By Randy Chittum, Ph.D.
Leaders at every level have to measure how broad and strategic they are against being close to and understanding the actual work. It used to be a foregone conclusion that broader was better. Now leaders are being asked to balance that with the paradigm of execution, suggesting they should be close enough to the work to manage it. In truth, this is not a static balance, but a dynamic movement between the balcony (providing perspective) and the dance floor (being close enough to the work to understand it). Leadership mastery is no longer only being able to do both, but knowing when to move from one to the other.
As leaders engage in this back-and-forth, I notice a bias to drift toward the dance floor. This makes sense when we realize how many leaders are selected for leadership based on their functional ability alone. We know that the skills that make a sales rep successful are not the same as those that will make a sales leader successful. It should not be a surprise that under stress we tend toward those things that have made us successful in the past.
Twice as much
I was once with an executive team when the CEO asked a brilliant question. He asked the team how he could get twice as much from each of them. He specified that he did not mean twice as many hours or twice as much work, but twice as much in terms of results and output. As they worked their way through this question, I kept hearing that each would have to get on the balcony more and provide higher-level strategic leadership. It all sounded perfect.
And yet something was missing. It was the dynamic balance. To get on the balcony you have to be willing to leave the dance floor. Some of us fear this because we doubt our capacity to lead from the balcony. Some of us fear this because we do not fully trust those on the dance floor to do their part. What I heard was a leadership distinction that came to serve us well – principles verses preferences.
Knowing when you are involved in principle-based leading instead of preference-based leading can propel you steadily toward higher-order thinking. We are using principles when we define broad operating guidelines where we articulate value-based boundaries on what we want. We are using preferences when we get involved in choosing between multiple alternatives, all of which meet the operating principles. What is principle to one person may be preference to another. This is based on level of responsibility and decision-making authority.
A quick example illustrates the point. Assume you are responsible for all sales in a company with multiple product lines and markets. It is principle-based to tell a product-based team that you want them to grow revenues by 20 percent this year. It might even be principle-based to tell them that you want that revenue growth to be at the same margins as this past year, and that they need to achieve this with the same staff and expense costs. Can you see how this provides most of the important information that the team needs to decide how to proceed? Compare this to the preference-based leader who informs the team which customers they should call on, provides them the script or presentation, tells them how to dress when they visit a new customer, and provides mandatory marketing and support.
Let me be clear. Great leaders might on occasion get involved in things like this. The question is about preponderance. Where are you spending your time? Is that the best use of your leadership? How would those around you answer those questions?
About the author
Randy is a leadership and organizational development consultant with 25 years of experience, the last 10 at PSS World
Medical where he was the Vice President of Leadership Development. Randy also teaches leadership and executive
coaching in the Institute for Transformational Leadership at Georgetown University. For more about what leaders can
do to help manage the transition of others, visit www.still-leading.com.
Leave a Reply