This is from a different listserv - I'm forwarding with permission.
Considering the current state of politics, both in the US and Europe, I
thought it appropriate. Anyone care to comment?
Barry
Peter Hunter popped up a good summary post on the thread of "how do we
motivate other people." A lot of this is also an issue of "style" of
leadership in individuals and in the culture.
A couple of thoughts also popped out. We live in a culture whereby we
support The Boss - we demonstrate that we want The Boss to be strong
and resilient and to make decisions. As my friend Mike Madras and I
discussed on the phone yesterday, he sees this current United Nations
situation with Bolton as pretty classic -- we want to nominate an
individual who is STRONG as our representative to the UN even though
most of us would agree that his actual behavior is reprehensible. He
treats people badly.
Why is this man even being nominated? Because he is a collegial pal of
others whose style is a bit different but whose core behavior is pretty
much congruent. A strong leader who doesn't listen to things that do
not fit the model of the world that is subscribed to.
Well, "BOSS spelled backwards is self-explanatory." If you don't know
this American euphemism, pop me a personal email and I will explain
since it is pretty simple really...
If one's values align with the BOSS' beliefs, then all is generally
well and good. But if there are differences, the style of leadership
can be terribly demotivating and even (predictably) drive a set of
behaviors that are misaligned to the organization's desired ones.
Heck, these autocratic kinds of responses can predictably generate the
exact kind of political situation within an organization that we see in
so many aspects of our culture today - a slim minority of power
generating a polarization of people. The Rights versus the Wrongs with
little dialog between them and little compromise with lots of
antagonism.
People want to be involved and be listened to. At the same time, we
sometimes tend to criticize those leaders that appear to be flexible
and open to changing their opinions based on the ideas of their
"constituencies."
Sometimes, it seems like we believe that "Might Makes Right." Being
"right" does not necessarily make one correct or contributes to
optimizing performance.
Yes, "Nobody ever washes a rental car." We cannot expect people to take
care of things where they feel no ownership and that nobody cares. So,
it is HOW we engage them and how we respond that seems to make a
critical difference in how leaders / managers are perceived.
And I think that we need to look at our models of leadership and make a
decision as to what kinds of leaders are the most effective within our
organizations. Recognize that half the people are below average and it
is through them that we can realize the largest performance
improvement.
It seems to be those managers that involve and engage ALL the people
who can be most effective, rather than the ones who appear powerful,
strong and opinionated (you can also read that arrogant, stubborn and
intolerant).
--
For the FUN of It!
Scott Simmerman, CPF - "The Square Wheels Guy"
Performance Management Company - 864-292-8700
3 Old Oak Drive Taylors, SC 29687
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
