Leaders Don’t Always Get It

It is surprising, given the thousands of articles on leadership, how many leaders still do not seem to get it. Leading is not about the leader but instead is about followers and their coproduction of organizational outcomes – profits, revenues and social causes.

Part of the problem may be the perspective conveyed by books and articles on leading.  For example, consider these three books: (1) Moments of Impact: How to Design Strategic Conversations That Accelerate Change;¹ (2) Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way you Lead;² and (3) Transforming Your Leadership Culture.³  

Moments of Impact¹ has valuable ideas on the process of strategy development and the plethora of meetings that are often part of the process. It offers a range of ideas and uses scholarly research to explain – this is good. However, it lacks details about the followers – it tells the leaders to engage followers but not how. Their sound advice of “active learning, engaging participants as whole people and following a narrative arc”^{1 (p. 137)} is sound but falls short of how a leader can make it happen via his or her behavior. As a result, the book feels more like a to-do list, an approach that seems to dominate the leadership literature. 

 

Similarly, Open Leadership² offers guidance to protect the organization in times of nearly complete transparency – it provides leaders advice on dealing with openness. Some of its ideas address the concerns I have about the portrayal of leading in the literature. That is, leadership (and decision-making) is a shared or distributed activity – the book is a move away from the leader-centric mantra of most publications. Practitioner leaders will find this book interesting, valuable and worthy of the time to read it, but as with other writings, it favors a checklist of action items.

 

Finally, Transforming Your Leadership Culture³ is a stronger example on how leader scholars are thinking about leadership. It advocates collective leadership and promotes an inclusive culture where leaders and followers are partners. It also drives home the message that “human systems [in organizations exist] first” followed by “operational systems.”^{3 (p. 4)} I enjoyed reading the survey questions found at the back of some of the chapters – these questions highlight the importance of a topic while helping a reader consider actual behaviors versus the ideal. However, as with other writings, it too has the feel of a to-do list.

 

These brief descriptions are not for the purpose of trashing the books but instead provide examples of how even valuable books can provide incomplete messages – that is, effective leading is not just about following a formulaic list of action items (doing behaviors). Having a solid set of action items is necessary but insufficient to be an effective leader. Recent scholarly work reveals a combination of doing behavior as suggested by these lists in conjunction with making it possible to work with and through followers/workers – the concept of being a leader.  

It is common for leaders in the early stages of their development to default to action lists because it guides and structures actions in the new role.⁵ However, a leader must continue to grow – that is, he or she must integrate leading as a component of his/her identity.⁵ This means the role of leader becomes part of the person.  

Unfortunately, most books and writings on leadership seem to align with the early stages in a leader’s development, leaving out altogether the complexity of incorporating the role of leader into identity. In other words, leader books and articles focus on what leaders should do.  Identity work, on the other hand, is a more gut-wrenching, reflective process whereby the leader learns from experience until it becomes automatic and intuitive. The problem that evolves from the literature is that it gives the false impression that if one takes the recommended actions, he or she will be a success. 

For example, a recent article in the New York Times Magazine⁴ portrayed Marissa Mayer’s impact on Yahoo during her first two years at the helm; her results have not been stellar. Some believe Yahoo’s results evolved from its ownership of Alibaba and, without its inclusion, would leave Yahoo with a negative valuation.⁴   

What I found interesting about the article is how negative it was about her behaviors as a leader; I was surprised. I wonder if she has fallen victim to some of the perspectives found in the literature described above. Here are some excerpts describing Mayer’s behaviors. My comments are in brackets. 

“…Mayer, who has a tendency to compare herself with Steve Jobs, wasn’t about to abandon her turnaround plan.” ^{4 (p. 24)} [She is not Steve Jobs and should instead craft her own leader style.]

“Hours after entering Yahoo’s complex on the morning of July 17, 2012 [second day on the job], she set up her computer to log into the company’s code base so she could personally make changes, much like the founder of a tiny tech firm might do.” ^{4 (p. 26)} [Sounds like micromanagement.]

“Mayer…immersed herself in the redesign of the [smartphone mail app]. Mayer would regularly interrogate designers about the minutest details of display and user experience.” ^{4 (p. 26)} [Should hire quality people she can trust.]               

A NewFronts “event seemed to ignite Mayer’s interest in content, and within a month she asked that all programming decisions be run by her.” ^{4 (p. 27)} [Sounds like micromanagement.] 

“…Mayer tended to require countless tests about user preferences before making an important product decision. But when it came to media strategy, she seemed perfectly comfortable going with her gut.”^{4 (p. 27)} [May confuse staff.]

“Mayer spent as much time deliberating Yahoo’s parking policies as she did strategizing over the sale of its Alibaba stock.”^{4 (p. 44)} [This is a management activity; leaders don’t need to be involved in everything.]

“Mayer also had a habit of operating on her own time. Every Monday at 3 p.m. Pacific, she asked her direct reports to gather for a three-hour meeting….Invariably, Mayer would be at least 45 minutes late.”^{4 (p. 44)} [Could be thought of as rude.]

“This delinquency eventually became a problem outside Yahoo…Mayer was scheduled for dinner with executives from the ad agency IPG. The 8:30 p.m. meal was inconvenient for the firm’s C.E.O., Michael Roth, but he shuffled his calendar so he could accommodate it. Mayer didn’t show up until 10.”^{4 (p. 44)} [This may lead to long-term relationship problems.] 

In reading this article, assuming its accuracy, Mayer seems to be doing a leader role rather than being a leader. It is not unlike some of the general press about the leader actions described in the literature. For example, her adoption of Steve Jobs’ habits could be from the literature (even the movie) on his behavior and the results he accomplished. Like all leaders, she needs to construct her own leader-self; too much mimicry could lead people to view here as inauthentic. Authenticity is an important part of a leader’s success.  

I was also surprised that she feels the need to be involved in so many things – even parking. This may not be coming from the literature and instead from fear. New leaders need to get their “sea legs.” Her need to sign off on programming decisions would suggest she is a “go-it-alone leader” and she does not trust the people she has working for her. Most press places the leader at the center of everything, but this is not wise or good.  It fails to recognize the role of followers as producers of outcomes in partnership with the leader. 

Even making people wait suggests an attitude she has about leadership – “I am in charge, and they will just have to wait.” When I first read that she had required those from working at home to start working from the office, I thought her reasoning was sound – collaboration is more difficult at a distance. However, this article has made me think differently. While she was forcing employees back into the office, she built a baby nursery near her office so that she could work at the office. The nursery was at her expense, but were any other employees given this option, and how many could afford it?

There is a disconnect somewhere. While the literature keeps providing a list of actions for leaders to take, successful leadership transcends a set of actions. Mayer may or may not have been influenced by this barrage of recommendations found in the literature, but her behaviors seem to suggest she has been influenced. While I have hopes that Mayer will be a success – and judging by her work at Google, I think she will eventually do well – it appears she has some development work to achieve. Nevertheless, she has not yet learned how to lead effectively – she is doing rather than being a leader. She also needs to hire the right people so that she can trust in what they do. 

I fear that part of the problem with leadership literature today is we have heard too much about actions that leaders need to take and not enough about how a leader should be.  

Feel free to make comments or add your thoughts on this matter. 

References

¹Ertel, C., & Solomon, L.K. (2014). Moments of Impact: How to Design Strategic Conversations That Accelerate Change. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

²Li, C. (2010). Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way You Lead. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 

³McGuire, J.B., & Rhodes, G.B. (2009). Transforming Your Leadership Culture. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass and The Center for Creative Leadership.

 

⁴Carlson, N. (2014, Dec. 21). “No Results,” New York Times, New York Times Magazine, pp. 22-27 & 44-46. 

⁵Ely, R.J., & Rhode, D.L. (2010). “Women and Leadership: Defining the Challenges,” N. Nohria & R. Khurana (Eds.), Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice (pp. 377-410). Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.