Hands up, how many of you have attended a meeting with the leader or CEO in your organisation, which is intended to review, discuss, and debate an important issue, only to have the leader dominate the discussion from the outset. Effusing on their view of the matter and barely letting anyone get a word in. Even when they do ask for views around the table, the discussion is inevitably returned to their perspective and how they want things to be done.
How often have you walked out of such a meeting, instructions in hand, and wondered why you were even there? The process would have been more efficient if your leader had simply sent an email outlining what they wanted done. No debate, no discussion, just execute.
This scenario happens all too often in organisations because there is a fundamental contradiction that lies at the heart of the concept of leadership. Harvard Business Review defines leadership as “the accomplishment of a goal through the direction of human assistants. The man who successfully marshals his human collaborators to achieve particular ends is a leader."[1]
The image that this definition evokes is one of a man (or woman) who is often, charismatic and driven, and has the vision in their mind of what the end goal of a particular endeavour is or should be, and then directs the activities and efforts of their colleagues to achieve that goal. This directed approach is a largely dominant perspective of leadership, particularly in western oriented cultures.
As a result of this perspective there are several important outcomes for leaders and the practice of leadership. It tends to result in a self-image among leaders that they have, or must have, the answer to the question, and the only function of those they lead is to execute their instructions to ensure that the vision or plan is carried out.
It also results in a situation where the rest of the Organisation becomes reluctant to take decisions on their own or vary the execution of plans because the leader has made a decision about what will be done and how it will be done and expects their instructions to be carried out. In the worst examples of this practice, the leader has bullied the rest of the team into submission and will not countenance any variance from the course they have set.
A further challenge arising from the omniscient leader approach is that there is very little opportunity to test ideas before they are implemented, to balance out questionable strategies or approaches before they become a disaster. One only has to look at leaders such as Bernard Ebbers at WorldCom, Ken Lay at Enron and Edward Lampert at K-Mart, who are often referenced as among the worst CEO’s, for examples of leadership that represent many of the traits already outlined.
The challenge for these leaders is that they have mistaken their approach for strength and an unequivocal belief in their own ability to always be right. Sometimes it works, but more often than not, the organisation they lead works in spite of them, and even then, its rarely as good as it can be.
The missing element in this leadership style is listening on the part of the leader.
The hard charging, charismatic, go-get-‘em, kind of leader finds it really difficult to enter a meeting, lay out the issue or challenge and then keep silent as their team discusses, debates or even argues vociferously the different perspectives of a solution or approach.
However, listening, it can be argued, is the most important skill a leader can have. Listening provides a rich and granular understanding of the challenge being confronted. Having your team debate the issues, offer their opinions, and table possible solutions, offers a leader a variety of choices from which to formulate a way forward.
The hard charging leader may view listening rather than directing as a sign of weakness and openness to being led by others, however, this is not the case.
It takes tremendous strength to sit and listen, and not inject your own views, as your peers, colleagues and subordinates debate an issue.
It takes strength to recognise within yourself as a leader that you may not have all the answers or even the best ideas.
It takes strength and significant mental agility to distil from a broad range of views, the key components of a solution and to offer constructive criticism.
And finally, it takes strength to persuade colleagues with differing views on an issue, to support and execute the solution that finally emerges from a healthy debate.
Listening leaders draw their knowledge and inspiration from across an organisation. The get out of their office and ‘walk the floor’, meeting with as many colleagues as they can. Engaging everyone from the office cleaner to the COO in conversation and asking colleagues questions about their role, and how they believe things could be done better in the organisation.
It is surprising how often the solution to an intractable problem comes from elsewhere in the organisation. Those who do their work every day do it that way because that’s the way it is done. It may be inefficient or clunky, but it works for them because it has always been thus, and anyway, most of the time it’s just easier to accept the status-quo. An outside view of that function often identifies the bottleneck and the solution, however, unless the outside observer has the opportunity to talk to about it, change and improvement is unlikely.
Listening leaders create a cultural norm in organisations. If they listen, collect facts, views, and ideas, before acting, others in the organisation will likely feel encouraged to do the same. This builds a culture of inclusion and a sense of ownership among all employees.
Former US President John F. Kennedy visited a NASA facility in 1962 and asked a cleaner he met what he did at the facility. The man replied, “I am putting a man on the moon”. An organisation that builds a sense of inclusion and commitment to its purpose and mission cannot but succeed.
If you are a leader of a small team, a big division, or the whole organisation, you will be well served to stop and take a moment to listen to the team around you. Their thoughts and ideas may offer the solution to the challenge you are facing.
The very fact that you listen, even if their ideas are not what’s needed, will build a sense of trust and inclusion that will only strengthen the bond you have with your team, and stand you in good stead when the chips are down.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Harvard Business Review Magazine, January 2004, Understanding Leadership by W.C.H Prentice
Comments