leadership and hierarchy
"Those who follow can not lead!"
this line from Counting Sheep Bigelf jumps from the receiver on and really has me thinking. An area by implementing still a big role in our society has is the economy. The status of "leader" is almost a title of nobility. A quality characteristic that stands out from the ordinary workers. recommended for senior roles. Managers work longer, take responsibility and do not simply end after 8 hours and can be the company company.
me personally is the suspect. For a systematic approach but should only be asked: What is leadership?
aim of the guide is to act to influence (and some thoughts) of people to achieve objectives. The structure of leadership is archaic nature and therefore not democratic. One (the leader / the manager) acts as primus inter pares. It leads. This implies that it is in its discretion, where it leads (target) and how this happens (the leadership and resources to meet the objective). Of course there are democratic governance, for example, lead the groups themselves. However, this is not the rule, either in business or elsewhere. Would it be the would be "managers" unnecessary.
But what can now be said about a manager? In leadership research, there are theories that investigate when leadership is successful. One can focus on qualities of leaders, the behavior of the leader and the leadership situation. Basically, all three concepts justified. What in the whole debate but I think is underestimated is a property. A leader must have vision. The best guide is useless if there is no goal or the led no target can be identified. For an ambitious goal, a vision, take into account efforts. Does this goal is not to perform even the smallest efforts to grumbling and pain.
Here we come now to the glaring problem that the leadership and the hierarchy is, in which it is embedded in the rule is. Can someone who is himself out (that follow) cause at all?
My contention: he can not. The primacy of the leader is lifted in a hierarchy again and twisted. The leader is the leader and subordinate. His position is not better than those of his subordinates. Both need to follow that one leading the way is still to neglect it.
He also does not lead itself, it lacks the leaders in a hierarchy of vision. Even if he has them, they're not important, as not specifying the target of his visions, but that of his superiors. If, in this case to conflict, he has to choose between passing or consequences, both will not work. The leader can determine not only the target is not, he can choose not to get there. In choosing the means of his guide, he is the superior restricted. He can act only to the extent that by its leader gives him freedom.
What then is the task of the leader? He's not a real leader, but a link. He is like the valet, who, while driving a car (virtually a part of the convoy), but only does what others tell him. To try a different picture: he is the shepherd. Does lead the shepherd, the dog is just one executor of his will. The guide is only agent that implements the will of another. We also do not come up with the idea, the chauffeur or shepherd dog to which associated with leadership.
What remains so capture? Who follows another, can not lead themselves. To run it needs its own free will, an own goal. In a hierarchy, as is typical in government agencies and businesses, or even the military, that leadership is hardly possible. The lead decision-makers at the top (if at all possible would result in the company and the supervisory board or shareholders, because ultimately they can provide the management transfer). Hierarchies destroy all management positions . Including design them to steering positions
reasoning can be two things:
1) can be legitimizing the steering wheel in a hierarchy only by the hierarchy itself and the related penalty power. Other concepts like that of a visionary or charismatic leadership can not be maintained in a hierarchy. This course is also the right of managers to yourself then. Initiative and imagination are also required of simple subjects, can not also explain why a manager more than a simple Befehlsausführer is.
2) The status of the executives with whom they are sometimes considered, is untenable. should be questioned
what extent this work in hierarchies, the subordination and consequences of our self-harmony as democratic citizens. In my opinion, would require a rethink on that ground alone. Instead of one-sided as to require subordinate loyalty and obedience, would be of helpful to the employee - employer relationship designed as a market transaction. It is important that both meet at eye level and the choice is yours. Condition would therefore, that the state provides a perfect market, where labor is supplied and demanded.
0 comments:
Post a Comment