As a leader, it's your job to craft your team's vision — and then motivate team members to attain that vision. But where do you begin?
What Would You Do?
What Would You Do?
When Jessica took over the department, she turned to Mary, her mentor and boss, for support. On several occasions, Jessica asked Mary where she saw the department going. Each time Mary would make a vague comment or suggestion and then turn the question around, and ask her—"Where do you see the department going?"
Jessica became increasingly frustrated with this response.
Mary was the boss, the person with the grand vision. Why wouldn't she tell Jessica what she was supposed to be doing?
What would you do?
Mary is purposefully being vague and not answering Jessica's question because it's Jessica's job, as a new leader, to create the vision and direction for her department.
Jessica needs to think about where she sees her group going, what it will take to get there, and how this fits into the company's overall strategy. The vision that Jessica arrives at will be her most important motivational tool, and will help her to align resources and to keep people focused on the tasks at hand.
In this topic, you'll understand what makes an effective leader, as well as learn how to create a vision and motivate others to do their best.
Managing versus leading
Key Idea
A common misconception about leadership is that it's the province of a chosen few. Some think that it's just a matter of possessing certain quasi-mystical traits — like charisma and vision — which you either have or you don't.
The fact of the matter is that leadership skills are not innate. They can be acquired and honed.
In order to understand what leaders do, it is important to understand the difference between management and leadership. They are two distinct and complementary systems of action.
Management involves coping with complexity; leadership, coping with change.
Managing requires bringing order and predictability to a situation, while leading requires adapting to changing circumstances — an increasingly important skill in today's volatile and competitive business environment. As such, the work of management is significantly different from the work of leadership.
For example, while managing requires planning and budgeting skills, leading requires the ability to set direction. Organizing and staffing are management tasks, whereas aligning people falls under the domain of leadership. Finally, while managing concerns controlling and problem solving, leading is about motivating and inspiring a team.
Managing versus leading
Key Idea
A common misconception about leadership is that it's the province of a chosen few. Some think that it's just a matter of possessing certain quasi-mystical traits — like charisma and vision — which you either have or you don't.
The fact of the matter is that leadership skills are not innate. They can be acquired and honed.
In order to understand what leaders do, it is important to understand the difference between management and leadership. They are two distinct and complementary systems of action.
Management involves coping with complexity; leadership, coping with change.
Managing requires bringing order and predictability to a situation, while leading requires adapting to changing circumstances — an increasingly important skill in today's volatile and competitive business environment. As such, the work of management is significantly different from the work of leadership.
For example, while managing requires planning and budgeting skills, leading requires the ability to set direction. Organizing and staffing are management tasks, whereas aligning people falls under the domain of leadership. Finally, while managing concerns controlling and problem solving, leading is about motivating and inspiring a team.
Managing versus leading
View as multimediaKey Idea
A common misconception about leadership is that it's the province of a chosen few. Some think that it's just a matter of possessing certain quasi-mystical traits — like charisma and vision — which you either have or you don't.
The fact of the matter is that leadership skills are not innate. They can be acquired and honed.
In order to understand what leaders do, it is important to understand the difference between management and leadership. They are two distinct and complementary systems of action.
Management involves coping with complexity; leadership, coping with change.
Managing requires bringing order and predictability to a situation, while leading requires adapting to changing circumstances — an increasingly important skill in today's volatile and competitive business environment. As such, the work of management is significantly different from the work of leadership.
For example, while managing requires planning and budgeting skills, leading requires the ability to set direction. Organizing and staffing are management tasks, whereas aligning people falls under the domain of leadership. Finally, while managing concerns controlling and problem solving, leading is about motivating and inspiring a team.
Leadership skills aren't innate; they can be acquired and honed. What is the difference between a leader and a manager?A common misconception about leadership is that it's the province of a chosen few. Some think that it's just a matter of possessing certain quasi-mystical traits — like charisma and vision — which you either have or you don't.
The fact of the matter is that leadership skills are not innate. They can be acquired and honed.
In order to understand what leaders do, it is important to understand the difference between management and leadership. They are two distinct and complementary systems of action.
Management involves coping with complexity; leadership, coping with change.
Managing requires bringing order and predictability to a situation, while leading requires adapting to changing circumstances — an increasingly important skill in today's volatile and competitive business environment. As such, the work of management is significantly different from the work of leadership.
For example, while managing requires planning and budgeting skills, leading requires the ability to set direction. Organizing and staffing are management tasks, whereas aligning people falls under the domain of leadership. Finally, while managing concerns controlling and problem solving, leading is about motivating and inspiring a team.
On my first day on the job as Harvard's Vice Provost for International Affairs, I didn't know what to do, because Harvard had never had a vice provost. But on the twelfth day, I realized what the job was. War began in the Middle East, Israel bombed Lebanon, and I had to ask myself the question, "Do we have anybody there? And if so, what do we do?" The answer, Harvard being a very decentralized organization, is, "We have no idea whether we have anybody in Lebanon or, for that matter, in almost any other country in the world." We began to discover, almost retail, one by one, that in the end we had 47 Harvard affiliated people in Lebanon.
The question then became specifically, "And so what?" So the first decision — and it had to be made just like that, because there is a war going on — is, "Yes, we will try to evacuate each and every Harvard affiliate who is there. We will evacuate our people."
The second question — just as instantaneous because there's a war going on — "Who are our people?" Not only those 47, but many of them were there with others. They were with spouses. They were with kids.
So we had to make a series of decisions and we had to make them quickly, that we would evacuate them with their spouses. And we would evacuate them with their partners, if they had them there. Then, the next obvious question is "Well then, who is a partner?" Well, there's a war going on, you're being shot at, a partner is whoever you tell me is your partner.
We also had to make some decisions about, "Who is not part of the 'we'?" So we evacuated spouses, partners, and children, but not parents. And then, of course, we had to actually carry out the evacuation. We had a subcontractor. The next part of the "we" was, "Do we just evacuate people who are returning to the U.S., but not the Lebanese?"
And the answer was, "The Lebanese, of course, we're taking them from home, but they too are part of Harvard University." I discovered that Harvard really was a global enterprise and that the key question is to realize that Harvard is wherever its people are.
That's what makes each and every one of us who works for Harvard valued individually and what makes Harvard the organization that it wants to be.
Leaders set the direction during times of change and align people towards goals.
The question then became specifically, "And so what?" So the first decision — and it had to be made just like that, because there is a war going on — is, "Yes, we will try to evacuate each and every Harvard affiliate who is there. We will evacuate our people."
The second question — just as instantaneous because there's a war going on — "Who are our people?" Not only those 47, but many of them were there with others. They were with spouses. They were with kids.
So we had to make a series of decisions and we had to make them quickly, that we would evacuate them with their spouses. And we would evacuate them with their partners, if they had them there. Then, the next obvious question is "Well then, who is a partner?" Well, there's a war going on, you're being shot at, a partner is whoever you tell me is your partner.
We also had to make some decisions about, "Who is not part of the 'we'?" So we evacuated spouses, partners, and children, but not parents. And then, of course, we had to actually carry out the evacuation. We had a subcontractor. The next part of the "we" was, "Do we just evacuate people who are returning to the U.S., but not the Lebanese?"
And the answer was, "The Lebanese, of course, we're taking them from home, but they too are part of Harvard University." I discovered that Harvard really was a global enterprise and that the key question is to realize that Harvard is wherever its people are.
That's what makes each and every one of us who works for Harvard valued individually and what makes Harvard the organization that it wants to be.
Leaders set the direction during times of change and align people towards goals.
Planning and budgeting versus setting a direction
The aim of management is to obtain well-defined, orderly results. Therefore, managers engaged in the planning and budgeting process typically:
To align people to a vision, a leader must:
Controlling and problem solving versus motivating and inspiring
Processes like controlling activities and solving problems are mechanisms managers put in place to make it easy for people to complete their daily jobs. Managers use these processes to:
Effective leaders motivate in a variety of ways.
Leading today's business organizations
In the past, leaders generally knew they were invested with formal authority. As such, their directives carried organizational weight. Today's organizations are flatter and less hierarchical. Many leaders now do not have formal authority and, even if they do, find it is not particularly useful. Instead, they recognize that leading requires the mastery of certain skills, all of which can be learned and developed.
Successful leadership requires strong:
- Craft specific targets or goals for the future (typically short-term)
- Establish detailed steps for achieving the desired targets
- Allocate the resources required to accomplish them
- Gather a range of data and look for patterns, relationship, and linkages
- Develop a vision of the future (often the distant future)
- Craft the strategies necessary for achieving that vision
Organizing and staffing versus aligning people
Organizing is a management process that, at its core, involves creating systems that enable people to implement plans as precisely and efficiently as possible. The processes of organizing and staffing require managers to:The definition of leadership is to have inspired, energized followers.
-Warren G. Bennis
- Choose a job hierarchy and justify reporting relationships
- Staff the positions with the appropriate people
- Provide training for those who need it
- Communicate plans to the workforce
- Decide how much authority to delegate, and to whom
To align people to a vision, a leader must:
- Solicit input and discussion from a wide range of people
- Help people to comprehend a vision of an alternative future
- Get them to believe in and become energized by this vision once it is understood
Controlling and problem solving versus motivating and inspiring
Processes like controlling activities and solving problems are mechanisms managers put in place to make it easy for people to complete their daily jobs. Managers use these processes to:
- Efficiently compare the behavior of the system they've organized and staffed with the original plan and budget
- If the comparison reveals a divergence from the original course, take the corrective actions necessary to get the plan back on track
Effective leaders motivate in a variety of ways.
For example, they:
Management skills are essential. But in response to an ever-changing economic and social marketplace, managers are increasingly being called upon to be leaders as well. As a result, the ability to lead — that is, identify a vision, align people to it, and motivate them to achieve it — has become even more critical for today's managers.- Articulate a vision in a manner that stresses the values of their audience
- Involve people in deciding how to achieve the shared vision
- Support employees' efforts to realize the vision by providing coaching, feedback, and role modeling
- Recognize and reward success
Leading today's business organizations
In the past, leaders generally knew they were invested with formal authority. As such, their directives carried organizational weight. Today's organizations are flatter and less hierarchical. Many leaders now do not have formal authority and, even if they do, find it is not particularly useful. Instead, they recognize that leading requires the mastery of certain skills, all of which can be learned and developed.
Successful leadership requires strong:
- Communication skills: To speak and write persuasively
- Interpersonal skills: To listen and hear what people are saying and react in constructive ways (active listening)
- Conflict-resolution skills: To handle friction and inevitable tensions
- Negotiation skills: To bring different groups together in order to reach mutually agreeable goals
- Motivational skills: To align people who may not report to you toward a goal
Emotional intelligence capabilities
In addition to mastering certain concrete skills, effective leaders generally share a cluster of essential characteristics. These characteristics can be categorized as components of emotional intelligence—the ability to manage yourself and your relationships effectively. Research has shown that what distinguishes outstanding leaders is their degree of emotional intelligence, not their technical or analytical skills. Five key components of emotional intelligence (EI) are:
- Self-awareness: The ability to recognize and understand your moods, emotions, and drives as well as their effect on others
- Self-regulation: The ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses and moods, suspend judgment, and think before acting
- Motivation: The ability to pursue goals with energy and persistence, for reasons that go beyond money or status
- Empathy: The ability to understand people's emotional makeup
- Social skill: The ability to manage relationships, build networks, and find common ground
Leading on a grand scale
I had the good fortune last year to be involved in the development and editing of an incredible book, which was the secret memoir of Zhao Ziyang who had been the leader of China. He was the ruler of the country in 1989. During Tiananmen, he is the man who tried but failed ultimately to stop the Tiananmen Massacre. He recorded 30 hours of tape secretly while he was under house arrest after 1989. It was smuggled out of the country and a colleague and I turned it into a book last year. So during the process I really got inside Zhao's head and learned a lot about him and what made him a great leader.
While he failed in 1989 to stop the violent putdown of the peaceful protest in Beijing, he had succeeded incredibly in the years before that in bringing the early roots of economic reform to China. So the China that we think of today, this incredible economic juggernaut, this incredible export machine, he really planted the seeds for that when he was a provincial leader.
So going through that and looking at his experience, I kind of drew from it a few lessons that I think he offers to leaders and managers. And number one was experimentation. In Russia — when the Soviet Union fell apart and Russia was trying to reform that economy, they tried to do it all at once. They tried shock therapy and it failed miserably. It was too much for the system to handle.
What Zhao had done as a provincial leader in Sichuan province, in Guangdong province, was pioneer some reforms locally that could be observed, could be tested, and you sort of look for early wins and if they succeed, then you can adopt them nationally. And he did just that, some ideas that let peasants grow some extra grain for themselves after they had met their state quotas.
And this kind of minor tweaking of the old Maoist system really worked and people's living standards increased, production increased and he didn't have to put the entire nation at risk with a big experiment. Rather they tested things locally, they worked and they were adopted elsewhere. So that's number one.
Second lesson from studying Zhao is how important it is to get buy in and to get buy in from everyone, from your friends as well as your foes. Zhao was in a complicated position trying to reform a Maoist economy and dealing with colleagues, some of whom were still Maoists, who didn't see anything wrong with the previous system.
Zhao's goal was to modernize the economy, but he understood that to bring everybody along he had to be very cognizant of what their arguments were, what their objections were, and even the language that they used.
For example, he didn't say we should develop a capitalist economy or even a market economy, he talked about developing a commodity economy, which is sort of a code word it turned out for a market capitalist style system, but it was in the language that the skeptics could accept and enabled him to go forward.
And the third lesson that I draw from Zhao is to be open to change. I mean he was a lifelong communist party technocrat. That was the only professional life he knew. And at a certain point when the facts suggested that the system wasn't working, that the system needed to change, he was able to pivot. He sort of looked objectively at things.
It is very difficult when you have staked your life based on a certain sustaining myth to suddenly say, OK, it's really time to make a dramatic change. So in the book, those are really the three lessons that Zhao's life sort of leaves to us. Again even though he failed to stop the Tiananmen Massacre in the '80s, he really did deliver kind of the seeds of economic reform that continue today.
And again the lessons are gradualism, experimentation, getting buy in, and being willing to switch when you realize things are not going the way you had planned.
To lead large-scale change, move gradually, experiment, get buy-in, and adapt to shifting conditions.
While he failed in 1989 to stop the violent putdown of the peaceful protest in Beijing, he had succeeded incredibly in the years before that in bringing the early roots of economic reform to China. So the China that we think of today, this incredible economic juggernaut, this incredible export machine, he really planted the seeds for that when he was a provincial leader.
So going through that and looking at his experience, I kind of drew from it a few lessons that I think he offers to leaders and managers. And number one was experimentation. In Russia — when the Soviet Union fell apart and Russia was trying to reform that economy, they tried to do it all at once. They tried shock therapy and it failed miserably. It was too much for the system to handle.
What Zhao had done as a provincial leader in Sichuan province, in Guangdong province, was pioneer some reforms locally that could be observed, could be tested, and you sort of look for early wins and if they succeed, then you can adopt them nationally. And he did just that, some ideas that let peasants grow some extra grain for themselves after they had met their state quotas.
And this kind of minor tweaking of the old Maoist system really worked and people's living standards increased, production increased and he didn't have to put the entire nation at risk with a big experiment. Rather they tested things locally, they worked and they were adopted elsewhere. So that's number one.
Second lesson from studying Zhao is how important it is to get buy in and to get buy in from everyone, from your friends as well as your foes. Zhao was in a complicated position trying to reform a Maoist economy and dealing with colleagues, some of whom were still Maoists, who didn't see anything wrong with the previous system.
Zhao's goal was to modernize the economy, but he understood that to bring everybody along he had to be very cognizant of what their arguments were, what their objections were, and even the language that they used.
For example, he didn't say we should develop a capitalist economy or even a market economy, he talked about developing a commodity economy, which is sort of a code word it turned out for a market capitalist style system, but it was in the language that the skeptics could accept and enabled him to go forward.
And the third lesson that I draw from Zhao is to be open to change. I mean he was a lifelong communist party technocrat. That was the only professional life he knew. And at a certain point when the facts suggested that the system wasn't working, that the system needed to change, he was able to pivot. He sort of looked objectively at things.
It is very difficult when you have staked your life based on a certain sustaining myth to suddenly say, OK, it's really time to make a dramatic change. So in the book, those are really the three lessons that Zhao's life sort of leaves to us. Again even though he failed to stop the Tiananmen Massacre in the '80s, he really did deliver kind of the seeds of economic reform that continue today.
And again the lessons are gradualism, experimentation, getting buy in, and being willing to switch when you realize things are not going the way you had planned.
To lead large-scale change, move gradually, experiment, get buy-in, and adapt to shifting conditions.
No comments:
Post a Comment