Leadership Perspectives

Alan Hooper

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Topic: Business
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351922548
• Subtopic: Leadership
• Index: Business

This definitive reference work is designed to meet a need for all those who have an interest in Leadership; be they students at business schools, academic researchers, leadership consultants or practical leaders. At last, we have a collection of seminal peer-reviewed articles and book chapters in one convenient volume. All the members of the Editorial Team have an association with the renowned Centre for Leadership Studies at Exeter University and they have chosen their articles around six core themes: Understanding Leadership; Relationships; Power and Leadership; Leadership, Identity and Difference; Imagination; Spirituality in Organizations. These themes cover a broad spectrum of Leadership and this volume enables people to access some of the best writing on this fascinating topic, all in one publication.

Part I
Understanding Leadership

Introduction to Part I

Understanding Leadership

Alan Hooper

‘Leadership’ is a word that is used frequently in our everyday lives, and yet there appears to be little common understanding about what it really means. For instance, when we talk about ‘leadership’ are we referring to the qualities of a particular leader? Are we reflecting on the difference between leadership and management? Or are we talking about the leadership issues in an organization? This lack of clarity about the word ‘leadership’ is not solely due to the richness of the English language, it is also affected by the changing nature of leadership (such as the shift from autocracy to empowerment), by the constant change of the environment in which leadership operates and also by our growing comprehension about the different aspects of this illusive topic.

A significant contribution to our growing understanding about leadership has been made by Chris Argyris. In his excellent essay, ‘Teaching Smart People How to Learn’ (1991), he revealed that the dilemma for companies was the fact that it was the smartest people who found it the hardest to learn. As there are a lot of smart people at the top of organizations, it is therefore hardly surprising that ‘understanding’ leadership has been difficult. It has also not been helped by the fact that leadership has often been associated with doing – taking decisions and action – rather than with thoughtful reflection. This tendency towards ‘single-loop’ as opposed to ‘double-loop’ learning (Argyris, 1991, p. 100) has led to the perception that there are not many thoughtful leaders. This perception is not true (consider Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela), but the myth persists.

Thankfully, much has been written in the last few years to enable us to gain a better understanding of the nature of leadership. The five essays in Part I explore this topic by examining the difference between leadership and management; managerial mindsets; narcissism; organizational totalitarianism; and the learning organization.

In the first essay John Kotter points out that leadership and management are both distinctive and complementary systems – and that not everyone can be good at both. Kotter’s distinction between the two is that ‘[m]anagement is about coping with complexity’ whereas ‘Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change’ (p. 8). He then goes on to discuss in some detail the different processes between leadership and management (for example, setting a direction versus planning and budgeting; motivating people versus controlling and problem-solving). His major contribution is the explanation of the distinctive leadership and management roles in practical terms, reinforced with appropriate case studies. This, in turn, shows why it is difficult to be good at both. However, Kotter points out (p. 13) that the best companies have an ability to develop outstanding ‘leader-managers’ by introducing significant challenges early in their careers, and providing continual growth opportunities as these individuals progress up the managerial ladder.

In Chapter 4 Jonathan Gosling and Henry Mintzberg agree with Kotter that management is complicated and also stress that ‘the separation of management from leadership is dangerous’ (p. 41). Their significant contribution to the understanding of leadership is their finding that in order to focus not only on what needs to be done, but also on how they have to think, managers need various ‘mindsets’. They stress the need for both action and reflection, which involves five perspectives:

• Managing self: the reflective mind-set

• Managing organisations: the analytic mind-set

• Managing context: the worldly mind-set

• Managing relationships: the collaborative mind-set

• Managing change: the action mind-set (p. 42).

This essay takes the thinking a step further than Kotter in that it addresses the difficult areas of leadership and management and acknowledges the complexity. In particular, Gosling and Mintzberg challenge some of the accepted conventions (‘the problem for many managers today… is not a lack of analysis but too much of it – at least, too much conventional analysis’ (p. 45)); point out the realities (‘[t]his is a world made up of edges and boundaries, like a patchwork’ (p. 46)); and indicate how to achieve success by ‘moving towards a more engaging style. Engaging managers listen more than they talk’ (p. 47). Their recipe for success in the action mindset ‘is to mobilize energy around those things that need changing, while being careful to maintain the rest’ (p. 48). The problem is that, as sound as this advice is, those people who oppose change tend to maintain the status quo with a persistent and annoying stubbornness.

However, Gosling and Mintzberg stress the need to consider the five mindsets as a whole and point out that ‘[e]ffective organizations tailor handsome results out of the woven mindsets of their managers’ (p. 49).

This poetic language is in contrast to the world of the superstar CEOs. In Chapter 3 Michael Maccoby explores the characteristics of narcissistic leaders who are egotistical and self-promoting, with larger-than-life personalities. Throughout history such individuals have shaped the destiny of countries and organizations through their vision and their ability to inspire people. These are the leaders that people talk about. They fascinate us because it is difficult to understand why they are so effective, especially as many seem to lack empathy. It is in helping us to understand narcissistic leaders that Maccoby’s work is so useful, especially because such individuals can be dangerous for organizations.

Maccoby provides three reasons why business leaders have higher profiles today: first, the fact that nowadays business plays a bigger role in our lives; second, the enormous changes in the business world, which call for more visionary leadership; and, third, the change in the personality of strategic leaders at the top (pp. 31–32). He goes on to explain that there are two types of narcissism: ‘productive’ and ‘non-productive’, and then considers their strengths and weaknesses.

The strengths are well understood (for example, great vision and an ability to attract followers) but the weaknesses are less so, and are therefore worth exploring because these can be the root cause of failure. Maccoby identifies these as being sensitive to criticism, being poor listeners, lacking empathy, distaste for mentoring and an intense desire to compete (pp. 35–37). These characteristics could be considered to be typical of many individualistic leaders which, in excess, could lead to self-destruction.

Maccoby’s essay includes some useful advice for how such leaders can avoid the traps, and how others can best work with them. Given the energy which surrounds such individuals and the significant impact they can have on organizations, for good or ill, it is easy to see why the Harvard Business Review included this essay in both its Best of HBR in 2000 and Inside the Mind of the Leader edition in 2004.

Narcissism also features in Howard Schwartz’s essay (Chapter 2). Here, the emphasis switches to the organization, and Schwartz’s thesis is based on the premise that ‘the perfect organization’ does not exist, but because people fail to accept that fact, many organizations delude themselves, which is both dangerous and non-productive. Such organizations tend to live out the narcissistic fantasies of those in power (p. 17). An extreme example of this was the Nazi party where officials wielded power ‘even over their nominal superiors through their capacity for denunciation’ (p. 23).

Such self-delusion can lead to those at or near the top of the hierarchy being perceived as representing ‘the organizational ideal’. The fantasy is played out through ‘passivity and slavishness, shamefulness, cynicism, loneliness’ (p. 17). All of this can have a real impact on output because ‘in the totalitarian organization, productive work comes to be less important than the maintenance of narcissistic fantasy’ (p. 28). There are many organizations with these characteristics, and Schwartz helps us to understand why this is so.

The final essay in Part I has made a major contribution to our understanding of the ‘learning organization.’ At the beginning of his essay, Peter Senge points out that ‘superior performance depends on superior learning’ (p. 51), and that this develops effectively within an organization which is not only inquisitive, but also generates and adapts its learning, constantly adjusting to the changing environment. This dynamism requires leadership, but a different type to that of the past in which the emphasis has been on ‘heroes – great men (and occasionally women) who rise to the fore in times of crisis’ (p. 52–53). In contrast, leadership in learning organizations requires a more subtle and adaptive approach.

Senge then explains that the key to a learning organization is leadership – and this starts with the creative tension between the vision and current reality (p. 53). This requires leaders to adopt the critical roles of designer, teacher and steward. These three roles are explained in detail, as are the skills and tools required to achieve the appropriate kind of leadership. In this essay, Senge brings together very effectively the essential thinking of the late 1980s and early 1990s, which has since become the cornerstone of effective leadership (namely, leader as teacher and steward, building a shared vision, systems thinking, coaching and so on). It is significant that the organizations that have managed change best in the last decade (such as BP, GE and the British military) are those that have become true ‘learning organizations’. The key is proper empowerment which is well summarized at the end of the essay in the words of Lao Tsu:

The great leader is he who the people say ‘We did it ourselves.’ (p. 66)

This section on ‘Understanding Leadership’ is not all-embracing (that would be impossible), but the five selected essays give us an insight into key aspects of leadership and thus enable us to have a better understanding of this complicated, illusive and fascinating subject.

Reference

Argyris, Chris (1991), ‘Teaching Smart People How to Learn’, Harvard Business Review, May–June, pp. 99–109.

[1]
What Leaders Really Do

Good management controls complexity;
effective leadership produces useful change.

by John P. Kotter

Leadership is different from management, but not for the reasons most people think. Leadership isn’t mystical and mysterious. It has nothing to do with having “charisma” or other exotic personality traits. It is not the province of a chosen few. Nor is leadership necessarily better than management or a replacement for it.

Rather, leadership and management are two distinctive and complementary systems of action. Each has its own function and characteristic activities. Both are necessary for success in an increasingly complex and volatile business environment.

Most U.S. corporations today are overmanaged and underled. They need to develop their capacity to exercise leadership. Successful corporations don’t wait for leaders to come along. They actively seek out people with leadership potential and expose them to career experiences designed to develop that potential. Indeed, with careful selection, nurturing, and encouragement, dozens of people can play important leadership roles in a business organization.

Leadership complement management; it doesn’t replace it.

But while improving their ability to lead, companies should remember that strong leadership with weak management is no better, and is sometimes actually worse, than the reverse. The real challenge is to combine strong leadership and strong management and use each to balance the other.

Of course, not everyone can be good at both leading and managing. Some people have the capacity to become excellent managers but not strong leaders. Others have great leadership potential but, for a variety of reasons, have great difficulty becoming strong managers. Smart companies value both kinds of people and work hard to make them a part of the team.

But when it comes to preparing people for executive jobs, such companies rightly ignore the recent literature that says people cannot manage and lead. They try to develop leader-managers. Once companies understand the fundamental difference between leadership and management, they can begin to groom their top people to provide both.

The Difference Between Management and Leadership

Management is about coping with complexity. Its practices and procedures are largely a response to one of the most significant developments of the twentieth century: the emergence of large organizations. Without good management, complex enterprises tend to become chaotic in ways that threaten their very existence. Good management brings a degree of order and consistency to key dimensions like the quality and profitability of products.

Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change. Part of the reason it has become so important in recent years is that the business world has become more competitive and more volatile. Faster technological change, greater international competition, the deregulation of markets, overcapacity in capital-intensive industries, an unstable oil cartel, raiders with junk bonds, and the changing demographics of the work force are among the many factors that have contributed to this shift. The net result is that doing what was done yesterday, or doing it 5% better, is no longer a formula for success. Major changes are more and more necessary to survive and compete effectively in this new environment. More change always demands more leadership.

Consider a simple military analogy: a peacetime army can usually survive with good administration and management up and down the hierarchy, coupled with good leadership concentrated at the very top. A wartime army, however, needs competent leadership at all levels. No one yet has figured out how to manage people effectively into battle; they must be led.

These different functions – coping with...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Notes on the Editorial Team
• Part I Understanding Leadership
• Part II Relationships
• Part III Power and Leadership
• Part IV Leadership, Identity and Difference
• Part V Imagination
• Part VI Spirituality in Organizations
• Name Index