As is stated often in the Community Tool Box, it's important that any collaboration you enter into be consistent with your mission and philosophy. Being part of a community coalition that includes organizations and groups with very different goals and philosophies is usually not a problem.
You can work together on issues on which you agree, and choose not to where you disagree. But entering into a contract or collaborative grant arrangement with an organization whose philosophy is very different from yours can be disastrous. Leaders are human. That's hardly news, but it means that they come with all the same problems and failings as everyone else. One of the greatest challenges of leadership is facing your own personal issues, and making sure they don't prevent you from exercising leadership.
Acknowledging the attitudes and tendencies that get in your way, and working to overcome them, is absolutely necessary if you're to become an effective leader. Among the most common personal traits that good leaders have to overcome or keep in check are:.
The administrator of a state agency constantly voiced his commitment to listening to the opinions and judgments of those in the field. To his credit, he often consulted with providers about new directions or new initiatives that the agency was planning. When the advice from the field was negative, however, he invariably ignored it, and got angry if anyone suggested that he was not really being collaborative if he only listened to advice when it confirmed his plans or beliefs.
He behaved the same way with his subordinates in the agency, often to the point of screaming at people when they disagreed with him. The result was that, far from providers feeling included, they felt shut out and cheated by the administrator's actions. He instituted a number of regulations and reforms that didn't work because of his inability to listen to negative feedback, and his relationships with those in the field deteriorated drastically.
He continued to tout his willingness to ask for opinions and advice from providers, but was never able either to accept disagreement, or to accept the suggestion that he was anything but completely open and collaborative. Harry Truman made the decision to drop the A-bomb on Hiroshima, and then went to bed and slept all night. Regardless of what you think about the decision - the human costs were staggering, and historians still dispute whether it saved lives in the long run by eliminating the need for an Allied invasion of Japan - Truman's response to it is instructive.
He struggled with the decision itself In addition to character traits that can get in a leader's way, there are the effects of health and personal crises. The director of a health care organization who was being treated for liver cancer decided to resign because she felt she needed to put all her energy into recovery, and couldn't do justice to her leadership position.
The director of a community-based organization continued to work while his wife was being treated for cancer, but found himself making serious mistakes in a variety of situations. Divorce, deaths, personal financial reverses - in short, any of the same personal issues that anyone else might have to face - can beset any leader at any time.
It's important to understand that those kinds of crises will probably have an effect on your leadership, unless you're extremely good at separating the different areas of your life. Again, this list is far from complete, but it includes many of the most common stumbling blocks that leaders throw in front of themselves.
Fortunately, there are some strategies that can be used to identify and remove those stumbling blocks, or at least cut them down so you can jump over them more easily. Listen to people's responses to your ideas, plans, and opinions.
Listen more than you talk. Listen to a broad range of people, not just to those who agree with you. Probe to find out why they think or feel the way they do. Assume that everyone has something important to say. If you hear the same things from a number of different and diverse sources, you should at least consider the possibility that they're accurate.
If they're about things you do that you can change, you might give it a try. This is feedback people's views of you from everyone around you - staff, volunteers, Board, participants, people from other organizations or groups yours works with - anyone you work with in any way. As with listening, if you hear the same thing from a lot of different sources, it's probably true.
Act on it. All the feedback in the world won't do you any good unless you do something with it. Are you the center of controversy and chaos?
Or do calm and good feeling seem to reside wherever you do? The chances are that the answer lies somewhere in between these extremes, but it probably should be closer to the calm and good feeling side. Even if you're involved in a battle with the forces of evil, you can foster calm in yourself and those you work with. At the same time, your group could be on top of the world, and you and your colleagues could still be climbing the walls if that's the kind of atmosphere you create.
Another question to ask is whether the people you work with are happy and enthusiastic. If you're meeting their needs, the chances are they will be. If you're insensitive and impatient, if you play favorites, if you're disengaged from them and from the cause, or if you're downright nasty, they'll probably wish they were somewhere else. Taking a look around will tell you a lot about what - and how - you're doing as a leader.
Most of us find it difficult to change entirely on our own. A psychotherapist, a good friend, a perceptive colleague, or a trusted clergyman might be able to help you gain perspective on issues that you find hard to face. Many people find meditation or some form of self-discovery helpful in understanding themselves and in getting through change.
Don't feel you have to do it all on your own. The difficulty here is that, if you're defensive, you're likely to be defensive about being defensive. If you're insecure, you may well be insecure about finding help - there's always the chance that you'll find out that your insecurity is well-founded. One of the greatest challenges of leadership is shouldering the responsibility it confers. Part of that responsibility is the responsibility to deal with those aspects of yourself that can keep you from being an effective leader.
That's not easy, but the rewards are great. A leadership position brings with it unique demands. Leaders can be looked on as authority figures, as saviors, as fixers of things that are broken, as spiritual guides, as mentors, as models, as inspirers, as teachers This in itself carries a set of challenges, in addition to those posed by what all leaders indeed have to do in order to keep things going.
Some of the issues that leaders have to cope with specifically because they're leaders are:. Perhaps even more threatening than burnout is "burn-down" - the loss of passion and intensity that can come with familiarity and long service. You may still care about what you're doing, but the enthusiasm just isn't there anymore. In many ways, this condition may be even harder to deal with than burnout. At least if you're burned out, it's obvious: if you're burned down, especially if it's happened over a long period, neither you nor others may have realized it.
So how can you continue to be a leader and also continue to be a functioning human being? There are things you can do to retain both your sanity and your competency. Hold occasional meetings and at-least-yearly retreats to discuss vision and renew commitment. These will serve both to review the vision to see if it still resonates and to rework it if necessary , and to renew your and others' purpose and pursuit of it.
They'll help to remind you of why you're doing this in the first place, give you an opportunity to work on group solidarity, and - ideally - leave you feeling refreshed and ready to carry on. Surround yourself with good people who share your vision. If you can find others who are competent and committed to whom you can delegate some of the tasks of leadership, it will both remove pressure from you, and make your group stronger. One of the greatest mistakes a leader can make is to be threatened by others' abilities.
In fact, sharing responsibility with capable people makes all of you more effective, and strengthens your leadership. Having competent people to depend on also means that you can develop systems and know they'll work. Organizational maintenance becomes much easier, and you have more time to devote to the actual pursuit of your vision.
Find an individual or group with whom you can discuss the realities of leadership. In many communities, some heads of organizations meet on a regular basis to talk about the difficulties and rewards of their situations with others who truly understand.
Some such arrangement can be a valuable hedge against burnout, and can also help you gain insight into how you function as a leader. It can introduce you to alternative ways of doing things, as well as giving you a chance to vent, and to realize you're not alone. The founder and director of a prominent think tank once went seven years without a day off - including Sundays.
That's 2, straight days of work. The skills and knowledge of the team can be applied to the challenge at hand. These developed team members are highly skilled, often more so than the leader, and they have a high level of motivation and commitment. The leadership style that best supports this situation is delegation S4. The leader empowers team members to work independently toward achieving agreed-upon goals. Share more about organizational goals so team members can make more informed decisions.
Situational leadership requires leaders to have multiple leadership styles and move among them. This might require practice to develop. So might the organization.
This can make it challenging to develop the full scope needed to be an effective situational leader. Different situations require different leadership styles to bring out the best results. It often takes conscious effort to develop these skills. A great leader should develop the following characteristics of situational leadership, including:. Dwight D. Eisenhower was the supreme allied commander during World War II. He then became the President of the United States.
His success in each of these roles is often attributed to his ability to leverage different leadership styles in each situation. His ability to adapt to various situations and people helped him become a great diplomat and leader. Colin Powell is a former :. His roles have dictated that he be a decisive leader, and his military rank assumes that his subordinates follow orders.
Still, he believed in taking a situational leadership approach with his commanders in the army. He recognized that everyone he worked with had different:.
Powell further explains that he understands each human is different, and that the best leaders are those who can figure out how to get the best out of each individual.
Many considered him one of the best in American history. Under his leadership, the Bruins won 10 championships, seven of them consecutive. They managed an game winning streak over three seasons, despite having a team that was constantly changing. She was named the 11th greatest coach — of any sport — of all time.
Situational leadership is a flexible leadership style that adapts to the needs of employees and situations. It comes very intuitively to many leaders and is straightforward to apply. Leaders evaluate the situation and decide which leadership style is most supportive.
Situational leaders tend to stay in close communication with team members. This helps them build strong relationships with the team. As a result, it creates a better work environment in which employees feel valued as individuals.
If you can, chances are, this type of leader made you feel supported and valued. The ability to adapt to different people and situations can make for a more versatile leader who does well in a diverse team. So was loyalty: Our comrades on and behind the barge needed help immediately. Had I not already earned that trust and developed a command presence in a thousand undramatic settings, those soldiers would not have followed my lead.
Had I not demonstrated my confidence that we could pull off the rescue, they would not have followed. This same lesson applies to leaders in private industry. We are misled by the popular-culture portrayals of leaders. Movies and television have to deal in superficialities and sound bites.
They have to emphasize charisma, a mysterious and seductive quality. But when they do so, they overlook the real roots of leadership. I can think of no leader, military or business, who has achieved his or her position without some profound expertise.
Expertise grows out of hard work and, to some extent, luck. Hard work develops a skill base, and luck gives us the chance to apply that base. Throughout my childhood, my parents ran small businesses: first a restaurant, and then a small hotel with a restaurant.
Every member of the family was expected to pitch in. For my part, I scrubbed floors, waited on tables, did kitchen prep, and helped keep the books. All through high school and college, my responsibilities expanded.
I learned new things and kept my hand in old things. On the strength of this success, I was asked to tackle the mess hall. This was even easier: I was already a minor expert in private-sector mess halls. Because I had expertise, I was successful; and because I was successful, I was identified by my superiors as a potential leader. Back in , for example, I suffered through a stint of desk-bound research in which I was part of a team charged with analyzing LOTS logistics over the shore vehicles.
I was sure I was wasting my time, crunching numbers and drafting memos rather than leading troops. Exactly 20 years later, I was in charge of—among several other resources—a flotilla of LOTS ships, which plied the coasts of Saudi Arabia serving as a backup for our truck convoys.
Because I had been a member of the team that helped specify their design, I knew exactly how to use those vessels. I had expertise, which not only helped me do my job but also reinforced me as a leader in the eyes of my subordinates.
Owning the facts is a prerequisite to leadership. But there are millions of technocrats out there with lots of facts in their quivers and little leadership potential. In many cases, what they are missing is empathy.
Empathy and expertise command respect. I got my first inkling of this back in the s, when I was a newsboy in my hometown of Charleroi, Pennsylvania. I started out at the age of nine, hawking afternoon editions of the Charleroi Mail on the corner of Fifth and McKean. Things started going along pretty well for me there.
Read all about it! I soon began to notice, though, that the real market for papers was in the local bars and restaurants, rather than on quiet street corners like my own. At my little stand, I was averaging 50 copies a day. In the bars and restaurants, especially around dinner time, you could sell that many copies in two hours—and get tips, to boot.
I decided to mine this rich vein of opportunity. A group of them paid me a visit, gave me a few licks, and suggested that I stick to my quiet little corner and stay out of their restaurants.
I did just that—for a little while. Then I went right back to selling papers in those crowded barrooms and restaurants. The opportunity was very good. And even then, I had a keen sense of justice. Why should the big kids control the best territory just because that was the way it had always been done? I gained the respect of the older boys and they no longer bothered me.
Years went by, and I gradually moved up in the newsboy hierarchy. Then one day I had a disturbing realization. It seemed that I had a clear choice. I could perpetuate the cycle or I could act in the spirit of empathy, based on my vivid recollection of what it felt like to get knocked around.
I chose the latter course. My peers went along with the plan because they knew I understood the situation from all sides.
Empathy was an absolutely vital quality in the context of the Gulf War. We asked ourselves constantly: What do the other people on our team need? Why do they think they need it, and how can we give it to them? The military always has its share of bendable rules. Can we find one to fit each situation? Our hosts, the Saudi Arabian people and their government, were among the most important objects of this kind of attention.
We made our share of mistakes. American soldiers, male and female, reported to the site to unload boxes and crates of supplies. Unfortunately, we had no idea that the building we were moving into was located next to a particularly devout Muslim community, whose members were deeply offended by the sight of women with uncovered hair and rolled-up sleeves working up a good sweat in the desert sun.
Members of the community complained to the local religious police, and our female soldiers were soon subjected to catcalls and jeering. Before the situation developed into a crisis, U. We soon reached a simple compromise: All U. It was a small concession but one that greatly pleased the religious police responsible for enforcing the Sharia, or Islamic law.
We learned a great deal about the sensitivities of a Muslim community through these negotiations, and we applied the lessons in our subsequent dealings with the Saudi population.
We also took our learning one step further. It was clear that our hosts were inclined to avoid conflict with their , guests, at least until things were approaching a crisis stage. It was our responsibility, therefore, to anticipate their needs and avoid crises. One day several months after the ground war ended, I realized that our two inactivated firing ranges were still littered with unexploded ordnance and that the bedouins would soon be traversing these areas again.
We put ourselves in the shoes of the bedouins and of the Saudi officials who had to protect the interests of these desert wanderers. We cleaned up the ranges well before the Saudi Arabians had to put pressure on us to do so. With that we earned their continued respect and cooperation. Empathy also helps you know where you can draw the line and make it stick. For example, some Saudi Arabians disapproved of the U. I made it clear that from the U. That line stuck.
Empathy counts for even more on the individual level. This was brought home to me one afternoon in August , some six months into Desert Farewell.
A very young private was sent to me by the military police for disciplinary action. The facts of the incident were clear enough. He cussed them out and wound up spending the night in jail. He arrived in my office looking remorseful and more than a little bit scared and launched into a hurried and jumbled explanation. It was hot the night before, he said; he was tired, the MPs were picking on him, and so on. They had a job to do. Terrorist attacks were still a very real possibility, and the recent tragedies in Beirut and Berlin were very much in our minds.
Tight security and ID checks were therefore still needed to protect the safety of everyone at the base. Then, after telling my wayward private that I would personally thank the MPs for their vigilance, I let him off the hook. He was out of my office in a flash. Why did I bend the rules? Because empathy demanded it. This was a tough period. The war was long since over, and the vast majority of Coalition forces were already back in their home countries.
But we logisticians were still there, picking up and packing up the theater of operations. And, in fact, the weather was very hot—hotter than earlier in the summer when smoke billowing from the oil fires in Kuwait had blocked out the sun. Inevitably, some tempers were wearing thin in the ranks. My young private had already learned his lesson, and he was more useful to me outside the brig than in.
0コメント