Development Skills: CORE VALUES
EQUITY
The leadership journey for development skills should includes financial disparities from marginalized identities from vulnerable backgrounds from being able to afford international & domestic travel experiences. The goal is to cover the financial expenses for youth to participate. By providing youth from marginalized identities with a global education will provide them with a global lens, cultural context, systematic and social understanding of the world.
ACCESS
The youth from marginalized identities from vulnerable backgrounds don’t always have access to international and domestic travel opportunities, or the financial resources because the opportunity is not local. By making Cultural and Educational Journey’s free will allow for more youth to have ACCESS to these opportunities. This idea should be coupled with development Skills alike.
HEALTH AND WELLNESS
Whether PTSD or personal or environmental stress, youth from marginalized identities from vulnerable backgrounds experience a high amount of stress, anxiety and depression which impacts how they see themselves, feel about themselves, and feel about their opportunities/life in general. So, make it your responsibility to support youth holistically. We know, in order to maintain longevity, one’s health must be stable and or balanced. By focusing on getting the youth to prioritize their health, we will be able to decrease the levels of anxiety, stress and depression youth feel.
EDUCATION
Educational Advocacy Development, educating youth about inequality, inequities, systematic racism and social justice, prepares them to serve their community and beyond as advocates. Leadership journey for development skills is important.
We must understand that leadership is about more than heavy-handed action from the top. Its defining characteristics change according to the needs and vagaries of the individual, the organization, the industry, and the world at large. In other words, leadership is not a state, it’s a journey. There aren’t always sharp dividing lines between one style of leadership and another—an autocratic leader sometimes has to be participative, and a reformer sometimes needs to act like an autocrat. But by thinking clearly about the different roles it’s okay to assume at different times, I’ve been better able to tailor the way I make decisions, communicate with people, and manage my time so that we can address the most pressing needs of the organization in the moment.
The Autocrat
Autocracy, which is acquainted with in the early stages of career—is the most painful, least enjoyable style of management. Leadership journey for development skills must be recognized. Yet it has its place, especially in a turnaround situation. When a business needs to change relatively quickly, it’s much more important to just make a decision and get people moving than it is to take the time to conduct a thorough analysis and attempt to influence others to come around to your way of thinking. Therefore, should define the autocratic leader not as someone who bullies others needlessly but as the managerial equivalent of an emergency room surgeon, forced to do whatever it takes to save a patient’s life. Autocracy often causes pain and arouses antagonism, and there is simply no way for the chief executive to escape the resentment and blame that will be directed toward him or her. The best the CEO can do to mitigate matters is to assume personal responsibility, act quickly, and stay focused on the mission at hand.
An autocratic leader is the managerial equivalent of an emergency room surgeon, forced to do whatever it takes to save a patient’s life.
In 1977, Carter administration as the chief administrator of the newly created U.S. Health Care Financing Administration. HCFA was charged with bringing under one roof the financing systems for Medicare (which was then part of the Social Security Administration) and Medicaid (which was then part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare). This idea should be coupled with development Skills alike. The two agencies, which provided health care coverage for the poor, duplicated each other somewhat, wasting taxpayers’ money and generating conflicting health care regulations. My directive was to bring a measure of efficiency to the new organization by creating a coordinated approach to purchasing health care services for both Medicaid and Medicare.
Leadership journey for development skills are essential. Accordingly, one of the first, most important steps was to get all 4,600 people from both agencies to work at one location. A physical move would offer a chance to build efficiency into HCFA from the start: When workers change offices, their old patterns are disrupted. They meet new people, encounter varied perspectives, and, theoretically at least, suggest to one another different and better ways of doing things. Of course, the resistance to this plan was as predictable as it was loud. Some employees resented having to relocate from offices in Washington, DC, to a new workplace in Baltimore. A few even complained to their representatives in Congress.
To protect the project from strangulation, you have to act autocratically. Perhaps, mandate is extremely clear, and discover a few useful tactics to get people to help fulfill it. First, it became apparent that assuming the responsibility for this high-risk decision could have tremendous power. Consider, the magic words “If this doesn’t work, it’s on my head,” the politicians and administrators who were objecting to the move began to cooperate and stopped threatening to obstruct the reorganization. Second, you may use the element of surprise: Had we announced the consolidation of Medicare and Medicaid in advance, opponents would have had time to block or stall the move. So the staffs were merged during a congressional recess. The surprise worked—HCFA went on to become the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a unified government health care services agency located outside of Baltimore that today provides coverage and benefits for about 70 million people nationwide.
It becomes extremely dysfunctional bureaucracy. The company was born of a merger in June 1982 between two separate Blue Cross organizations (one in northern California and one in southern California), each with its own administrative systems. Neither had annual budgeting or planning processes. By the mid-1980s, millions of customers had fled to alternate health plans because of escalating premiums and diminishing quality of service, and the organization was losing close to $1 million a day. Worse yet was the failure of many self-satisfied Blue Cross executives to identify with their customers. During my first week at the company, one should ask senior managers what business the company is in. “We’re in the business of being Blue Cross,” they smugly responded.
With the company hemorrhaging money and with pressure from the board to turn things around quickly, I had to be the bad guy: Within 18 months, it was forced to lay off nearly half the company’s 6,000 employees. There was no problem with getting rid of every one of the senior managers who had run the company into the ground. But it was painful to let go of the rank-and-file workers who were not responsible for the mismanagement. Equally painful was the realization that Blue Cross was at the brink of financial death; if things didn’t change quickly, there would be no health care insurance for millions of Californians. This idea should be coupled with development Skills as well.
Certainly, the company acted humanely by providing laid-off workers with outplacement services and continued medical coverage, but on a personal level, it was unpleasant to see so many good people lose their jobs because of previous management’s mistakes. It was clear, though, that if we responded too slowly or lost sight of the goal—to pull Blue Cross from intensive-care status—the remaining employees would ultimately lose their jobs, too.