What Makes People Follow Reluctant Leaders - globaladvisors.biz/inc-feed/20141208/what-makes-people-follow-reluctant-leaders/ By Stefan Stern In today’s knowledge-based and highly-automated enterprises, companies look for the cleverest and most capable people they can find. But having hired such talent, organizations face a challenge. Places full of highly mobile and in-demand workers operate more democratically. Leaders don’t necessarily gain power by dint of high rank; they need to earn it every day. How do they do that? And, for the would-be leader in an organization like this, what are the secrets to rising to the top? For the answers, it’s useful to look at how leaders succeed in professional service firms, traditionally structured as partnerships. These have always been places where the leaders are those who most impress their clever peers rather than their superiors. A new study by professors Laura Empson (Cass Business School, London) and Johan Alvehus (University of Lund, Sweden) sheds light on who reaches the position of maximum authority in these firms and why. They went deep into three international firms with reputations for excellence – one a law firm, one a public accounting fir, one a management consultancy – conducting over 100 face-to-face interviews with people working within them. The leaders in these firms, they discovered, are characterized by three traits. First, they are exemplary professionals, judged by their colleagues to be capable of doing the core work of the firm at the very highest level of quality. In the words of Empson and Alvehus they have gained “legitimacy to lead through market success.” As important as the model of excellence they offer is the very fact that they are seen (and trusted) by the professionals they lead as “one of us.” One senior partner put it this way: “I think that professional service practitioners … will accept almost unlimited decision-making and authority from someone they think understands the things they are going through.” Second, these leaders enable autonomy while retaining control. Clever people do not want to be told how to do their jobs, but they appreciate the importance of coherence, and the power of colleagues pulling together rather than working at cross purposes. They grant permission to lead to colleagues they believe will allow room for grown-up and capable people to get on with their work, while ensuring that the firm is heading in the right direction and maintaining high standards. Third, and even tricker to manage, effective leaders are given credit for their political skills, both as they rise through the organization and as they operate at the top. As one senior partner said: “I think the level of politics and personality here is different because you have a sort of cadre of highly paid (partners) … people who own the client relationships. So there is something about needing to keep all 500 partners happy which brings a level of politics, which you wouldn’t get if we were an engineering company or a pharmaceuticals company.” It would be hard not to note the parallels to the workings of political parties and the delicate process of “seeking high office.” In these firms, elections are held, requiring candidates to issue manifestos, give speeches, and participate in debates. There is much talk of “the electorate,” “constituents,” and “mandates.” Aspiring leaders of professional service firms must build and sustain consensus among their colleagues, make trade-offs between competing interest groups, and offer incentives to individuals to lend their support. The process is subject to the lobbying and bargaining which occurs in any other political arena. But the respect for political skill is striking, because in these workplaces Empson and Alvehus also frequently encountered abhorrence of political behavior, and a professed belief that effective leaders are “above politics.” The leaders who succeed, the researchers conclude, are capable of interacting politically while appearing apolitical. Without being caught doing anything so grubby as scheming or plotting, they manage relationships and power with aplomb. This requires a combination of social astuteness, interpersonal influence, networking ability, and apparent sincerity. Put these three traits together, and the sum is a kind of paradox: the people most enthusiastically granted the power to lead by their peers are individuals who seem reluctant to do so. They relish doing the core work of the firm, serving clients with distinction. They are happy to grant autonomy. They don’t exhibit the political behavior associated with raw ambition. They might not go so far as to say (as General Sherman did), “If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve.” But they display the attitude toward leadership that it is not work one would choose, only a responsibility that should be shouldered by “one of us.” Perhaps it is only appropriate that such a paradox of an employee, the autonomous follower, can only be directed by another paradox: the reluctant leader. As enterprises of all kinds depend increasingly on clever, capable talent, they will have to embrace the same paradoxical arrangement. In today’s well-regarded professional services firms, they can find the models for enabling knowledge workers to combine their energies and accomplish great things. And they can find the secrets to enjoying a brilliant career in an organization where so many are brilliant.
Posted on: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 06:04:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015