Leadership in Nonprofit World Paper

User Generated


Business Finance


submit a paper of not less than five pages, double spaced, profiling someone you view as a leader, explaining why you think so. ( It could be a superhero, your mother, a friend, a famous person dead or alive) You must reference the readings linked below in building your arguments. You must rely on more than one source in explaining the individual's leadership profile.


Jonathan Sacks,7 Principles of Leadership in the Torah.pdf

The Covenantal Leader.pdf


What is Leadership (1)-1.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

HBR FROM THE HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW OnPoint A R T I C L E Don’t take a one-size-fitsall approach to leadership. Choose the style that maximizes your effective- Leadership That Gets Results by Daniel Goleman ness in a given situation. New sections to guide you through the article: • The Idea in Brief • The Idea at Work • Exploring Further. . . PRODUCT NUMBER 4487 T H E I D E A I N B R I E F M a n y managers mistakenly assume that leadership style is a function of personality rather than strategic choice. Instead of choosing the one style that suits their temperament, they should ask which style best addresses the demands of a particular situation. Research has shown that the most successful leaders have strengths in the following emo- T H E I D E A AT Leadership That Gets Results tional intelligence competencies: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. There are six basic styles of leadership; each makes use of the key components of emotional intelligence in different combinations. The best leaders don’t know just one style of leadership—they’re skilled at several, and have the flexibility to switch between styles as the circumstances dictate. W O R K M a nage r s often fail to appreciate how profoundly the organizational climate can influence financial results. It can account for nearly a third of financial performance. Organizational climate, in turn, is influenced by leadership style—by the way that managers motivate direct reports, gather and use information, make decisions, manage change initiatives, and handle crises. There are six basic leadership styles. Each derives from different emotional intelligence competencies, works best in particular situations, and affects the organizational climate in different ways. 1. The coercive style. This “Do what I say” approach can be very effective in a turnaround situation, a natural disaster, or when working with problem employees. But in most situations, coercive leadership inhibits the organization’s flexibility and dampens employees’ motivation. 2. The authoritative style. An authoritative leader takes a “Come with me” approach: she states the overall goal but gives people the freedom to choose their own means of achieving it. This style works especially well when a business is adrift. It is less effective when the leader is working with a team of experts who are more experienced than he is. 3. The affiliative style. The hallmark of the affiliative leader is a “People come first” attitude. This style is particularly useful for building team harmony or increasing morale. But its exclusive focus on praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected. Also, affiliative leaders rarely offer advice, which often leaves employees in a quandary. 4. The democratic style. This style’s impact on organizational climate is not as high as you might imagine. By giving workers a voice in decisions, democratic leaders build organizational flexibility and responsibility and help generate fresh ideas. But sometimes the price is endless meetings and confused employees who feel leaderless. 5. The pacesetting style. A leader who sets high performance standards and exemplifies them himself has a very positive impact on employees who are self-motivated and highly competent. But other employees tend to feel overwhelmed by such a leader’s demands for excellence—and to resent his tendency to take over a situation. 6. The coaching style. This style focuses more on personal development than on immediate work-related tasks. It works well when employees are already aware of their weaknesses and want to improve, but not when they are resistant to changing their ways. The more styles a leader has mastered, the better. In particular, being able to switch among the authoritative, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles as conditions dictate creates the best organizational climate and optimizes business performance. HBR OnPoint © 2000 by Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved. New research suggests that the most effective executives use a collection of distinct leadership styles – each in the right measure, at just the right time. Such flexibility is tough to put into action, but it pays off in performance. And better yet, it can be learned. L EADERSHIP THAT GETS ESULTS A R sk any group of businesspeople the question “What do effective leaders do?” and you’ll hear a sweep of answers. Leaders set strategy; they motivate; they create a mission; they build a culture. Then ask “What should leaders do?” If the group is seasoned, you’ll likely hear one response: the leader’s singular job is to get results. But how? The mystery of what leaders can and ought to do in order to spark the best performance from their people is age-old. In recent years, that mystery has spawned an entire cottage industry: literally thousands of “leadership experts” have made careers of testing and coaching executives, all in pursuit of creating businesspeople who can turn bold objectives – be they strategic, financial, organizational, or all three – into reality. Still, effective leadership eludes many people and organizations. One reason is that until recently, virtually no quantitative research has demonstrated which precise leadership behaviors yield positive results. Leadership experts proffer advice based on inference, experience, and instinct. Sometimes that advice is right on target; sometimes it’s not. But new research by the consulting firm Hay/ McBer, which draws on a random sample of 3,871 executives selected from a database of more than 20,000 executives worldwide, takes much of the mystery out of effective leadership. The research found six distinct leadership styles, each springing from different components of emotional intelligence. The styles, taken individually, appear to have a direct and unique impact on the working atmosphere of a company, division, or team, and in turn, on its financial performance. And perhaps most important, the research indicates that leaders with the best results do not rely on only one leadership style; they use most of them in a given week –seamlessly and in different measure – depending on the Copyright © 2000 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. harvard business review March–April 2000 ART WORK BY C. F. PAYNE by Daniel Goleman Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s Emotional Intelligence: A Primer Emotional intelligence – the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively – consists of four fundamental capabilities: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and social skill. Each capability, in turn, is composed of specific sets of competencies. Below is a list of the capabilities and their corresponding traits. Self-Awareness " Emotional self-awareness: the ability to read and understand your emotions as well as recognize their impact on work performance, relationships, and the like. " " " " Accurate self-assessment: a realistic evaluation of your strengths and limitations. " Self-Management " Trustworthiness: a consistent display of honesty and integrity. Conscientiousness: the abili- " " Adaptability: skill at adjust- Achievement orientation: the drive to meet an internal standard of excellence. " Empathy: skill at sensing " Service orientation: the ability to recognize and meet customers’ needs. Initiative: a readiness to seize opportunities. business situation. Imagine the styles, then, as the array of clubs in a golf pro’s bag. Over the course of a game, the pro picks and chooses clubs based on the demands of the shot. Sometimes he has to ponder his selection, but usually it is automatic. The pro senses the challenge ahead, swiftly pulls out the right tool, and elegantly puts it to work. That’s how high-impact leaders operate, too. What are the six styles of leadership? None will shock workplace veterans. Indeed, each style, by name and brief description alone, will likely resonate with anyone who leads, is led, or as is the case with most of us, does both. Coercive leaders demand immediate compliance. Authoritative leaders mobilize people toward a vision. Affiliative leaders create emotional bonds and harmony. Democratic leaders build consensus through participation. Pacesetting leaders expect excellence and self-direction. And coaching leaders develop people for the future. Close your eyes and you can surely imagine a colleague who uses any one of these styles. You most likely use at least one yourself. What is new in this research, then, is its implications for action. First, it offers a fine-grained understanding of how different leadership styles affect performance and results. Second, it offers clear guidance on when a manager 80 " Visionary leadership: the ability to take charge " Influence: the ability to wield a range of and inspire with a compelling vision. persuasive tactics. " Developing others: the propensity to bolster the abilities of others through feedback and guidance. " Communication: skill at listening and at sending clear, convincing, and well-tuned messages. " Change catalyst: proficiency in initiating new " Conflict management: the ability to de-escalate Organizational awareness: the ability to read the currents of organizational life, build decision networks, and navigate politics. ing to changing situations and overcoming obstacles. " Social Skill other people’s emotions, understanding their perspective, and taking an active interest in their concerns. ty to manage yourself and your responsibilities. Self-confidence: a strong and positive sense of self-worth. Self-control: the ability to keep disruptive emotions and impulses under control. Social Awareness ideas and leading people in a new direction. disagreements and orchestrate resolutions. " Building bonds: proficiency at cultivating and maintaining a web of relationships. " Teamwork and collaboration: competence at promoting cooperation and building teams. should switch between them. It also strongly suggests that switching flexibly is well advised. New, too, is the research’s finding that each leadership style springs from different components of emotional intelligence. Measuring Leadership’s Impact It has been more than a decade since research first linked aspects of emotional intelligence to business results. The late David McClelland, a noted Harvard University psychologist, found that leaders with strengths in a critical mass of six or more emotional intelligence competencies were far more effective than peers who lacked such strengths. For Daniel Goleman is the author of Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1995) and Working with Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1998). He is cochairman of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, which is based at Rutgers University’s Graduate School of Applied Psychology in Piscataway, New Jersey. His article “What Makes a Leader?” appeared in the November–December 1998 issue of HBR. He can be reached at goleman@javanet.com. harvard business review March–April 2000 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s instance, when he analyzed the performance of division heads at a global food and beverage company, he found that among leaders with this critical mass of competence, 87% placed in the top third for annual salary bonuses based on their business performance. More telling, their divisions on average outperformed yearly revenue targets by 15% to 20%. Those executives who lacked emotional intelligence were rarely rated as outstanding in their annual performance reviews, and their divisions underperformed by an average of almost 20%. Our research set out to gain a more molecular view of the links among leadership and emotional intelligence, and climate and performance. A team of McClelland’s colleagues headed by Mary Fontaine and Ruth Jacobs from Hay/McBer studied data about or observed thousands of executives, noting specific behaviors and their impact on climate.1 How did each individual motivate direct reports? Manage change initiatives? Handle crises? It was in a later phase of the research that we identified which emotional intelligence capabilities drive the six leadership styles. How does he rate in terms of self-control and social skill? Does a leader show high or low levels of empathy? The team tested each executive’s immediate sphere of influence for its climate. “Climate” is not an amorphous term. First defined by psychologists George Litwin and Richard Stringer and later refined by McClelland and his colleagues, it refers to six key factors that influence an organization’s working environment: its flexibility – that is, how free employees feel to innovate unencumbered by red tape; their sense of responsibility to the organization; the level of standards that people set; the sense of accuracy about performance feedback and aptness of rewards; the clarity people have about mission and values; and finally, the level of commitment to a common purpose. We found that all six leadership styles have a measurable effect on each aspect of climate. (For details, see the exhibit “Getting Molecular: The Impact of Leadership Styles on Drivers of Climate.”) Further, when we looked at the impact Getting Molecular: The Impact of Leadership of climate on financial results – such as return on sales, Styles on Drivers of Climate revenue growth, efficiency, Our research investigated how each leadership strongly positive– and a .21 correlation with and profitability – we found a style affected the six drivers of climate, or workresponsibility– positive, but not as strong. In direct correlation between the ing atmosphere. The figures below show the other words, the style’s correlation with rewards two. Leaders who used styles correlation between each leadership style and was more than twice that with responsibility. that positively affected the each aspect of climate. So, for instance, if we According to the data, the authoritative climate had decidedly better look at the climate driver of flexibility, we see leadership style has the most positive effect financial results than those that the coercive style has a -.28 correlation on climate, but three others – affiliative, who did not. That is not to say while the democratic style has a .28 correlation, democratic, and coaching – follow close that organizational climate equally strong in the opposite direction. Focusing behind. That said, the research indicates that is the only driver of perforon the authoritative leadership style, we find no style should be relied on exclusively, and mance. Economic conditions that it has a .54 correlation with rewards– all have at least short-term uses. Coercive Authoritative Affiliative Democratic Pacesetting Coaching Flexibility -. 28 . 32 . 27 . 28 -. 07 . 17 Responsibility -. 37 . 21 . 16 . 23 . 04 . 08 Standards . 02 . 38 . 31 . 22 -. 27 . 39 Rewards -. 18 . 54 . 48 . 42 -. 29 . 43 Clarity -. 11 . 44 . 37 . 35 -. 28 . 38 Commitment -. 13 . 35 . 34 . 26 -. 20 . 27 Overall impact on climate -. 26 .54 .46 .43 -. 25 .42 harvard business review March–April 2000 81 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s The Six Leadership Styles at a Glance Our research found that leaders use six styles, each springing from different components of emotional intelligence.Here is a summary of the styles, their origin, when they work best, and their impact on an organization’s climate and thus its performance. 12 Coercive Authoritative The leader’s modus operandi Demands immediate compliance Mobilizes people toward a vision The style in a phrase “Do what I tell you.” “Come with me.” Drive to achieve, initiative, self-control Self-confidence, empathy, change catalyst In a crisis, to kick start a turnaround, or with problem employees When changes require a new vision, or when a clear direction is needed Negative Most strongly positive Underlying emotional intelligence competencies When the style works best Overall impact on climate and competitive dynamics matter enormously. But our analysis strongly suggests that climate accounts for nearly a third of results. And that’s simply too much of an impact to ignore. The Styles in Detail Executives use six leadership styles, but only four of the six consistently have a positive effect on climate and results. Let’s look then at each style of leadership in detail. (For a summary of the material that follows, see the chart “The Six Leadership Styles at a Glance.”) The Coercive Style. The computer company was in crisis mode – its sales and profits were falling, its stock was losing value precipitously, and its shareholders were in an uproar. The board brought in a new CEO with a reputation as a turnaround artist. He set to work chopping jobs, selling off divisions, and making the tough decisions that should have been executed years before. The company was saved, at least in the short-term. From the start, though, the CEO created a reign of terror, bullying and demeaning his executives, roaring his displeasure at the slightest misstep. The company’s top echelons were decimated not just by his erratic firings but also by defections. The CEO’s direct reports, frightened by his tendency to blame the bearer of bad news, stopped bringing him any news at all. Morale was at an all-time low –a fact reflected in another downturn in the business after the short-term recovery. The CEO was eventually fired by the board of directors. It’s easy to understand why of all the leadership styles, the coercive one is the least effective in most 82 situations. Consider what the style does to an organization’s climate. Flexibility is the hardest hit. The leader’s extreme top-down decision making kills new ideas on the vine. People feel so disrespected that they think, “I won’t even bring my ideas up – they’ll only be shot down.” Likewise, people’s sense of responsibility evaporates: unable to act on their own initiative, they lose their sense of ownership and feel little accountability for their performance. Some become so resentful they adopt the attitude, “I’m not going to help this bastard.” Coercive leadership also has a damaging effect on the rewards system. Most high-performing workers are motivated by more than money – they seek the satisfaction of work well done. The coercive style erodes such pride. And finally, the style undermines one of the leader’s prime tools – motivating people by showing them how their job fits into a grand, shared mission. Such a loss, measured in terms of diminished clarity and commitment, leaves people alienated from their own jobs, wondering, “How does any of this matter?” Given the impact of the coercive style, you might assume it should never be applied. Our research, however, uncovered a few occasions when it worked masterfully. Take the case of a division president who was brought in to change the direction of a food company that was losing money. His first act was to have the executive conference room demolished. To him, the room – with its long marble table that looked like “the deck of the Starship Enterprise” – symbolized the tradition-bound formality that was paralyzing the company. The destruction of the room, and the subsequent move to a smaller, more informal setting, sent a message no one could harvard business review March–April 2000 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s 3 456 Affiliative Democratic Pacesetting Coaching Creates harmony and builds emotional bonds Forges consensus through participation Sets high standards for performance Develops people for the future “People come first.” “What do you think?” “Do as I do, now.” “Try this.” Empathy, building relationships, communication Collaboration, team leadership, communication Conscientiousness, drive to achieve, initiative Developing others, empathy, self-awareness To heal rifts in a team or to motivate people during stressful circumstances To build buy-in or consensus, or to get input from valuable employees To get quick results from a highly motivated and competent team To help an employee improve performance or develop long-term strengths Positive Positive Negative Positive miss, and the division’s culture changed quickly in its wake. That said, the coercive style should be used only with extreme caution and in the few situations when it is absolutely imperative, such as during a turnaround or when a hostile takeover is looming. In those cases, the coercive style can break failed business habits and shock people into new ways of working. It is always appropriate during a genuine emergency, like in the aftermath of an earthquake or a fire. And it can work with problem employees with whom all else has failed. But if a leader relies solely on this style or continues to use it once the emergency passes, the long-term impact of his insensitivity to the morale and feelings of those he leads will be ruinous. The Authoritative Style. Tom was the vice president of marketing at a floundering national restaurant chain that specialized in pizza. Needless to say, the company’s poor performance troubled the senior managers, but they were at a loss for what to do. Every Monday, they met to review recent sales, struggling to come up with fixes. To Tom, the approach didn’t make sense. “We were always trying to figure out why our sales were down last week. We had the whole company looking backward instead of figuring out what we had to do tomorrow.” Tom saw an opportunity to change people’s way of thinking at an off-site strategy meeting. There, the conversation began with stale truisms: the company had to drive up shareholder wealth and increase return on assets. Tom believed those concepts didn’t have the power to inspire a restaurant manager to be innovative or to do better than a goodenough job. harvard business review March–April 2000 So Tom made a bold move. In the middle of a meeting, he made an impassioned plea for his colleagues to think from the customer’s perspective. Customers want convenience, he said. The company was not in the restaurant business, it was in the business of distributing high-quality, convenient-to-get pizza. That notion – and nothing else – should drive everything the company did. With his vibrant enthusiasm and clear vision – the hallmarks of the authoritative style – Tom filled a leadership vacuum at the company. Indeed, his concept became the core of the new mission statement. But this conceptual breakthrough was just the beginning. Tom made sure that the mission statement was built into the company’s strategic planning process as the designated driver of growth. And he ensured that the vision was articulated so that local restaurant managers understood they were the key to the company’s success and were free to find new ways to distribute pizza. Changes came quickly. Within weeks, many local managers started guaranteeing fast, new delivery times. Even better, they started to act like entrepreneurs, finding ingenious locations to open new branches: kiosks on busy street corners and in bus and train stations, even from carts in airports and hotel lobbies. Tom’s success was no fluke. Our research indicates that of the six leadership styles, the authoritative one is most effective, driving up every aspect of climate. Take clarity. The authoritative leader is a visionary; he motivates people by making clear to them how their work fits into a larger vision for the organization. People who work for such leaders understand that what they do matters and why. 83 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s Authoritative leadership also maximizes commitment to the organization’s goals and strategy. By framing the individual tasks within a grand vision, the authoritative leader defines standards that revolve around that vision. When he gives performance feedback – whether positive or negative – the singular criterion is whether or not that performance furthers the vision. The standards for success are clear to all, as are the rewards. Finally, consider the style’s impact on flexibility. An authoritative leader states the end but generally gives people plenty of leeway to devise their own means. Authoritative leaders give people the freedom to innovate, experiment, and take calculated risks. Because of its positive impact, the authoritative style works well in almost any business situation. But it is particularly effective when a business is adrift. An authoritative leader charts a new course and sells his people on a fresh long-term vision. The authoritative style, powerful though it may be, will not work in every situation. The approach fails, for instance, when a leader is working with a team of experts or peers who are more experienced than he is; they may see the leader as pompous or out-of-touch. Another limitation: if a manager trying to be authoritative becomes overbearing, he can undermine the egalitarian spirit of an effective team. Yet even with such caveats, leaders would be wise to grab for the authoritative “club” more often than not. It may not guarantee a hole in one, but it certainly helps with the long drive. The Affiliative Style. If the coercive leader demands, “Do what I say,” and the authoritative urges, “Come with me,” the affiliative leader says, “People come first.” This leadership style revolves around people – its proponents value individuals and their A n authoritative leader states the end but gives people plenty of leeway to devise their own means. emotions more than tasks and goals. The affiliative leader strives to keep employees happy and to create harmony among them. He manages by building strong emotional bonds and then reaping the benefits of such an approach, namely fierce loyalty. The style also has a markedly positive effect on communication. People who like one another a lot talk a lot. They share ideas; they share inspiration. And the 84 style drives up flexibility; friends trust one another, allowing habitual innovation and risk taking. Flexibility also rises because the affiliative leader, like a parent who adjusts household rules for a maturing adolescent, doesn’t impose unnecessary strictures on how employees get their work done. They give people the freedom to do their job in the way they think is most effective. As for a sense of recognition and reward for work well done, the affiliative leader offers ample positive feedback. Such feedback has special potency in the workplace because it is all too rare: outside of an annual review, most people usually get no feedback on their day-to-day efforts – or only negative feedback. That makes the affiliative leader’s positive words all the more motivating. Finally, affiliative leaders are masters at building a sense of belonging. They are, for instance, likely to take their direct reports out for a meal or a drink, one-onone, to see how they’re doing. They will bring in a cake to celebrate a group accomplishment. They are natural relationship builders. Joe Torre, the heart and soul of the New York Yankees, is a classic affiliative leader. During the 1999 World Series, Torre tended ably to the psyches of his players as they endured the emotional pressure cooker of a pennant race. All season long, he made a special point to praise Scott Brosius, whose father had died during the season, for staying committed even as he mourned. At the celebration party after the team’s final game, Torre specifically sought out right fielder Paul O’Neill. Although he had received the news of his father’s death that morning, O’Neill chose to play in the decisive game – and he burst into tears the moment it ended. Torre made a point of acknowledging O’Neill’s personal struggle, calling him a “warrior.” Torre also used the spotlight of the victory celebration to praise two players whose return the following year was threatened by contract disputes. In doing so, he sent a clear message to the team and to the club’s owner that he valued the players immensely – too much to lose them. Along with ministering to the emotions of his people, an affiliative leader may also tend to his own emotions openly. The year Torre’s brother was near death awaiting a heart transplant, he shared his worries with his players. He also spoke candidly with the team about his treatment for prostate cancer. The affiliative style’s generally positive impact makes it a good all-weather approach, but leaders should employ it particularly when trying to build team harmony, increase morale, improve communication, or repair broken trust. For instance, one executive in our study was hired to replace a ruthharvard business review March–April 2000 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s less team leader. The former leader had taken credit for his employees’ work and had attempted to pit them against one another. His efforts ultimately failed, but the team he left behind was suspicious and weary. The new executive managed to mend the situation by unstintingly showing emotional honesty and rebuilding ties. Several months in, her leadership had created a renewed sense of commitment and energy. Despite its benefits, the affiliative style should not be used alone. Its exclusive focus on praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected; employees may perceive that mediocrity is tolerated. And because affiliative leaders rarely offer constructive advice on how to improve, employees must figure out how to do so on their own. When people need clear directives to navigate through complex challenges, the affiliative style leaves them rudderless. Indeed, if overly relied on, this style can actually steer a group to failure. Perhaps that is why many affiliative leaders, including Torre, use this style in close conjunction with the authoritative style. Authoritative leaders state a vision, set standards, and let people know how their work is furthering the group’s goals. Alternate that with the caring, nurturing approach of the affiliative leader, and you have a potent combination. The Democratic Style. Sister Mary ran a Catholic school system in a large metropolitan area. One of the schools – the only private school in an impoverished neighborhood – had been losing money for years, and the archdiocese could no longer afford to keep it open. When Sister Mary eventually got the order to shut it down, she didn’t just lock the doors. She called a meeting of all the teachers and staff at the school and explained to them the details of the financial crisis – the first time anyone working at the school had been included in the business side of the institution. She asked for their ideas on ways to keep the school open and on how to handle the closing, should it come to that. Sister Mary spent much of her time at the meeting just listening. She did the same at later meetings for school parents and for the community and during a successive series of meetings for the school’s teachers and staff. After two months of meetings, the consensus was clear: the school would have to close. A plan was made to transfer students to other schools in the Catholic system. The final outcome was no different than if Sister Mary had gone ahead and closed the school the day she was told to. But by allowing the school’s constituents to reach that decision collectively, Sister Mary received none of the backlash that would have accompanied such a move. People mourned harvard business review March–April 2000 the loss of the school, but they understood its inevitability. Virtually no one objected. Compare that with the experiences of a priest in our research who headed another Catholic school. He, too, was told to shut it down. And he did – by fiat. The result was disastrous: parents filed lawsuits, teachers and parents picketed, and local newspapers ran editorials attacking his decision. It took a year to resolve the disputes before he could finally go ahead and close the school. Sister Mary exemplifies the democratic style in action – and its benefits. By spending time getting people’s ideas and buy-in, a leader builds trust, respect, and commitment. By letting workers themselves have a say in decisions that affect their goals and how they do their work, the democratic leader drives up flexibility and responsibility. And by listening to employees’ concerns, the democratic leader learns what to do to keep morale high. Finally, because they have a say in setting their goals and the standards for evaluating success, people operating in a democratic system tend to be very realistic about what can and cannot be accomplished. However, the democratic style has its drawbacks, which is why its impact on climate is not as high as some of the other styles. One of its more exasperating consequences can be endless meetings where ideas are mulled over, consensus remains elusive, and the only visible result is scheduling more meetings. Some democratic leaders use the style to put off making crucial decisions, hoping that enough thrashing things out will eventually yield a blinding insight. In reality, their people end up feeling confused and leaderless. Such an approach can even escalate conflicts. When does the style work best? This approach is ideal when a leader is himself uncertain about the best direction to take and needs ideas and guidance from able employees. And even if a leader has a strong vision, the democratic style works well to generate fresh ideas for executing that vision. The democratic style, of course, makes much less sense when employees are not competent or informed enough to offer sound advice. And it almost goes without saying that building consensus is wrongheaded in times of crisis. Take the case of a CEO whose computer company was severely threatened by changes in the market. He always sought consensus about what to do. As competitors stole customers and customers’ needs changed, he kept appointing committees to consider the situation. When the market made a sudden shift because of a new technology, the CEO froze in his tracks. The board replaced him before he could appoint yet another task force to consider the situation. The 85 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s new CEO, while occasionally democratic and affiliative, relied heavily on the authoritative style, especially in his first months. The Pacesetting Style. Like the coercive style, the pacesetting style has its place in the leader’s repertory, but it should be used sparingly. That’s not what we expected to find. After all, the hallmarks of the pacesetting style sound admirable. The leader sets extremely high performance standards and exemplifies them himself. He is obsessive about doing things better and faster, and he asks the same of everyone around him. He quickly pinpoints poor performers and demands more from them. If they don’t rise to the occasion, he replaces them with people who can. You would think such an approach would improve results, but it doesn’t. In fact, the pacesetting style destroys climate. Many employees feel overwhelmed by the pacesetter’s demands for excellence, and their morale drops. Guidelines for working may be clear in the leader’s head, but she does not state them clearly; she expects people to know what to do and even thinks, “If I have to tell you, you’re the wrong person for the job.” Work becomes not a matter of doing one’s best along a clear course so much as second-guessing what the leader wants. At the same time, people often feel that the pacesetter doesn’t trust them to work in their own way or to take initiative. Flexibility and responsibility evaporate; work becomes so task focused and routinized it’s boring. As for rewards, the pacesetter either gives no feedback on how people are doing or jumps in to take over when he thinks they’re lagging. And if the leader should leave, people feel directionless – they’re so used to “the expert” setting the rules. Finally, commitment dwindles under the regime of a pacesetting leader because people have no sense of how their personal efforts fit into the big picture. For an example of the pacesetting style, take the case of Sam, a biochemist in R&D at a large pharmaceutical company. Sam’s superb technical expertise made him an early star: he was the one everyone turned to when they needed help. Soon he was promoted to head of a team developing a new product. The other scientists on the team were as competent and self-motivated as Sam; his métier as team leader became offering himself as a model of how to do first-class scientific work under tremendous deadline pressure, pitching in when needed. His team completed its task in record time. But then came a new assignment: Sam was put in charge of R&D for his entire division. As his tasks expanded and he had to articulate a vision, coordinate projects, delegate responsibility, and help develop others, Sam began to slip. Not trusting that 86 his subordinates were as capable as he was, he became a micromanager, obsessed with details and taking over for others when their performance slackened. Instead of trusting them to improve with guidance and development, Sam found himself working nights and weekends after stepping in to take over for the head of a floundering research team. Finally, his own boss suggested, to his relief, that he return to his old job as head of a product development team. Although Sam faltered, the pacesetting style isn’t always a disaster. The approach works well when all employees are self-motivated, highly competent, and need little direction or coordination – for example, it can work for leaders of highly skilled and selfmotivated professionals, like R&D groups or legal teams. And, given a talented team to lead, pacesetting does exactly that: gets work done on time or even ahead of schedule. Yet like any leadership style, pacesetting should never be used by itself. The Coaching Style. A product unit at a global computer company had seen sales plummet from twice as much as its competitors to only half as much. So Lawrence, the president of the manufacturing division, decided to close the unit and reassign its people and products. Upon hearing the news, James, the head of the doomed unit, decided to go over his boss’s head and plead his case to the CEO. What did Lawrence do? Instead of blowing up at James, he sat down with his rebellious direct report and talked over not just the decision to close the division but also James’s future. He explained to James how moving to another division would help him develop new skills. It would make him a better leader and teach him more about the company’s business. Lawrence acted more like a counselor than a traditional boss. He listened to James’s concerns and hopes, and he shared his own. He said he believed James had grown stale in his current job; it was, after all, the only place he’d worked in the company. He predicted that James would blossom in a new role. The conversation then took a practical turn. James had not yet had his meeting with the CEO – the one he had impetuously demanded when he heard of his division’s closing. Knowing this – and also knowing that the CEO unwaveringly supported the closing – Lawrence took the time to coach James on how to present his case in that meeting. “You don’t get an audience with the CEO very often,” he noted, “let’s make sure you impress him with your thoughtfulness.” He advised James not to plead his personal case but to focus on the business unit: “If he thinks you’re in there for your own glory, he’ll throw you out faster than you walked through the harvard business review March–April 2000 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s door.” And he urged him to put his ideas in writing; the CEO always appreciated that. Lawrence’s reason for coaching instead of scolding? “James is a good guy, very talented and promising,” the executive explained to us, “and I don’t want this to derail his career. I want him to stay with the company, I want him to work out, I want him to learn, I want him to benefit and grow. Just because he screwed up doesn’t mean he’s terrible.” Lawrence’s actions illustrate the coaching style par excellence. Coaching leaders help employees identify their unique strengths and weaknesses and tie them to their personal and career aspirations. They encourage employees to establish long-term development goals and help them conceptualize a plan for attaining them. They make agreements with their employees about their role and responsibilities in enacting development plans, and they give plentiful instruction and feedback. Coaching leaders excel at delegating; they give employees challenging assignments, even if that means the tasks won’t be accomplished quickly. In other words, these leaders are willing to put up with short-term failure if it furthers long-term learning. Of the six styles, our research found that the coaching style is used least often. Many leaders told us they don’t have the time in this high-pressure economy for the slow and tedious work of teaching people and helping them grow. But after a first session, it takes little or no extra time. Leaders who ignore this style are passing up a powerful tool: its impact on climate and performance are markedly positive. Admittedly, there is a paradox in coaching’s positive effect on business performance because coaching focuses primarily on personal development, not on immediate work-related tasks. Even so, coaching improves results. The reason: it requires constant dialogue, and that dialogue has a way of pushing up every driver of climate. Take flexibility. When an employee knows his boss watches him and cares about what he does, he feels free to experiment. After all, he’s sure to get quick and constructive feedback. Similarly, the ongoing dialogue of coaching guarantees that people know what is expected of them and how their work fits into a larger vision or strategy. That affects responsibility and clarity. As for commitment, coaching helps there, too, because the style’s implicit message is, “I believe in you, I’m investing in you, and I expect your best efforts.” Employees very often rise to that challenge with their heart, mind, and soul. The coaching style works well in many business situations, but it is perhaps most effective when people on the receiving end are “up for it.” For inharvard business review March–April 2000 stance, the coaching style works particularly well when employees are already aware of their weaknesses and would like to improve their performance. Similarly, the style works well when employees realize how cultivating new abilities can help them advance. In short, it works best with employees who want to be coached. L eaders who have mastered four or more – especially the authoritative, democratic, affiliative, and coaching styles –have the best climate and business performance. By contrast, the coaching style makes little sense when employees, for whatever reason, are resistant to learning or changing their ways. And it flops if the leader lacks the expertise to help the employee along. The fact is, many managers are unfamiliar with or simply inept at coaching, particularly when it comes to giving ongoing performance feedback that motivates rather than creates fear or apathy. Some companies have realized the positive impact of the style and are trying to make it a core competence. At some companies, a significant portion of annual bonuses are tied to an executive’s development of his or her direct reports. But many organizations have yet to take full advantage of this leadership style. Although the coaching style may not scream “bottom-line results,” it delivers them. Leaders Need Many Styles Many studies, including this one, have shown that the more styles a leader exhibits, the better. Leaders who have mastered four or more – especially the authoritative, democratic, affiliative, and coaching styles – have the very best climate and business performance. And the most effective leaders switch flexibly among the leadership styles as needed. Although that may sound daunting, we witnessed it more often than you might guess, at both large corporations and tiny start-ups, by seasoned veterans who could explain exactly how and why they lead and by entrepreneurs who claim to lead by gut alone. Such leaders don’t mechanically match their style to fit a checklist of situations – they are far more fluid. They are exquisitely sensitive to the impact they are having on others and seamlessly adjust their style to get the best results. These are leaders, for example, who can read in the first minutes of conversation that a talented but underper87 Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s forming employee has been demoralized by an unsympathetic, do-it-the-way-I-tell-you manager and needs to be inspired through a reminder of why her work matters. Or that leader might choose to reenergize the employee by asking her about her dreams and aspirations and finding ways to make her job more challenging. Or that initial conversation might signal that the employee needs an ultimatum: improve or leave. For an example of fluid leadership in action, consider Joan, the general manager of a major division at a global food and beverage company. Joan was appointed to her job while the division was in a deep crisis. It had not made its profit targets for six years; in the most recent year, it had missed by $50 million. Morale among the top management team was miserable; mistrust and resentments were rampant. Joan’s directive from above was clear: turn the division around. Joan did so with a nimbleness in switching among leadership styles that is rare. From the start, she realized she had a short window to demonstrate effective leadership and to establish rapport and trust. She also knew that she urgently needed to be informed about what was not working, so her first task was to listen to key people. Her first week on the job she had lunch and dinner meetings with each member of the management team. Joan sought to get each person’s understanding of the current situation. But her focus was not so much on learning how each person diagnosed the problem as on getting to know each manager as a person. Here Joan employed the affiliative style: she explored their lives, dreams, and aspirations. She also stepped into the coaching role, looking for ways she could help the team members achieve what they wanted in their careers. For instance, one manager who had been getting feedback that he was a poor team player confided his worries to her. He thought he was a good team member, but he was plagued by persistent complaints. Recognizing that he was a talented executive and a valuable asset to the company, Joan made an agreement with him to point out (in private) when his actions undermined his goal of being seen as a team player. She followed the one-on-one conversations with a three-day off-site meeting. Her goal here was team building, so that everyone would own whatever solution for the business problems emerged. Her initial stance at the off-site meeting was that of a democratic leader. She encouraged everyone to express freely their frustrations and complaints. Growing Your Emotional Intelligence Unlike IQ, which is largely genetic – it changes little from childhood – the skills of emotional intelligence can be learned at any age. It’s not easy, however. Growing your emotional intelligence takes practice and commitment. But the payoffs are well worth the investment. Consider the case of a marketing director for a division of a global food company. Jack, as I’ll call him, was a classic pacesetter: highenergy, always striving to find better ways to get things done, and too eager to step in and take over when, say, someone seemed about to miss a deadline. Worse, Jack was prone to pounce on anyone who didn’t seem to meet his standards, flying off the handle if a person merely deviated from completing a job in the order Jack thought best. Jack’s leadership style had a predictably disastrous impact on climate and business results. After two years of stagnant performance, Jack’s boss suggested he seek out a coach. Jack wasn’t pleased but, realizing his own job was on the line, he complied. The coach, an expert in teaching people how to increase their emotional intelligence, began with a 360-degree evaluation of Jack. A diagnosis from multiple viewpoints is essential in improving emotional intelligence because those who need the most help usually have blind spots. In fact, our research found that top-performing leaders overestimate their strengths on, at most, one emotional intelligence ability, whereas poor performers overrate themselves on four or more. Jack was not that far off, but he did rate himself more glowingly than his direct reports, who gave him especially low grades on emotional self-control and empathy. Initially, Jack had some trouble accepting the feedback data. But when his coach showed him how those weaknesses were tied to his inability to display leadership styles dependent on those competencies – especially the authoritative, affiliative, and coaching styles – Jack realized he had to improve if he wanted to advance in the company. Making such a connection is essential. The reason: improving emotional intelligence isn’t done in a weekend or during a seminar – it takes diligent practice on the job, over several months. If people do not see the value of the change, they will not make that effort. Once Jack zeroed in on areas for improvement and committed himself to making the effort, he and his coach worked up a plan to turn his Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s The next day, Joan had the group focus on solutions: each person made three specific proposals about what needed to be done. As Joan clustered the suggestions, a natural consensus emerged about priorities for the business, such as cutting costs. As the group came up with specific action plans, Joan got the commitment and buy-in she sought. With that vision in place, Joan shifted into the authoritative style, assigning accountability for each follow-up step to specific executives and holding them responsible for their accomplishment. For example, the division had been dropping prices on products without increasing its volume. One obvious solution was to raise prices, but the previous VP of sales had dithered and had let the problem fester. The new VP of sales now had responsibility to adjust the price points to fix the problem. Over the following months, Joan’s main stance was authoritative. She continually articulated the group’s new vision in a way that reminded each member of how his or her role was crucial to achieving these goals. And, especially during the first few weeks of the plan’s implementation, Joan felt that the urgency of the business crisis justified an occasional shift into the coercive style should someone fail to meet his or her responsibility. As she put it, day-to-day job into a learning laboratory. For instance, Jack discovered he was empathetic when things were calm, but in a crisis, he tuned out others. This tendency hampered his ability to listen to what people were telling him in the very moments he most needed to do so. Jack’s plan required him to focus on his behavior during tough situations. As soon as he felt himself tensing up, his job was to immediately step back, let the other person speak, and then ask clarifying questions. The point was to not act judgmental or hostile under pressure. The change didn’t come easily, but with practice Jack learned to defuse his flare-ups by entering into a dialogue instead of launching a harangue. Although he didn’t always agree with them, at least he gave people a chance to make their case. At the same time, Jack also practiced giving his direct reports more positive feedback and reminding them of how their work “I had to be brutal about this follow-up and make sure this stuff happened. It was going to take discipline and focus.” The results? Every aspect of climate improved. People were innovating. They were talking about the division’s vision and crowing about their commitment to new, clear goals. The ultimate proof of Joan’s fluid leadership style is written in black ink: after only seven months, her division exceeded its yearly profit target by $5 million. Expanding Your Repertory Few leaders, of course, have all six styles in their repertory, and even fewer know when and how to use them. In fact, as we have brought the findings of our research into many organizations, the most common responses have been, “But I have only two of those!” and, “I can’t use all those styles. It wouldn’t be natural.” Such feelings are understandable, and in some cases, the antidote is relatively simple. The leader can build a team with members who employ styles she lacks. Take the case of a VP for manufacturing. She successfully ran a global factory system largely by using the affiliative style. She contributed to the group’s mission. And he restrained himself from micromanaging them. Jack met with his coach every week or two to review his progress and get advice on specific problems. For instance, occasionally Jack would find himself falling back on his old pacesetting tactics – cutting people off, jumping in to take over, and blowing up in a rage. Almost immediately, he would regret it. So he and his coach dissected those relapses to figure out what triggered the old ways and what to do the next time a similar moment arose. Such “relapse prevention” measures inoculate people against future lapses or just giving up. Over a sixmonth period, Jack made real improvement. His own records showed he had reduced the number of flare-ups from one or more a day at the beginning to just one or two a month. The climate had improved sharply, and the division’s numbers were starting to creep upward. Why does improving an emotional intelligence competence take months rather than days? Because the emotional centers of the brain, not just the neocortex, are involved. The neocortex, the thinking brain that learns technical skills and purely cognitive abilities, gains knowledge very quickly, but the emotional brain does not. To master a new behavior, the emotional centers need repetition and practice. Improving your emotional intelligence, then, is akin to changing your habits. Brain circuits that carry leadership habits have to unlearn the old ones and replace them with the new. The more often a behavioral sequence is repeated, the stronger the underlying brain circuits become. At some point, the new neural pathways become the brain’s default option. When that happened, Jack was able to go through the paces of leadership effortlessly, using styles that worked for him – and the whole company. Le a d e r s h i p Th a t G e t s R e s u l t s was on the road constantly, meeting with plant managers, attending to their pressing concerns, and letting them know how much she cared about them personally. She left the division’s strategy – extreme efficiency – to a trusted lieutenant with a keen understanding of technology, and she delegated its performance standards to a colleague who was adept at the authoritative approach. She also had a pacesetter on her team who always visited the plants with her. An alternative approach, and one I would recommend more, is for leaders to expand their own style repertories. To do so, leaders must first understand which emotional intelligence competencies underlie the leadership styles they are lacking. They can then work assiduously to increase their quotient of them. For instance, an affiliative leader has strengths in three emotional intelligence competencies: in empathy, in building relationships, and in communication. Empathy – sensing how people are feeling in the moment – allows the affiliative leader to respond to employees in a way that is highly congruent with that person’s emotions, thus building rapport. The affiliative leader also displays a natural ease in forming new relationships, getting to know someone as a person, and cultivating a bond. Finally, the outstanding affiliative leader has mastered the art of interpersonal communication, particularly in saying just the right thing or making the apt symbolic gesture at just the right moment. So if you are primarily a pacesetting leader who wants to be able to use the affiliative style more 90 often, you would need to improve your level of empathy and, perhaps, your skills at building relationships or communicating effectively. As another example, an authoritative leader who wants to add the democratic style to his repertory might need to work on the capabilities of collaboration and communication. Such advice about adding capabilities may seem simplistic – ”Go change yourself” – but enhancing emotional intelligence is entirely possible with practice. (For more on how to improve emotional intelligence, see the sidebar “Growing Your Emotional Intelligence.”) More Science, Less Art Like parenthood, leadership will never be an exact science. But neither should it be a complete mystery to those who practice it. In recent years, research has helped parents understand the genetic, psychological, and behavioral components that affect their “job performance.” With our new research, leaders, too, can get a clearer picture of what it takes to lead effectively. And perhaps as important, they can see how they can make that happen. The business environment is continually changing, and a leader must respond in kind. Hour to hour, day to day, week to week, executives must play their leadership styles like a pro – using the right one at just the right time and in the right measure. The payoff is in the results. 1. Daniel Goleman consults with Hay/McBer on leadership development. Product no. 4487 To place an order, call 1-800-988-0886. harvard business review March–April 2000 E X P L O R I N G F U R T H E R . . . Leadership That Gets Results ARTICLES “What Makes a Leader?” by Daniel Goleman (Harvard Business Review, November–December 1998, Product no. 3790) “Leadership That Gets Results” is Goleman’s follow-up to this article. A study of 200 global companies reveals that soft skills have a lot to do with emotional intelligence, which, Goleman argues, is the key component of leadership. Emotional intelligence comprises self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. In the workplace, it manifests itself not simply in the ability to control your temper or get along with others. Rather, it involves knowing your own and your colleagues’ emotional makeup well enough to be able to move people in directions that help accomplish company goals. Emotional intelligence isn’t just an innate talent, Goleman insists—it can be measured, learned, and developed. “The Ways Chief Executive Officers Lead” by Charles M. Farkas and Suzy Wetlaufer (Harvard Business Review, May–June 1996, Product no. 96303) Goleman pinpoints emotional intelligence as the key element of successful leadership; Farkas and Wetlaufer zero in on the leader’s focus. Whereas Goleman emphasizes matching the leadership style to a particular business situation, Farkas and Wetlaufer concentrate on the particular approach that leaders choose. The authors interviewed 160 CEOs around the world, inquiring about their attitudes, activities, and perspectives. Instead of uncovering 160 different leadership styles, they found only five, each with a singular focus: strategy, people, expertise, controls, or change. For example, CEOs who focus on strategy “believe that their most important job is to create, test, and design the implementation of long-term strategy.” CEOs who use the “box approach” believe “they can add the most value in their organizations by creating, communicating, and monitoring an explicit set of controls—financial, cultural, or both—that ensure uniform, predictable behaviors for customers and employees.” “What Effective General Managers Really Do” by John P. Kotter (Harvard Business Review, March–April 1999, Product no. 3707) Managers who carefully control their time and work within highly structured environments may be undermining their effectiveness. Kotter demonstrates how such seemingly wasteful activities as chatting in hallways and holding impromptu meetings can actually be a very efficient way of managing. When he describes the two fundamental challenges managers face—figuring out what to do in the midst of an enormous amount of potentially relevant information and getting things done through a large and diverse set of people, most of whom the manager has no direct control over—Kotter shows some awareness of the emotional intelligence these challenges call for. But his primary point is about managers taking a strategic approach to the tactical issue of handling their schedules and interactions. He advises managers to develop flexible agendas and broad networks of people. Flexible agendas enable managers to react opportunistically to the flow of events around them. And with broad networks, even quick and pointed conversations can help extend managers’ reach well beyond their formal chain of command. Visit us on the Web at: U.S. and Canada: 800-988-0886 617-783-7500 • Fax: 617-783-7555 Rabbi Sacks rabbisacks.org http://www.rabbisacks.org/seven-principles-of-jewish-leadership-written-for-the-adam-science-foundation-leadership-programme/ Seven Principles of Jewish Leadership I was recently asked to write the foreword to a publication being produced by the Adam Science Foundation to mark the twentieth anniversary of its leadership programme. Named after the late Adam Science, zichrono livracha, who tragically died in 1991 aged just twenty-seven, the programme has had great success in developing the next generation of lay and professional leadership within Anglo-Jewry. It has helped to produce leaders and leadership for a new age with its old-new challenges. The phrase “Jewish leadership” is ambiguous. It means leadership by Jews, but it also means leadership in a Jewish way, according to Judaic principles and values. The first is common, the second rare. Throughout my life it has been a privilege to witness both. So by way of saying thank you for the past and giving blessings for the future, I have set out below seven of the many axioms of leadership done in a Jewish way. Principle 1: Leadership begins with taking responsibility. Contrast the opening of Genesis with the opening of Exodus. The opening chapters of Genesis are about failures of responsibility. Confronted by God with their sin, Adam blames Eve, Eve blames the serpent. Cain says, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Even Noah, “righteous, perfect in his generations,” has no effect on his contemporaries. By contrast, at the beginning of Exodus Moses takes responsibility. When he sees an Egyptian beating an Israelite, he intervenes. When he sees two Israelites fighting, he intervenes. In Midian, when he sees shepherds abusing the daughters of Yitro, he intervenes. Moses, an Israelite brought up as an Egyptian, could have avoided each of these confrontations, yet he did not. He is the supreme case of one who says: when I see wrong, if no one else is prepared to act, I will. At the heart of Judaism are three beliefs about leadership: We are free. We are responsible. And together we can change the world. Principle 2: No one can lead alone. Seven times in Genesis 1, we hear the word tov, “good.” Only twice in the whole Torah does the phrase lo tov, “not good,” appear. The first is when God says, “It is not good for man to be alone.” The second is when Yitro sees his son-in-law Moses leading alone, and says, “What you are doing is not good.” We cannot live alone. We cannot lead alone. Leadership is teamsmanship. One corollary of this is that there is no one leadership style in Judaism. During the wilderness years there were three leaders: Moses, Miriam and Aaron. Moses was close to God. Aaron was close to the people. Miriam led the women and sustained her two brothers. The sages say it was in her merit that there was water to drink in the desert. During the biblical era there were three different leadership roles: kings, priests and prophets. The king was a political leader. The priest was a religious leader. The prophet was a visionary, a man or woman of ideals and ideas. So in Judaism leadership is an emergent property of multiple roles and perspectives. No one person can lead the Jewish people. Principle 3: Leadership is about the future. It is vision-driven. Before Moses can lead he has to experience a vision at the burning bush. There he is told his task: to lead the people from slavery to freedom. He has a destination: the land flowing with milk and honey. He is given a double challenge: to persuade the Egyptians to let the Israelites go, and to persuade the Israelites to take the risk of going. The latter turns out to be more difficult than the former. Along the way, Moses performs signs and wonders. Yet his greatest leadership act occurs in the last month of his life. He gathers the people together on the bank of the Jordan and delivers the speeches that constitute the book of Deuteronomy. There he rises to the greatest heights of prophecy, his eyes turned to the furthest horizon of the future. He tells the people of the challenges they will face in the Promised Land. He gives them laws. He sets forth his vision of the good society. He institutes principles, such as the septennial national assembly at which the Torah was to be recited, that will periodically recall Israel to its mission. Before you can lead, you must have a vision of the future and be able to communicate it to others. Principle 4: Leaders learn. They study more than others. They read more than others. Of the king, the Torah says that he must write his own Sefer Torah which “must always be with him, and he shall read from it all the days of his life” (Deut. 17: 19). Joshua, Moses’ successor, is commanded: “Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night” (Josh. 1: 8). Without constant study, leadership lacks direction and depth. This is so even in secular leadership. Gladstone had a library of more than 30,000 books. He read more than 20,000 of them. Gladstone and Disraeli were both prolific writers. Winston Churchill wrote some 50 books and won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Visit David Ben-Gurion’s house in Tel Aviv and you will see that it is essentially a library with 20,000 books. Study makes the difference between the statesman and the politician, between the transformative leader and the manager. Principle 5: Leadership means believing in the people you lead. The rabbis gave a remarkable interpretation of the passage where Moses says about the Israelites, “They will not believe in me.” God said to Moses: “They are believers the children of believers, but in the end you will not believe.” They also said that the sign God gave Moses when his hand became leprous (Ex. 4:6) was a punishment for casting doubt on the Israelites. A leader must have faith in the people he or she leads. There is a profound principle at stake here. Judaism prefers the leadership of influence to the leadership of power. Kings had power. Prophets had influence but no power at all. Power lifts the leader above the people. Influence lifts the people above their former selves. Influence respects people; power controls people. Judaism, which has the highest view of human dignity of any major religion, is therefore deeply sceptical about power and deeply serious about influence. Hence one of Judaism’s greatest insights into leadership: the highest form of leadership is teaching. Power begets followers. Teaching creates leaders. Principle 6: Leadership involves a sense of timing and pace . When Moses asks God to choose his successor, he says: “May the Lord, the God who gives breath to all living things, appoint someone over this community to go out before them and come in before them, who will lead them out and bring them in” (Num. 27: 16-17). Why the apparent repetition? Moses is saying two things about leadership. A leader must lead from the front: he or she must “go out before them.” But a leader must not be so far out in front that, when he turns around, he finds no one following. He must “lead them out,” meaning, he must carry people with him. He must go at a pace that people can bear. One of Moses’ deepest frustrations – we sense it throughout the biblical narrative – is the sheer time it takes for people to change. In the end, it would take a new generation and a new leader to lead the people across the Jordan and into the promised land. Hence the rabbis’ great saying: “It is not for you to complete the task but neither are you free to desist from it.” Leadership involves a delicate balance between impatience and patience. Go too fast and people resist and rebel. Go too slow and they become complacent. Transformation takes time, often more than a single generation. Principle 7: Leadership is stressful and emotionally demanding. Listen to Moses, the greatest leader the Jewish people ever had: “Did I conceive all these people? Did I give them birth? Why do you tell me to carry them in my arms, as a nurse carries an infant, to the land you promised on oath to their ancestors? …I cannot carry all these people by myself; the burden is too heavy for me. If this is how you are going to treat me, please go ahead and kill me —if I have found favour in your eyes—and do not let me face my own ruin” (Num. 11: 11-15). You can find similar sentiments in the words of Elijah, Jeremiah and Jonah. All at some stage prayed to die rather than carry on. Transformative leaders see the need for people to change. But people resist change and expect the work to be done for them by the leader. When the leader hands the challenge back, the people then turn on him and blame him for their troubles. So Moses is to blame for the hardships of the desert. Elijah is to blame for disturbing the peace. Jeremiah is to blame for the Babylonians. No wonder that the most transformative leaders feel, at times, burnout and despair. Why then do they lead? Not because they believe in themselves. The greatest Jewish leaders doubted their ability to lead. Moses said, “Who am I?” “They will not believe in me.” “I am not a man of words.” Isaiah said, “I am a man of unclean lips. Jeremiah said, “I cannot speak for I am a child.” Jonah, faced with the challenge of leadership, ran away. Leaders lead because there is work to do, there are people in need, there is injustice to be fought, there is wrong to be righted, there are problems to be solved and challenges ahead. Leaders hear this as a call to light a candle instead of cursing the darkness. They lead because they know that to stand idly by and expect others to do the work is the too-easy option. The responsible life is the best life there is, and is worth all the pain and frustration. To lead is to serve – the highest accolade Moses ever received was to be called eved Hashem, “God’s servant,” and there is no higher honour. * There are challenges ahead for British and world Jewry and for the people and state of Israel. The return of antisemitism is one. The isolation of Israel is another. A third is the erosion of Jewish identity at the edges of affiliation and commitment. In truth these are all symptoms of the single overarching question of Jewish existence in the modern age. What is it to live as a Jew in the public domain, in a world without walls? Jews know how to live with poverty. Do we know how to live with affluence? Jews know how to survive persecution. Do we know how to handle freedom? We know how to recognise enemies. Do we know how to make friends? Our destiny is in our hands, and if we seek a better world we are going to have to do it ourselves. Never in history has there been a better time to be a Jewish leader. For the first time in 4,000 years of history we have independence and sovereignty in Israel, rights and equality throughout the Diaspora. In Britain we have a higher percentage of children at Jewish schools than at any other stage of our 356-year history. Jews and the Jewish voice are respected in the public domain. And although there are dangerous elements at the fringes of society, Britain remains a fundamentally tolerant society. There is a right way for future Jewish leadership to go, and a wrong way. The wrong way is to emphasize antisemitism and the assaults on Israel, to exaggerate the tensions between the different streams in Jewish life, and to bemoan the lack of Jewish leadership. The right way is to make friends within and beyond the Jewish community, to emphasize the ethical and spiritual dimensions of Judaism, to find social action projects we can work on across other divides, and to find ways of making Jews feel proud to be Jews. (First published in The Jewish Chronicle and The Jerusalem Post) © 2015 Rabbi Sacks. All rights reserved. The Office of Rabbi Sacks is kindly supported by The Covenant & Conversation Trust.Site by Maven The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University The Covenantal Leader Honoring the Implicit Relationship with Employees By Cam Caldwell, PhD 2016 Volume 19 Issue 2 This article will explain the role of covenantal leaders in understanding the often overlooked assumptions that make up the unspoken psychological contract between leaders and followers.[1] The article then briefly describes the five ethically related roles of covenantal leadership and the implicit message that is communicated to employees when covenantal leaders honor each of these roles. The concept that leadership is inherently an ethical duty has been well established for many years.[2] Drawing on that perspective, Moses Pava developed a leadership approach he named “covenantal leadership.” Covenantal leadership, the heart of Pava’s philosophy, reflects the Old Testament theme of a shared community. Implicit in covenantal leadership is the concept that lives are interconnected and that one’s responsibilities extend to a larger society and contain an array of moral responsibilities. Pava emphasizes that covenants are: * open-ended and emphasize mutual responsibility, but are general rather than specific; * long-term in nature, often expected to continue indefinitely; * respectful of human integrity, and intended to ensure the identity, unique-ness, and personhood of the participants.[3] Covenantal leadership not only emphasizes ethical responsibilities but the sacred nature of leadership as a covenant, or two-way promise, consisting of obligations that management guru Tom Peters has called “a sacred trust.”[4] Pava describes covenantal leaders as ethical stewards who owe a sacred duty to employees to pursue their best interests, to keep them informed about the organization’s problems and to progress, and to engage them as full partners in creating organizational wealth.[5] Wise leaders acknowledge their obligation to share vital information and assist employees to succeed.[6] Covenantal leaders actively seek to understand the employees’ view of this psychological contract. Unfortunately, many leaders are unaware of their employees’ perceptions about these unspoken covenantal duties. Too few leaders make the effort to learn what duties their employees believe their organizations owe them. In contrast, covenantal leaders create organizational systems that are aligned with professed values, https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 1 of 6 The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM emphasize constant learning, and engage employees at all levels in the governance process[7] to honor the unwritten set of obligations. Pava explained that there are five sacred duties of the leader that make up his covenantal leadership model. Each of these duties contains an implicit message that honors the relationship between leaders and followers. [8] 1. Leaders Serve Others. In their servant role, the message sent by the covenantal leader to others is: You really do matter. You are important to this organization. If we are to succeed, I must understand you and help you to achieve what matters to you. The covenantal leader values employees as unique individuals who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect and who are owed the moral duty of being able to become their best.[9] Scholars[10] have repeatedly affirmed that leaders must clearly understand the individual and collective needs and desires of others to fulfill their highest potential. To serve, the covenantal leader must first seek to understand rather than to be understood. Service to others is measured by the recipient’s “gold standard” and is based upon what those recipients value, rather than what the leader thinks is most important. 2. Leaders Are Examples. By being an authentic example, the message of the covenantal leader is: I acknowledge the importance of what I profess by exemplifying those values. I am willing to be accountable and I ask you to do the same. Help me by telling me if you think I am not keeping my promises. Covenantal leaders exemplify their values and inspire by their integrity in modeling what they believe. [11] Their moral covenant is to honor commitments and keep promises—including implied promises associated with organizational values. Wise Leaders recognize the need to check-in with team members about how they perceive those implied obligations—critical elements of the psychological contract that are often neglected.[12] 3. Leaders Constantly Teach. By teaching others constantly, covenantal leaders communicate: I recognize that I must help you by providing you with the best possible information and training. I want you to succeed. Here is how you can improve. Help me to help you! Covenantal leaders create learning organizations.[13] They recognize that the improvement process requires them to show others how to succeed. They understand that the key to excellent performance is in understanding how to improve, and that team members expect to be provided with the feedback and coaching so essential to personal growth. 4. Leaders Pursue Truth. In pursuing truth, covenantal leaders declare: I don’t know everything and we must constantly be learning and improving together. We can only succeed together if we constantly are open to learning. Constantly learning enables us to survive in an incredibly competitive global economy. https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 2 of 6 The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM Covenantal leaders recognize that they must constantly seek to understand the truth by being evidencebased, striving to improve their own understanding, and encouraging others to constantly innovate, improve, and seek for truth. Covenantal leaders understand that they are truth dependent and that they must be honest and share truth with their employees.[14] Those with whom they work are viewed as valuable contributors to organization-wide learning and innovation.[15] Covenantal leaders recognize their obligation to create the long-term wealth available only when organizations constantly strive to keep pace in a knowledge-, wisdom-, and information-based economy.[16] 5. Leaders empower others. To honor their empowerment obligations, covenantal leaders communicate: I am committed to your success and I demonstrate that commitment by understanding your needs, providing you with necessary resources, and being available if you need help along the way. Covenantal leaders recognize that asking others to achieve results must be balanced with providing the resources and the authority to accomplish those outcomes. Empowerment is an ethical obligation enabling others to succeed, understanding the obstacles they need to overcome, and giving them the power to accomplish duties for which they are responsible.[17] Covenantal leaders know that empowerment means supporting team members in all aspects of their responsibilities.[18] By understanding the five roles of covenantal leadership and by clearly articulating the commitment to employees’ best interests implicit in those five roles, covenantal leaders have the ability to create organizational cultures and interpersonal relationships that generate the extra-mile commitment, innovative contributions, and high productivity so necessary for successful organizations. Who are the covenantal leaders in today’s business world? Clayton M. Christensen, former Harvard professor, expert in disruptive innovation, and current CEO of his own business consulting firm is a great example. Christensen has spent a lifetime of serving others, searching for new truths, and is a proponent of constant learning. His book How Will You Measure Your Life? was written after Harvard’s graduating MBA class asked him to be the featured speaker at their graduation—not because of his academic expertise but because of his wisdom as a role model and personal example. As a former Rhodes Scholar, Christensen’s commitment to constant learning and his life of service as a scholar, consultant, and lay religious leader testify of his brilliance, his humility, and his commitment to empowering others to become their best. Conclusion Covenantal leadership raises the bar for leadership performance—and today’s successful business leaders are committed to that optimum level of personal performance for themselves and for their employees. Only when leaders listen to their employees, understand their expectations, and honor the implicit elements of employees expectations will those employees be the committed, innovative, and productive partners in today’s competitive global marketplace.[19] [1] The nature of the psychological contract and its often misunderstood features is well explained in https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 3 of 6 The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM Rousseau, D. M., Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995). [2] James MacGregor Burns emphasized the nature of leadership as an ethical obligation in his classic book, first written in 1978. See Burns, J. M., Leadership (New York: Harper & Row, 1978). [3] Caldwell, Cam. “Leading with Meaning: Using Covenantal Leadership to Build a Better Organization,” Business Ethics Quarterly 15, no. 3 (2005): 499-505. ISSN 1052-150X. [4] Available in the video, “Recession – Sacred Trust” available online at You Tube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TOYQQ87Ms0. Peters emphasizes the importance of leaders helping people to live better lives. [5] The leader’s role as ethical steward is explained in Caldwell, C., Hayes, L., and Long, D., “Leadership, Trustworthiness, and Ethical Stewardship,” Journal of Business Ethics 96 no. 4, (2010): 497-512. [6] The nature of the “mediating lens” through which individuals perceive that duties are owed to them and the responsibility of the leader to respond to those perceptions to be thought of as trustworthy is clarified in Caldwell, C., and Hayes, L., “Leadership, Trustworthiness, and the Mediating Lens,” Journal of Management Development 26, no. 3 (2007): 261-278. [7] This partnership role is identified as part of the stewardship responsibility of leaders in Block, P., Stewardship: Choosing Service Over Self-Interest (2nd Ed.) (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 2013). [8] The importance of the relationship between leaders and followers has become a topic of increasing interest in the modern organization and is described in Hayes, L., Caldwell, C., Licona, B., and Meyer, T. E., “Follower Behaviors and Barriers to Wealth Creation,” Journal of Management Development 34 (2015): 270285. [9] The servant leader’s role as “servant first” is well articulated in Greenleaf, R. K., and Spears, L. C., Servant Leadership: A Journey into Legitimate Power and Greatness 25th Anniversary Edition, (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2002). [10] Max DePree also calls the leader’s obligation to serve a sacred obligation and explained the leader “must become a servant and a debtor” in honoring covenantal duties owed to employees. See DePree, M., Leadership is an Art, (New York: Crown Publishing, 2004), 11. Robert Greenleaf, often recognized as the Father of Servant Leadership, also wrote extensively about the sacred nature of the leader and explained that the leader’s obligation to serve was a sacred ethical duty. See Greenleaf, R. K., On Becoming a Servant Leader, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996). Stephen R. Covey also has written extensively about the moral and ethical duty of leaders to “treat people so well that they recognize their greatness and strive to achieve it” Covey uses similar language to explain that organizations have a moral duty to help their employees in that same serving way. See Covey, S.R., The 8th Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness, (New York: Free Press, 2004), 98. [11] The importance of leaders modeling what they believe was also identified in Kouzes, J. M., and Posner, B. Z., The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2012). https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 4 of 6 The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM [12] The complex nature of psychological contracts, which are perceived by most employees as ethical commitments made to them by their leaders is well explained in Rousseau, D. M., Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995). [13] The importance of creating a learning organization in today’s constantly changing business environment is explained in Senge, P. M., The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization, (New York: Doubleday, 2006). [14] Peter Block makes this truth-seeking and truth-telling point powerfully in Block, P., Stewardship: Choosing Service Over Self-Interest, (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1993). [15] Innovation, or creating new truth, is clearly enumerated as the key to wealth creation by Christensen, C. M., The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing, 2016). [16] Op. cit. The importance of constantly seeking the truth, of innovating, and continuously improving is well expressed in Covey, S. R., (2004). [17] W. Edwards Deming emphasized the moral obligation of empowering employees in Deming, W. E., Out of the Crisis, (Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2000). [18] The concept of empowerment or “power with” rather than “power over” others was powerfully introduced by Mary Parker Follett and is explained in Graham, P. (Ed.), Mary Parker Follett: Prophet of Management: A Celebration of Writings from the 1920s, (District of Columbia: Beard Books, 2003). [19] This point is well made by Harvard’s Clayton M. Christensen in Christensen, C. M., The Innovator’s Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business, (New York: HarperCollins, 2011). About the Author(s) Cam Caldwell, PhD, obtained his PhD degree from Washington State University in 2004 where he was a Thomas S. Foley graduate fellow. He has co-authored over seventy publications about leadership, trust, and ethics and his book about moral leadership was published in 2012 by Business Expert Press. Issue: 2016 Volume 19 Issue 2 Topic: CEO Performance, Ethics / Corporate Social Responsibility, Featured Article, Leadership, Management, Organizational Behavior Tags: covenantal leadership, empower, examples, Moses Pava, serve, teach, Tom Peters, truth https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 5 of 6 The Covenantal Leader | Graziadio Business Review | Graziadio School of Business and Management | Pepperdine University 9/21/16, 6:48 PM Graziadio School of Business and Management | 6100 Center Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90045-1590 Copyright © 2016 Pepperdine University Terms of Use | Privacy Policy The opinions expressed are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Graziadio School of Business and Management nor Pepperdine University. https://gbr.pepperdine.edu/?p=17907&preview_id=17907&preview_nonce=915e0080d0&_thumbnail_id=-1&preview=true Page 6 of 6 Leadership Professor Richard Joel Rabbi Sacks 7 Leadership Lessons from Torah • 3/17/20 • 1- Leaders Take Responsibility • 2-No one can Lead Alone • 3-Leadership is about the Future • 4-Leaders Learn • 5-Leadership means believing in the people you lead • 6-Leadership involves a sense of timing and pace • 7-Leadership is Stressful and emotionally demanding • At the heart of Judaism are three beliefs about leadership: • We are free. We are Responsible. And together we can change the world. Jim Collins-Level Five Leadership The triumph of humility and fierce resolve Hierarchy of Executive Capacities 1 2 3 4 5 Highly Capable Individual Contributing Team Member Competent Manager Effective Leader Executive Level Five Leader • Builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical combination of personal humility and fierce resolve • What they do? • First Who • Stockdale Paradox • Buildup-Breakthrough Flywheel • The Hedgehog Concept • Technology Accelerators • A Culture of Discipline • The Window and the Mirror • Look in the mirror for fauly; look out the window for credit 7 Transformations of Leadership Rooke and Torbert • Action Logic – how leaders interpret their surroundings and react when their power or safety is threatened • “Understanding it and transforming it can transform their companies” 7 Types of Action Logic Action Logic = Leadership Styles • Opportunist • Diplomat • Expert • Achiever • Individualist • Strategist • Alchemist To Think About • Genes are not destiny. They tell us where we came from; Not what we can become. Dominic Purpura, MD Dean, Albert Einstein Medical School Connected, but Alone Sherry Turkle • Noted Psychologist • I welcomed the virtual world- thought it would help us in the real world. • We’re letting technology take us places we don’t want to go • These devices are so powerful, they don’t just change what we do, they change who we are • We wanted to be connected anywhere; we end up hiding from each other while connected to each other • Issues of control Connected, But Alone • We want to have each other, but at a distance • Young people don’t learn to have a conversation • They’re frightened because they can’t control it • “I would rather text than talk” • We are lonely, but are afraid of intimacy • Make room for solitude • Create sacred spaces for conversation • Need to listen to each other, even the boring bits Leadership Communication • Richard Neustadt-Presidential Power • The power to persuade • Napolean- A leader is a dealer in hope
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer:
1 Paper
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer



Nelson Mandela: A Leader Who Transformed a Nation

Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

Nelson Mandela: A Leader Who Transformed a Nation
In the context of any society or organization, leadership is considered paramount.
Through effective leadership, individuals, groups, and nations are able to conveniently attain
their obligations and cause the desired positive transformations. This paper will specifically
profile Nelson Mandela, who is commonly perceived as a transformative leader and an essential
symbol of hope for the establishment of a society that is both just and embraces equality. Most of
Mandela’s leadership qualities and attainments closely align with the specific principles
highlighted in the recommended readings, facilitating the establishment of a strong foundation
that can effectively enhance the understanding of his leadership profile.
Mandela as a Visionary Leader
Nelson Mandela can undoubtedly be described as one of the most visionary leaders the
world has ever encountered, one of his most strong visions being the desire to have a free and
democratic South Africa where all individuals from distinguished races and backgrounds can
have access to equal rights and opportunities with minimal to no hinderances. He was guided by
numerous quotes that stood for what he believed in, for instance, “Education is the most
powerful weapon which you can use to change the world” (Kioupi & Voulvoulis, 2019). It is
evident that his vision was mainly inspired and motivated by the various provisions of the
principles of justice, non-violence, and racial harmony.
Mandela was also a passionate elite who highly valued education as a leader as one of the
important tools that could help him and his country walk out of poverty and misery. As President
Richard Joel states in the video “Telling Our Whole Story,” passion and learning are necessary
elements for one’s success and understanding of their own story. Being a passionate young elite,

Mandela was conversant about their own story and situation, and he organized and mobilized his
subjects against unfair treatments, including apartheid and emerging elements of inequality.
Sacks (2012) believes that most visionary leaders, if not all, articulate a vivid and
realizable vision and inspire the rest of the people, including their subjects, to w...

Great! Studypool always delivers quality work.


Related Tags