Achieving Results Through Others
The Leader-Manager’s core role in an organization is to achieve results through others. Where early career professionals are focused on individual efforts and results, the leader-manager is tasked with combining individual efforts and aligning these with organizational goals.
In doing so, leader-managers are given the formal authority to hire, fire and improve performance and at the same time need to use the softer side of influence to achieve maximum individual efforts.
The use of authority is often associated with management, whereas influence is associated with leadership. This separation is not entirely accurate, as both leadership and management require a blend of authority and influence to achieve results. The perfect blend of influence and authority often depends on the company culture, as well as the individual leader’s style. Both authority and influence are needed for teams to succeed.
Authority involves using formal methods of direction, which includes power structures, standard operating procedures, job descriptions or other directive methods of leader-management. Influence is the attempt to obtain the commitment of others by personal persuasion, such as setting aspirational goals, convincing with data, finding common ground and most importantly finding the intersect between personal and organizational needs and goals.
Three Styles of Leader-Management
The proportions of influence vs. authority that a leader-manager deploys in their day-to-day work are often reflective of the individual leader-manager’s inherent style. Overall, there are three core styles that a leader-manager can use when leading others.
The traditional style (aka direct) is appropriate when leading teams in crisis or when stringent rules and guidelines are required. This could be leading in the military, leading in a nuclear facility or working in emergency services.
The participative style (aka involve) is the preferred style when individual commitment is needed. This style is seen mostly in knowledge-based, technology, professional or creative organizations where it is desirable for the whole person to show up to work. It is also appropriate in times of change.
The team-centric style (aka coach) places the leader-manager outside the team circle and relies on the self-directed team to get things done. The role of this leader-manager is to mentor, coach and provide support from the sidelines.
Flexing Style for Situation
Each leader-manager will come to the table with a preferred individual style. The effectiveness of each style is highly dependent on organizational culture, the willingness and ability of direct reports as well as desired outcomes. The best leader-managers are able to flex between each of these styles to achieve best results.
WORD OF CAUTION: It is common for early career leader-managers to rely too heavily on one form of leadership over the other. One example is an organization that relied significantly on participative leadership until a disruption in the industry and a restructure was necessary. The restructure decision was seen very much as a directive approach, which was perceived as incoherent with the participative culture.
AVOID CULTURE SHOCK: To avoid the culture shock of having to implement a traditional approach in times of business change, it is useful to establish formal routine lines of leadership such as performance reviews, talent planning, etc., so that when a more directive approach is needed, it doesn’t send the team or organization into a tailspin.
