By John S. Quaisie
The concept of team leadership echoes throughout God’s creation. Wherever there is a group of people, the leadership factor becomes too obvious.
In one job interview session, about 20 candidates were put in two groups to work on a practical project, to test their problem-solving skills. No leaders were appointed for the groups. It was observed that, after an initial moment of hesitation and waiting, one of the members (in each group) came out voluntarily to facilitate their team to achieve their goal within the set time frame.
It is interesting to see how children choose their leaders. When they are playing together, children are able to identify someone among them, who has the needed skills to guide or direct them.
THE LEADERSHIP STYLE
While the idea of team leadership is well known, the quality of leadership, however, presents many teams with serious challenges. Indeed, one of the critical factors which accounts for the success and failures of teams is the leadership style. A good look at the operations of the various corporate entities in the global market would reveal a variety of leadership styles, including the following:
- Autocratic
- Democratic/Participative
- Laissez-Faire
- Transactional
- Transformational
- Bureaucratic
- Servant
- Visionary
In our current reflection, we shall focus on some of the leadership styles and their impact on teamwork.
It is generally accepted that organizations make more progress when leadership is based on democratic and transformational models. However, in certain critical situations, some groups and organizations have made significant progress when the leadership adopted autocratic means to carry out their developmental agenda. In world history, there have been stories of dictators who have used their authoritarian style to achieve some success for their nation, organization and business entities.
One of the leaders generally considered as autocratic, is Napoleon Bonaparte, a French military general who made exploits in his military career during the French revolution of the 18th century; and later established himself as France’s head of state in the 1800s.
In the exercise of his leadership style, Napoleon was considered to be a despot. However, he was able to initiate great reforms which benefited his country. He expelled very vocal critics of his regime, and at the same time used the services of persons with exceptional skills and talents, to accomplish his objectives.
Today, Napoleon is remembered as an enlightened despot, who introduced great reforms in France. He is credited with the beautification of Paris.
Some other autocratic leaders create a giant image of themselves and make all the decisions, with almost no input from others. They see themselves as the only wise people with the best solutions. All others must subject themselves to their bidding.
- The Praise Singers
Having silenced possible critics and dissenting voices, the autocratic leaders surround themselves with praise singers. They are led to believe that the leader does no wrong. For example, the Chief Executive Officer of an organization would give ear only to employees who would always agree with them.
In the CEO’s thinking, all categories of staff – the utility staff, the middle-level managers, supervisors, senior managers – must buy the leader’s ideas and applaud them for every step they take, even when it is obvious that they are going the wrong direction.
- The Emperor’s New Clothes
Many stories around the world have tried to depict the fate of autocratic rulers who try to silence critics and dissenting voices in their team. In a literary folktale written by a Danish author, Hans Christian Andersen and published by C.A. Reitzel in 1837, an authoritarian ruler, an emperor who loved to change his clothes very often to suit different occasions, hired the services of two men who presented themselves as expert in designing and weaving special clothes.
The two men were actually crooks who intended to deceive the emperor. According to the con men, anyone who could not see the special clothes would be considered stupid or incompetent.
When the emperor’s special clothes were ready, he sent his ministers to examine them and give him feedback. The officials went to the crooks to inspect the attire, but they did not find the special clothes. Considering the emperor’s autocratic behaviour, and to avoid being shamed, they decided to present a false report which would agree with the emperor’s expectation. They all praised the emperor for securing such beautiful and gorgeous clothes fit for a great occasion.
On the appointed day, the emperor was dressed by the two con men for the great public meeting. As the emperor, accompanied by his ministers, presented himself to his people, there was general acclamation, praising the sovereign for his special outfit. No one dared raise a dissenting voice for fear of being punished.
As the emperor passed by, a young boy exclaimed, “But the king is naked.” At this point the emperor realized that he had been fooled and disgraced in public.
This folklore illustrates the fate of dictators and authoritarian leaders who suppress people with dissenting views.
- Team Members Who Dare To Be Different
In world history, some individuals and groups have dared to be different, inspite of possible sanctions.
In 2 Kings Chapter 5, we read about a famous Syrian army commander who suffered from leprosy. It took his courageous Hebrew slave girl – a housemaid – to recommend a prophet in Samaria, Israel, who could solve his problem.
Naaman, accompanied by his servants, arrived at the house of Elisha, the prophet. Elisha sent his servant to instruct Naaman to dip himself seven times in the river Jordan for his full healing. Filled with pride, Naaman felt humiliated by Elisha’s action.
He expected the prophet to come out and meet him and speak directly with him, instead of sending word through his servant. Besides, he also found it humiliating to dip himself in Israel’s river Jordan. He boasted of the great Syrian rivers like the Abana and Pharpar, where he could wash himself with dignity.
In this angry mood, Naaman was bent on returning home to Syria, without trying the prophet Elisha’s solution. It took the action of his bold and courageous subordinates, who accompanied him, to bring him to reason.
“My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, ‘Wash and be cleansed’!” (2Kings 5:13 NIV).
Naaman decided to try his servants’ proposal. In the end, he was totally cleansed from the leprosy. The servants did not follow their master blindly and say ‘yes sir’ to all his instructions. They dared to be different; and that saved their master and brought brighter dimensions to their team.
- Team Loyalty
In an organization, team loyalty plays a major role in the achievement of corporate goals and objectives. The Top Executive Team, the Senior Management Team and Supervisors must be able to present a united front when addressing issues relating to the entire organization, or sections of it. Lack of serious commitment to decisions regarding strategic directions and the handling of confidential information could cause serious problems. Let us examine the following scenarios.
- At the end of an interview session, the panelists meet to discuss the performance of the candidates for final selection. Later, the selected candidate, a female, is officially employed. One of the interview panel members who knows the new employee, reveals to her which of the interviewers were against her being employed. Consequently, the new employee carries with her negative thoughts about the panelist. You could imagine the kind of cooperation he would receive if she became a member of his department.
- The Senior Management Team of a company meets to brainstorm on an important issue. Members are deeply divided on the action to take. At the end of the session, however, a consensus is reached and the decision is communicated to the general workforce.
Some of the workers are opposed to the management decision. A male member of the Senior Management informs some of the staff privately that he disagreed with his colleagues on the action they were going to take. This disclosure could cause mistrust among members of the management team. Besides, the generality of the employees would think that management does not seek the interest of the staff.
The above scenarios are examples of serious breach of trust.
Team members are required to commit themselves seriously to the team and be in the position to stand by its decisions, inspite of their own personal opinion or views.
In many cases, workers have resorted to strike action, due to access to confidential information shared by some members of the Senior Management Team.
Personal views and opinions must give way to collective decisions.
John is a HR/Management Practitioner
Phone/WhatsApp No. 0244599628
E-Mail: [email protected]
