Leadership 1001 Series: Granting or Denying Leadership
Imagine the following scene in a conference room: a team member finishes their final PowerPoint slide, people shift in their seats, most lean in, others lean back, heads tilt, eyes meet, heads nod, and a decision is made. In these micro-moments, leadership is either granted or denied.
Leadership emerges when a situation requires a leader and a follower.
Leadership = Situation + Leader + Follower
Ideally, leadership is a natural outflow of the relationship between understood roles and a rational solution co-created to meet the needs of the situation.
Group Co-creation
At its best, a group co-creates the solution and goals, granting leadership:
we have a problem to solve or goal to accomplish (situation),
the problem or goal is communicated,
a solution is constructed, and
everyone agrees on the next steps (leaderships is granted).
From this point of view, the natural flow of the leader and follower relationship is to openly discuss the situation and create the solution together. Leadership is shared and emerges as an outcome of the discussion between those designated as “leader” or “follower,” regardless of job title (also called emergent leadership).
Leader vs Leadership
The challenge is when leadership is controlled or demanded by one group, and the exchange between “leader” and “follower” is diminished.
This challenge can occur with authoritative personalities who find value in their own viewpoint above others. Even when clear roles are understood, such as in an organization with a strong hierarchical structure, leadership can still be misunderstood as the “leader.”
Leadership is not the leader, not the highest position, not the top dog.
Leadership is what emerges when the group agrees on what to do about a situation and how to go about doing it.
Leaders diminish their “leadership” by incorrectly believing that their job is to tell everyone what to do, rather than hold the space for the group to discover, agree upon, and commit to the leadership decision itself.
Motivation, Manipulation, and Intention
Motivation is an important, yet often unseen variable in this leadership equation. Leaders focus on motivating their employees. Other times leaders focus on manipulating their employees. There is a huge difference when it comes to the intention of the leader.
Is their motivation selfish, for their own advancement or influence?
Or, is their motivation for the betterment of the team and the organization?
Consider the following two internal dialogues of the leader:
Scenario #1
The CEO sits back in her chair and looks at the group, asking herself, “who wants what and who is afraid of what so that I can use that information to get what I want?”
Scenario #2
The CEO brings to mind what she knows about the whole of the organization that not everybody in front of her understands. She then asks herself, “what does this group need to hear and know in order to make the most informed choice for the betterment of our organization, our goals, and our mission?”
Scenario #1 highlights the early making of toxic leadership, wherein the ends and means are honed to self-preservation, self-promotion, and self-indulgence (perhaps also a sign of narcissism).
Scenario #2 highlights thinking that is broad-minded, inclusive, and respectful of the many voices in the room and the varying levels of expertise. It threads together a bigger picture to create a more informed group mindset. This leader knows their role is to facilitate positive change in order to meet the ever-changing demands each company and individual faces.
Leadership is either granted or denied by the group, and sometimes it is stolen by manipulative and toxic leaders. At other times, new “leaders” simply don’t understand what leadership is.