The Art of Leadership and Team Management

What’s the art of leadership?

Almost everyone wishes to learn the art of leadership. Depending on the source, it is claimed by many, defined by a few, and exercised by the unheralded.

We know a lot about leadership; it is the application of leadership that most people struggle with.

Despite all of the leadership texts that contain a veritable plethora of leadership theories (each of which is THE KEY), leadership remains a very individual concept that is exercised in a variety of yet successful ways.

A successful application almost always results in leadership. Unsuccessful applications are always ineffective. Is this yet another theory? No, but I will share some of my findings about where to look for leadership.

Although we may not be able to define it precisely, I believe we can recognize it when we see it.

Each of us can be a leader. We will only become effective leaders, however, when we lose our fear of making mistakes and share responsibility for the achievement of the goals of the organization. If those goals are our measures of achievement, then the organization will work to succeed and achieve; if they are not, we will be the transient leader that gets things going, but fails by failing to share credit and push for only the good of the organization.

There are formal and informal leaders.

In some literature, people are referred to as "formal leaders" and "informal leaders."

I'm not going to discuss those "formal leaders" because, by definition, they are in positions of authority (i.e., a supervisory position), and that is their sole claim to leadership.

In contrast, "informal leaders" exercise leadership from positions that are not formally designated for leadership, posing a problem for the organization. It is unclear how the informal leader emerges, but it is frequently caused by a lack of leadership in the "formal" position. But that doesn't rule out the "great man" theory (which holds that when a crisis occurs and no one is prepared to deal with it, someone will step up and deal with it).

Why is someone not in a leadership role given the authority to exercise leadership by the group with which they work?

Of course, there are several answers to that question, so let's look at some of them. It is possible that the leader is a confident (or at least confidently acting) person with a bit of charisma, thus one who offers logical answers to group questions and has the ability to demonstrate that they have good ideas. We frequently see this in groups that begin by discussing specific problems; if no one is explicitly "in charge," the leader who emerges is frequently the person who demonstrates the most passion about the topic.

Or they could simply be someone who is impatient for action and pushes others to take action that appears to achieve some common goals. In this case, the group usually rallies around the "visionary." Sometimes the visionary lacks a strong vision, but that doesn't mean they can't pursue one (or have one in the first place).

Another possibility is that one of these groups recognizes that things can be done in a way that benefits everyone involved, similar to how John Nash's gaming theory (the basis for the film "A Beautiful Mind") was developed. The concern is not for the leader's betterment, enrichment, or even recognition, but for the achievement of group goals, which include the entire organization.

When we come across this type of leader, John Collins refers to them as "Level 5" leaders in his book Good to Great. They are the ones who are driven by the achievement of the group as a whole rather than their own personal success. Because they don't blow their horns, these leaders go unnoticed.

They are too preoccupied with achieving meaningful goals to be distracted by something so counterproductive. Nonetheless, they do certain things that "prove" their leadership. Some of these are the topics on which I'd like to concentrate this discussion.

Leaders who are passionate about their vision (which they ALWAYS have) make certain that everyone in the organization is aware of it.

They will indoctrinate everyone so that it becomes a tangible part of the environment, so much so that employees will take it home with them at night. Everything that flows is then a reflection of that vision, because the vision becomes the beacon that guides everyone in the organization's actions.

Those leaders are intimately familiar with their followers' personalities, histories, and passions.

Because of the leadership involved in attracting and retaining the right people to "get the job done," the leader knows them. They return to W. Edwards Deming's theory, not for Statistical Process Control techniques (though these are valuable), but for Deming's "14 Points," one of which is to ensure adequate and continuous training.

Cheerleading is a waste of time if the right people are on the job and given the resources to get the job done, because these workers already get out of bed excited about going to work.

Motivation? It's in each of them, and they don't need slogans, mantras, or group meetings to celebrate history because the "self-actualized" person is also self-motivated. They understand their jobs, what is expected of them, and that they have a responsibility to the rest of the employees to do the best job they can.

One reason for this is that the individual has been involved in the development of their job and its responsibilities, they have been informed about how their job fits into the overall scheme, and they are intimately involved in company changes. Revolutionary? No, it's been documented for decades.

When leaders develop this type of employee and managers supervise those employees, they are freed up to do visionary tasks such as keeping the goal in sight and making course corrections as conditions change. Tweaking is a skill that these leaders possess that is not taught in school, making it all the more valuable.

My resume includes a ten-year stint as a division controller for a manufacturing company. The division manager was a true visionary who transformed the division from a lackluster, under-motivated, money-losing operation to an energetic, proud organization that had achieved ISO 9000 certification and was on its way to becoming profitable.

Over the course of ten years, I witnessed that manager steadfastly steer the division in the direction of his clearly defined vision. Not every one of his actions was correct, but that didn't stop us from learning from them. And the division became a model for the corporation, while the division manager was promoted to regional manager so that his skills could be applied in other divisions.

He'd learned that assembling the team was his most difficult task, but once that was completed, the team drove the progress.

He simply stepped aside. His time was spent not showing what he'd done, but rather providing tools to team members so they could get to where he wanted faster. If he needed to do something that one of the team members should have done, that team member was, by definition, unnecessary and was eliminated.

That is not to say that mistakes were not tolerated, nor that every effort was not made to ensure that the team member was properly placed and trained. However, when it became clear that change was required, it happened quickly and cleanly. It was a true pleasure to work there, but even more so to witness that unsung leadership in action.

Individuals can do the following to improve their leadership skills:

1. Maintain your focus on your company's primary goal. Never allow yourself to become distracted from that.

2. Surround yourself not with those who only agree with you, but with the right people for the job at hand, and then train and equip them to do it.

3. Recognize the advantages of having people with diverse personalities around you. Separate skill sets not only come with different personalities, but different approaches are critical to your company's success.

4. After you've hired the right people, get out of their way. You don't need them if you have to micromanage them. This isn't a big deal, though, because they won't stay anyway if you treat them badly.

5. Always consult your feedback loop in all of your processes to ensure that things are working as expected and that you can make appropriate changes on time. Failure to do so will hasten the demise of your organization as a whole. Remember that your feedback loop is only as valuable as the people who provide feedback to you. Take their advice.

6. Recognize and accept when you have exceeded your limits. Then seek assistance to overcome it.

Creating an Appropriate Organizational Structure

• Taking into account the organization's strategic direction and objectives.

• Taking into account the desired organizational culture.

• Identifying the critical activity areas of the organization.

• Choosing the best organizational structure.

This is an important first step. Before making any changes or taking new directions, leaders must decide on an organizational structure that will support the strategic direction being pursued as well as an organizational culture that they will strive to create.

The management team network that is established will be compatible with the structure and will contribute to the development of the desired culture.

Choosing A Management Team Structure

• Create a network of management teams to meet the needs identified in the previous activity.

• Individual team structure.

• Individual team objectives, roles, responsibilities, size, location, and resource requirements must be agreed upon.

• Create profiles for the team members and team leaders on each management team.

When implemented, the planning done here will serve as the template for the new structure.

This planning is best done as a factual, needs-based exercise.

The team's role and objectives should be allowed to dictate team size, location, team leader, and team member profiles.

The resource implications should be addressed after the structure has been agreed upon.

Existing and potential personnel should be evaluated against these criteria only after the teams have been formed.

Solution 1: Evaluate Existing Teams

This includes identifying existing management teams, analyzing their objectives, evaluating existing team performance, evaluating individual team leaders' performance, and comparing each management team profile to the newly defined requirements. Due to legislative constraints and/or ethical considerations, this will be required in many, if not most, organizations. Existing teams, however, are unlikely to be suitable, except in part, and the outcomes of this action will simply identify what are likely to be major gaps and changes that will be required to meet the new requirements.

Solution 1: Dissolve Existing Teams

The old structure is being completely demolished. This option is the most effective, requiring total reengineering, but it is also the most radical. If at all possible, this is the better option because the organization can make the necessary changes to best match the new strategic direction and move forward without being hampered by partially or entirely unsuitable management teams.

Putting the New Management Team Network in Place

1. Providing information about the changes to all those who will be affected—in most organizations, this means at all levels and both internally and externally.

2. Choosing team leaders and members.

3. establishing the teams in their respective locations.

4. Each team must receive training in its new role, responsibilities, goals, and operational activities.

5. Providing sufficient resources for each team.

6. Putting the new network into operation.

This is a critical stage that must be managed as a major change activity and project. To oversee the changes, an executive-level manager should be appointed. Communication with all stakeholders, who will be numerous, at various levels, and both internal and external to the organization, must be carefully managed.

Putting In Place A Management Team Performance Management System

• Creating a strict team performance evaluation system.

• Individual team performance is being monitored.

• Taking appropriate corrective action as needed.

Many organizations have an effective employee appraisal system in place, but this usually applies only to operational employees and junior managers. Middle and senior managers must also be evaluated on a regular basis, preferably more frequently than operational employees, because managers' actions have a greater negative or positive impact.

Because of the degree of influence and impact of the team's collective decisions and actions, this line of thinking must also be applied to management teams.

Organizational leaders must be constantly aware of their management teams' performance levels and take action to maintain or raise those levels as needed.

It is critical to implement a performance appraisal and continuous improvement approach to the network of management teams.

In the early stages of the teams' existence, the emphasis will be on raising awareness and understanding of the team's objectives, as well as identifying training and development requirements to support new or modified roles.

As the team grows and matures, monitoring will prioritize consistency of performance and then support continuous improvement in that performance. Performance appraisal must be a regular and visible process at all stages of each team's life cycle.

Review and Refresh of the Network

• Organizing regular reviews of the management team network's suitability

• Evaluating the suitability of each network component against newer versions of the strategic objectives; evaluating the network structure against the current organizational structure and culture.

• Making necessary changes to individual components and/or the network's overall structure.

• Every year, as part of the annual strategic planning process, a major review should be conducted as part of the review and adjustment of strategies and objectives.

• Furthermore, the state of the management teams' network should be an agenda item at least quarterly executive level meetings, where appropriate corrective action can be decided.

• At this point, minor or major changes should be agreed upon to adjust the network so that it continues to meet the requirements imposed by the updated strategic and operational objectives.

In conclusion, establishing a compatible management team structure is a critical first step in ensuring that the organization's strategies are successfully implemented. The strategic and operational objectives will not be met unless there is a strong network of management teams that is proportionate to the size and complexity of the organization and its strategic objectives. Effective management teams are the driving force behind achieving goals. This network will fail if it is weak or flawed. It is the responsibility of the organization's leaders to ensure that the management team network is strong, dynamic, and focused on achieving its goals, both individually and collectively.
 

Share : The Art of Leadership and Team Management