This week I have been talking over and thinking about the leadership of professional teams. Over my career in the law in private practice and industry I have seen many different styles utilised in the awkward art of motivating and managing highly educated, skilled and motivated people.
I also recognise that there is a sometime subtle distinction between management and leadership which Steven Covey sums up well: Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall.
There are many contrasting styles of leadership (and of management). Inclusive (where all members of the team are openly involved in decision making) v remote (where the manager remains aloof and decides on their own telling the team what to do.) Delegate (management and work is handed over to others) v keep to yourself (where the leader tries to do all of the work and only begrudgingly hands it out).
This article suggests there are three styles: autocratic (or authoritarian) paternalistic and democratic and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Of all of these one of the most extreme is the approach where a leader rules through Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. This is where the boss keeps his direct reports in a state of terror all the time as to whether they are doing well or badly and even if they will keep their jobs from one day to the next. Lee Iacocca allegedly played mind games with his senior executives to keep them off balance. And yet he is also considered a very successful executive who turned Chrysler round.
Perhaps the most important aspect of a leader’s style is that he or she has consciously chosen which approach and why. What sort of team do they want and how will they best be motivated – will fear or reward work best. And when it comes right down to it does a leader genuinely care about the careers of their workers – or only about themselves.
And anyway with professionals as Peter Drucker says: Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to get their work done.!
I also recognise that there is a sometime subtle distinction between management and leadership which Steven Covey sums up well: Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall.
There are many contrasting styles of leadership (and of management). Inclusive (where all members of the team are openly involved in decision making) v remote (where the manager remains aloof and decides on their own telling the team what to do.) Delegate (management and work is handed over to others) v keep to yourself (where the leader tries to do all of the work and only begrudgingly hands it out).
This article suggests there are three styles: autocratic (or authoritarian) paternalistic and democratic and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Of all of these one of the most extreme is the approach where a leader rules through Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. This is where the boss keeps his direct reports in a state of terror all the time as to whether they are doing well or badly and even if they will keep their jobs from one day to the next. Lee Iacocca allegedly played mind games with his senior executives to keep them off balance. And yet he is also considered a very successful executive who turned Chrysler round.
Perhaps the most important aspect of a leader’s style is that he or she has consciously chosen which approach and why. What sort of team do they want and how will they best be motivated – will fear or reward work best. And when it comes right down to it does a leader genuinely care about the careers of their workers – or only about themselves.
And anyway with professionals as Peter Drucker says: Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to get their work done.!
RSS Feed
