymond is not receptive to the concerns from his followers and only seems to listen to those
who hold more formal authority. Isolation between those who hold formal authority and those
who do not is a major issue in this case. This dissonance is reflected by Heifetz (2010) in his
understanding that those with formal authority only have it because the individuals with informal
authority give it to them.
Another issue is that students are not mentioned at all. While the aim is to provide
students with the resources they need to be successful, they are left out of the conversation. The

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

10

university is more concerned with their reputation and public image than they are the actual
programs within the institution. Additionally, NSUs upper level administration is instructing
that these resources and support are provided, yet they are mostly White individuals who dont
share the identities or understanding of what a diverse student population needs. Their stocks of
knowledge do not lend to creating an inclusive environment, which is important to recognize.
When looking at Raymonds leadership style, it is important to note how his identity as an Asian
Pacific American male at a predominantly White institution may play into how individuals view
his leadership style (Eagly & Chin, 2010). These issues are can be understood based on the
insights that the reconstructed theories provide, recognizing the immense need to acknowledge
social identities and social location.
Now that several issues have been recognized, it is important to provide a process for
addressing the issues. While it is difficult to offer a solution through the use of reconstructed
theories, the process is equally as important (Dugan, 2016).
Rebuild and Reuse
In order to resolve the leadership issue, I will utilize both the reconstructed LMX theory
and Team Leadership theory to advance the goals of the institution. I would first ask that the
vice president of student affairs provide a definition of what a leader is within the NSU
community. By providing explicit definitions and expectations, she would be engaging in the
process of the ideological critique that was mentioned in the theories deconstruction. I would
also ask the vice president of student affairs to provide additional traits and skillsets that would
be beneficial to the NSU community, as opposed to simply positive relationships and the eight
conditions of effectiveness. Initially, I would remove the sole responsibility of assessing
leadership from Raymond and also give some responsibility to his team and campus partners

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

11

through a survey. The survey would include a self-assessment as well as the ability to name the
strengths and weaknesses that they feel the department is facing. While the staff is completing
their survey, I would also create a similar assessment for students. It would include questions
about the programs currently offered and questions relating to what support systems students
need to be successful. By having students complete a survey, the goal is to make them feel like
an equal part of the NSU team.
After receiving everyones survey responses, I would schedule a staff retreat to discuss
the results. We would spend the day determining what assumptions each individual holds
through their stocks of knowledge and how their social location may alter how they view
leadership (Dugan, 2016; Eagly & Chin, 2010). I would ask each member, including Raymond,
Donna, and other staff, to spend time coming up with a strategy about how they can move
forward together. Having a retreat of this type will allow each individuals assumptions and
frustrations to be heard while providing solutions for positive change. Additionally, it would
provide a space for each individual to discuss their issues, but more importantly how they can
come together to provide programming and resources for NSUs students. The retreat would
culminate focusing on the students responses and what services they would like the department
to provide. With this information, the staff can begin creating meaningful programs that will
benefit their students and enhance the public image of NSU.
Conclusion
Engaging in the process of deconstruction and reconstruction is central to the success of
theory in a given context. By holding two things constant, we are able to strengthen theory and
increase its relevance. Using the reconstructed LMX and Team Leadership theories, we are able

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
to address the leadership issues within NSU and make a more positive experience for the staff
and the students.

12

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

13
References

Dugan, J. P. (2016).
Eagly, A. H., & Chin, J. L. (2010). Diversity and leadership in a changing world. American
Psychologist, 65, 216-224.
Heifetz, R. (2010). Leadership. In R. A. Couto (Ed.), Political and civic leadership: A reference
handbook (pp. 12-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.