I had a talk yesterday about a new leader in a local school. The word was I was much more comfortable with the previous one; here, we are not allowed to say anything or respond in any way towards selected ideas. I guess she is just a very different character. /…/ A character will only determine one smaller part of implementing a leadership role. But being an autocrat and leading like a monarch from few hundred years ago? This, in nowadays time, is not a character thing! This person simply does not want to deal with other people, does not want to include them and does not want to worry about how others are doing at work. And if you don’t want to be a leader, then don’t take up this role.
Times are shifting. Environments in which we work now have new and different traits. The fast phased change is not just a fancy wording, but is very true. A leader can not keep the power with himself or herself to allow all the changes and projects. A leader can not cotrol and cannot even understand everything that is going on; there are broad challenges that come by and noone has such a wide mind. We are still very much trapped into that old traditional way of collaborating in our working space.
The three forms
As I see evolution of leadership in a glance, it has three major forms. I think that only very rare examples came into form no. 3. Some came to the form no. 2. And many are trapped in the frame of form no. 1.
Form no. 1
A leader is a boss. Scientists say for this time that: “leader is the one capable of impressing his will on others” (male form, for that time, is not used by mistake or prejudice, but for objective reasons). Those leaders are autocrats. Their mind says that they know better than anyone else. Those leaders have the X theory view on others; i. e. people in general are lazy and have to be somehow pushed towards work.
Form no. 2
A leader and a boss are two different things. A leader is there in lines with the people. A leader is a role model for others. He or she is the most motivated, the most eager, passioned, and so on. This sort of leader works in a noble way – by an example. The thinking here is (that) followers need somebody who will show the way and lead them on. Somebody is needed to pierce the snow and everyone will then follow.
Form no. 3
Leaders and followers are (equal) partners. Actually, being a follower does not come with any sort of different demands that being a leader. In both we want to see high motivation, in both we want to see an independent and critical mind, and within both we want to see a dedication towards realising a vision and a mission. A leader is someone who builds a platform and enables others to do their work best they can. To be a leader is a specific and a professional role in the organisation or a group – a leader need an expertise in building a quality work environment. He or she needs to be able to remove the obstacles to quality work. This sort of leader doesn’t want people to follow him or her, but to develop their own way; and become successful themselves.
Conclusion
Potentials of collaboration are definitely at least close to abundant. So are potentials inside people. Just … forget that image of a leader who needs to know it all, who needs to have answers and be invincible for others. Of course, people will admire you if you manage to do it, to handle all the pressue and pick right moves. But, what about that kind of admiration that comes when you put trust into people and encourage them to be decision makers; to be that what some might think they can only look up to.
We can go on and practice control – we can develop those control systems and make them better and better. And we will be ripped caterpillars. Or we can challenge our believes, start seeing things from a new angle, and be butterflies.
Paradim 