On the surface, there would appear to be a yawning chasm between the empowering leader and the laissez-faire alternative, especially in terms of the creativity, performance, cohesion and satisfaction that they can expect to elicit from their team. Worst-case scenario, there is a total absence of leadership, meaning that team members are left sidelined. It creates distance as the leader is more dismissive of team members’ needs, avoids confronting problems, keeps interaction to a strict minimum and shirks their responsibilities as a leader. The passive, laissez-faire approach to leadership has the reverse effect.
Whilst the hierarchical chain is not actually broken, team members start to feel that they have more worth and importance to the firm by being given responsibility rather than being enslaved by a rigid, top-down structure where the boss always has the final word. One of the main offshoots of empowering leadership is that it removes some of the aura that surrounds the leader. Then on the flipside, there is the passive, laissez-faire approach. Empowering team members by delegating responsibility has become viewed as the way to go. It is for this reason, amongst others, that in the business world leading by example is no longer viewed as the sole or even ideal approach to getting the best out of one’s subordinates. Although for a long time considered an inspirational approach to leadership, this model is to some extent passive.
There is no notion of giving responsibility to others. This is a somewhat traditional view of leadership from a relational perspective as the leader is not so much transmitting any tools, skills or knowledge as simply being followed. It translates an image of an individual heading a business, team or family unit in so inspiring a way that those “beneath” want to produce or deliver that little something extra in the image of the person they look up to. The expression “leading by example” conjures up many ideas, be they in a business context or in realms such as the sporting world or even personal life. But what if their success as managers was more dependent on the individual expectations and needs of those working for them rather than what they as leaders have decided is the right approach to directing operations?
#HANDS ON VS HANDS OFF DRIVERS#
Proactive business leaders who give responsibility to their team members are traditionally seen as drivers of performance, while their passive, laissez-faire counterparts are generally viewed in a dimmer light.
0 kommentar(er)
