Is Leadership About Growing Others?

Is Leadership About Growing Others?

This post is in response to:

Leadership is About Growing Others

The premise provided, "Leadership is about growing others - It's not about you!" is incorrect as a whole. The reason why this understanding is correct is based on the definition of leadership. Leadership is "Guiding Intent with Integrity". A leader has to guide his subordinates and himself toward a goal that solves a business or humanistic problem.  Jack Welch's quote, “Before you become a leader success is all about growing yourself. Once you become a leader success is all about growing others.”, is not bout being a leader, it's about being SUCCESSFUL! Successful people look for business or humanistic problems to solve that have a greater solution benefit to production cost ratio. They marshal resources, which may cultivate future leaders or managers to handle the business problem's solution life cycle.  Bryan Oliver's comment, "Leadership is all about self-sacrifice, not worrying about who gets the credit for what idea, and is not about how good the leader looks to the person they report to.", also misses the mark. The perception is perpetrated by the idea that "[ Leadership ] is Not About You!", your ego. Are you the business problem or the solution? You are neither. What you are is an individual among many working on the problem trying to solve it. You can work with others to solve the problem, or you can work alone. But, you are never the only person who can solve this problem.  Leaders do not sacrifice themselves or others in the name of producing a solution. They are motivated by the outcome they want this solution to have on humanity. How will this solution impact the world, make it a better place, and make life easier for others. That is what leaders envision, and convey through their guidance. Their passion, is about them. Their motivation is intrinsic, based on solving an extrinsic problem.

Why do Supervisors Plans Fail?

This is in response to Chris Swains article on "Why Supervisor's Plans Fail!" (http://bnetworking.info/?p=1652)

Chris, the article provides an interesting perspective, but the perspective is too narrow. It should also account for the global calendar and leadership.  Organizations could have a global calendar from which all departmental calendars are synchronized to. In addition, the organizational calendar could be synchronized with events outside the organization, such as trade shows and economic events, like Christmas, tax season, and major holidays. The unfortunate part for most organizations is that there is no physical global calendar for organization members to refer to. Thus the global calendar is cerebral.  While organizations and teams have their own calendars, individuals have their own personal calendars. Personal events may or may not interfere with the organizations calendar, and the teams calendar. What is not conveyed to the calendar though are intentions, otherwise known as "Hidden Agendas". These intentions, for example, don't provide time to adjust the project plan and account for success.  Which brings me to my next point in the perspective. Leadership is "Guiding Intent with Integrity" towards a goal. The article was written from the perspective of a Supervisor relying on their project plan / time table to drive results. The problem with this perspective is that it suggests that the motivational methods for driving the project are based on reminding employees that there is a dead line.  The goal should be the motivational drive here, not the time table. Individual employees should see how their enthusiasm for this work builds commitment to this part of the project and helps drive other team members through external motivation. It's also known as "Motivation From Without." And is often written about in health magazines, as people use other people to motivate them to go to the gym and keep going.  The piece that most supervisors fail to realize and understand, that team leaders study, is now to motivate people through many different methods. As mentioned, one source of motivation is from within, an employee's personal drive to solve a particular humanistic problem. And, motivation from without, where employees are motivated by seeing someone else's dedication to solving this problem.  This is what really distinguishes a organization at Stage 2 & 3 vs an organization at Stage 4 or 5.

Chris Swain (https://www.linkedin.com/groups?viewMemberFeed=&gid=2355813&memberID=227104845)

Incorrect Definitions of Leadership

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-makes-leader-dr-travis-bradberry

=====

Summary Points of the article:

Leadership has nothing to do with seniority or one’s position in the hierarchy of a company. 

Leadership has nothing to do with titles. 

Leadership has nothing to do with personal attributes. 

Leadership isn’t management.  

So, again, what makes a leader?

Peter Drucker: “The only definition of a leader is someone who has followers.”

Warren Bennis: “Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality.”

Bill Gates: “As we look ahead into the next century, leaders will be those who empower others.”

John Maxwell: “Leadership is influence – nothing more, nothing less.”

So what is leadership?

DEFINITION: Leadership is a process of social influence which maximizes the efforts of others toward the achievement of a greater good.

=====

Definitions should be simple and elegant, to which you definition is not, and my research contradicts your definition.  

1st - Any definition of leadership must account for both the Light side and Dark side of Leadership - from Gandolf the White through Emperor Palpatine.

2nd - Leadership does not require followers. There is self leadership.  

3rd - The "Greater Good" is of no consequence to the definition of leadership, as pointed out in point #1.  Leaders can and do use the "Greater Good" to mis-guide followers.

The definition of leadership is, "Guiding Intent with Integrity".

Guidance, like coaching, depends on what the goal is, and how all parties wish to achieve it.  What you call, "Social Influence". Psychologist determined that teams follow a coach's instructions directly - tell them what not to do and they do it; tell them what to do and they do it.

Intentions are the a mix of: interests, problems, expectations, values, motivations, feelings, wants, desires, goals, rules, beliefs, education, psychological, physiological, fears, cravings, obligations, experiences, needs, strategies, issues, habits, expressions, ... to describe these visually, think of intentions as the wax in a lava lamp flowing up and down.

Integrity is maintained or broken based on the social contract between the leader and the followers. There are many cultural issue to take into account when looking into the social contract between leader and followers.

There is a lot more, for example there are 3 classes of followers, and observers.

Leadership Questions

So, I've been reading a lot of books on leadership and collecting questions on leadership.  Here are some of them:

How do leaders build relationships?

How do leaders coach followers to become leaders?

What methods are there when describing a vision to followers?

How do leaders ferret out the beliefs of their followers?

How do leaders empower their followers to make decisions?

Why do leaders praise their followers when they have succeeded at achieving a milestone and/or a goal?

How do leaders control the conversation? And why is this [ controlling the conversation ] important?

How do leaders respond to an observers comment a out their execution of a vision?

How does a leader respond when a follower's limiting beliefs affect their [ the followers] motivation and initiative?

How and Who should leaders solicit input from followers about their vision?

Does a leader need to be a planner or a do'er?

Does a leader need planners or do'ers as followers?

How should a leader respond when a mistake is discovered?

How should a leader discuss goals in order to come into alignment with their followers?

When should a leader step into a team dispute?

What sources should a leader take into account when building a vision?

Should a leader organize his followers based on guiding principles or the rule of law?

What should a leader keep from his followers?

When should a leader interact with other groups?

What habits should a highly effective leader have?

Should leaders reflect on their past leadership roles?

How does a leader determine who to reward when the vision is achieved?

How does Ego affect a leaders ability to lead followers?

How do leaders check in with followers on their progress, resources, and/or journey?

How does a leader think about his followers?

How does a leader build respect?

How does a leader delegate responsibility?

How does a leader take two opposing view points and create a third unifying view point?

Why does a leader face what he fears most?

How does a leader manage expectations?

How do leaders manage uncertainty?

How does a leader challenge the norm, and set the pace of change that followers can absorb?

How does a leader uncover deep seated and held beliefs by followers, non-followers, outsiders and observers?

How does a leader bring his followers to understand the benefits and trade offs associated with their desired outcome?

How does a leader start a conversation about a difficult subject?

How does a leader keep a conversation going until all the perspectives have been examined?

How does a leader deal with resistance to change from followers, non-followers and outsiders?

How does a leader deal with distractions from the vision?

How does a leader represent the followers issues to peers, non-followers, outsiders and observers?

What happens to a leader when he becomes the message, and no longer the messenger?

How can a leader help two groups change - his followers primarily, and the non-followers and observers. While, Outsiders are not affected by the issue initially, they may become affected through the proposed changes.

What questions should a leader ask his followers to determine how willing and able they are to change vs how much they require others to change?

How should a leader represent his followers issues to peers, followers, non-followers, outsiders and observers?

When should a leader step out of the drama he's playing in, and look at the play from an audience's perspective as well as a critics?

What should a leader do to monitor factions within his followers?

Should a leader monitor the factions in non-followers?

Should a leader build coalitions in peers, followers, non-followers, outsiders, and observers?

Should a leader empathize with the pain of change peers, followers, non-followers, outsiders and observers will feel as they strive for a goal?

What are followers willing sacrifice during periods of change?

Why, when and how do followers push back when they refuse to change?

What happens when a leader presents an issue before the followers are ready to deal with it?

Why is change necessary?

A leader is faced with two warring factions, usually over the separation of duties, he can side with one faction or the other, why would he choose not to?

Why would a leader choose to act like a facilitator and allow those working on a cultural problem to work it out among themselves?

Getting Off Stage!

Expanding on your point - Reflection.

A similar example uses the perspective of a stage. The leader needed to be: part of the play, part of the audience, and the director. While the leader is taking action steps within the play, he also needs to step out into the audience to see how things look. Who is coming on stage, who is leaving, what parts are they playing, ... and How is the story being told, what is adding to the story, what is distracting from the story.

One problem that can occur with leadership, is that while a leader trumpets the message of his followers, he becomes the message. Eventually people they network with become jaded against the messenger, "Oh, it's Joe. All he ever speaks about is 'Saving the Rain Forest' ! " Leaders need to avoid this delema by networking with with liked minded peers to build a chorus for the message.

Another point leaders can reflect on by watching as a director / audience (observer's) perspective, is how the antagonist and protagonist are using the actors to motivate people. How is drama being created? How are characters being moved around the stage.? How are are characters being brought together? How are characters being separated? How are characters being attacked? Which story is more interesting, the story about Alice falling down the rabbit hole, or the story about the Rabbit creating holes?

While there are many other questions concerning this perspective that could be addressed, I'll leave the audience here with one last thought. All the actors on stage, while a chorus, are singing the same song eventually, in their own unique way. How does the song change as the story proceeds? Does it change? And when does it change?

One of the greatest triumphs a leader has is finding a way to bring two diverse groups together through a common cause, problem, or solution. Sometimes this is call innovative, sometimes it's considered just a logical progression of how technology should have progressed. When the chorus refuses to change their minds about how the song could be sung, or their stance on an issue, makes the leader's job of finding like minded peers to network with.

An interesting play on this theme is, "You're not a true Christian!". 200 Christians are placed on stage with Jesus.  The antagonist starts by differentiating himself from Jesus.  And, the process continues as eventually all 200 Christians are all claiming that they are a True Christian, while stating that everyone else is not.  As a space alien cartoon portrayed, "They are all fighting over which religion is the most peaceful!"

Do you agree?

A strong, positive leadership style is crucial because destructive criticism and bullying does little to motivate people; in fact, it often causes people to shut down and stop trying.