Managing Leadership^®

One of the problems with traditional views of leadership is the tendency to confuse other characteristics with it. A common way we do this is by becoming so impressed by the seemingly powerful presence of one or another trait presumptively indicative of leadership as to uncritically assume that there is more behind it than there may actually be – sometimes even simply equating it with leadership, itself.

This tendency is important to our topic, today, of explaining why “followers” are typically not really followers at all. Because it is so large an element of this argument, we will restrict ourselves here to one example of it: idea generation.

People who do this are widely viewed, for that reason alone, as leaders. As it happens, however, we frequently make this connection – and the associated award of the title of leadership – after the fact, when we trace an accepted and important idea back to its source.

But it is not just an idea, but the adoption and adaptation of it to organizational purpose that combine to make up true, meaningful, corporate “vision.” And this is rarely accomplished solely by single – or singular – individuals.

It is a collective, collaborative effort in which various people play separate interconnecting roles. Some of these are more visible – but none are more important or vital than others to the overall process.

The thing is that lots of ideas are generated all the time throughout our organizations. But only some of them progress into actionable projects that become influential elements of our operations.

So, why do we only notice the people who generated ideas we wind up acting on, and refer only to them as leaders? Why aren’t the others who propose initiatives which turn out to be infeasible, or un-actionable for whatever reasons, also leaders?

Because, really, neither of them are leaders at all. Rather, all of them – including those in the latter group – are giving expression to organizational leadership.

And they’re not the only ones.

The rest of the organization evaluates the ideas simmering within it. Everyone tries them on for size, determines how they contribute to current ways of doing things, or improve outputs produced or received. They test them, generate feedback, and then drop or modify them, or send their architects back to the drawing board.

The idea generators, then – or, actually, their ideas – are like candidates waiting for the decision of the panel of judges. They – successful or otherwise – all note the results and the reasons for them, and proceed with their next efforts while bearing those lessons in mind. Often, but certainly not necessarily, the innovators and assessors alternate roles over time and as events dictate and dynamics evolve.

So, in a healthy outfit, leadership flows and reverberates throughout the organization. It is multidirectional, becoming richer and more informed as it acts upon itself in the course of pursuing organizational aims at all levels.

Leadership in an organization isn’t like a research demonstration in a laboratory, with scientists acting on experimental material to produce predictable results. In an organization, no one can introduce specifically calibrated stimulants downward into a container of otherwise passive preparations in order to generate particular outcomes. After all, in organizations, the objects “leaders” propose to act upon – well, they’re alive.

And they don’t live and breathe for the very thought of being able to follow you. They are there to collaborate with you. Best for you if you collaborate with them.

Tomorrow, we’ll conclude this series with a brief look at how you might do that. See you then!

—

Today’s tips: A couple of days ago we referred in this section to a WSJ piece challenging commonly-held assumptions about the formidable and generally dreaded institution of the performance review. Wally Bock, the author of Three Star Leadership, noted the article, as well. His take, though, is to cut right through all the angst about the institution, and instead to go after inept instituters. Please be sure to visit his must-read piece about stepping up to the plate and doing your job as a manager – and as a developer of managers.

And speaking of ideas, please stop over to see Eric Brown‘s discussion of the various sizes they come in – and which of them may turn out to be the best fit.

—

Want to read articles from the Encyclopedia Britannica for free? Take a moment to scroll down the sidebar on the main site a bit: right below my current readings you will see a dynamically renewing box pointing to articles on capitalism from the Britannica. These are typically available only by paid subscription, but if you click through to an article from here, you will be able to read it for free. Try it!

And speaking of subscriptions, ours here are always free! Why not subscribe by email or RSS reader now?

Technorati Tags: leadership, follower, leader, purpose, corporate, vision, organizational leadership, organization, feedback, WSJ, performance review, Wally Bock, Three Star Leadership, manager, Eric Brown