It is patently obvious that society has become increasingly complex. Never in the history of mankind have we been bombarded with so much information so quickly. Nor, in the history of mankind, have we been faced with such quick, irregular, and non-linear change. In such an environment, sophisticated leadership is more important than ever.
Today, the leader is faced with a quandary: Failure to act when everything else is changing around you can lead to the death of an organization or a movement. On the other hand, acting too quickly, without proper information, can also be lethal. As Author Robert Steinberg has said: "The essence of intelligence would seem to be in knowing when to think and act quickly, and knowing when to think and act slowly” (cited in Fullan, p. x).
So, the question is “how does one lead in what Michael Fullan has deemed “’a culture of change’”? I would argue that, too often, the leaders we emulate are “take charge” individuals who exemplify the attitude expressed by U.S. Patriot, Thomas Payne of “Lead, follow, or get out of the way.” They are leaders like Winston Churchill, who can energize a nation in times of war or Mustafa Kemal Ataturk who can lead a nation to reform through forcible means. To this end, Leadership guru Ronald Heifetz (1994) has accused us of looking for the wrong kind of leaders, especially in times of crisis:
In a crisis…we call for someone with answers, decisions, strength, and a map of the future, someone who knows where we ought to be going – in short someone who can make hard problems simple…Instead of looking for saviors, we should be calling for leadership that will challenge us to face problems for which there are not simple, painless solutions – problems that require us to learn new ways p. 21).
These kinds of superhuman, charismatic, and energetic leaders to which Heifetz refers can be more damaging than beneficial. They lead us to sporadic progress and provide us with examples which very few of us can copy. Most of us cannot be like Winston Churchill. In fact, the British people were wise enough to realize that a leader who is effective in wartime may not be effective in times of peace and recovery. Mr. Churchill was not re-elected in 1945, immediately after World War II.
Likewise, these times do not call for leaders like Kemal Ataturk, who rule by decree. Yes, if you are strong enough and intimidating enough, people will do what you say. But such leadership does not foster commitment in others – it merely achieves compliance. Compliance does not lead to real change or a real sense of responsibility among people in organizations.
No, the complexity of our time does not call for demagogues, nor does it call for superheroes. Leadership, today, depends on individuals who can help get others to confront problems that have not been solved and which don’t have easy solutions – simply because real change depends on everyone, not a single, extraordinary individual.
In my view, the able leader is one who considers the opinions of his followers. Yes, leaders must have the inner strength and self-confidence to step into the unknown and persuade others to follow. However, this bold self-assurance must be tempered with a “decent doubt” – a humility to admit to being wrong and to acknowledge that others have good ideas – perhaps even better than one’s own. Leaders are not afraid of the strengths of others. The great industrialist, Andrew Carnegie, explicated this in his epitaph: “Here lies a man who attracted better people into his service than he was himself.” In fact, it could be said that the greatest task of a leader is encouraging and recognizing the accomplishments of others and embracing dissent. Any leader who does not put dissenters in his or her inner circle is probably doomed to groupthink mentality and assured of failure.
Finally, an effective leader comprehends that he has a much greater responsibility than self-service and self-aggrandizement. An effective leader acts with moral purpose, by this I mean –acting with the intention of making a positive difference in the lives of employees, customers, and society as a whole. A leader appreciates that he must sacrifice for the good of others and that his welfare is undeniably tied to the welfare of every individual in his community or organization. A leader endorses the notion of abolitionist Frederick Douglas that, “It is better to be part of a great whole than to be the whole of a small part.”
No comments:
Post a Comment