The Leadership Year: Month Two
It’s month 2 of the leadership year. Before we get started take some time to think about month 1. What were your key thoughts? Working on leadership means we should continue to build on our experience, so don’t leave all your learnings behind as we move onto a new topic! Instead think about how you can use this month to take those learnings a little bit further.
If month 1 was all about knowing ourselves, as we are right now, month 2 will see us explore the kind of leader we want to become. We’ll start this by thinking of other leaders and what is that makes us admire them.
There are examples of leadership all around us. The natural place to start would be the leadership we’ve experience in our workplaces. Most of us can probably single out those managers who made a difference to our careers. I know I can think of leaders who stretched me but also supported that journey, doing so in a way that felt perfect for my development. These experiences are worth recalling from a new perspective. What exactly did they do that meant that I felt so supported? Why did I feel able to stretch myself beyond my day job? How did that manager create an environment that created real growth for me? In the moment we are more likely to simply celebrate the success than to stop and think about what it was that happened to get us there. We may even consider those leaders as great people who were the reason why it happened. But actually, most people’s actions can be replicated. If we can identify what they did that created the successful environment, we can weave these actions into our own way of working too.
But leadership is broader than the workplace. We see it in sport, in the news, in our families, and obviously in politics (let’s not start a debate by exploring that one too much!) I often ask people who their favourite leader is in training courses and there’s always such a wide range of people, but characters like Nelson Mandela come up frequently. I then ask people to think about the top 5 qualities of the person they chose. We will all highlight different qualities here, sometimes even when discussing the same person. Some may speak of Mandela’s strong sense of fairness whereas others will talk of his ability to inspire or his determination never to give up. What we identify may speak more about ourselves than it does about the other person, and we need to ask ourselves why we think these qualities are so important. Then with an honest reflection, how well do we embody these qualities ourselves? If inspiring others is so important to us, how are we ensuring we make this a part of our own leadership style?
In thinking about others, we start to shape thoughts about where we want to develop, but by linking the qualities and actions back to our own experiences we do this in an authentic way. The qualities we build are meaningful to us, and the actions we take we know can work as we have experienced them ourselves. This can help us grow our leadership style without losing a sense of self.
When looking at others we can see examples of many different ways leaders behave, and we should be prepared to adapt our own style of leadership based on the needs of the situation or individual. Kurt Lewin created a model where 3 styles of leadership can be explored.
· Authoritarian Leaders: This is often a style I see people resisting. We can associate authoritarian leaders with bossy, insensitive “my way or the highway” people. And in truth when over-used the authoritarian style of leadership is often not a rich experience. Very few people intend to come across as overly authoritarian, but it can happen, and so many of us don’t like to explore this area too much. But it is a valuable leadership style. Without someone taking authority it can be easy for working processes to become chaotic and at their worst damaging to the business. In particular in a time of crisis, people look to a leader to step in and take control. If we resist this style too much, we may find ourselves losing creditability as a leader and failing to lead when we are most needed
· Democratic Leaders: These leaders like to ask for other’s input. They will gather people together to explain a situation and genuinely listen to all of their ideas. This can be an empowering process as everyone feels like their voice has been heard, and that they have an opportunity to influence decisions in their business. The leader still retains the ultimate decision-making responsibility but will weigh up everyone’s thoughts before deciding on what to do next. Most people like this style of leadership feeling that it is the best of both worlds & should be their go-to option. But it is time-consuming and can sometimes feel like all decisions are made by committee. If over-used the leader can lose creditability, as well as reduce efficiencies in their team by taking too long to make any decision
· Laissez-Faire Leaders: These leaders trust their teams to get on with their work with little input. They believe they are capable of making the right choices without feeling the need to monitor or control outputs. This can be a dynamic way of working with individuals feeling they can take responsibility about changes and shape work in new directions. This can foster a creative and innovative environment and minimise dependence on one individual to be the ‘expert in the room’. But this only works if the individuals are truly capable of autonomous decision making. If they are under-experienced, then their decisions could have big knock-on effects and the leader will lose control rapidly. This style often gets feedback of “being nice in theory” but people struggle to delegate the authority to their teams in reality for fear of what may happen. I’m a little biased here as this is my preferred style, but I believe that if the structure is right in the first place there is more to gain from this style than there is to lose
These 3 styles are interesting to look at and map against your own approach. Do you think you’ve got the balance right? Do you deploy the right style for each situation? I naturally lean towards Laissez-Faire but can lurch back to authoritative – and that can be a difficult and confusing behaviour for those I work with. Now that I have reflected on my style regularly over a number of years, I know this is an area I need to watch and being mindful of my approach has helped me adapt. At the end of each week, I’d often consider if I had the balance right. Over time I can see more democratic-style interactions have become part of, what is now, my natural style, but this only happened because I took the time to stop and think about it.
We can choose the kind of leader we want to be. There is no right or wrong answer, but if we continue to check ourselves and think more deeply about how our actions compare to how we want to come across then we will start to make changes. These 3 exercises will help us build a better picture of the leader we aspire to become:
1. How did our best leaders create an environment for us to grow?
2. What qualities does a good leader possess, why are they important and how do I compare?
3. Monitor the balance of Authoritarian, Democratic and Laissez-faire and consider if you need to make any changes
Running low on time? Just 1 of these exercises will help you progress.
Want to reflect with greater depth? Consider scoring yourself out of 10 in the qualities that matter to you, and each of Lewin’s 3 styles. Set a goal to nudge your scores closer to the kind of leadership behaviour you want to express.
