Relational Skills Audit Analysis

Words: 1992
Pages: 8

The first audit I did was the Relational Skills Audit. This audit was short and concise. It evaluated the strength of my ability to interact with various relational situations. This is a very important audit because being a good leader knows how to manage a series of diverse relationship. Especially trying to stimulate people to do the things you know needs to be done. Managing and mastering important relational skills takes time and it is an ongoing task. Malphurs says that leaders should develop their
3
capabilities by being, knowing, doing, and feeling.1 As leaders we can identify with our following by understanding what they go through on a daily basis both interpersonal and intrapersonal. This helps us to relate to them and their specific
…show more content…
Yes, it is true that the people of an organization bring life and blood to a project however; it is also true that people can be misguided or unmotivated by interpersonal difficulties that ultimately affect timely productivity. My sentiments from the first audit still hold true for this one. I was not satisfied with the results of the audit and felt a little awkward because I wanted a better explanation of my results but the audit was not designed to produce an interpretive analysis.
Overall, the results of my Task Audit were average. I did score below average in the following areas: Researching, time management, praying, budgeting, and advertising.
These results are not from a direct reflection of substandard performance but more particularly from my disinterest in these topics as a whole. What is important to note is that I have note been the evaluated in these areas formally so my guess is that they are below average. On the other hand, I received a strong scored in the following areas:
Strategizing, use of technology, strategic planning, creating/ creativity, and implementing ideas. Leadership Style Audit p.
…show more content…
214
The fourth audit I did was the Church Structure Audit. This audit was the shortest of all, no less insightful, but kind of confusing because it did not have any specified directions for its intent or evaluative end state. The thought process I used to complete this audit was basically to simply depict our current church structure as truthful as possible. Based on this information here is a motif of our church structure. On average the members are older and not younger, power within the church is shared, decisions are made from the top, the coordination efforts are good, but could be better, the responsive time for feedback is fast, information is less filtered, ownership is weak, our sense of responsibility is weak, our commitment is also weak, our relationship are formal, but we seem to handle difficult situations well, there is less span of control, the quality of personnel needs should be more qualified, and leadership style is more relational than task-oriented. Overall, on the Church Structure Audit was the least of my favorite audits for no other reason than it seemed too basic. It did not offer any additional analysis or interpretive data to stimulate my thinking. After I completed the Audit, I reflected