Who Can Teach Leadership?

By Gianpiero Petriglieri

Mel’s hand went up precipitously and unexpectedly, like thunder on a clear day. I had barely
begun introducing the leadership course I would be teaching over the coming weeks. “I have a
question, Professor.” I gave him the floor.

“What makes you think you can teach us to lead?”

I looked around. A roomful of puzzled managers silently stared back. Five minutes into our first
class, my students were already questioning leadership. Mine.

Mel had looked me up on the web and learned that I had spent one decade training as a medical
doctor and psychiatrist and another working in business schools. I have researched leadership,
taught and coached thousands of MBAs and executives, consulted and directed leadership
programs for global organizations. None of it had escaped Google’s microscope, revealing an
issue that Mel wanted me to own: I am an academic.

Engaged as I am with private and public organizations, I have never started, owned, or managed
a business. No share price ever soared, no product went to market, no enterprise downsized
under (alongside, or despite) my stewardship. This made me — in Mel’s eyes — dubiously
qualified to teach leadership.

Mel is fictional — none of my students have ever asked that question so openly, so clearly, so
early. But by the end of each course, many admit to wondering the same thing. My background,
my profession, the skills and accomplishments I am proud of — for the Mel in my classes, eager
to climb corporate heights — are like sins I slowly atone for.

As managers flock to courses that promise to transform them into leaders, Mel’s question lingers
in many business school classrooms and corporate auditoria. Some teachers pre-empt it by
emphasizing their corporate experience or casually dropping names of CEOs they have met.
Others by pointing out that it is not their job to teach anyone to lead. Rather it is to provide
opportunities for students to learn it themselves. Many find solace in the fact that the question
will likely remain unspoken, tiptoed around like the proverbial elephant in the room.

That is a pity. Who can teach, or help us learn, to lead is an important question. One that deserves
tackling head-on because it offers an opportunity to dispel two problematic assumptions and
uncover a fundamental truth about learning to lead.
The first assumption is that leading means occupying a senior managerial position. The fallacy of
this equation is apparent if you look back to executives you have met. Were they all leaders?
Were they all leaders who could teach, and that you would eagerly learn from? Chances are,
some were and some weren’t.

The second assumption is that leading is learned by the transmission of advice or personal
examples from those who have led to those who are yet to lead. There is value in yielding to the
lessons of role models. Emulation alone, however, a leader does not make. Neither do theories,
as much as they help.

We learn to lead through the experience of leading — and following. Even if “leader” has never
been your job title, you have surely led, at work and outside of it. If you are like most managers I
meet, in fact, you spend more time leading than learning. Your career is so fast-flowing and high-
pressure that you have little time and space to distill lasting lessons from your experience. And
that is where leadership courses can add much value — by offering an opportunity to examine
your history, habits and mores from some distance and in the company of others who may not
share your context and your views. That improves how we lead by enhancing how we learn .

In a recent study, Jennifer Petriglieri, Jack Wood and I found that working with professionals who
espoused different perspectives and values helped managers question, and learn more deeply
from, their own experience — building the personal foundations required to lead mindfully,
effectively and responsibly. Whatever qualifications and work history a teacher (or a coach) may
have, then, matters less than their ability to help you maximize your return on experience.

Will your course, your teachers, your classmates, help you approach, examine and draw
meaningful lessons from your experience past and present? Will they take your experience
seriously without taking your conclusions literally? Will they challenge you to take a second look
at things you usually take for granted, or rush over? Will they provoke you to articulate, broaden
or revise the views you have of yourself, leading, and the world? Will you be open and committed
to that work? These are the questions you should ask anytime you’re enlisting someone to help
you become a better leader.

Seen from this perspective, Mel’s question is not about familiarity with business. It is about trust.
In a new environment, faced with complex and potentially uncomfortable challenges — and
scrutinizing our experience is such a challenge — we naturally look at the person in front of the
room and wonder how trustworthy they are. We wonder whether they will listen, understand
our views and take them on board. We wonder more the less familiar that person appears. If I
don’t look like what you expect, you may trust me less until I prove that I understand and value
your concerns and aspirations — that I can help assuage the former and achieve the latter.
That is only fair. I welcome that scrutiny — uncomfortable as it may be, it comes with the privilege
of my job — especially if it is driven by skepticism rather than cynicism. The former blends
mistrust with curiosity, the latter with preconceived rejection. We inevitably encounter both
skepticism and cynicism when we are entrusted with the privilege to lead. Today I may be under
the microscope. Tomorrow it will be you.

Full of hope and good intentions, you will walk into a room as the designated leader, putting a
face to the name people Googled just yesterday. You will need to gain the trust of a group that
includes members with whom you may have little in common. Someone may ask, more or less
overtly, what makes you think you can lead. Do not resent them for it. That’s what you signed up
for. Whatever you may have done before, what matters most is what you will do next. That day
you may remember a leadership course that honored fair scrutiny and did not circumvent the
question of trust. The kind of course, that is, where one may really learn to lead.

Transformational Leadership

Becoming an Inspirational Leader

Everyone respects Molly. Her team members are fiercely loyal, and they're highly successful – as
individuals, and as a team.

By contrast, other leaders in the organization report that their people seem disengaged. They
experience high staff turnover, and their results are often disappointing.

So, what does Molly do that other leaders don't? Molly is a transformational leader and, in this
article and video, we'll look at how you can be one, too.

To begin with, Molly regularly reminds her team members of the purpose of their work. And she
knows that she's a role model for her team, so she demonstrates integrity in all of her working
relationships.

She sets high expectations, but "walks the walk" to demonstrate the standards that she
expects. In this article, we'll explore what transformational leadership is, and we'll outline how
you can become a transformational leader.

What Is Transformational Leadership?

Leadership expert James McGregor Burns introduced the concept of transformational leadership
in his 1978 book, "Leadership." He defined transformational leadership as a process where
"leaders and their followers raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation."
Bernard M. Bass later developed the concept of transformational leadership further. According
his 1985 book, "Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations," this kind of leader:

 Is a model of integrity and fairness.

 Sets clear goals.
 Has high expectations.
 Encourages others.
 Provides support and recognition.
 Stirs the emotions of people.
 Gets people to look beyond their self-interest.
 Inspires people to reach for the improbable.

More than 25 years after Bass' book, transformational leadership is often argued to be one of the
most important ideas in business leadership.

How to Become a Transformational Leader

We've distilled Bass' ideas into a process that you can use to become a transformational leader.
This involves you:

1. Creating an inspiring vision of the future.

2. Motivating people to buy into and deliver the vision.
3. Managing delivery of the vision.
4. Building ever-stronger, trust-based relationships with your people.

Use these steps, along with the tools we outline below, to develop your transformational
leadership skills.

Step 1: Create an Inspiring Vision

People need a compelling reason to follow your lead, and this is why you need to create and
communicate an inspiring vision of the future.

Your vision sets out your team or organization's purpose – why you all get up in the morning to
do what you do. You develop this partly by understanding the values of the people you lead,
partly by understanding the capabilities and resources of your organization, and partly by
conducting an intelligent analysis of your environment, and selecting the best way forward within
it.

This is the subject of business unit strategy, and developing a coherent strategy takes a lot of
hard work and careful thought.
If you're developing a vision for your organization, use Mullins' Seven Domains Model to
analyze your environment. Then, use tools such as Lafley and Martin's Five-Step Strategy
Model to develop your strategy. This is usually then expressed in a business plan , and
summarized in a mission statement .

If you're developing a vision for your team, start with the company's mission and vision, and
explore the ways in which your team can contribute directly to it.

Step 2: Motivate People to Buy Into and Deliver the Vision

Now, starting with your mission statement , you need to appeal to your people's values , and
inspire them with where you're going to lead them, and why.

Use business storytelling as part of your call to action: this will help people appreciate the
positive impact of your vision on the people you're trying to help. (Hint: if the only person you're
trying to help is yourself, you won't inspire anyone.)

Then, talk about your vision often. Link it to people's goals and tasks to give it context, and help
people see how they can contribute to it.

Transformational leaders also know that nothing significant happens unless they encourage their
people. So, make sure that you know about the different kinds of motivation, and use these to
inspire your people to deliver their best.

Step 3: Manage Delivery of the Vision

A vision is no use on its own: it needs to become reality. However, many leaders make the mistake
of developing a vision, but of not putting in the hard and often mundane work of delivering it.

To manage the delivery of your vision, you'll need to combine effective project
management with sensitive change management . This will help you deliver the changes you
need with the full support of your people.

Communicate each person's roles and responsibilities clearly, and connect these to your plans.
Everyone should fully understand what they're responsible for, and know how you will measure
their success. Next, set clear, SMART goals for everyone, including some short-term goals that
will help people achieve quick wins and stay motivated. Use management by objectives to link
short-term achievement to your longer-term goals.

You may need to build your self-discipline and stamina, so that you don't let yourself down. And,
set a good example to your people – especially if they're affected by delays or difficulties – by
being a model of hard work and persistence.

Also, stay visible by practicing management by walking around . This is an ideal technique for
transformational leaders, because it helps you stay connected with daily activities, and allows
you to answer questions as they arise.

Step 4: Build Ever-Stronger, Trust-Based Relationships With Your People

As a transformational leader, you need to focus your attention on your people, and work hard to
help them achieve their goals and dreams.

Use Dunham and Pierce's Leadership Process Model as your starting point. This tool outlines
how important your people are to your success as a leader.

It also underlines the fact that leadership is a long-term process, and that, as a leader, you need
to work constantly to build relationships, earn trust, and help your people grow as individuals.

Meet your people individually to understand their developmental needs , and help them to
meet their career goals. What do they want to achieve in their role? Where do they see
themselves five years from now? How can you help them reach this goal?

You can build trust with your people by being open and honest in your interactions. Use
the Johari Window to disclose safe personal information about yourself, and to get a better
understanding of "what makes your people tick."

Lastly, set aside time to coach your people. When you help them find their own solutions, you
not only create a skilled team, but you also strengthen their self-confidence and their trust in
you.
GIVING CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK

Feedback is an essential element for everyone in an organization's workforce. Giving feedback is

a task you perform again and again as a manager or supervisor, letting people know where they
are and where to go next in terms of expectations and goals - yours, their own, and the
organizations.

Feedback is a useful tool for indicating when things are going in the right direction or for
redirecting problem performance. Your objective in giving feedback is to provide guidance by
supplying information in a useful manner, either to support effective behavior, or to guide
someone back on track toward successful performance.

Some situations which require giving constructive feedback include:

• Ongoing performance discussions

• Providing specific performance pointers

• Following up on coaching discussions

• Giving corrective guidance

• Letting someone know the consequences of their behavior

Some clues that constructive feedback is needed are when:

• Someone asks for your opinion about how they are doing

• Unresolved problems persist

• Errors occur again and again

• An employee's performance doesn't meet expectations

• A peer's work habits disturb you

SIX WAYS TO MAKE FEEDBACK CONSTRUCTIVE

Part of being an effective manager or supervisor is knowing what feedback to give. The trick is
learning how to give it constructively so that it has some value. constructive feedback is a tool
that is used to build things up, not break things down. It lets the other person know that you are
on their side.

1. If you can't think of a constructive purpose for giving feedback, don't give it at all.

2. Focus on description rather than judgement. Describing behavior is a way of reporting what
has occurred, while judging behavior is an evaluation of what has occurred in terms of "right or
wrong", or "good or bad". By avoiding evaluative language, you reduce the need for the individual
to respond defensively.

For example: "You demonstrate a high degree of confidence when you answer customer
questions about registration procedures, "rather than, "Your communication skills are good."

3. Focus on observation rather than inference. Observations refer to what you can see or hear
about an individual's behavior, while inferences refer to the assumptions and interpretations you
make from what you see or hear. Focus on what the person did and your reaction.

For example: "When you gave that student the Financial Aid form, you tossed it across the
counter," rather than describe what you assume to be the person's motivation, "I suppose you
give all forms out that way!"

4. Focus on behavior rather than the person Refer to what an individual does rather than on what
you imagine she or he is. To focus on behavior, use adverbs, which describe action, rather than
adjectives, which describe qualities.

For example: "You talked considerably during the staff meeting, which prevented me from
getting to some of the main points," rather than "You talk too much."

5. Provide a balance of positive and negative feedback If you consistently give only positive or
negative feedback, people will distrust the feedback and it will become useless.

6. Be aware of feedback overload. Select two or three important points you want to make and
offer feedback about those points. If you overload an individual with feedback, she or he may
become confused about what needs to be improved or changed.

For example: "The number of applicants and the time it takes you to enter them are both within
the expected ranges. The number of keying errors you are currently making is higher than
expected." Giving feedback constructively benefits everyone. You, as the manager or supervisor,
use the ongoing exchange of information as a way of getting to know your people and providing
them with valuable guidance in their work. The employee, manager, supervisor, or peer receives
data that makes that makes her or his job go easier. The organization gains in improved
productivity of its workforce.

THE SIX STEP METHOD FOR GIVING CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK

Step 1: State the constructive purpose of your feedback. State your purpose briefly by indicating
what you'd like to cover and why it's important. If you are initiating feedback, this focus keeps
the other person from having to guess what you want to talk about. If the other person has
requested feedback, a focusing statement will make sure that you direct your feedback toward
what the person needs.
For example:

"I have a concern about."

"I feel I need to let you know."

"I want to discuss."

"I have some thoughts about."

Step 2: Describe specifically what you have observed. Have a certain event or action in mind and
be able to say when and where it happened, who was involved, and what the results were. Stick
to what you personally observed and don't try to speak for others. Avoid talking vaguely about
what the person "always" or "usually" does.

For example: "Yesterday afternoon, when you were speaking with Mrs. Sanchez, I noticed that
you kept raising your voice."

Step 3: Describe your reactions. Explain the consequences of the other person's behavior and
how you feel about it. Give examples of how you and others are affected. When you describe
your reactions or the consequences of the observed behaviors, the other person can better
appreciate the impact their actions are having on others and on the organization or team as a
whole.

For example: "The staff member looked embarrassed and I felt uncomfortable about seeing the
episode." "Shouting at our students is not acceptable behavior in this department."

Step 4: Give the other person an opportunity to respond. Remain silent and meet the other
persons eye, indicating that you are waiting for answer. If the person hesitates to respond, ask
an open ended question.

For example: "What do you think?" "What is your view of this situation?" "What are your reaction
to this?" "Tell me, what are your thoughts?"

Step 5: Offer specific suggestions. Whenever possible make your suggestions helpful by including
practical, feasible examples. Offering suggestions shows that you have thought past your
evaluations and moved to how to improve the situation. Even if people are working up to
expected standards, they often benefit from ideas that could help them to perform better. If your
feedback was offered supportively or neutrally, in the "for your information" mode, or depending
on the situation's circumstances, suggestions may not be appropriate. Use your common sense
and offer an idea if you think the other person will find it useful. Don't drum up a suggestion for
improvement just for the sake of it.
For example: "Jennifer, I sometimes write myself notes or put up signs to remind myself to do
something." "Jill, rather than telling Ed that you're not interested in all the details, you might try
asking him specific questions about the information you are most interested in."

Step 6: Summarize and express your support Review the major points you discussed. Summarize
the Action items, not the negative points of the other person's behavior. If you have given neutral
feedback, emphasize the main points you have wanted to convey. For corrective feedback, stress
the main things you've discussed that the person could do differently. End on a positive note by
communicating confidence in the person's ability to improve the situation.

For example: "As I said, the way the group has figured out how to cover phone calls has really
lessened the number of phone messages to be returned. You've really followed through on a
tough problem. Please keep taking the initiate on problems like that.

By summarizing, you can avoid misunderstandings and check to make sure that your
communication is clean. This summary is an opportunity to show your support for the other
person—a way to conclude even an negative feedback situation on a positive note.

For example: "At least we understand each other better since we've talked. I'll do what I can to
make sure your priorities are factored into the schedule, and I'll expect you to come straight to
me if the schedule is a problem.

5 Reasons Strategic Leaders Need To Ask Good Questions

Ellie Nieves

Do you aspire to be a good leader? Like many, you may be under the impression that being a
good leader requires that you have all the answers. After all, others look to leaders for guidance
and direction. But, leadership is less about having all the answers and more about asking all the
right questions:

1. Provides clear direction: Have you ever spent hours working on a project to then determine
that what you produced wasn't what was required? Have you ever executed on a plan to discover
that you were going in the wrong direction? It can be frustrating. But, setbacks and failure can
be avoided by asking the right questions. When taking on a new project, it is important that we
not make any assumptions. Rather, we need to ask as many questions as possible to be clear on
what the desired outcome is.

2. Increases your knowledge: Knowledge is power. The more you know, the more effective you
can be as a leader. In school, we are taught to learn through extensive study and reading books.
But, the most powerful learning occurs when our curiosity is piqued and we ask insightful
questions. As we progress in our leadership journeys, knowledge informs our experience.
Questions become essential to building our knowledge base and sharpening our leadership skills.

3. Enhances your ability to influence and persuade: Persuasion and influence are important
leadership attributes. Asking the right questions can enhance a leader's ability to influence and
persuade. For example, trial lawyers spend countless hours learning how to build a case simply
by asking questions. The right questions can elicit responses that broaden perspectives and
influence opinions.

4. Promotes engagement: Team members often get frustrated when they are not asked for their
opinions or perspectives -- especially on subjects that they are experts in. Asking questions
increases engagement. When team members are engaged, they feel valued and appreciated. A
good leader, therefore, takes the time to ask appropriate questions. The right questions
spark creative thinking and foster collaboration. As a result, team members feel empowered and
more committed to their work. Engaging team members can begin with simple questions like:

What do you think?

How are things going?

How can we do better?

How can I help you?

5. Helps you make better decisions: In today's global marketplace, leaders are faced with
increasingly complex issues. The higher level of complexity requires a higher level of thought to
make more effective decisions. Arriving at a wrong conclusion because you do not have the right
facts can hurt your credibility as a leader. It is, therefore, important to gather the pertinent facts
surrounding an issue by asking the right questions.

Asking the right questions is an essential skill in the workplace. If you ask the right questions, you
will become more effective as a leader.

5 Strategy Questions Every Leader Should Make Time For

in Strategic thinking by Freek Vermeulen

Have you ever noticed that when you ask someone in your company, “How are you?” they are
more likely to answer “Busy!” than “Very well, thank you”? That is because the norm in most
companies is that you are supposed to be very busy – or otherwise at least pretend to be –
because otherwise you can’t be all that important. The answers “I am not up to much” and “I
have some time on my hands, actually” are not going to do much for your internal status and
career.

However, that you are very busy all the time is actually a bit of problem when you are in charge
of your company or unit’s strategy, and responsible for organizing it. Because it means that you
don’t have much time to think and reflect. And thinking is in fact quite an important activity when
it comes to assessing and developing a strategy.

The CEO of a large, global bank once told me: “It is very easy for someone in my position to be
very busy all the time. There is always another meeting you really have to attend, and you can fly
somewhere else pretty much every other day. However, I feel that that is not what I am paid to
do. It is my job to carefully think about our strategy.”

I believe his view is spot-on. And there are other successful business leaders who understand the
value of making time to think. Bill Gates, for example, was famous fortaking a week off twice a
year – spent in a secret waterfront cottage – just to think and reflect deeply about Microsoft and
its future without any interruption. Similarly, Warren Buffett has said, “I insist on a lot of time
being spent, almost every day, to just sit and think.”

If you can’t find time to think, it probably means that you haven’t organized your firm, unit, or
team very well, and you are busy putting out little fires all the time. It also means that you are at
risk of leading your company astray.

As famous management professor Henry Mintzberg has described, much of strategy is

“emergent.” It is often not the result of a strategic plan just being implemented, but driven by
opportunistic responses to unexpected events. Stuff happens. Companies often engage in new
activities – customers, markets, products, and business models – serendipitously, in response to
external events and lucky breaks. But this also means that business leaders need to make ample
time to reflect on the configuration that has emerged. They need to systematically analyze and
carefully think it through, and make adjustments where necessary.

Many leaders don’t make that time – at least not enough of it.

If you are in charge of an organization, force yourself to have regular and long stretches of
uninterrupted time just to think things through. When you do so – and you should – here are five
guiding questions that could help you reflect on the big picture.
1. What does not fit? Ask yourself, of the various activities and businesses that you have moved
into, do they make sense together? Individually, each of them may seem attractive, but can you
explain why they would work well together; why the sum is greater than the parts?
As the late Steve Jobs explained to Apple’s employees when he axed a seemingly attractive
business line, “Although micro-cosmically it made sense, macro-cosmically it didn’t add up.” If
you can’t explain how the sum is greater than the parts, re-assess its components.
2. What would an outsider do? Firms often suffer from legacy products, projects, or beliefs.
Things they do or deliberately have not done. Some of them can be the result of what in
Organization Theory we call “escalation of commitment.” We have committed to something, and
determinedly fought for it – and perhaps for all the right reasons – but now that things have
changed and it no longer makes sense, we may still be inclined to persist. A good question to ask
yourself is “what would other, external people do, if they found themselves in charge of this
company?”
Intel’s Andy Grove called it “the revolving door” when discussing strategy with then-CEO Gordon
Moore; let’s pretend we are outsiders coming new to the job, ask ourselves what they would do,
and then do it ourselves. It led Intel to withdraw from the business of memory chips, and focus
on microprocessors. This resulted in more than a decade of 30 percent annual growth in revenue
and 40 percent increase in net income.
3. Is my organization consistent with my strategy? In 1990, Al West, the founder and CEO of SEI
– the wealth management company that, at the time, was worth $195 million – found himself in
a hospital bed for three months after a skiing accident. With not much more to do than stare at
the ceiling and reflect on his company’s present and future, he realized that although they had
declared innovation to be key in their strategy, the underlying organizational architecture was
wholly unsuited for the job. When he went back to work, he slashed bureaucracy, implemented
a team structure, and abandoned many company rules. The company started growing rapidly
and is now worth about $8 billion.

As a consequence of his involuntary thinking time, West did what all business leaders should do:
he asked himself whether the way his company was set up was ideal for its strategic aspirations.
What would your organization look like if you could design it from scratch?

4. Do I understand why we do it this way? When I am getting to know a new firm, for instance
because I am writing a case study on them, I make it a habit to not only find out how they do
things but also explicitly ask why. Why do you do it this way? You’d be surprised how often I get
the answer “that’s how we have always done it” [while shrugging shoulders] and “everybody in
our industry does it this way.”
The problem is that if you can’t even explain why your own company does it this way, I am quite
unconvinced that it could not be done better. For example, when more than a decade ago I
worked with a large British newspaper company, I asked why their papers were so big. Their
answer was “all quality newspapers are big; customers would not want it any other way.” A few
years later, a rival company – the Independent – halved the size of its newspaper, and saw a
surge in circulation. Subsequently, many competitors followed, to similar effect. Yes, customers
did want it. Later, I found out that the practice of large newspapers had begun in London, in 1712,
because the English government started taxing newspapers by the number of pages they printed
— the publishers responded by printing their stories on so-called broadsheets to minimize the
number of sheets required. This tax law was abolished in 1855 but newspapers just continued
printing on the impractically large sheets of paper.

Many practices and habits are like that; they once started for perfectly good reasons but then
companies just continued doing it that way, even when circumstances changed. Take time to
think it through, and ask yourself: Do I really understand why we (still) do it this way? If you can’t
answer this question, I am pretty sure it can be done better.

5. What might be the long-term consequences? The final question to ask yourself, when
carefully reflecting on your company’s strategy and organization, is what could possibly be the
long-term consequences of your key strategic actions. Often we judge things by their short-term
results, since these are most salient, and if they look good, persist in our course of action.
However, for many strategic actions, the long-term effects may be different.

Consider a practice adopted by many of the UK’s IVF clinics – of selecting only relatively easy
patients to treat, in order to boost short-term success rates (measured in terms of number of
births resulting from the treatment). The practice seems to make commercial sense, because it
(initially) makes a clinic look good in the industry’s “League Table.” But,

as my research with Mihaela Stan from University College London showed, it backfires in the long
run because it deprives an organization of valuable learning opportunities which in the long run
leads to a lower relative success rate.

When you start a new strategy or practice it is of course impossible to measure such long-term
consequences ex-ante, however, you can think them through. For instance, when we asked
various medical professionals in these clinics what might be the benefits of treating difficult
patients, they could understand and articulate the learning effects very well. They could not
measure them, but with some careful thought they could understand the potential long-term
consequences before even engaging in the strategic action. Actions often have different effects
in the short and long run. Sit down and think them through.

Strategy, by definition, is about making complex decisions under uncertainty, with substantive,
long-term consequences. Therefore, it requires substantial periods of careful, undisturbed
reflection and consideration. Don’t just accept the situation and business constellation you have
arrived at. Leadership is not just about doing things, it is also about thinking. Make time for it.

8 Tips For Leading Those Who Don't Want to Follow

Mike Myatt

Want to test your leadership mettle? See how well you do when leading those not inclined to
follow. Surrounding yourself with like-minded people may be comforting, it might even seem like
a good idea, but it’s not the stuff of great leadership. The best leaders are not only capable of
effectively leading those who hold differing opinions and perspectives – they thrive on it. In
today’s column I’ll share 8 Tips for transforming tough relationships into productive relationships.

Poor leaders find themselves mired down in organizations unnecessarily suffering from corporate
politics, turf-wars, empire building, title inflated ego and arrogance, and the list goes on...
Effective leaders don’t have to deal with the aforementioned dysfunction because they
understand how to align opposing views and diverse interests.

If unique perspectives, philosophical differences, and dissenting opinionsare viewed as

an opportunity as opposed to a set-back, growth and development are certain to follow. What I
like to refer as “positional gaps” are best closed by listening to all sides, finding common ground,
and then letting the principle of doing the right thing guide the process.

When a leader develops the skill to convert negative conflict into creative tension, they have
found the secret sauce for developing high performance teams. Mature leaders see individual
differences as fuel for development, not as barriers to success. The goal of a leader is not to clone
him/herself, but to harness individual strengths for the greater good of the organization. This
is best accomplished by respecting individual talents; not stifling them.

It is absolutely possible to build very productive relationships with even the most adversarial of
individuals. Regardless of a person's original intent, opinion or position, the key to closing a
positional gap is simply a matter of finding common ground in order to establish rapport.
Moreover, building rapport is easily achieved assuming your motivations for doing so are sincere.
I have always found that rapport is quickly developed when you listen, care, and attempt to help
people succeed.

While building and maintaining rapport with people with whom you disagree is certainly more
challenging, many of the same rules expressed in my comments above still apply. I have found
that often times conflict resolution simply just requires more intense focus on understanding the
needs, wants and desires of the other party. If opposing views are worth the time and energy to
debate, then they are worth a legitimate effort to gain alignment on perspective and resolution
on position. However this will rarely happen if lines of communication do not remain open.
Candid, effective communication is best maintained through a mutual respect and rapport.

In an attempt to resolve any conflict, the first step is to identify and isolate the specific areas of
difference being debated. The sad fact is many business people are absolutists in that they only
see things in terms of rights and wrongs. Thinking in terms of "my way" is right and therefore
"other ways" are wrong is the basis for polarizing any relationship, which quickly results in
converting discussions into power struggles.

However when a situation can be seen through the lens of difference, and a position is simply a
matter of opinion not a totalitarian statement of fact, then cooperation and compromise is
possible. Identifying and understanding differences allows people (regardless of title) to shift
their position through compromise and negotiation while maintaining respect and rapport. The
following perspectives if kept top of mind will help in identifying and bridging positional gaps:

 Listening leads to understanding.

 Respect leads to acceptance.
 Accepting a person where they are creates an bond of trust.
 Trust leads to a willingness to be open to:
 New opportunities;
 New collaborations;
 New strategies;
 New ideas, and;
 New attitudes.

The following 8 tips (listed in no particular order of preference) will allow you to move from being
entangled in a positional or philosophical juxtaposition toward finding alignment :

1. Be Consistent: If your desire is to minimize misunderstandings, then I would suggest you

stop confusing people. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and follow-through on
your commitments. Most people don’t have to agree with you 100% of the time, but they
do need to trust you 100% of the time. Trust cannot exist where leaders are fickle,
inconsistent, indecisive, or display a lack of character. Never be swayed by consensus that
calls you to compromise your values, rather be guided by doing the right thing. Finally,
know that no person is universally right or universally liked, and become at peace with
that.
2. The Importance Factor: Not every difference needs to be resolved. In fact, most
differences don’t require intervention as they actually contribute to a dynamic, creative,
 innovative culture. Remember that it’s not important be right, and more importantly,
that you don’t have to be right for the right things to be accomplished. Pick your battles
and avoid conflict for the sake of conflict. However if the issue is important enough to
create a conflict, then it is surely important enough to resolve. If the issue, circumstance,
or situation is important enough, and there is enough at stake, people will do what is
necessary to open lines of communication and close positional gaps.
3. Make Respect a Priority: Disagreement and disrespect are two different things, or at least
they should be. Regardless of whether or not perspectives and opinions differ, a position
of respect should be adhered to and maintained. Respect is at the core of building
meaningful relationships. It is the foundation that supports high performance teams,
partnerships, superior and subordinate relationships, and peer-to-
peer relationships. Respecting the right to differ while being productive is a concept that
all successful executives and entrepreneurs master.
4. Define Acceptable Behavior: You know what they say about assuming…Just having a
definition for what constitutes acceptable behavior is a positive step in avoiding
unnecessary conflict. Creating a framework for decisioning, using a published delegation
of authority statement, encouraging sound business practices in collaboration, team
building, leadership development, and talent management will all help avoid conflicts.
5. Hit Conflict Head-on: You can only resolve problems by proactively seeking to do so. While
you can’t always prevent conflicts, it has been my experience that the secret to conflict
resolution is in fact conflict prevention where possible. By actually seeking out areas of
potential conflict and proactively intervening in a well reasoned and decisive fashion you
will likely prevent certain conflicts from ever arising. If a conflict does flair up, you will
likely minimize its severity by dealing with it quickly.
6. Understanding the WIIFM Factor: Understanding the other person’s WIIFM (What’s In It
For Me) position is critical. It is absolutely essential to understand other’s motivations
prior to weighing in. The way to avoid conflict is to help those around you achieve their
objectives. If you approach conflict from the perspective of taking the action that will help
others best achieve their goals you will find few obstacles will stand in your way with
regard to resolving conflict.
7. View Conflict as Opportunity: Hidden within virtually every conflict is the potential for
a tremendous teaching/learning opportunity. Where there is disagreement there is an
inherent potential for growth and development. If you’re a CEO who doesn’t leverage
conflict for team building and leadership development purposes you’re missing a
great opportunity.
8. Clarity of Purpose: Everyone who works for me knows that I care about them as an
individual. They are important to me. They know that I’ll go to great lengths to work with
them so long as one thing remains the focus point – the good of the organization. So long
 as the issues being worked on are leading us toward our vision, they know they’ll have
my attention regardless of positional gaps or personal differences. Likewise, if things
degenerate into placing pride or ego ahead of other team members or the organization
as a whole, they know I’ll have no tolerance whatsoever.

The bottom line is that people matter, and but for people, organizations don’t exist. It’s important
to remember that a manager exists when the company says so, but that said manager only really
becomes a leader when their team says so. As a leader you have only two choices when it comes
to your people – serve them and care for them. Sometimes this means working through
challenging scenarios and situations. If as a leader you’re not up to this task, then you should
rethink your decision to lead.

3 Ways to Prevent Resistance to your Leadership

January 7, 2014

Every single day, we move earth (with all that construction happening), and we move people (all
acts of persuasion are in effect moving people). Effective leadership is what makes it all happen.

Leaders give us a direction, a path to follow, a hope to pull us forward, and goals to meet.
Leadership is at the very core of humanity.

But then, there are good leaders and there are bad leaders. There is also accidental leadership.
No matter which camp you belong to right now, there’s one thing you can’t escape from:
resistance.

Resistance to your leadership is an emotional response. Maybe to a new environment, new

policies, and anything else that demands moving from the comfort zone. Before you donned your
leadership role, you may have reacted the same way.

Resistance is common. It’s also necessary, predictable and natural as Jim Murray, CEO of Optimal
Solutions International, wrote for Leader Values. Resistance should be expected. As a leader,
however, you have to take accountability for results. You need to stay the course. So how do you
lead without being questioned? How do you lead without resistance?

Hit the emotions

While resistance itself is an emotional response, most top leaders also hit us at an emotional
level. According to Meghan M. Biro of Forbes.com, leaders have

“…an ability to reach people that transcends the intellectual and rational.”
She also states that in addition to working with emotions, leadership also calls for continuous
learning, contextualizing decisions depending on situations, being honest, taking accountability,
being kind, respecting others, and mastering the art of “letting go.”

Show and tell

Another way to avoid resistance is to demonstrate that you could do the job if you had to – no
matter what the job entails. Advice such as, “Walk the walk. Talk the talk,” comes into play here.

When you roll up your sleeves and lead by example, it diffuses the resistance. Who can complain
when you are willing to bare your chest to gunfire?

Master the art of collaboration

We define delegation as: give them work to do. Meanwhile, we define collaboration as: give
them work to do, work with them, work together, do whatever it takes, get things done.

Some management literature would make you believe that if you can delegate and supervise,
you’ll become a better manager. However, great leaders are masters of collaboration, not
delegation. Collaboration demands a lot more than mere delegation, but the long-term results
are well worth the extra effort.

Leadership is nothing without resistance. Just like rejections in life make us all stronger,
resistance makes leaders better.

Surviving and Transforming Toxic Leaders

Lipman–Blumen’s [2005a] strategies to survive and overcome toxic leaders includes:

1) Take risks by confronting your own anxiety;

2) Seek the leader within you and foster accountability and democratic processes;

3) Appreciate the more disillusioning (realistic) leaders instead of the “paradise–promising” toxic
leaders;

4) Forego the illusion that the followers are the “chosen ones.” In Lipman–Blumen’s view the true
antidote to toxic leaders is represented by the South African (Zulu) concept of ubuntu, caring for
each other’s well–being.

For example, we are defined “through the otherness of other human beings” [Lipman–Blumen,
2005a: 244].

Marcia Lynn Whicker, author of Toxic Leader [1996] suggests to:

1) Be aware that toxic leadership is a real threat to organizational health.

2) Talk to toxic leaders in a non–threatening way, but let them know you are aware.

3) Work through the organizational channels to express concern about the situation.

4) Put everything in writing, you may need documentation later on.

5) Identify trustworthy leaders in the organizations and reach out to them.

6) Be firm at every step and refuse to engage in dysfunctional behaviors.

7) Maintain productivity despite efforts by others to undermine it.

8) Take a long run view and try to ignore petty slights and actions.

9) Refuse to participate in secret meetings and agreements.

10) Remember that toxic leaders are fundamentally flawed and will eventually self–destruct
[Whicker, 1996: 177].

Dr. Robert Sutton’s provocative work uses a more colorful adjective to describe the toxic leader
dilemma. His book, The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One that
Isn’t [2007] is the result of several years studying dysfunctional behaviors in leaders, co–workers,
and organizations.

Synthesizing his recommendations, leaders can diminish their toxic behaviors by adopting the
following actions:

1) Face their past and try to be their authentic self.

2) Avoid making people feel humiliated, de–energized, or belittled.

3) Avoid mistreating less powerful people.

4) Focus on win–win–win (others, self, and the organization).

5) Not thinking to be better or worse than others (be humble).

6) Focus on the similarities and synergies with others (rather than the differences).

7) Be happy and satisfied with themselves (no reason to stomp on others).

Subordinates and followers can benefit from practical strategies and antidotes to “deal” [Sutton,
2007], “cope” [Lubi,t 2004], and “survive” [Gangel, 2008] toxic leaders at work. Subordinates may
find one or more of the following “behavioral antidotes” useful or effective. Preferably these are
done in consultation with a coach–mentor, an ombudsperson, or a trustworthy leader in the
organization.
1) Develop indifference and emotional detachment.

2) Look for small wins and small victories that can keep you going.

3) Limit your exposure with the toxic individual.

4) Expose them through whistleblower and other HR–compliance channels.

5) Stand up to them and hold them accountable.

Transforming toxic leaders is not a feasible option for individual subordinates alone—it is an
organizational and systemic responsibility. “One brave person without a system of support
cannot solve the problem of toxicity. After all, if it takes a village to raise a child, then most
certainly it takes an organization working together to change the tide of toxicity” [Kusy and
Holloway, 2009: 50]. In his book Transforming Toxic Leaders, Alan Goldman [2009b] suggests that
transformation can be achieved by strategically moving around the chess pieces in an
organization and by addressing “individual psychological and emotional toxins” [Goldman,
2009b: 21]. Unlike most other publications that view toxic leaders as a dysfunctional phenomena
and destructive “cancer” in organizations, Dr. Goldman argues that most highly productive
leaders have some toxic qualities instrumental to their success. Therefore, toxic leaders could
become an asset to organizations, but only when administrations do not dwell on it, but provide
appropriate interventions to detoxify and transform toxicity into opportunity [Goldman, 2009b].
Unfortunately, most organizational structures are complicit with toxic leadership dynamics. Dr.
Goldman’s book, Destructive Leaders and Dysfunctional Organizations [2009a] states that the danger of
these dynamics come mostly on the side of the organization that either does not have the right
mechanisms to detect toxicity, are blindsided by the toxic leader, or simply allow toxicity to exist
because of convenient returns. When toxicity is tolerated, overlooked, or avoided, it metastasizes and
erodes productivity, motivation, creativity and engagement. Failure to address toxicity in leaders and
organizations may have a long–term effect on the image, finances and turnover in the organization. Like
the human body, Frost [2003] suggests that organizations should start a process to detoxify from
unhealthy leadership and workplace dynamics. They should focus their energy on identifying and
empowering “toxin detectors” and “toxin healers.” Give voice and appropriate channels of
communication, evaluation and review by peers, subordinates, and other stakeholders. These health
checks can also be performed through the formal services of ombudspersons, HR, or through the
informal services of supportive personnel.

Defining and Recognizing Toxic Leaders

The term “toxic leader” was originally phrased by Dr. Marcia Lynn Whicker’s 1986 analysis of
three distinct types of leaders in organizations: the “trustworthy” (green light), the “transitional”
(yellow light), and the “toxic” (red light). Toxic leaders are bullies, enforcers, and street fighters.
They are “maladjusted, malcontent, and often malevolent and malicious people” who succeed
by tearing others down and “glory in turf protection, fighting, and controlling others rather than
uplifting followers” [Whicker, 1996:66]. They have a “deep–seated but well–disguised sense
of personal inadequacy, selfish, values, and cleverness at concealing deceit” [Whicker, 1996: 12].
Jean Lipman–Blumen describes toxic leaders as “those individuals who, by virtue of their
destructive behaviors and their dysfunctional personal qualities or characteristics, inflict serious
and enduring harm on the individuals, groups, organizations, communities and even the nations
that they lead” [Lipman–Blumen, 2005b: 30].
Toxic leaders are not to be confused with transactional leaders or difficult people [Edwards and
McGrath, 2009; Tavanti, 2008; Whicker, 1996]. As Paul Glass [2002] suggests, we all need to learn effective
strategies and attitudes to deal with difficult personalities in the workplace. Learning to deal with
different and difficult personalities is a challenge for both leaders and followers [Ury, 1991], but
difficult people may not be necessarily “toxic.” On the one hand, a decisive, demanding,
and sometimes verbally abusive leader may not necessarily be “toxic” to subordinates and the
organizational unit. On the other hand, even charming and cheerful leaders may be toxic. It is not
necessarily the attitudes and style of communication that make a leader toxic; it is the systemic
discouraging effects that often indicate toxic dynamics. Toxic leaders might be highly competent
and effective in their jobs, but they contribute to an unhealthy climate among their peers and
subordinates with consequences far beyond the morale of a
few victims. George E. Reed’s [2008] analysis of toxic leaders in the US Army identifies three key
characteristics of the toxic leader syndrome: 1) An apparent lack of concern for the well–being
of subordinates; 2) A personality or interpersonal technique that negatively affects organizational
climate; 3) A conviction by subordinates that the leader is motivated primarily by self–interest
[Reed, 2008: 67]. According to Jean Lipman–Blumen’s The Allure of Toxic Leaders [2005a], toxic leaders’
destructive behaviors are recognizable in one or more of the following actions:

1) Leaving followers worse off:

This is applicable to followers and other stakeholders “dependent” or in need of the leader’s action. The
action and relations are often characterized by destructive and diminishing dynamics such as
undermining, de-meaning, intimidating, or incapacitating. It starts from the toxic leaders’ intention to
dominate or eliminate their own followers when there is a perceived competence.
When incompetence becomes salient, the leaders’ toxicity is less evident, and the harm made
unintentionally.

2) Violating rights and dignity:

As it is for political leaders and dictators, the violation of human rights or organizational compliance is
often recognizable in the action of toxic leaders toward followers and dependents. This dynamic assumes
that only the leader knows the truth and acts justly. Therefore, the respect of other people’s dignity,
opinion, or ability is necessarily functional to the leader’s success and his or her interpretation
of organizational success.

3) Spinning news and events:

They consciously and strategically feed their followers news that enhances the leaders’ power, superiority,
and diminishes or alters other people or unit’s values. By doing so, toxic leaders persuade followers that
only the leader can save them or the organization. They also create a situation of leader–dependency
while impairing followers’ capacity to act independently. With the intention of reaffirming the leaders’
authority, toxic leaders often feed followers with misdiagnosed issues and problems.

4) Promoting or ignoring incompetence:

The shortcomings in an organization are always directed toward the reaffirmation of ego–centered
management systems. Therefore, followers who are willing to sub-serve the egomaniac toxic leader will
be promoted, no matter their competency. On the other hand, competent managers who do not express
subservient behaviors or what is not immediately beneficial to the toxic leader’s agenda are systematically
excluded. Schmidt’s [2008] Toxic Leadership Scale includes abusive supervision, authoritarian leadership,
narcissism, self–promotion, and unpredictability among other dysfunctional dynamics. Alan Goldman’s
[2009a] study suggests that toxic leaders often display psychological disorders varying from “adult
attention deficit disorder” to passive aggressive personality disorders, to borderline personality disorders
and narcissistic personality disorder. They display some preferred managerial methods like
micromanaging, ego–management (narcissism), and managing by fear (bullying).

Toxic Micromanagers:

Toxic leaders who micromanage their subordinates want to demonstrate their superiority and dominance.
The excessive control or attention to details, a characteristic of a micromanaging style, becomes
dysfunctional when utilized as instrument of systemic control and influence over subordinates.
Micromanagers in leaders reflect their lack of trust in the subordinate’s capacity to make decisions and
carryon with a project. The focus is as much on quality control of the product as reflecting a dynamic
directed toward reinforcing the ego and supremacy of the leader. Hence, micromanagers are usually
irritated when a subordinate makes decisions without consulting them, even if the decision is beneficial
to the organization and it is within the subordinate’s level of authority.

Toxic Narcissists:

Many toxic leaders appear to exemplify, in a variety of degrees and facets, narcissistic personality
disorders. Current research does not sufficiently explain the “accepted” level (hence, nontoxic) of ego–
centered and narcissistic behavior in a leader. A small dosage of “ego” may be instrumental in leaders to
express entrepreneurship and the energy to be innovative. However, excessive narcissistic and ego–
centered personalities may be detrimental to organizational systems and values.

Toxic Bullies:

Toxic leaders who manage by fear aim to control people by usingthreats in a direct and indirect way,
invoking fears, for example, of getting fired or earning a low performance rating. In their interpersonal
relations, toxic leaders often reflect bullying dynamics. A bully leader is defined as “someone who places
targets in a submissive, powerless position whereby they are more easily influenced and controlled, in
order to achieve personal or organizational gains” [Harvey et al., 2007: 117]. If the behavior is not
regulated through policies and monitoring by the HR administration [Vega and Comer, 2005], the
combination of bullying and leadership can be quite toxic for subordinates and the organization. As the
only thing the bully leader respects is authority from above, the higher administration of an organization
has the responsibility to properly address issues of bullying in the workplace, particularly when associated
with people in leadership. Unfortunately, studies show that workplace and leadership bullying has grown
exponentially in the last decade [Hodson et al., 2006].

Pls note, Format for preparing/presenting a report: TITLE OUTLINES OBJECTIVES CONTENTS
REFERENCES

References

1. https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_41.htm
2. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/leadership-definition-2948275
3. https://www.cabrillo.edu/services/jobs/pdfs/giving-feedback.pdf
4. https://fairygodboss.com/articles/why-being-a-good-leader-is-about-asking-the-right-questions
5. https://hbr.org/2015/09/5-strategy-questions-every-leader-should-make-time-for
6. https://medium.com/@kaylamgross/5-strategy-questions-every-leader-should-make-time-for-
bc80a9cf5f66
7. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2013/01/07/8-tips-for-leading-those-who-dont-
want-to-follow/#41974b0f577a
8. https://www.academia.edu/2928190/Managing_Toxic_Leaders_Dysfunctional_Patterns_in_Org
anizational_Leadership_and_How_to_Deal_with_Them