One of the more vexing problems for leaders is the
ability to “control” individuals when an authority relationship does not exist
(e.g. person not in the same hierarchy, business, department or unit). For
example, many organizations are structured in such a way that legitimate power
is vested in those at the top of a function. However, these same
individuals may perform roles that extend across the enterprise – e.g. human
resources, compliance or legal. As a result, there may only be a small measure
of "legitimate" control over the people they need to influence.
Organizations can address this issue by constructing a so-called
"dotted-line" reporting relationship, but the same degree of weight
does not exist in comparison to a direct reporting leader-follower
relationship. In other instances, when there are parallel organizations (e.g.
two subsidiaries) of the same holding company – and cooperation between
organizations is essential for the success of both units – the hierarchical
separation can render management difficult.
Thus a leader must learn to influence people they do
not directly "control." This can happen when the leader has either a
power that transcends the legitimate basis of authority (i.e. hierarchy)or holds
a “personal power.”1 Personal or referent power signals the leader
either has a specialized expertise or attractive qualities that draw people to
them, making them want to follow.1 Beyond these bases of power, a
leader can also influence by understanding the needs and desires of those
he/she is trying to influence. This knowledge enables the leader to respond by
helping the individual reach his or her goals. Expectancy theory reveals that
when a worker realizes he or she can get what is sought, he or she is more
likely to put in the effort to reach the performance required to get it.6
This same approach applies to workers in or outside the leader's hierarchy.
Organizational Structure
Becoming an astute leader who can influence across
the organization is essential. Often businesses are not organized to allow the
functions to be controlled by the same individuals. The primary reason is one
person could not handle the vast range of responsibilities, exacting the need
for a division of labor. However, this leads to the aforementioned problem of
trying to lead without true authority.
This assumes that authority is a necessary condition
of leading. Is it true? Not really. Even when a follower directly reports to a leader,
the worker can still choose to accept directives or not. In practice most do
because of other powers the leader holds such as the authority to punish, fire,
or reward. However, since the choice exists, the problem of no real control
exists in nearly all leader-follower situations.
Self-management
A foundational skill for leading is a high degree of
Emotional Intelligence2 (EI); it describes a series of skills and
abilities across two domains – Personal Competencies and Social Competencies.
One must be able to manage one’s self and the relationships one holds.
Emotional Intelligence can be learned and developed through training and
mentoring.2
EI is a necessary skill because of the benefits it
affords a leader. For example, the leader who has been shown to exercise
self-control or a competence in behaving appropriately in crisis situations
earns idiosyncrasy credits3 from his or followers. Credits afford
the leader flexibility to take greater risks and leeway in behaviors as a means
to pursue organizational goals.4 Idiosyncrasy credits are earned
rights that the leader can build and then use to "push the envelope"
in moving the business forward. The more credits the leader has, the more
latitude is extended.3 "...[S]igns of competence and conformity
[early in the relationship with the led] will permit later nonconformity to be
better tolerated."3 (p. 14)
Directing Others
Effective leaders have a way of being that differs
from the traditional view of authority and control. Instead of acting and
behaving as being in charge, effective leaders are more likely to view their
job as a role. In their role, the leader is responsible for setting strategy
and direction and executing change in the organization. Fulfillment of these
and other responsibilities, including making sure all of the management
processes are operating efficiently and effectively, are of critical importance
to the organization. While the leader is positioned with ultimate
responsibility, he/she should not assume or act as the controller – instead a give-and-take
partnership is advised. "...[B]y sharing power and allowing followers to
influence them, leaders develop leadership skills in others, as well as achieve
further gains through their greater participation in involvement."3 (p.
13)
Understanding the Person
Transformational leadership1 behaviors
establish a different type of arrangement with those in the follower position.
One dimension of transformational leadership is called individualized
consideration; it describes a leader who extends personalized attention to
those he/she is leading.1 A close leader-follower relationship can
improve worker motivation because leaders become knowledgeable of the desires
and goals of the worker, providing an opportunity to assist. In turn, the worker
is more likely to increase effort to reach performance. This behavior can
impact direct reports and others not in the control of the leader.
Self-serving Leaders
Alternatively, leaders who follow a darker path and
place their needs and goals ahead of all others eventually will lose the right
to channel others. This reaction is probably truer for workers who are not in
the direct hierarchy of the leader. Even when a leader holds charismatic
appeal, it will be less effective if their outlook is solely self-beneficial
(i.e. personalized charismatic leadership).5
Leaders and followers are in a give-and-take
relationship and are equal partners in benefitting the enterprise. Leaders
struggle with those they are trying to lead when there is no direct
hierarchical "control." However, leaders need to recognize that the
problem of leading outside a position of control invades all leader-follower
relationships. Therefore, leaders need to address leading and discover the
principles that will allow them to influence regardless of the worker's
reporting relationship.
Please feel free to add comments.
References
1 Robbins, S.,
& Judge, T. (2011). Organizational Behavior (14th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education.
2 Goleman, D.
(1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York, New York: Bantam Books.
3 Hollander, E.P.
(1997). “How and Why Active Followers Matter in Leadership,” E.P. Hollander
& L.R. Offermann (Eds.), The Balance of Leadership and Followership
(pp. 11-28): University of Maryland.
4 Stone, T.H.,
Cooper, W.H. (2006). “Idiosyncrasy Credit Theory Revisited,” ASAC, 2006, Banff,
Alberta. Retrieved online 10-11-13.
5 Popper, M.
(1999). “The Sources of Motivation of Personalized and Socialized Charismatic
Leaders.” Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 22, 231 - 246.
6 Pinder, C.C.
(1998). “Expectancy-Valence Theories of Work Motivation,” Work Motivation in
Organizational Behavior (pp. 337-364). Glenview, IL: Scott Foreseman.
No comments:
Post a Comment