In an ideal world, the titles "manager" and "leader" would go hand in hand, but that's not always the case. The Situational Leadership theory defines leadership as "a process by which a leader influences a constituent to produce a desired result." Merriam-Webster describes a manager as "a person who directs a team." Steve Farber, one of my favorite authors, believes leadership is the innate ability to cultivate a workplace that people enjoy.
It's no surprise that productivity and employee morale rely heavily on a manager's leadership style. One wrong move (or even the perception of being wrong), may cause employees to lose trust in their managers' abilities to guide their careers. The question is, what's the difference between a competent manager and a truly great leader? It's the ability to inspire employees during difficult times.
We recently received a call from a client who was concerned about a newly promoted IT staffer. "John" was a star -- technically proficient, reliable and competent, with an incredibly strong work ethic. When the previous IT manager left the company, it seemed obvious that John would be a natural in the role. Unfortunately, three months into the job, the team was not performing well and John couldn't seem to grasp all the varied elements of successful leadership. The company didn't want to lose John -- but it also knew that something had to change. John had never managed employees prior to his promotion, and the company's lack of training directly contributed to this dilemma.
Our client is not the only business facing this challenge -- many companies don't invest in proper management training for newly promoted managers. In times of economic turmoil, training programs are often the first to be eliminated in an effort to cut costs. While this may seem like an easy fix, it's actually the wrong choice and one that reveals a lack of big-picture thinking. In fact, a study conducted by Spherion Atlantic Enterprises LLC revealed that 61 percent of respondents who received training or mentoring said they were very likely to remain with their current employer for the next five years or more.
What our client didn't realize is that there were several options to improve John's management style. The company could invest in one-on-one coaching, professional development classes or other advanced certification. A cost-effective option would be to assign John a mentor from senior management for regular and formal check-ins. Meanwhile, there are also many online libraries that provide interactive, individual curriculums based on what employees need to learn.
Our client also realized that while they worked to improve John's management style, they simultaneously needed to rely on others in his team -- proven leaders within the company and even outside sources -- for true leadership.
The effectiveness of company leaders -- from the CEO and down through individual department managers -- is a crucial indicator of a company's success. Some of the core traits of a strong leader include:
- Can delegate but also knows when to step in. A leader empowers his or her team to work independently but is able to make the "big decisions" when necessary.
- Has a clear vision of the company and shares it with the team. Not only does this individual understand where the company is headed, he or she makes sure that everyone else understands it as well.
- Responds to employee leadership needs in a constructive manner. Not only will a leader try to steer others, but he or she knows the type of feedback that resonates best with each team member.
Yes, these are challenging times for business owners. But with more attention spent on motivating and keeping employees (the most critical part of any business), the true leaders will weather the storm with their employees at their side.
Life insurance as low as $14/mo for $250,000 or $21/mo for $500,000 of coverage. Contact MetLife®
Comments:
Finally, a managerial article from an author with credibility! Great article Burton, always love listening to what you have to say.
There are some excellent ideas shared here on what the company can do to help a new manager learn how to handle his role appropriately -- but I think you've missed a key point: John's manager - the person who promoted John - should have planned to support John more in his new role, ideally working in tangent with HR. IT staffers are typically introverted and, without mentoring, can be challenged by the amount of communications and interactions required by their first IT management position. In an ideal world, IT would be aligned to the business appropriately and John would have been working with cross-functional teams so he'd have a stronger support network, also. See http://jessicaobermayer.com for more on IT alignment.
Where do you find great leadership training?
Interesting article... I talk about this very concept in my latest book, MESSY Manager - Managing is messy, leadership is simple... just not easy- Managing an leading are 2 entirely different approaches and you can always see the managers because they are pushing instead of pulling. Managing is like pushing spaghetti across the table with your thumbs. It's doable but it's messy. Leadership on the other hand is about pulling the spaghetti. It's a much cleaner process. I agree with the distinct leadership qualities pointed out in this article. Jean-Guy Francoeur Author, MESSY Manager
Anybody can be a competent manager but not everybody can be a great leader. Managers can be made through education and training but leaders are in born and leadership skills cannot be taught at universities. If both of these skills are present on a person, then you have an employee you must take care of.
Great leader - competent manager, I don't see the difference...You can't be a competent manager who effectively leads a team unless you are a great leader.
A great leader or competent manager.....so those are the only choices? Barack Obama is neither a great leader nor a competent manager; you need to add a third category - inept.
Some ''John''s are just not cut to be managers or they do not even enjoy working with people. There is nothing wrong with it, of course. Neither did I at times. It can be fulfilling and also make you want to tear your hear out. No amount of coaching or mentoring will make a great difference for such people, although once I started having coaches and mentors I realized how much great coach/mentor can do for a great ''student''. I would recommend it to everyone.
It is spot on that companies appoint new managers without any training even and expect them to ''play by the ear''.
For a long time I am thinking about what you said ''In times of economic turmoil, training programs are often the first to be eliminated in an effort to cut costs. While this may seem like an easy fix, it's actually the wrong choice and one that reveals a lack of big-picture thinking.''
I conclude (and might be wrong) all who cut training did not see return, simple as that, or why would anyone in his right mind cut something he or his business benefits from. We, as consultants are not doing great job? Not delivering what produces results, people are not clear how to measure them? Why don't we explain how to measure it, or if we do why no one believes us?
Management of companies is responsible, too. If they invest in training that has to be the right training for the right person and the right problem or situation, and when a person completes the training he/she should be able to apply whatever they learned at that training, or at least be more motivated.
But someone said motivation is not enough. ''Motivation alone is not enough. If you have an idiot and you motivate him, now you have a motivated idiot'' I think this is Jim Rohn's quote. Not that I call anyone an idiot.
I am not going into discussion about managers and leaders this time, but would very much appreciate hearing someone else's opinion on why training is the first thing companies cut when cutting costs, and what might be solution? Thanks.
PS: I had experience with management who asked me ''what trainings I had'', payed training, sent people and forgot all about it, so if anyone understands training like that, no wonder they can do without any training/coaching. I had this impression : they had the money and they spent it. No more no less.