A few months ago, I stopped freelancing and dove head first into a regular, full-time position with benefits. I was happy about the offer and looked forward to being part of a team, gaining additional HR experience, and earning a more steady income.
Now, as I leave the worst job I’ve ever had, reporting to (in my humble opinion) the most odious human being I’ve ever laid eyes on, I’m powerfully reminded once again about the importance of good and ethical leadership.
My friend (let’s call her Shirley) and I have been debating this issue for a while now.
Shirley’s position: Yes, leadership is important, but the rank and file doesn’t need the permission of its “elected” leaders to do great things.
Hmmm …
My position: That’s true — to a point. Also true? Rotten leadership leads to rotten cultures, which leads to rotten work relationships, which leads to rotten organizations.
The masses can be motivated to do good all day long, but if those good actions aren’t supported by senior leadership, and — as is most often the case in these situations — bad actions ARE supported by senior leadership, then forget it. There’s a limit to the amount of good that can flourish under stinky management.
The late Peter Drucker, a truly gifted management thinker credited with bringing much wisdom to the workplace, once said: “Rank does not confer privilege or give power. It imposes responsibility.”
Drucker’s statement goes right to the heart of the philosophy of servant leadership, and I’ll say it again — our workplaces need more of it. Show me a horrific leader and I’ll show you someone who’s infinitely more interested in his power than in the well-being of the employees under his charge.
But back to my friend Shirley.
She believes adults can do right without being told to do right. Shirley says, “We all have more influence than we know.” She also says, “We could make our leaders do anything if we used our power.”
History is her rationale. She points to phenomenal leaders through the ages, such as Martin Luther King and Jesus (hate him or love him, you can’t deny the guy’s influence), who weren’t democratically elected yet yielded great authority.
I say it’s just not that simple. Here’s my rationale:
But if all this is true, then the flip side is true as well — good and principled leadership can have an AMAZINGINGLY BENEFICIAL effect on an organization. Yippee!
And that’s why I don’t think my friend has any chance of winning this one. (Maybe next time, sweetie.)
Any way you slice it, people need leaders. Organizations need leaders. Whether the leader attains her power through position or charisma isn’t the point. Most people are followers and will follow the example of leaders, even bad leaders.
The point is (as another friend said when I asked her opinion), that without effective leadership, even if employees DO achieve fantastic things, these things might not align with the business needs, and then what?
The point is, no matter how many informal leaders an organization has, the buck still stops with the “elected” leaders, and nothing short of the corporate equivalent of a civil war can alter that status quo.
And when’s the last time you heard about one of those?