The “ vicious circle for leaders” (Obolensky,
2014), happens every day at my former organization within my department. The idea that the leader needs to take a
hands-on approach can mean many things, but in this case, I assume it to mean
that the leader steps in and solves the follower’s problem. This can be harmful to the organization in
many ways. While this process ensures
the followers remain dependent on the leader, it does not lend itself to
retention or confidence in followers.
When a company has leaders that have no intention of guiding their
followers to a level of self-management then there is no chance of hiring or
promoting from within. To me, the idea
of a leader is to make your followers stronger and self-reliant not dependent
and helpless.
Obolenski (2014) stated, “how a follower
behaves will dictate the type of leadership that is shown in response” (p.
162). While I agree with this statement
I also believe the opposite is true, that how a leader behaves will dictate the
type of follower they create. As usual,
I see leadership as a teaching role, not a dictator role, therefore, to me the
way to break the vicious circle is for the leader to step out of the role they
are playing and create a new one. In the
current cycle the leader responds to the follower asking for advice by stepping
in and solving the problem for the follower, in my circle, I would ask the
follower to talk the options through with me until we found one that was
appropriate.
Figure 1. A typical vicious circle for leaders. Reprinted from Obolensky, N.
(2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty
(2nd ed.). Farnham, England: Gower Publishing Limited.
In my new circle, the leader is always building on the
skills the follower already has. In my
mind, it is more shaped like an upward moving spiral than a circle, as once the
follower “learns” from the leader they will move up a level. Kelley (1988) described what distinguished an
effective from an ineffective follower as their enthusiasm, intellect, and
self-reliant behavior in the pursuit of the organizational goal. Why is this important to leaders? They have
the chance to mold some of these followers into future leaders, and others into
active and creative followers. The idea
of a leader wanting their followers to be reliant on them for everything is an example
of a top-down structure, which is not as effective in the long run. Kelley (1988) also pointed out that “self-managed
followers give their organizations a significant cost advantage because they
eliminate much of the need for elaborate supervisory control systems that often
lower morale” (p. 144). Whenever a large
gap appears between leaders and followers teaching and guiding are not
happening.
Even at the lowest level, leaders can empower their followers. When people feel they are being given the tools
required and the support they need they have a better outlook on the job
itself. I have never understood when leaders
keep knowledge locked away like it is a secret only they can know, the purpose
of a leader is to spread that knowledge.
A truly great leader will not only spread that knowledge but also show
their followers how to spread it also.
Kelley, R. E. (1988). In Praise of Followers. Harvard
Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.
Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership:
Embracing paradox and
uncertainty (2nd ed.). Farnham, England:
Gower Publishing Limited.
