At present, I am vacationing with my family at my alma mater in the US. I went to college here almost 20-23 years ago. Catching up with dear friends who live in the area and reminiscing about the college and my time here, I couldn't help but think of different leaders who have led during that time and in the interim period. It made me think about different styles of leadership. It made me think how important it is to have the right kind of leader in the right place to be able to take a particular institution or corporation forward.
That made me think about the time in 1977 or 1978 when we had a Jazz concert in India. Hundreds of us were in the choir and I remember remarking to each other how much we loved the conductor and how, to use an old cliché, we would follow him to hell and back. It brought to mind how some leaders are loved and followers will follow them because of the deep love that they have for the leader while others are feared and respected, and can get the job done because of that fear and respect. I remember my principal at school, a wonderful man, great teacher, but one who walked the corridors of our school with rubber-soled shoes that wreaked terror in us if we were caught out of place. And yet the school did magnificently under him.
As I looked at these two styles of leadership, I wondered: which one works – "to be loved or to be feared?" I think it was Niccolò Machiavelli who pondered that timeless conundrum 500 years ago and yet, in this article by Amy Cuddy, Matthew Kohut and John Neffinger, he hedged his bets. "It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved."
Machiavelli, I think, had it partly right. In their article in Harvard Business Review entitled "Connect, Then Lead." they go on to say that when they look at leaders, the first two characteristics that come to the fore or the question that is asked is: "How lovable are they?" and "How fearsome are they?" How lovable in terms of their warmth, their communion, their trustworthiness and how fearsome in terms of their strengths, their agency or their competence. But in looking at these two questions I think the jury is still out on them.
I remember reading a fable many years ago about a contest between the sun and the wind as to who was the stronger. They finally decided to settle it. They looked towards the earth and there was this man walking along in a coat. The sun said, "Go ahead. Let's see who can get the coat off first." The wind said, "That's find. Let me try." So he began to blow as hard as he could. He blew and blew but it only made the man pull his coat tighter around him. Finally the wind gave up and then the sun began to beat down on him. The warmth began to really make him feel hot and he finally took off his coat.
This begs the question – which is the better of the two? To have warmth and be loved or to be fiercely competitive and competent and get the job done through that.
The authors of this article end by saying that warmth is the conduit of influence. They quote organizational psychologist Andrea Abele and a couple of other psychologists who teamed up and did some research, looking at leaders and asking them what kind of programs they would like to be a part of. "When asked to choose between training programs focusing on competence-related skills (such as time management) and warmth-related ones (providing social support, for instance), most participants opted for competence-based training for themselves but soft-skills training for others." Further research showed that when they were asked to describe and event that shaped their self-image, most told stories about themselves that emphasized their own competence and self-determination ("I passed my pilot's license test on the first try"), whereas when they described a similar event for someone else, they focused on that person's warmth and generosity ("My friend tutored his neighbor's child in math and refused to accept any payment").
I thought that this would be a good dilemma to throw out to you, all of you in your workspaces and ask the question in your own leadership styles, "Do I lead as one who is loved or as one who is feared?" Then, is this an either/or question or is it a both/and question? Should I lead the two together or can they be mutually exclusive. I'm going to let you wrestle with that through the day but will throw out a couple of old adages that I feel will make us think.
· You must build trust so that you can share truth.
· People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care.
Think through that. Being loved; being strong. Loved or feared – which one is your leadership style? Which one gets the job done? Which one is the one that you think is the right kind of style for you? I hope that it inspires you to think a little bit about yourself and maybe make changes if you need to. Or if you are completely comfortable with where you are, that's great too.
Let me pray for you. Almighty God, on each one of these precious ones on this call, pour out Your Spirit that they may know and understand how it is that they lead, what characteristics and traits help them, what they need to acquire or put in to the things that they do to help them be more effective. Above all, Master, we long to be people who are doing well, doing what's good and doing what's noble. I pray that You would lead each one on this call to that effect. In the precious Name of Jesus we pray. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment