Governing by rules allows those at the top to believe they can control the actions of those below. Leading from values, though, shifts the responsibility for decision-making to employees. Shifting power to people may seem dangerous, but it can ultimately make an organization more powerful.
As CEO of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, James H. Quigley oversees a network of member firms composed of more than 170,000 employees in 145 countries. He recently co-authored a book, As One, about the eight archetypes of leaders and followers—and about applying those models to your organization to unlock the power of teams working “as one.”
Bill Hybels could be running a company, says Jack Welch. Or a country. But he’s not. Instead he runs a church. Not content to deliver sermons, Hybels and his team run a pop-up business school called the Global Leadership Summit. Each year, they bring an impressive lineup of speakers to teach leadership to pastors and laypeople.
When Vineet Nayar became president of HCL Technologies in 2005, the company’s growth had slowed. As the board asked Nayar to step into a leadership role, it made it clear: The time had come for something radical. These days, Nayar is that rare breed of leader who actually puts employee engagement first. Why does he do it?
The concept of the “complete leader” who has it all figured out is finally bowing before the sheer complexity of modern problems. After working with hundreds of people who struggled under the old myth, researchers at the MIT Sloan School of Management and MIT Leadership Center have come up with a new theory: distributed leadership.
A little theater can go a long way. Theater is made up of the stance you take, the tone you set, your appearance, your visibility and, to a large degree, your influence. But there’s a key distinction with leadership: You can’t fake it. Leadership is not a game of “pretend.”
- By Scott Eblin
- September 13, 2010
One of the common things that keeps managers from becoming leaders is spending too much time and attention protecting their turf. Over time, their attention gets internally focused on protecting and keeping order in their own little world ... Are most managers more concerned with their toes getting stepped on or growing bigger feet?
Research conducted decades ago still offers insights into how leaders operate. Kurt Lewin’s 1939 study of leadership styles led the researchers to establish three basic types: 1. Authoritarian. 2. Participative or Democratic. 3. Delegative or Laissez Faire.
People often describe leaders as having a sense of urgency. Author John Kotter, in A Sense of Urgency, says there are two kinds, one good and one bad:
Robert Bruner, dean of the University of Virginia’s business school, offers these answers on what it takes for leaders to draw followers: moral authority, a credible plan—and the loudest megaphone.
