hello we're gonna cover week one the material that you're going to read during this first week of course which consists primarily of chapters one and chapter two of north house so what I want to do is I want to give you an overview of these chapters I'm just gonna cut I'm just gonna cover the key ideas so that when you read the book you have an idea to see where it's a where it's going so let's get started now I'm going to be going off of this PowerPoint presentation which you can download and you can follow along you can print it out you can do this pretty much however you'd like to chapter one starts off by defining leadership since we're studying leadership that's a good idea to know what leadership is until the leadership that north house north house provides is really a pretty good definition I like it a lot he defines leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal so we've got various elements in here the first you might notice is that you've got an individual who is a leader you've got a group of individuals who are the followers and then you have what the individual what the leader does and first of all the individual influences that's the idea of having an effect on people and the second key idea is that they're moving towards a common goal and this common goal is really important leading is going towards a goal now what that goal is can strongly influence how good the leadership is perceived to be if I the leader leads people to a goal and they realize that the goal was bad even though he was successful and leading them to the goal he'll be perceived as a bad leader but if it's a good goal and even if they get there and smart as a leader he'll be here she will be perceived as a as a good leader now let's talk about some different concepts involved in leadership different ways of viewing leadership one of the different ways of viewing leadership is what's known as trait leadership versus process leadership and we tend to think of leadership as trait process as a trait in a in trait terms but in reality when we do research we really find out it's more of a process so what do we what do we mean by the trait approach to leadership the trait definition of leadership is that certain individuals have special innate characteristics or qualities that differentiate them from non leaders for example we know that if a person is taller than average more intelligent than average more extroverted than average is very fluent and there's a few other traits that person is more likely to influence other people and so on this trait definition of leadership the trait approach to leadership the you look at the abilities of the leader and these are the ideas that the abilities reside and select people and this pretty much restricts leadership to those with an inborn talent so this is kind of like a traditional naive common-sense approach to to leadership but in reality we found that can be a lot more complex now trait leadership we're going to see later in chapter 2 has a lot of value to it but there's a lot of other things that are happening in leadership besides having leaders who have certain traits in process leadership you look at leadership not as a set of traits that the leader has but rather as a phenomena that occurs is in the interactions between leaders and followers and so the leadership is something that is occurs in the interactions it's observed in leadership behaviors in what the leader does but it's going to depend on the followers it's going to depend on the context it depends on what the leader does in the specific context with the specific followers how the followers respond how the context changes and it's far more complex and simply a bunch of traits and because it is complex and it's not just a bunch of innate characteristics this type of leadership can be learned so that and that's why we have courses on leadership because I with a process definition of leadership you can learn things that are appropriate to make you a more effective leader now another distinction that can be made in types of leadership is comparing assigned leadership with emergent leadership assigned leadership is leadership based on a position within an organization people get assigned to these leadership positions somebody with power says you'll be the team leader you're going to be the plant manager you're gonna be a department head you're gonna be the director of such and such and this leadership assignment can be appropriate can be not appropriate but it comes from from power within the organization that is assigned it to somebody regardless of the qualities and the leadership behaviors of the person that receives this power now hopefully the assigned leadership goes to people who will be good leaders in all the senses but we can compare assigned leadership to emergent leadership an emerging leadership is leadership perceived by others regardless of that individuals title it emerges over time through interactions with each other it's not something that's assigned to some but it's like but it's rather Wow look at this guy he's a good guy he's got some good ideas or he's a nice guy I want to please him it it's it emerges Ned totally based on what the leader does in the given context with the followers so it emerges over time as the leader interacts with other people and this might involve verbal engagement getting involved in somebody's life gathering and providing information that you useful said everybody can do their job seeking others opinions showing them that they're valuable showing that they care and that they can contribute to the organization being firm clear about what the goals are but not being rigid being willing to adapt to the situation it emerges when one has professional competence and people recognize it you know how to do your job you're an expert and that also emerges with interpersonal warmth when people tell that you care about them you're able to influence them a lot more so the emergent leadership is not so much dependent upon what other people the roles that people assign to you but it's based on the leaders behavior in the context it's also affected by their personality and gender and lots of lots of variables that that surround the the leader that can influence how the person is perceived as a leader so that's assigned versus emergent leadership now another key idea with leadership is it's a concept of power because we said in our definition of influence that a leader is someone who influences and this power power is the campus the capacity to influence and what do we mean by influence we can define influence as the ability to change other people's beliefs if you change what people believe you're influencing them if you change their attitudes if they didn't like something before but they like it now you've influenced them and if you change people's behaviors if they stop doing one thing and start doing another thing you've influenced them and so a leader has this capacity to influence the leader has to have power now power is quite complex we've all heard the saying power corrupts but perhaps only certain types of power corrupt other types of powers can be really good and own perhaps only certain circumstances power corrupts a good framework for understanding power is a water knows the basis of social power by French and Raven an old paper written in 1959 that still does a pretty good job of explaining the different types of power that people have now these words are not super intuitive what they mean referent power expert power legitimate power reward power and cause coercive power but let's look at them so that we can see what's going on here on this table explains the five French and Ravens basis of power first of all there's referent power and referent power is basically relationship power sometimes people like you and they just really want to please you they want to be close to you they want to have a good relationship with you they value your friendship they value who they your your person your character and if people if you have that type of power that's called referent power people want to do what you want them to do because they like you an example is a teacher who's adored by students has referent power they want to please the the teacher so that's one type of power another type of power is expert power expert power it comes from being competent from knowing a lot from understanding how to solve the problems that come up especially in a work situation so if you're in your work situation there's somebody that who really understands how to solve problems who understands the issues that are going on that person has expert power people will do what he or she says they'll be influenced by him they'll change their opinions they'll gain knowledge from the expert and therefore the expert is said to have power another type of power is what's known as legitimate power and that's kind of the power associated with a formal job Authority when you sign on with a company when you're employed you agree that you're going to obey your supervisor and your supervisor has agreed that he or she will obey his or her supervisor all the way up when you enter into an organization you agree to n2o Bay the power hierarchy that's how organizations work they've got to have some type of hierarchy and that's how decisions are made and implemented and so if you're somewhere in the hierarchy where you can influence other people because everybody has agreed because of cultural beliefs that you should have that power to make those decisions you have what's known as legitimate power now there's also a couple other types of power that are very often associated with power and that's a reward and coercive tower or you could call it reward power and Punishment power reward powers basically the ability to provide good things to people typically in an organization that's money you can get a raise if you do good things if something the person that can give you the raise has reward power maybe you can get a promotion maybe you can get a better position maybe you can get extra time off that's all reward power and if somebody has that ability to give you those things they have rapport reward power now the opposite end is power that nobody likes receiving but an awful lot of people like having and that's coercive power and that's the ability to do painful things to people maybe lower people's pay maybe fire them maybe give them a demotion maybe giving them bad job assignments it's it's also a type of power and people with coercive power if they use it are often not liked but they're often obeyed because people don't want to be course they don't want to receive punishments and suffer negative consequences for what they do so these provide an overview of five different types of power so throughout the book when we talk about power we'll be coming back to these five different types and we can see how they can be used for good and for bad now we might want you might have noticed that these five different power bases are somewhat associated to assign to power and emergent power so the ones that are linked to assigned power we can call that position power and that's derived from your ranking in the organization for example the legitimate power the reward power and the coercive power all come from the rank in the association your your organization when your boss has these types of this type in these three types of power another classification usually associated with emergent power it's a personal power that's influenced it's derived from being seen as likable and competent people look at you as a person and they say aha I want to be influenced by this person because they have what I like and what I need and so this is closely associated with referent power and expert power now a person can have a mix of both position power and personal power they're not an opposition opposition to each other but they're just basically two two types of categories of how to influence people now it's a lot easier to change concerning personal power if you want to be more of a leader it's easier to change your personal power your referent power your ability to your ability to influence people because they like you and your expert power the ability to influence people because you're an expert then it is too get different legitimate power different reward power different coercive power that comes from your rank in the Association so if you want to have greater influence on people you want to focus on developing personal power becoming a likeable and competent because those can be changed very easily and can be depended on your own behaviors that your control of in various contexts and in different relationships so that's an overview of trait of chapter 1 now let's look at chapter 2 now the rest of this book beginning in chapter 2 are different approaches to leadership there's about 10 or 11 different approaches that we're gonna look at none of them describe leadership perfectly all of them describe leadership to some degree they're kind of like their their different theories that explain things some traits some theories will explain certain things better than others some some theories won't explain hardly anything except in special circumstances some might explain a lot but we don't have much data for it others might explain things and we have very good data for it and we exactly know and we know exactly how much influence such an approach can have in a leadership situation so we're gonna be going through these different approaches and these different theories throughout this course and this week we're going to look at the trait approach chapter 2 but next week we'll look at another approach sometimes we'll look at two approaches and you'll see how this theory is applicable in certain circumstances and I need to know that theory in order to make good decisions in this one a specific context so now let's look at the trait approach the idea of the trade approach is that there are major leadership traits that that are associated with leadership and so if someone wants to be a leader there are traits to possess or cultivate if one wants to perceived as by others as a leader or if one wants to be an effective leader now we've done studies where some traits have emerged that are really good for being perceived as a leader we know those traits pretty well to actually be a good leader the traits that are necessary we have some idea but it's so much depends on the circumstances that sometimes they're not as useful as we dial like them to be so first of all let's talk off talk about the traits that are pretty universally contribute to being perceived by others as a leader and we're going to give some examples some examples of good leaders some of leaders that might not be too good let's start off with the the trait of intelligence and that's kind of like verbal perceptual and we're easing capabilities it's good old-fashioned smarts it's sometimes it's called cognitive ability and it turns out to be one of the things that we can measure the very best in all of psychology measuring people's intelligence is fred we've got that down pretty good because it's it's really hard to fake intelligence you can fake personality traits you can present yourself as being just this awesome person but it's hard to present yourself as being intelligent on an intelligence test when you're not really and intelligent people are more likely to be perceived as leaders we can take the example of Steve Jobs there is no doubt that he was a smart guy and lots and lots of people perceive him as an excellent leader because he was so intelligent and led a company that made so much money and produced such products but it's interesting that not everybody perceives Steve Jobs as a really nice guy because he was kind of kind of mean he would fire people with just a minute notice if he didn't like somebody if they made a bad first impression on him he would he could have you fired right away so other people would say he's uh wasn't a real good leader but in terms of intelligence that certainly contributed to him being perceived as a an excellent leader now it's an also an important factor in effective leadership not just mean perceived as a leader all things considered if you have two people that are gonna do the exact same thing in the exact situation it's better to choose the more intelligent person who's able to process more information and reason more exactly then the it's more important to choose a more intelligent person than the less intelligent person all things being equal but we'll come back to effective leadership a little bit later another trait that's important for being perceived as a leader is self-confident confidence being certain about one's competencies and skills once decisions just really being sure of what you're doing that causes people to see you as being a leader now you can be wrong Hitler had a lot of self-confidence and people liked his self-confidence they eventually saw that his approach was wrong and he went down as really bad leader but for a while he was perceived especially in his own context has been a really a good leader Steve Jobs is another example of someone who has lots of self-confidence didn't doubt what he was doing kept on fighting and doing what he knew that he could do well another major leader leadership trait necessary that's associated with a being perceived is determination the desire to get the job done for example having taking the initiative being persistent the drive to keep going even when things get tough and a good example of this is Lance Armstrong who won seven Tour de France and for years he fought off accusations of drug use and for I don't know 10 15 years he was just considered an awesome leader he over had overcome cancer he he led a big organization known as a LIVESTRONG and he was he was received as being just a real great guy because of his determination to overcome all the obstacles well not too long ago he he admitted to drug use and that he really wasn't as skilled as people thought that he was and so his uh his leadership reputation has completely fallen but there's no doubt when he was characterized in the media by his determination that he was perceived as a leader another leadership trait that's necessary is integrity and typically integrity means the quality of honesty and trustworthiness when we talk about integrity later we'll see that can be actually much more complex than that and an example is Billy Graham Billy Graham still alive but he's pretty old I think he's in his 90s now so he's not too much of a leader now but for well over 50 years he was the most visible leader of the evangelical movement in the United States he was highly skilled he would do these evangelism campaigns that were highly culturally relative during the the periods that he was doing them and he he no matter what accusations people made against him it always turned out that he was trying to really live in a christ-like way he was extremely honest and he was extremely trustworthy and none of the accusations against him stuck he admits that he made some mistakes he admitted his own weaknesses but in terms of honesty and trustworthiness he he pretty much want his whole life being able to pass the the tests for integrity and for that reason he was had so much influence on the evangelical world in America now another leadership trait that's really valued is the socio bility and it contributes to being viewed as a leader and that's the leaders inclination to seek out Pleasant social relationships somebody that goes around and interacts with people and has pleasant relationships with them I think a good example of this is John Wallace the president of APU he is genuinely a nice guy he has great values he cares about people he's constantly focusing people towards Christ he's focusing constantly refocusing the mission of APU towards what's really important in life and he doesn't in a really nice way everybody likes John Wallace and he seems to like everybody too now I'm sure there's some people that hate him and oppose him but he just always seems to be a nice he's a very sociable person if you send him a facebook request he will take you right away as a as a friend he tries to connect with everybody and and create these warm interactions and so that helps him being perceived as a leader and gives him this referent power that has enabled him to to lead apu to to growth for so many years so those are some of the major leadership traits that are pretty universally perceived as indicating that somebody is a leader whether there actually are a good leader or not it's another question but these traits cause people to be perceived as a leader now another set of traits that have been studied quite a bit is what's known as a five factor personality model we found that when you look at leader personality traits there's five five personality traits that seem to be related to all other personality traits it's kind of like five families of traits and so social psychologists personality psychologists organizational psychologists study these personality traits quite a bit because every personality trait every behavioral tendency seems to be linked to one of these five and so these five our first is neuroticism and that's this tendency to worry which is associated with being depressed and insecure vulnerable and people also tend to be Hospital and mean when they're high on this neuroticism scale another dimension and all these dimensions are independent you can be high on one low on the other they aren't strongly correlated to each other they're they're generally independent I'm extraversion it's this tendency to be sociable assertive to have positive energy and talk a lot maybe to be kinda loud really outgoing that's extraversion and so the low on extraversion is what we call introversion these people tend to be quiet and get their energy from being alone and maybe do their best work when they're alone rather than in groups a third scale is openness or open-mindedness and this is a tendency to constantly want to get information this idea that trying to be creative insightful and curious it's strongly associated with with intelligence but it's more of a personality trait of behavioral tendencies to want to get new ideas some people are open-minded other people are not very open-minded they want to do their duty accomplish what they're supposed to do they don't want to continually be getting more information but other people do want to continually be getting more information and integrating it into their life a fourth characteristic is agreeableness and this is basically niceness a tendency to be accepting trusting nurturing of others really caring about others and conscientiousness is this the tendency to be thorough to do your job really well to make keep working on it until it's done perfectly organized controlled disciplined dependable decisive and that at the lower end you have more spontaneous flexible people that attend maybe not to be disorganized that tend to be disorganized maybe procrastinate maybe have so many good things to do that they have difficulty being on time so these are the the five big personality traits that psychologists measure and it turns out that they're all to some degree associated with leadership in fact there's we can say there's a strong relationship a fairly strong relationship between the big five personality traits and leadership both perceived leadership and effective leadership it's it's more difficult to measure how effective a leader is than it is to how how a leader is perceived but when you actually measure how much they get the job done how much leading they actually do these are five traits are associated with the these five traits are associated with leadership turns out that extraversion extraversion is a factor or the trait most strongly associated with leadership high conscientiousness is also associated with leadership somebody who's focused and discipline get things done high openness to new information to new idea is also related to leadership and low neuroticism not having this tendency to worry is also associated with a being an effective leader and to a lesser degree high agreeableness is associated with being a good leader it's not as strongly related as the other factors are because sometimes to achieve an organization's goal you have to let people goal go which isn't very nice and people that are really highly agreeable might hesitate to make the make the decisions that are really difficult in order to achieve the organization's goal so for that reason still it's better to be above average and agreeableness to be a nice guy but sometimes I can get get in the way of being an effective leader now personality traits are not the only thing not the only traits that are related to a leadership perhaps you've heard of emotional intelligence that's also associated with leadership even though it's not necessarily considered a personality trait it's kind of a different set of skills that people have it's an ability and it's been defined as the ability to perceive emotions and manage emotions in oneself and in others so if I'm emotionally intelligent I'm aware of my own feelings I'm aware of what you're feeling I can manage my own emotions I can be sad when I should be sad I can be happy and positive and upbeat when I should be and I can also manage your emotions I can make you feel positive and upbeat when I need to encourage you to do your work I can make you feel sad when you've done something that isn't appropriate so that you won't want to do it again and but generally it's creating the positive emotions in oneself and in others that fits this definition of emotional intelligent and the underlying assumption to this is that people who are more able to manage their own and others emotions will be more effective leaders because in a sense we only do what we want to do and so if we can manage our emotions to want to do what we need to to accomplish the goals and if we can manage other people's emotions so they want to do what they should to accomplish the goals we're gonna be a good leader so emotional intelligence which is separate from personality traits it's separate from intelligence is also another set of traits that's associated with effective leadership now let's talk about some applications of the trade approach now this trade approach is interesting cuz it really focuses on the leader it focuses exclusively on the leader you'd ask questions what traits do the leaders exhibit who has these traits it doesn't ask what's the context what are the who are the followers what are the followers doing what are the traits of the followers it focuses on the the leader so it's a real simple approach you just have to look at one person to find the tricks you don't have to look at some complex system of a bunch of people interacting you just have to look at the leader and so a lot of times in hiring they you HR personnel use personality assessments and organizations want to use these personality assessments to find the right people and this is based on the assumption that people with certain traits will increase organizational effectiveness they'll help the organization accomplish its goals and that specific characteristics or traits are necessary for specific positions and so a lot of personality assessment measures for fit is this a business person have the right person eye traits to be a leader this is personality assessment indicate that the person has right traits to be an administrator to be a manager to be in on the service side managing customers the the personality assessment assumes that for any position there are certain sets of crates that are more appropriate for others and so different personality assessments are used to measure for fit there's the ltq which is a leadership trait questionnaire and you'll actually take part take this questionnaire and use it to analyze your own leadership traits that's the way for testing for leadership traits you might be familiar with the myers-briggs personality inventory that's the one that gives you different letters and categories like ENTJ extrovert intuitive thinking judgment it's a somewhat of a complex way of looking that person ID because there's four dimensions but by having four dimensions it ended up putting people into sixteen different categories and we'll be looking at this later and there's pretty good evidence that each type of personality to the sixteen different personality types tends to do better in certain jobs than than others so we'll be looking at that a little bit later now the strengths of the trait approach include several really important things first of all it intuitively appeals to followers followers want to perceive that that leaders are superior and that they possess special traits if you think your boss is an idiot that has a pretty discouraging position to be in but if you have confidence in your boss and if you think your boss knows what he or she is doing and you're gonna be a lot happier in your job so we're motivated to want to see positive traits in our bosses and this is this is associated with what's known as the romance of leadership which we'll come back to in a little bit and so people have this need to view leaders as gifted and so they like looking for traits in their leaders another strength of the trade approach is that first century we've been doing research on these traits and it is pretty credible you can't just use traits to guarantee who will be a really good leader but we can say that people with this trait this these traits are more likely to be good leaders it highlights the role of the leader in the leadership process certainly the leader should have something to do with the leadership process and then also it provides bent benchmarks for what to look for when choosing a leader we can use the personality and trade assessments too for choosing leaders but there are also some negatives associated with the trade approach and the trade approach is often rightfully criticized first of all there's no definitive list of leadership traits there's endless lists of traits that have emerged we don't we know some that are very strong predictors of good leadership others it seems so much to depend on the context and that means that's because it doesn't take into the account the situational affects different skills different traits different behaviors are necessary in different contexts due to the situation and so leaders who are really effective when one situation might not be leaders in another situation another criticism of the trade approach is that many lists of all these traits that are necessary are highly subjective and that's because we're just it's so much easier to measure people's perceptions of leadership than actual leadership or the leadership outcomes so research often fails to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes and just looks at how people perceive x' people to be a leader and its limit the trait approach is has limited usefulness for training and development because some traits some abilities don't have that aren't very changeable a lot of people can't change bad habits they can't change how they interact with people and it's interesting that this says is one way that Christians can have an advantage because as Christians we have the Holy Spirit which want who wants to produce the fruit of the Spirit in our lives love and joy and peace and patience and kindness and goodness self-control and these are associated with personality traits they're associated with conscientiousness that strongly associated with self-control love and kindness is associated with I'm agreeableness the love joy peace peace is the opposite of neuroticism in some way Jesus said don't worry about things trust in me and so Christians have this 10 this ability to move away from high neuroticism trusting in God and not being full of anxiety so as Christians we have the power to make some changes and there are some individuals who are open-minded and have enough self-awareness so that they cannot change these characteristics but a lot of people can't so that leads to a limited usefulness for training and development now I wanna talk about a last topic very briefly and that has to do with the romance of leadership the romance of leadership is kind of a critique of leadership theory which says oh yeah we've got to study leadership the romance of leadership says do we really why do we so much want to study leadership and there's some interesting findings that have been made in this field of romance leadership one is people like to tribute the success and failures of an organization to its leadership there's lots of things that contribute to the success and failure of an organization their technology the economy the context the competition but people don't like to take those things into consideration when they look at the the success and failures of the organization they like looking at leadership and giving the leaders credit for success and blame for failures they don't like looking at the competition they don't like looking at the economy they'd rather focus on leadership so leaders get a lot more credit and blame than they may deserve another factor is we don't know very much about successful leadership what does it really take in a given circumstance to be successful we can't do that we can't go into a company look at this leader and say if you do these things we can guarantee you that you'll be successful we just don't know that much about leadership but we still believe it's very important and that's why it's called the romance of leadership because we're attracted to it because like the idea that oh this is a beautiful idea we need to know what makes leaders leaders and as I mentioned before we have this need to believe that our leaders are superior to us that they can help us that they'll lead us in the right direction it's it's kind of interesting to look at that this phenomena from a Christian position it's kind of like we're looking for a savior we know we can't do things ourselves that were not competent that our own judgment is not good enough and so we want to have really good leaders who will who will save us but we look at so many examples of good leaders and we see how they have failed Lance Armstrong is a good example that we'll be looking at some other examples later but humans still want to look towards leaders now from a Christian perspective we could say that what we're looking for is we're looking for a savior we're looking for someone who can make us whole who can redeem us can take us out of our own misery and weakness and connect us with the power that exists the God of all power and so so perhaps sometimes we look to leaders to play the role that God should be playing in our life and on the negative side sometimes we want to become leaders so people will view us as little gods and have somewhat respect for us and praise us and lift us up and tell us how good we are and and even even worship us when in fact it really should be God alone who should be worshiped fact Jesus actually said don't call anybody a leader because there's only one leader and that's God himself we need to have this need for a savior met in God who sent His Son Jesus Christ to save us and a final conclusion in the romance of leadership is that successful leadership is in the eyes of the beholder we don't have a universal measure for successful leadership it depends on who's doing the observing there's a lot of factors that cause people to see success um there's the organizational success if the organization is doing well people tend to say AHA the leader successful even if he's immoral and doing things that he shouldn't he's being a good leader because the organization is successful there's also the emotional responses to the goals that are achieved we can find out that this wonderful leader has actually been doing really bad things things that we evaluate negatively and when we find out that a leader has been doing things that make us upset that we believe are wrong that will cause our view of their leadership to go down even though he might have been accomplishing other goals that were good the interaction with the leader somebody who talks to us real nicely who gives us what we want who makes us feel good about ourselves we tend to view as a good leader even if they're not really accomplishing the goals that have been that everybody in the organization holds together and then most interestingly well maybe not most but still especially interesting is that interactions among followers influence perceptions of leadership if I think that somebody is a jerk and I start telling other people that that person is a jerk they're gonna have their view of that person it's gonna go down even though they might not ever have seen that leader do anything maybe if that leader never did any anything bad he or she will be viewed negatively because of interactions with other followers who might have a negative or positive view of the leader so here we see that leadership might not have anything to do with the leader it has more to do with interactions among the followers so the romance of leadership is a reminder to not put too much faith in leadership theory there's good things in this class but it's not going to transform you into this perfect leader who's always going to do the right thing in every circumstance it's going to give you some principles that in general you should be able to do to be a more effective leader but if you choose the wrong goals if you accomplish the goals in the wrong ways if you choose immoral goals if you're unethical and the way that you treat people and the ways that you influence people to accomplish those goals the principles of leadership that we look at here might not have a very positive effect on your real leadership or how you're perceived as a leadership okay so this has been an overview of the chapters contents so chapters 1 & 2 now you can read the text in depth and see the details behind all of this I hope you enjoy the text and we'll be going over the next two chapters next week