Schlagwort-Archive: Cooperation

The too tightly held egg breaks

Every time I take an egg in my hand, I pay attention that it does not slip out and breaks on the ground. At the same time, I avoid making a too strong grasp, so that I do not break it. I am aware that the shell is stable, but nevertheless the careless pressure could crack it.
Aren’t executives not in a similar situation? They lead the employees and ensure that they adhere to the sets of rules that result from the laws, the corporate guidelines, contracts and other arrangements. As with the egg, the leaders have to create the balance between a too loose and a too tight guidance. If results are missing or the employees withdraw their respect, then the leader forfeits his authority. If the manager controls too pedantic, then he risks the staff commitment and loses employees through fluctuation in the mid-term. In any case the danger exists that the basis for cooperation will be broken.

Eibroken

In the past executives could grow into their tasks by accompanying experienced superiors. Today, after graduating, a few internships and some short professional experiences, one can already get assigned to an executive position. This trend is amplified by HR policies in large companies, which rely more and more on assessments in artificial „lab conditions “. We can recognize these bosses from their work style. They are characterized by their Micro Management, the taking over of project functions and thereby missing out the leading.

The following leadership tasks are crucial, in order to accomplish the guiding role.

  • Communication
    The regular exchange of thoughts, opinions and facts is particularly important and at the same time very time-consuming in groups. The more employees are directly assigned, the more time is needed for the exchange of thoughts and the less time is available for each employee. It takes time for personal talks as well as for different forms of conversation (e.g. fireside chats, coffee talks, powwows). Besides personal discussions the comprehension of the employees is increased by publishing regularly important topics as emails, newsletters or a personal intranet page.
  • Coordination
    The skimpiest alternative of coordination is the command chain with their order and obedience. It is actually clear for most people that this model is no longer workable. Who would like to be led in such a manner! For this reason there are today further mechanisms for coordination, e.g. agreements, targets or the Linking pins. This naturally requires more time, than simply issuing an order. In the long run, however, the involved people learn to act autonomously. Then the remaining effort happens particularly in the information exchange.
  • Cooperation
    Also executives are forced to work together with others. For this purpose an environment should be created, that facilitates teamwork. Apart from the necessary equipment with spaces and media, workshops offer a setting outside of everyday life. In these work groups people coordinate the direction of the area and business models as well as the culture.

In all cases it is crucial to find the right balance between demanding and promoting. It is not a matter of not being able to exert pressure, but to create with the right leadership results AND to keep the acceptance, motivation and commitment of the employees.

Bottom line: Leadership is a critical task, since it has a large influence on the economic well-being of the company. It is an important contribution, in order to keep the teams on track and to provide them with sufficient hold. The same way as the too loosely or too firmly held egg breaks, the efficiency of a team stands and falls with too little or too much leadership.

See also: Out of the liability

The future of leadership

Guidance is one of the oldest roles in societies. And nevertheless executives are continuously looking for the right style of their role. Apart from the tasks and tools of leadership managers are concerned with the following questions.

  1. How much involvement is possible?
  2. How many rules are needed?
  3. How do I distribute tasks, authorities and responsibilities?
  4. How much loyalty do I need? How does it emerge?
  5. How do I promote cooperation?
  6. How to select executives?
  7. How much leadership do we need at all?

Do new systemic concepts like holistic, autonomous units, interconnectedness, participation, and self-organization, pave the way for new, yet not recognizable styles of leadership? How does the future of leadership looks like?

Fuehrung

Executives provide goals, organize, decide, evaluate and foster employees by using various tools (e.g. role descriptions, regular communication, performance reviews). They control with it their area, create orientation and take responsibility for the results (You find more about tasks and tools of leadership here: http://www.malik-management.com/en/malik-approach/malik-basic-models).
Without leadership, these aspects have to be developed in the team and consent has to be agreed. Positive examples of self-organizing groups are the agile teams in software development and other creative professions.

Nevertheless, new approaches imply also new answers to the questions of executives.

  1. Involvement results from democratic forms of cooperation, like having a say and participation. These can also be established in connection with hierarchical structures. For a long time, autonomous, self-organizing teams are common practice in the context of bureaucratic structures, like projects, Centers of Competence or Production islands.
  2. Regulations range from chaos to orderliness and from voluntary to mandatory. They are important tools, in order to clarify the desired behavior of the employees. These rules become meaningful with the appropriate level of detail that covers the tension between patronizing and autonomy. The joint agreement of basic guidelines in the governance minimizes the number of regulations.
  3. Task, authority and responsibility (TAR) of a role should be consolidated under one roof. The best example of the distribution of TAR is the subsidiarity principle of the Vatican. It bundles decisions at the point of action. Only if this is no longer possible, the role is established on the next higher level.
  4. The loyalty is an important element of leadership that cannot be directly created. On the one hand, it results from the authoritarian or charismatic attitudes of a leader. On the other hand, it evolves from the indirect stimulation of the commitment with personal, content-wise and formal commitment amplifiers.
  5. Cooperation can be designed in various ways by using the new possibilities of networking and self-organization. The exchange of information can be realized with common intranet sites, discussion groups and blogs. The employees access via mobile PCs or smartphones their necessary data wherever and whenever. The employees meet independently of their whereabout within phone and video conferences.
  6. The selection of executives has an influence on their acceptance. However, democratic approaches like the direct selection or recruiting of leaders by the employees, does not guarantee their effectiveness. Independently of the selection procedure, there will always be some employees, who accept the boss – or not. As you can also see in politics, democratic elections result in a distribution of 51% to 49% – i.e. half of the population does not want the winner.
  7. At the latest, when the number of members of an organization exceeds the magic Dunbar number of 150, we need leadership and an adequate hierarchy. Small organizations, like start-ups, can survive for a certain time without formal structures. We should not to forget that these are also often driven autocratically by a founder.

Bottom line: Like an orchestra will never like to forgo the conductor, we cannot let go the integrating role of leadership in the future. Each undertaking needs the strategic alignment and concluding decisions by executives. The guidance becomes state-of-the-art by using the new possibilities for cooperation.