That's quite a mouthful for a weekly little blog like this one - surely leadership can be boiled down to a few basic principles or actions in a structure that addresses leadership in most incidences. Lets see - a quick google of the topic offers articles on 5,6, 10 and 12 different styles. Hmmm - perhaps leadership is more sophisticated, complicated or pick your own adjective than I initially suspected.
I think I'll start with the following statement - all leaders are managers, not all managers are leaders. Leadership and management are really quite different - although I am certain that good, effective managers are also leaders.
Effective leadership requires excellent communication skills. Most importantly, effective leaders need to be good listeners, effective delegators and they must be able to explain their vision. If the project at hand cannot be articulated how can it be completed?
Good leaders need to be personally motivated and possess a desire to achieve and improve. Optimism is the key - has a pessimist ever motivated you to do anything?
Good leaders act with honesty and integrity, and understand how to explain something negative in a positive manner. Giving and receiving feedback in a positive manner is a key to leadership skills IMHO. Be flexible enough to seek and accept feedback when required - and creative enough to realize there could well be a better way to get something done than yours.
Sports fans are all too often well aware of how changing a coach can make a huge difference in the performance of their favorite team. Most of you know I am a huge fan of the San Jose Sharks in the NHL. A simple change in coaches from Todd McLellan resulted in a higher level of play. The team has been playing much better under Pete DeBoer - and though that may change in the future and necessitate additional changes it can always happen.
Another important leadership quality IMHO is to not use fear to try and motivate a team/organization/individual on a regular basis. It simply is not a path to long range success although there may be an occasional moment when as a last resort Fear can work as a motivating force. But it will not work long term- it will simply create resentment - at least that has been my experience on both sides of the leadership equation. I have tried it myself both as the leader and a team member.
Frequent leadership changes - for example a coaching change - may be indicative a leadership change higher up the food chain (General Manager to continue with the sports analogy) is called for. The same leadership principles apply all the way up a management chain in an organization.
As with any endeavor, change is the norm even in leadership - ideas should always evolve and change as the times or business indicate. An individual who accepts change as inevitable will almost always be better equipped to deal with the stresses of daily life and he or she who handles (manages?) stress successfully has a better chance of successfully navigating life.
That is my quick take on Leadership - emphasis on the "quick". Leadership is complex and a complete discussion of the topic could easily warrant an entire book. My book in progress is a mystery - LOL. Be sure to check Ramana'sMusings to see what my friend Ramana has to say on this week's topic,
On a facetious note: "Follow the leader." You've got to laugh, in a hollow way.
ReplyDeleteLeadership is not all that it's cracked up to be. Though, of course, take both your and Ramana's angles (albeit that they come from slightly differing corners).
I'd like to stress that with leadership comes responsibility. For those you lead. One example that popped into my mind on reading both your and Ramana's posts in quick succession is my father. He joined the Navy as part of young men in the motherland - at the time - having to serve military duty. Two years or so. My father did well. So well, they wanted to keep him on and offered him das "Offizier's Patent" (Officer's licence I suppose you may translate it as). No doing. He declined. His reasons? Probably something to do with Kant's Categorical Imperative (a concept he tends to mention when someone needs advice). Yes, so why did he decline? Because, so he told me, he didn't want to be put into the position of being RESPONSIBLE for other people/other people's lives (in case of actual action). Essentially, or at least that's my interpretation, he didn't want to be a leader. Let's leave aside that he isn't a follower either.
I don't know. And I'd like to hear both your and Ramana's take on this. Did he shirk that responsibility? Or was he, barely twenty one years old, already so self aware as not to saddle himself with a duty he didn't want to inflict upon himself?
On a lighter note: Being the eldest by far of four siblings I am a natural leader. Alas, I have no following.
U
You and I have elaborated on the topic on similar if on somewhat different approaches but, neither have addressed one major issue that has occurred to me in retrospect. Why don't we see many leaders? We keep hearing about hard pushing bosses but rarely if ever hear about effective leaders. This is something that perhaps both of us should address in a different 2 on 1 post.
ReplyDeleteComing to Ursula's take, it is indeed true that with leadership comes high responsibility and I salute her father for the decision that he took. Such a decision takes a lot of courage and I am impressed.