VISIONARY LEADERSHIP

This comparison exercise separates management from leadership in a very clear way. This is useful for those wishing to take on more of a leadership role, although it is sometimes interpreted as slightly downplaying the important role of a good manager in organizational life. Most managers have to do both roles.

Kotter on what leaders really do

Kotter (1996) echoes the ideas of Bennis. He says, ‘we have raised a generation of very talented people to be managers, not leader/managers, and vision is not a component of effective management. The management equivalent to vision creation is planning.’ He says that leaders are different from managers. ‘They don’t make plans; they don’t solve problems; they don’t even organise people. What leaders really do is prepare organizations for change and help them cope as they struggle through it.’ He identifies three areas of focus for leaders and contrasts these with the typical focus of a manager:

• setting direction versus planning and budgeting;

• aligning people versus organizing and staffing;

• motivating people versus controlling and problem solving.

We go to liberate, not to conquer.

We will not fly our flags in their country.

We are entering Iraq to free a people and the only flag which will be flown in that ancient land is their own.

Show respect for them.

There are some who are alive at this moment who will not be alive shortly.

Those who do not wish to go on that journey, we will not send.

As for the others, I expect you to rock their world.

Wipe them out if that is what they choose.

But if you are ferocious in battle remember to be magnanimous in victory.

Iraq is steeped in history.

It is the site of the Garden of Eden, of the Great Flood and the birthplace of Abraham.

Tread lightly there.

You will see things that no man could pay to see

– and you will have to go a long way to find a more decent, generous and upright people than the Iraqis.

You will be embarrassed by their hospitality even though they have nothing.

Don’t treat them as refugees for they are in their own country.

Their children will be poor, in years to come they will know that the light of liberation in their lives was brought by you.

Extract from speech widely hailed in the UK press as visionary. It was given by Lieutenant Colonel Tim Collins to around 800 men of the battlegroup of the 1st Battalion of the Royal Irish Regiment, at their Fort Blair Mayne camp in the Kuwaiti desert about 20 miles from the Iraqi border on Wednesday 19 March 2003. His intention was to prepare the men for the battle that lay ahead. Many of the men were young and the support from people back in the UK was patchy.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’ I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice .

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

Extract from speech by Martin Luther King, Jr. He was a driving force in the non-violent push for racial equality in the 1950s and the 1960s. This speech was given on 28 August 1963, on the steps of the Lincoln memorial . It mobilized supporters and acted as the catalyst for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Bass: proof that visionary leadership works!

Bass (in Bryman, 1992) developed the notion of transformation leadership, which many managers find meaningful and helpful. He distinguished between transactional leadership and transformational leadership (see box), and identified through extensive research that charismatic and inspirational leadership were the components most likely to be associated with leadership success.

Transformational leadership involves the leader raising the followers’ sense of purpose and levels of motivation. The aims of the leader and the followers combine into one purpose, and the leader raises the followers’ confidence and expectations of themselves . Transformational leadership comprises:

• charisma;

• inspiration;

• intellectual stimulation;

• individualized consideration.

Transactional leadership is simply an exchange in which the leaders hands over rewards when followers meet expectations.

• contingent reward;

• management by exception.

Source: Bryman (1992)

Gardner: the need for leaders to embody a story

Howard Gardner’s (1996) influential research into the nature of successful leaders gave rise to some interesting lessons about visionary leadership. He chose eleven 20th century leaders who have really made a difference, and researched their lives and their work by reading their biographies and tracking down any speeches, letters , audiotapes and videotapes that were available.

He chose a mixture of different types of leader, combining business leaders, political leaders and those who influenced our thinking and behaviours without being in a position to lead directly. The list included among others Alfred Sloan, head of General Motors, Pope John XXIII, one of the most influential and popular popes of modern times, Martin Luther King, the advocate of African Americans, and Margaret Mead, a cultural anthropologist who deeply influenced our ideas about childhood, family life and society. (There have been attempts made to discredit her research, but she is still supported by many as being highly innovative and influential.)

Gardner’s findings indicated that those leaders who had really made a difference to the way others thought, felt and acted all appeared to have a central story or message. Stories not only provide background, but help the followers to picture the future. The story must connect with the audience’s needs and be embodied in the leader him or herself. Gardner makes the point that phonies are never in short supply, and the individual who does not embody or act out his or her messages will eventually be found out.

Margaret Thatcher

‘Britain has lost its way in defeatism and socialism. We must reclaim the leadership from ‘them’ (socialists, union trouble makers and the ‘wets’) and restore earlier grandeur.’

Margaret Mead

‘As human beings we can make wise decisions about our own lives by studying options that many other cultures pursue .’

Mahatma Gandhi

‘We in India are equal in status and worth to all other human beings. We should work cooperatively with our antagonists if possible, but be prepared to be confrontational if necessary.’

Leadership stories from Gardner (1996)

Heifetz and Laurie: vision is not the answer

Heifetz and Laurie (1997) say that vision is not the answer. They say that the senior executive needs to alter his or her approach to match the needs of 21st century organizations. They say that what is needed is adaptive leadership. This is about challenging people, taking them out of their comfort zones, letting people feel external pressure and exposing conflict.

‘Followers want comfort and stability, and solutions from their leaders. But that’s babysitting . Real leaders ask hard questions and knock people out of their comfort zones. Then they manage the resulting distress.’ They believe the call for vision and inspiration is counter-productive and encourages dependency from employees .

There is a difference between the type of leadership needed to solve a routine technical problem and the type of leadership needed to enable complex organizational change. Leaders of change should concentrate on scanning the environment, and drawing people’s attention to the complex adaptive challenges that the organization needs to address, such as culture changes, or changes in core processes. This means not solving the problems for people, but giving the work back to them. It also means not protecting people from bad news and difficulty, but allowing them to feel the distress of things not working well. These ideas are quite a long way from the concept of transformational leadership mentioned above, which indicates that successful leaders are charismatic, visionary and inspirational.

Jean Lipman-Blumen: leaders need to make connections rather than build one vision

Jean Lipman-Blumen (2002) says that vision is no longer the answer. She encourages leaders to search for meaning and make connections, rather than build one vision. She notes that there is a growing sense that old forms of leadership are untenable in an increasingly global environment. She says that the sea change in the conditions of leadership imposed by the new global environment require new ways of thinking and working, which confront and deal constructively with both interdependence (overlapping visions , common problems) and diversity ( distinctive character of individuals, groups and organizations).

Lipman-Blumen talks about connective leaders (see box) who perceive connections among diverse people, ideas and institutions even when the parties themselves do not. In the new ‘connective era’, she says that leaders will need to reach out and collaborate even with old adversaries. Mikhail Gorbachev is a good example of this in the political arena. Nelson Mandela is another.

Again, this approach is different from the suggestion that leaders need to develop and communicate clear vision in an inspiring way. Jean Lipman-Blumen encourages leaders to help others to make good connections, and to develop a sense of common purpose across boundaries, thus building commitment across a wide domain.

• Ethical political savvy. A combination of political know-how with strong ethics. Adroit and transparent use of others and themselves to achieve goals.

• Authenticity and accountability. Authenticity is achieved by dedicating yourself to the purpose of the group . Accountability is achieved by being willing to have every choice scrutinized.

• A politics of commonalities. Searching for commonalities and common ground, and building communities.

• Thinking long-term, acting short- term . Coaching and encouraging successors, and building for a long-term future despite the current demands of the day to day.

• Leadership through expectation. Scrupulously avoiding micro-managing. Setting high expectations and trusting people.

• A quest for meaning. Calling supporters to change the world for the better.

Source: Lipman-Blumen (2002)

Leadership for the 21st century: less vision, more connection?

The world is changing. Organizations are more dispersed and less hierarchical. More information is more freely available. People want more from their jobs than they used to. Does this then change the role of the leader of change?

As we write this book, the US and UK governments are trying to persuade the rest of the world that war on Iraq was the only way to ensure a peaceful future. However, opinion polls within Europe and the United States indicate that increasing numbers of people are against armed conflict and no longer believe that this is a good way of resolving international issues. Perhaps things are different now. The increasingly globalized economy and access to news and information are perhaps encouraging people to form cooperative relationships with a measure of independence. Are people’s needs for strong leadership starting to shift? Perhaps clear, visionary, authoritative leadership is no longer working?

When we look inside organizations, the territory is also changing. John Kotter (1996) draws our attention to changes in organizational structures, systems and cultures (see Table 4.3). What does this mean for leading change? We think this means a shift from expectations of one visionary leader to the need for increased connectivity and overlapping agendas between different groups.