Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
They rely heavily on intuition to gauge the appropriate timing and course
of their actions. Their ability to collect and interpret soft data helps them
know just when and how to act.
to engage people and browse their commitment to company goals. But most
dont know how, and who can blame them? Theres simply too much advice out
there. Last year alone, more than 2000 books on leadership were published.
Some of them even repacking Moses and Shakespeare as leadership gurus.
Weve yet to hear advice that tells the whole truth about leadership. Yes,
everyone agrees that leadership needs vision, energy, authority, and strategic
direction. That goes without saying. But weve discovered that inspirational
leaders also share four unexpected qualities:
They rely heavily on intuition to gauge the appropriate timing and course
of their actions. Their ability to collect and interpret soft data helps them
know just when and how to act.
They reveal their differences. They capitalize about whats unique about
them.
You may find yourself in a top position without these qualities, but few people will
want to be led by you. Our theory about the four essential qualities of leadership,
should be noted, is not about results per se. While many of the leaders we have
studied and used as examples do infact post superior financial return, the focus
of our research have been on leaders who excel at inspiring people in capturing
hearts, minds and souls. This ability is not everything in business, but any
experienced leader will tell you it is worth quite a lot. Indeed, great results may be
impossible without it.
Our research into leadership began some 25 years ago and has followed three
streams since then. First, as academics, we ransacked the prominent leadership
theories of the past century to develop our own working model of effective
leadership. (For more on the history of leadership thinking, see the side bar
leadership; a small history of a big topic.) Second, as consultants, we have
tested our theory with thousands of executives in workshops worldwide and
through observations with dozens of clients. And third, as executives ourselves,
we have vetted our theories in our own organizations.
Some surprising results have emerged from our research. We learned that
leaders need all four qualities to be truly inspirational; one or two qualities are
rarely sufficient. Leaders who shamelessly promote their differences but who
conceal their weaknesses, for instances, are hugely ineffective-nobody wants a
perfect leader. We also learned that the interplay between the four qualities is
crucial. Inspirational leaders tend to mix and match the qualities in order to find
the right style for the right moment. Consider humor, which can be very effective
as a difference. Used properly, humor can communicate a leaders charisma. But
when a leaders sensing skills are not working, timing can be off and
inappropriate humor can make someone seem like a joker or worse a fool.
Clearly in this case, being an effective leader means knowing what difference to
use and when. And thats no mean feat, especially when the end results must be
authenticity.
When leaders reveal their weaknesses, they show us who they are-warts and all.
They may mean admitting that they are irritable on Monday mornings, that they
are somewhat disorganized, or even rather shy. Such admissions work because
people need to see leaders own up to some flaw before they participate willingly
in an endeavor. Exposing a weakness establishes trust and thus helps folks on
board. Indeed if executives try to communicate that they are perfect at everything
there will be no need for anyone to help them with anything. They wouldnt need
followers. Theyll signal that they can do it all themselves.
That said, the most effective leaders know that exposing a weakness must be
done carefully. They own up to selective weaknesses. Knowing which weakness
to disclose is a highly honed art. The golden rule is never to expose a weakness
that will be seen as a fatal flaw-and perhaps even several of them. Paradoxically,
4
this admission will help divert attention away from major weaknesses.
Another well-known strategy is to pick a weakness that can in some ways be
considered strength, such as being a workaholic. When leaders expose these
limited flaws, people wont see much of anything and little harm will come to
them. There is an important caveat, however: if the leaders vulnerability is not
perceived to be genuine, he wont gain anyones support. Instead he will open
himself up to derision and scorn. One scenario we saw repeatedly in our
research was one in which a CEO feigns absentmindedness to conceal his
inconsistency or even dishonesty. This is a sure way to alienate followers who
will remember accurately what happened or what was said.
Become a Sensor
Inspirational leaders rely heavily on their instincts to know when to reveal a
weakness or a difference. We call them good situation sensors, and by that we
mean that they can collect and interpret soft data. They can sniff out the signals
in the environment and sense whats going on without having anything spelled
out for them
Franz Humer, the CEO of Roche, is a classic sensor. He is highly accomplished
in detecting shifts in climate and ambience; he can read subtle cues and sense
underline currents of opinion that elude less perceptive people. Humer says he
developed this skill as a tour guide in his mid-twenties when he was responsible
for groups of 100 or more. There was no salary, only tips, he explains. Pretty
soon, I knew how to hone in on particular groups. Eventually I could predict
within 10% how much I could earn from any particular group. Indeed, great
sensors can easily gauge unexpressed feelings; they can very accurately judge
whether relationships are working or not. The process is complex, and as anyone
who has ever encountered it knows, the results are impressive.
5
means giving people what they need and not want they want. At its best, tough
empathy balances respect for the individual and for the task at hand. Attending to
both however isnt easy, especially when the business is in survival mode. At
such times, caring leaders have to give selflessly to the people and know when
to pull back.
One final point about though empathy: those more apt to use it are people who
really care about something. And when people care deeply about something-any
thing-theyre more likely to show their true selves. They will not only
communicate authenticity, which is the pre-condition for leadership, but they will
show that they are doing more than just playing a role. People do not commit to
executives who merely live up to the obligation of their jobs. They want more.
They want someone who cares passionately about the people and the work-Just
as they do.
DARE TO BE DIFFERENT
Another quality of inspirational leaders is that they capitalize on whats unique
about themselves. In fact, using this difference to great advantage is the most
important quality of the four we have mentioned. The most effective leaders
deliberately used differences to keep a social distance. Even as they are drawing
their followers close to them, inspirational leaders signal their separateness.
Often, leader will show his difference by having a distinctly different dress style or
physical appearance but typical he will move on to distinguish himself through
qualities like imagination, loyalty, expertise, or even a handshake. Anything can
be a difference, but it is important to communicate it. Most people, however, are
hesitant to communicate whats unique about them, and it can take years for
them to be fully aware of what sets them apart. This is a serious disadvantage in
a world where networking is so critical and teams need to be formed overnight.
Some leaders know exactly how to talk advantage of their differences. There are
other people who arent as aware of their difference but still use them to great
effect. It also emerge in an interview that most leaders start off not knowing what
their difference are but eventually come to know-and use them more effectively
over time. Most of the differences we have described are those that tend to be
apparent, either to the leader himself or to the colleagues around him. But there
are differences that are more subtle but still have very powerful effects.
Inspirational leaders use separateness to motivate others to perform better. They
recognize the fact that followers will push themselves if their leader just a little
aloof. Leadership, afterall, is not a popularity contest. One danger, of course, is
that executives can over differentiate themselves in their determination to
express their separateness. Indeed some leaders loose contact with their
followers and doing so is fatal. Once they create too much distance, they stop
being good sensors and they loose they ability to identify and care.
LEADERSHIP AND ACTION
All four of the qualities described here are necessary for inspirational leadership,
but they cannot be used mechanically. They must become or must already be
part of an executives personality. Thats why they receipe business books often
fail. No one can imitate another leader. So the challenge facing prospective
leaders is for them to be themselves, but with more skills. That can be done by
making yourself increasingly aware of the four leadership qualities we described
and by manipulating these qualities to come up with a personal style that works
for you. Remember, there is no universal formula, and whats needed will vary
from context to context.
But of all the facets of leadership that one might investigate there are few as
difficult as understanding what it takes to develop leaders. The four leadership
are necessary first step. Taken together, they tell executives to be authentic. As
NOTES
Take Action:
If you simply ask yourself (without any self-judgment), "Why should anyone be
led by me?", it's a powerful question that forces you to find some authentic
answers. And the answers you find must hold enough substance to command the
attention of a group of people in an organization or community group who are
placing their trust in you as the leader. What are your answers?
Character
Weaknesses
Differences -
10
can do all the jobs as well as the teammembers who may come together from
different disciplines. He or she has to be able to integrate knowledge as well as
resolve conflict and facilitate dialogue.
However, even an ideal mix of skills does not guarantee effective leadership. The
organizational context, its structure, reward systems and work processes can
either support or undermine leadership. For example, if teammembers are
rewarded for their individual productivity and not team contribution, it becomes
much harder for even the most skilled project leader to create teamwork.
Furthermore, even within the right context, the leadership skills that produce
results for product development may not be the ones needed at the strategic
level of the company. As I have pointed out in other articles (The New New
Boss. Research Technology Management, January February, 2001 and
Successful Leaders Employ Strategic Intelligence, RTM, May-June,
2001)innovative technology leaders may be low in people skills but high in
foresight, systems thinking, visioning, motivating and partnering. The most
effective ones like Bill Gates of Microsoft and Andy Grove of Intel partner with
operational leaders who have the skills they lack.
Logic of Leadership
The second dimension I consider is the logic of leadership. By that I mean the
reasons why certain leadership traits or qualities should be effective. For
example, why should empathy on the part of a leader get people to follow him,
particularly if he is demanding a high level of performance. Suppose, one of your
direct reports says he hasnt done his work and feels bad about it. If you
empathize with his guilty conscience, will that make him perform better? Or will
you just be legitimizing a corrosive self-pity which may be undermining his self
confidence.
More than empathy, a leader needs to understand the people he leads in terms
of what motivates peak performance. This will likely be a combination of intrinsic
motives - challenge, learning, meaningful projects and extrinsic motives - money,
recognition, opportunity to advance. It may also include coaching,
encouragement and tough love.
An article by Robert Goffee and Gareth Jones in the Harvard Business Review,
Why Should Anyone Be Led by You? (September-October, 2000) maintains that
besides vision and energy, inspirational leaders share four other qualities.
12
But why should these qualities make a leader inspiring? Take showing a
weakness. The authors hedge their recommendation by noting that the leader
should reveal only a tangential weakness which might also divert attention from
major weaknesses. However, I havent noticed inspirational business leaders like
Jack Welch pointing up a personal vulnerability. George W. Bush, a graduate of
the Harvard Business School must have read this article, since he has been
poking fun at himself for mangling the English language. This has made him
more likeable, but hardly inspirational.
The other qualities of using intuition, tough empathy and being oneself may or
may not contribute to being inspirational. They seem like good qualities to have,
but the authors give us anecdotes, not a compelling logic of why they would
inspire followers.
A problem with principles based on anecdote is that you can usually find an
anecdote with a counter example. In his commentaries on Livys history of Rome,
Machiavelli writing in the 16th century asked whether it was better for a leader to
be harsh or caring. He described two Roman generals, one a harsh type like
George C. Patton, the other a more caring type like Dwight D. Eisenhower, both
World War II American generals. Which Roman general was more successful? In
fact, says Machiavelli, both were equally good at winning battles and gaining the
loyalty of their troops. The key was their consistency. They walked the talk and
people knew what to expect from them.
13
I'm on the board of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union team, the All Blacks. I
know for a fact that there is no opposition as intimidating as your opponent's
legacy. When you play against the ABs, you're going up against a team that has a
74% win record over the past 104 years, the most sensational winning percentage
in all of global sport. You're not just playing against the players on the current team
you're playing against all of the guys who ever put on that jersey.
We've just done a $100 million deal with Adidas to sponsor the All Blacks. Adidas
is doing the deal not because it wants to be associated with rugby but because
using the All Blacks builds its brand value by being associated with the team's
legacy, its tradition, and its history. Adidas wants to be about authentic, competitive
warriors.
These days, if you don't have a past, then you need to create your own legends
and myths very fast. We live in Internet years, so your culture can become a
legendary, mythical thing in six months.
Kevin Roberts, Kiwi CEO of Saatchi & Saatchi
From Trust in the Future by Alan M. Webber
in Fast Company no 38, September 2000
Start
In the Sep-Oct 2000 Harvard Business Review, authors Robert Goffee and
Gareth Jones asked 'Why should anyone be led by you?' Great way to still a
15
room full of executives, apparently. All you can hear are the knees knocking. Why?
Nothing happens in business without followers, and followers in these empowered
times are hard to find.
So if you're a leader, or aspire to be (or hey, go easy on yourself are failing to
be) you'd better know what it takes to lead effectively. Most don't, Goffee and
Jones say, and who can blame them. For one thing, they're drowning in good
advice last year, more than 2,000 books on leadership were published.
Sure, everyone knows leaders need vision, energy, authority and strategic
direction, they say, but we've discovered that inspirational leaders also share four
unexpected qualities:
They selectively show their weaknesses by revealing their humanity leaders
inspire trust and collaboration. Owning up to faults and failings means your
enemies are less likely to invent worse ones. But beware don't expose anything
that will be seen as a fatal flaw. How about (these guys are cynics) exposing a
weakness that may also be a strength like, you're a workaholic? Be true tho
making things up will sink your credibility. Porkies always find you out.
They rely heavily on intuition for timing and the best course of action
collecting and interpreting soft data, inspirational leaders can sniff out the signals in
the environment and sense what's going on without having anything spelled out for
them. Franz Humer, Roche CEO and one-time tour guide who learned his skills
while surviving solely on tips; Ray van Shaik, Heineken CEO in the early 90s who
could read major shareholder Freddie Heineken like a book, are two examples.
Just don't get carried away always test your intuition with a trusted advisor or
team member.
They manage with tough empathy the soft stuff is hard, especially if it's not the
real thing, Goffee and Jones say, and there's altogether too much hype about
interpersonal-skills training and 'concern' for others. Inspirational leaders practice
tough empathy giving people what they need, not what they want. The Marine
Corps, McKinsey grow or go. But it's tough to be tough, and choosing between
the best interests of the team and the corporation (or the team and the customer) is
not always an easy call. But tough also means committed, and people respect
commitment and authenticity.
They reveal their differences and capitalise on what's unique about
themselves. It may be as obvious as dress, style or an affectation, or a subtle as
class, culture or nationality. In your face, or rarely seen. Difference sets leaders
apart.
All four qualities are necessary for inspirational leadership, but must be a part of
his or her personality. That's why the leadership cook books fail, Goffee and Jones
say. Leadership can't be copied, it has to be learned, and it's situational. Be
yourself, they say, but with great skill.
Sidebar 1 four popular myths about leadership:
(1) everyone can be a leader. Not true many executives don't have the selfknowledge or authenticity. Many don't want to be. Many don't choose to be
(2) people who get to the top are leaders. Not necessarily not everyone in a
leadership position is a leader. They may be there for 'political' reasons. And not all
leaders are at the top. If they're defined by followers, leaders can be anywhere
(3) leaders deliver results. Not always if results to leadership was a 1 to 1
relationship, picking leaders would be easy. Sometimes, results are down to luck or
16
17
and more change is needed; you need more leadership from more people.
Companies that are over-managed and under-led are going under.
Successful change is 70% leadership:30% management. But most organizations
go about it the other way, trying to drive change 70% with a managerial process,
and 30% leadership. Doesn't work.
Is there a feeling that employees in the middle or lower down the chain, who
traditionally might have reacted against change, may be beginning to accept
change, or at least greet it more positively?
Kotter possibly. Employees are certainly more receptive to change because they
see the inevitability of it. But, when it comes to resistance, don't just assume that
it's the troops. Everybody, at one time or another, resists. I have seen many
company presidents resist. CEOs and executive vice-presidents were the biggest
force in dragging their feet in some companies.
Sometimes it's middle management, not the bottom of the hierarchy; the bottom of
the hierarchy has often understood the need for change they are being pressured
by customers or information technology; they are sinking into a black hole and they
want change the problem isn't them, it's this "lump" in the middle.
The reason we sometimes focus on the middle is because very often that is where
you need many fewer people and of course people, quite legitimately, feel very
threatened by that; they become anchors, rather than being in front, trying to lead
the change.
In What Leaders Really Do, you have explored such situations and how to
combat them. Is there a formula for this?
Kotter it helps enormously if you realize people don't resist for a single reason,
but for many reasons. The better your understanding of why they are dragging their
feet, the better the chances of success.
- some people resist because they think the world is just fine so why do we need
to change it?
- some because they are scared to death; they are paralysed
- some resist because they have no confidence in the people who are trying to
drive the change
- others because they look at the vision that is promoted to describe the change
and it makes no sense to them
- yet others resist because they never hear about the vision; it looks to those at the
top as if they are resisting but, in fact, they just don't know what to do
- then there are people who resist because they are so boxed-in by various things
that they can't move; they don't have the information or the training that they need
to be able to do something, or they have a boss who is pressuring them, or there is
a performance appraisal system that will penalize them if they do what is needed
- some people resist because they see this change effort going along and they
don't see any real, concrete signs of success. Even if they were enthusiastic
supporters at the beginning, they waver.
To combat such different areas of resistance, you need to adopt differing
approaches.
What do you see as the major challenges for leaders in the future?
Kotter: It is the same big trend. They are just going to play themselves out, forcing
more and more companies that have had relatively safe harbours to leap further
and faster to be able to compete, to win, to serve. That is the most fundamental
18
trend. Companies have to leap further, faster, and in the right direction. If they
can't, they're in trouble.
Quick Case Study - to grow your company, leverage your leaders
Dupont's Leadership for Growth program leverages talent and ideas by taking
the chemical company's top executives out of their element and teaming them up
with colleagues from other divisions. From an article by Betsy Wiesendanger in
Fast Company issue 39, page 68
Beer in a plastic bottle? Purists might choke on their Speights at the thought. But
Craig Binetti, vice president and general manager of polyester resins and
intermediates at DuPont, saw the promise of a brave new market [OK, we know
this is a US story, and Speights is a South Island NZ beer, but we can't resist
adding a local flavor]. Researchers, packaging experts, and McKinsey consultants
had been dissecting the idea for a year. DuPont chemists had conquered plastic's
porousness, which lets air in and makes beer go flat. Focus groups indicated that
beer drinkers were willing to give plastic a try.
Binetti was ready to leap. But where -- and how, exactly? Should he approach
brewers? Bottlers? Wholesalers? Retailers? And were die-hard beer lovers really
ready to raise a plastic bottle to their lips?
Managers in Binetti's position -- he has the resources of a $26b, 94,000-person
company behind him -- might be tempted to call in more consultants. Instead, he
turned to DuPont's Leadership for Growth program, which culls the company's top
400 executives to form teams that can swoop into any of DuPont's 202 product
groups.
For three weeks, each team focuses its collective brainpower on the question at
hand -- anything from "What are new uses for Kevlar?" to "How can we sell
polyester resins online?" The program is both a training tool -- participants are
assigned a coach and get refresher courses on decision making and conflict
resolution -- and an intelligence unit, a way of leveraging team members' expertise
to flush out products and strategies that might be worth millions of dollars in new
revenues.
The program is an answer to something that's often said about operations as big
as DuPont: "If only they knew what they knew." The company is divided into 21
business units, some of which would qualify for Fortune 500 status on their own.
Leadership for Growth is a way of tapping the enormous knowledge base that lurks
within DuPont.
"The recommendations that come out of these groups are as good as, if not better
than, anything we get from external consultants," says program manager ChorHuat Lim.
The first rule of the program is this: Throw everybody into the deep end. No team
member is assigned to a project within his or her division, and each person brings
different skills and a different background to the effort.
"When I heard that I was going to be working on PET, I thought, What's that?" says
Tom Keen, who manages a nylon-yarn plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee. PET, or
polyethylene terephthalate, is the material that would be used to make plastic beer
bottles. Not that PET's promise mattered much to Keen and his team -- at first. "We
were a bunch of people who didn't know a plastic beer bottle from a Frisbee," he
19
says. Still, DuPont gave them all of the tools that they needed: three-inch [75mm]
binders crammed with product data and market research, and funding to jet off to
anywhere in the world to dig up additional intelligence.
For Rajeev Vaidya, a business manager in DuPont's fluoropolymers division,
Leadership for Growth was a chance to "step out of the swamp" for three weeks
last May, he says. His mission: Explore e-business opportunities for a DuPont
countertop material called Corian. He and his cohorts fanned out across the US
and talked to fabricators, contractors, and retailers. One person spied on shoppers
in a Home Depot.
"We were talking to people who'd worn out the soles of their shoes walking this
path," says Vaidya. Among his team's recommendations: Create an Internet
system to track orders online, and put kiosks in stores to help consumers design
their kitchens.
The beer-bottle team, meanwhile, uncapped its own unorthodox ideas. Could
DuPont make its own ale and call it "Du Brew"? (Not likely). How about a bottle
shaped like a sports-team mascot? (Sorry, no).
Discussions with brewers, however, proved enlightening. With beer consumption
flat in the United States, brewers want to set their brands apart. A plastic bottle
would appeal to 21-to-29-year-old males, the demographic that drinks the most
beer in the US, brewers said. And venues such as sports stadiums were a sure
market. Team members concluded that the best next step was to partner with a
brewer -- they even knew of one that was ready to sign on. "That was incredibly
valuable information," says Binetti, who is now doing a test run with the brewer
named by the team.
Sidebar: Chemical Reaction
How does an industry giant become more nimble? DuPont gets fast answers on
new business opportunities by training its executives to think outside their
divisions. Here's the program's MO.
Call in the troops for three weeks at most - Leadership for Growth used to be an
eight-week assignment, but "it wore people down," says Chor-Huat Lim, program
manager of Leadership for Growth.
Ensure that team members can fully commit themselves - "This isn't something
that can be done part-time," says Rajeev Vaidya, a business manager in DuPont's
fluoropolymers division, who participated in a team last year. "You'd dilute the
power of the whole thing." Provide information on what's been done on the issue
so far, so that team members don't tread old territory. Market research, competitive
information, product literature, and a list of pertinent Web sites are good choices.
Give teams latitude and a travel budget - While exploring e-commerce
applications for Corian countertop material, one Delaware-based team sent a
member to Dell Computer's Texas headquarters in order to bone up on e-business
best practices.
Assign a coach to each team - Coaches don't participate in field work, but they
do act as facilitators who can help members work on their management skills, and
who can intervene when meltdown seems imminent.
For more about Leadership for Growth, email Lee Hoffman (lee.c.hoffman@usa.dupont.com).
>> Pointers
Lots of the material we know you'd find useful doesn't lend itself to eZine treatment,
but we'd really like at the very least to point you towards it. Hence, pointers.
Hundred-word signposts to stuff we think is worth your time.
20
>> Mapping strategy. Robert S Kaplan and David P Norton are the originators of
the balanced scorecard, a strategic approach to organisational management that
'balances' all key performance indicators. Balanced scorecards tell you the
knowledge, skills and systems that your employees will need to innovate and build
the right strategic capabilities and efficiencies that deliver specific value to the
market, eventually leading to higher shareholder value. There's a summary and
some examples in the baldrigeplus.com exhibits collection. In the Sep-Oct 2000
HBR, Kaplan and Norton extend and develop the idea to 'mapping' strategy. If
you've got any strategic responsibilities or interests, this article is required
reading.
>> Curing health care. Clayton Christensen, Richard Bohmer and John Kenagy
(HBR, Sep-Oct, 2000) argue that the (US) health care system is in crisis, and one
essential prescription is disruptive innovation. The present system is directed too
much at high cost, resource-intensive care, overshooting the everyday needs of
most people. They've got a solution. If your interests include healthcare, managing
scarcity (or any public resource), or innovation, this is an article you should try to
read.
Resources
>> IDENTIFYING AND CULTIVATING TOMORROW'S LEADERS
Companies face an impending crisis as they struggle to fill gaps appearing in their leadership ranks as baby
boomers seek early retirement. Because of corporate restructuring, the roster of middle managers who could
have risen to upper leadership positions has been depleted. Companies are redefining what constitutes
optimal leadership by creating competencies for anticipated future needs and building them within their
leadership pipeline. APQC is conducting a consortium learning forum to uncover best practices in succession
management. This multiclient benchmarking project will explore how innovative organizations create
succession management programs that identify and cultivate potential leaders for a sustainable business
advantage. To find out more about this project, visit http://www.apqc.org/proposal/6546lead3.
>> Leadership in change and the wisdom of a gentleman John O. Burdett Participation & Empowerment:
An International Journal; 07: 1 1999;pp.5-14
>> Organizational politics: the missing discipline of management? David Butcher, Martin Clarke Industrial
& Commercial Training; 31: 1 1999; pp.9-12
>> Employee involvement: opening the diversity Pandora's Box? Gillian Shapiro Personnel Review; 29: 3
2000; pp. 304-323
>> Cladistics: a taxonomy for manufacturing organizations Ian McCarthy, Keith Ridgway Integrated
Manufacturing Systems; 11: 1 2000; pp.16-29
Full text at http://www.mcb.co.uk/emrld/now/articles.htm
>> The Inc.com Newsletter - Executive Recruiting
http://www.inc.com/guide/item/0,,GDE76,00.html
File size 25kb. Formatted in html
Emailed version - published 1400hrs, 27 September
21
However, the true hardness began to soften some time ago and the change is
accelerating.
It's speeded up to the point where the Harvard Business Review can declare 'It's
Hard Being Soft', describing 'the hard work of being a soft manager' and asking
'why should anyone be led by you?'
Clearly a major shift in attitudes is taking place. How far have you succumbed to
the soft trend? Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1) Soft leadership is more effective than armour-plated command-and-controlling.
2) Uppermost among the qualities needed to be a strong leader are sensitivity,
vulnerability and honesty about your weakness.
3) People start wanting to work with you when you quit pretending to be perfect.
4) Employees will eventually respect and support you when you let them know
that you're flesh and blood.
5) When you've established empathy you can give people what they need in
order to excel which is perhaps what they want.
6) You encourage others to share responsibility by relinquishing the idea that the
fate of the firm rests completely on you.
If you do agree with all or any of these, then you face a hard question: are you
putting your soft principles into practice? If not, you are unlikely to work for an
organisation that has time for such ideas.
The above Feelgood Formula enshrines the familiar philosophy that the better
you treat people, the better they will work. The problem for most organisations is
that the ends outrank the means.
Companies need their innovators more than ever. These brains need the
greatest possible space to deploy and share their thoughts. This is where
soft management holds the reins
The soft ways of the Feelgood Formula are just good behaviour: you manage in
human and humane ways because that's the correct way to treat your people.
The fact that it's also more effective is a bonus, albeit possibly a highly valuable
one.
But effectiveness depends, not on the degree of loving kindness brought to bear,
but on the competitive quality of the decisions taken, the processes installed, the
methods applied, the technologies developed and so on.
22
These are the 'hardest' areas of management in both senses of the term. Take
a false step in any of these matters today, and it might take years rather than
months to recover.
The pressures are so powerful that the experts polled in the latest survey
undertaken by the Global Future Forum predict some radical changes in
management and these tend towards a 'soft-hard' future.
A lot of larger companies will become networks of outsourced resources,
partnerships, alliances and contractors in order to become (soft) more responsive
to market demands.
Understanding the customer (soft) and superior retailing skills will prevail over
(hard) straight manufacturing capabilities as the primary drivers of success. Also,
organisational adaptability and flexibility (soft) are becoming more important to
success than operational performance and other traditional (hard) metrics.
Companies need their innovators more than ever. These brains need the
greatest possible space to deploy and share their thoughts. This is where soft
management holds the reins. Freedom of thought should flourish. You need selfmanaged bands of brothers and sisters who set their own goals.
Your model should be the university, not the military camp. However, in this soft
habitat, paradoxically, you require a focus of the hardest military intensity.
23
24
Today, in some ways it still does, but for different reasons and different situations.
The difference between a leadership theory and a management approach is a
bright notion that has changed the landscape of residential work throughout the
United States.
In our current environment, values, motivation, focus, goals, culture and
imagination have become critical factors in a management approach. Terms such
as mission, vision, mental models, and leadership play an important role in the
structure of a strong functional program. It is clear that not only is there a struggle
for leadership at the unit level, but the truest test of leadership is in the ability to
incorporate the styles and beliefs of those around you into a system of growth
and development, in spite of the forces working against this growth, both
internally and externally (E. Campagnone, personal communication, March,
2000).
Since leadership is more than just affecting the course of events, goals are
critical to the functioning of an organization. These goals must be obtainable and
correct. James MacGregor Burns has stated That socially useful goals not only
have to meet the needs of followers, they also should elevate followers to a
higher moral level. Calling this transformational leadership, he posits that people
begin with the need for survival and security, and once those needs are meet,
concern themselves with higher needs like affection, belonging, the common
good or serving others. This approach has the benefit of provoking discussion
about how to construct a hierarchy of orienting values. Heifetz, 1999, p. 21.)
Three years ago, a friend stated It is hard to identify the goals of my profession
in light of the things I am thinking about today. I know where I want to go, but do I
do a good job at getting others there with me. This salient point has been a focal
point of understanding of highly successful programs and ones that fails to
provide leadership under the guise of intended success. It requires a hard
assessment of program goals and achievements at a foundational level to grasp
the cultural implication of treatment over growth. as defined in program goals and
objectives. As the goals of the program became clearer and more defined, the
reality that the environment or milieu of the program can often be counter to
actualization. There often is no effort at understanding the culture of the program,
the impact of the staff or the reality of the children and their families in the
programs. The expectations of successful treatment were that upon completion
25
of the program, you were better. However, the question now became What the
hell is better and how do we get them there (E. Campagnone, personal
communication, July, 2000).
This led to finding a definition of culture as: a pattern of shared basic
assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external
adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be
considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way
to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 1992, p.12).
Sounds intriguing and intellectual, but it presents an interesting complex problem.
The culture of programs intreaditional development, was not ours, it was
someone elses idea that had to be translated at all levels by everyone into one
culture or understanding. Often, the communication and interpersonal
relationships of the management, leadership and milieu staff was too fragmented
to be successful. Thus, what was on paper and what occurred in the units were
strikingly different. It is not uncommon, upon close examination to find vastly
different perception of treatment by management and milieu staff and clients in
the same unit. The concepts of culture and leadership has not been addressed.
In Organizational Culture and Leadership , Schein (1997) states that the product
of our human need for stability, consistency and meaning (p.11) is manifested in
our culture.
The process of learning must ultimately be made part of the culture, not any
given solution to any given problem (p. 366). Again, the concept is intriguing but
here was the first great revelation of the translation of business concepts into
residential treatment. The therapeutic milieu is often defined as a learning
environment, based on values and standards and expectations. How close were
the values and standards lived by the staff and the children; by the management
or by the leadership in the professed values of the milieu? Who were the leaders
that were establishing our milieu and maintaining it?
In the book The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook, Peter Senge, (1994) discusses the
concept of learning. In the chapter on Co-creating(p. 323), the author presented
excellent examples in the development of a learning environment, team building
and program development. The role of the leader in this environment, beginning
with a shared vision (p.323-326) reinforced several essential ideas that should
26
27
At some point, the staff must understand that they are alone with these choices
and in many ways, they are the leaders of the moment in that childs life, this
alone should provide a level of energy for staff members to be motivated on a
personal level. Motivation is a power that arises within an individual to satisfy a
need (Bittel and Newstrom, 1990, p. 269). The desire to complete and process
is time consuming and arduous, it has to come from inside. It is fair to say that
one can manage easier than lead and motivate because of this internal drive of
the individual. A person can have motivation without another persons
leadership. Leadership cannot succeed without the motivation on the followers
part (p. 269). In Flight of the Buffalo (1993), Belasco and Stayer identify four
leadership principles in their leadership paradigm: Leaders transfer ownership for
work to those who execute the work. Leaders create an environment for
ownership where each person wants to be responsible. Leaders coach the
development of personal capabilities. Leaders learn fast themselves and
encourage others to learn quickly (p. 19).
The hardest challenge of new networks and systems in todays corporate culture
is that the upper level management and leadership reflect an authoritative
leadership style (p.16). The problem is that the newness of the network has not
allowed anyone to learn how to reach below themselves and trust. Mangers
assume that if we follow their mandates, things will be fine; except that there are
a multitude of sites and managers who must try to understand what is going on
and it does not work.
Strong leadership is justifiably considered an essential ingredient of successful
companies, but when leadership is invested in only one person or a select few it
is only natural that the vast majority of employees feel less than personally
responsible for producing high-quality products and services (Seifter and
Economy, 2001, p.41).
This decision-making process and micro-management can have noticeable effect
on the staff. Belman and Deal discuss Douglas McGregors Theory X and Theory
Y ideas of the managers assumptions of people. Theory X is a set of beliefs
advocating that subordinates are passive and lazy, have little ambition; prefer to
be led, and resist change (Bolman and Deal, p.105). Theory Y postulates, the
essential task of management is to arrange organizational conditions so that
people can achieve their own goals best by directing their efforts toward
28
organizational rewards (p. 106). As can be seen, the extremes of reality and
theory exist at times together.
For residential treatment programs, the challenge is to understand the Xs and
Ys of their management beliefs and leadership styles.
Theory X, Theory Y
Theory X is a traditional model for management thinking based on the following
assumptions:
Average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if possible;
Because of this human characteristic of dislike of work, most people must be
coerced, controlled, directed or threatened with punishment to get them to put
forth adequate effort toward the achievement of organizational objectives;
The average human being prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid responsibility,
has relatively little ambition, and wants security above all achievement (Bittel and
Newstrom, 1990, p. 270).
In his book, Leadership Ensemble, Harvey Seifter and Peter Economy (2001)
comments Apparently, there are two principal downsides to the traditional model
of fixed organizational leadership. Not only does the failure to take full advantage
of the skills and talents of every worker represent a high opportunity cost borne
by the entire company, but disenfranchised employees also tend to grow cynical
about the elite few who comprise a leadership nucleus. As a result, organizations
that restrict leadership to a small number of people, tend to suffer poor moral,
high turnover and the loss of competitive advantage (p. 89).
Theory Y finds it roots in recently accumulated knowledge about human
behavior:
The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or
rest;
External control and the threat of punishment are not the only means for bringing
about effort toward organizational objectives; Individuals will exercise self-control
in the service of objectives to which they are committed;
Commitment to objectives depends on the rewards associated with their
achievement. The most important rewards are those that satisfy needs for selfrespect and personal;
The average human being learns, under proper conditions, not only to accept but
also to seek responsibility;
29
31
Meg Greenfield, (as cited in Hesselbein, F., Goldsmith, M, and Beckard, R.,
1996) stated, We expect a human being who, to be successful, must combine in
the right way many seemingly contradictory qualities: worldliness and idealism,
toughness and charity, skepticism and belief, humility and self-confidence,
enthusiasm and restraint (p. 280). For some of us, the view that True leadership
must lead to changes that translate into social betterment (p.75) is a benchmark
concept that should be a basic component of all treatment environments.
32