A633.6.5.RB- Circle of Leadership

An office employee goes to work and while working on an assignment asks for advice and through the questions asked shows a low skill level to his boss. The boss gets concerned and decides to take a more hand on approach with the employee. The employee realizes this and their confidence is lowered and they start to believe they have to defer more to the boss. That is one cycle of what can become a vicious circle. Does it ever stop and if it does, do you think it ends well?  When the employee defers more to the boss and asks more advice are they further demonstrating less skill or possibly less will. How much more concerned does the boss become? Do they become so hands on with them start job duties start being taken away? How long can this go on?

These five small exchanges between subordinate and superior can create a circle of unwanted behavior. Followership and leadership are equally important in organizations. Human resources are a company’s best asset and not growing them to be the best followers and also the best leaders possible is a missed opportunity. So how does this happen? Two things are really important factors which are skill and will. Together these form a skill/will matrix. Skill can be measured based upon technical content and operational process (Obolensky, 2014). “Skill is the knowledge needed to do the job (technical content) as well as how to about it (operational process)” (Obolensky, 2014, p. 162). “Will is the motivation to do the work, as well as the motivation to do it without supervision” (Obolensky, 2014, p. 162). When high skill meets high will this is an indication of someone who is a performer. The goal is to move those not performing toward this state. Obolensky is quick to point out that there are four states within a skill/will matrix and not four types of people. Someone who is highly motivated and capable can become demotivated for any number of reasons and move out of the performer state. Think of performance burn out here, among other possibilities.

Followership is not necessarily how good you are at following, taking direction, and doing as you are told. It is the extent followers are prepared to take the lead (Obolensky, 2014). There are five levels of followership, again these are states and not types:

Level 1: Wait to be told

Level 2: Ask to be told

Level 3: Seek approval for a recommendation

Level 4: Seek approval for action undertaken

Level 5: Get on and inform in a routine way

(Obolensky, 2014)

Level 1 is the lowers level and describes someone who waits around to be told what to do. This is not a very productive state. Level 2 is a bit better they are looking for direction and asking for it, but this is only slightly more proactive. Level 3 describes someone is unsure what to do, has an idea, but seeks approval before doing anything. Level 4 followership describes someone who has taken action but is not sure if it is the right thing to do so they look for confirmation. Level 5 are capable and accountable for actively doing without needing direction. Periodically there is reporting between the follower and leader, but a level 5 follower is independent and able to lead themselves.

According to Obolensky behavior breeds behavior. I have been in a previous situation like the diagram above. I worked for an attorney and when I started as his paralegal I had some experience but was relatively pretty new out of college. He went to his office closed the door every day when he was in the office. I wondered why we never worked together as an initial training period for me to get to know his preferences and so we could become a cohesive team. I would email work to him and he would sign it and leave it on my desk or tell me to come get it. Sometimes he would obliterate the work and redo it himself. I could tell there were certain things he did not like so I tried not to do them and he would just end up doing these things himself. There was growing fear within this cycle that lead to paranoia for the thirteen months I worked at this office.

My confidence became super low and I had a felt sense something was wrong. The attorney came over from a very large firm to this small office of two attorneys. I always wondered why he would leave such an atmosphere. We were never in the position to chat with each other and honestly it was a really strange arrangement. His paralegal from his previous firm showed up a couple times for what looked like a social visit. One day I was called into his office and he let me go. It turned out that he made an agreement before I was hired that he had to have enough billable hours to be able to bring on his former paralegal at her previous rate. In a way I never had a real chance if that was the plan all along. He never wanted to know me or to train me. But for those thirteen months we were caught up in this awful cycle. No one should have to feel like that at work. So how do you break free?

Not everyone in a position of power is a leader and not everyone at the top of the business food chain knows how to coach or mentor followers. Those will low skill need to be helped in a way where they are grown level by level. Those with low will might be more difficult but need to be motivated. When looking up skill/will matrixes there were terrible terms filled in such as “fire them”, “whip them (into shape?)”, “train them”, or “promote them”. That sounds more like breaking mustangs and horse training than what you should say about human beings. When a follower asks for advice and is showing low skill this is a signal for an opportunity. Yes, it is okay to be concerned. But what you do next sets up the board like a chess game of continuous moves and countermoves. Determine where that person’s state falls within the levels of followership and try to move them up one level. Wait to see that they have gotten the hang of it and then work with them to grow one more level. Obolensky warns that you cannot take someone from Level 1 to Level 5 overnight.

Empowerment, encouragement, and motivation go further than making someone feel bad they shrink away. All that accomplishes is frustration for the leader and misery and shame for the follower. For many organizations hiring and letting go of employees is a high cost on an organization. For cost purposes alone is a reason to try to make it work. Beyond that and looking at more humanistic aspects doing this will all employees promotes strong followership, strengthens the organization, and can create a high performance team. If behavior breeds behavior which would be better: an epidemic of those leaving the organization and those who stay to have low skill and low will or energized people who want to be a part of the organization and make contributions and watch it prosper? I know which one sounds better to me. So what are you going to do to be a part of it? Don’t give up on people, they are worth it.

Reference:

Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex Adaptive Leadership (2nd. Ed.). Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing