Читать книгу Amplifiers - Tom Finegan - Страница 20

Several years ago, I was introduced to a video clip that quickly became a favorite and one that we use in our leadership development curriculum. The YouTube video of the “lone nut” illustrates the value of followership. The lone nut is a young man at an outdoor concert venue with a modest smattering of people. He starts to dance to the music as an individual in an open section of the field. At first, he is the lone nut dancing among a sea of oglers. Then, one person musters up the courage to join this lone dancer. This first follower makes two. The two dance joyfully until a third individual hesitatingly joins them. Once there are three dancing, others join the group in twos and threes. Some that were at first scoffing at the lone nut look to their friends sitting next to them, shrug their shoulders, and join in. Not only was it now safe for followers to join in but also they might be outcasts if they did not.

This example is not a perfect business example because it takes place at a festival. The individuals did not need to follow to accomplish a transformation effort or fulfill the mission of any organization. They were simply out to have some fun. None risked their career, nor did they have to worry about getting their other work done. But the example does highlight some key elements of leadership and followership.

First, let's look at the lone nut. The lone nut was an individual with an idea; in this case, an idea that there should be dancing at the festival. He demonstrated courage and he took action. He was not a particularly good dancer but his conviction that there ought to be dancing at the festival and that he would lead by example gave him the gumption to take charge. Have you ever found yourself taking a stance that has not yet been expressed? If so, you are playing the role of the lone nut.

Now the first follower is an important distinction. The first follower has that unique blend of leadership and followership characteristics. The first follower is a true Amplifier. Had the first follower never followed the lone nut, the lone nut never would have become a leader. He just remains the lone nut. The first follower needs courage. The first follower does not know if the rest of the crowd will think dancing in an open field is a good idea. The first follower also must display a similar level of courage and action. It is now much safer for the second follower to participate, yet there is still some risk of being ostracized. The lone nut and the first follower have taken some risk out of the equation for the others.

The second follower may be following for a variety of reasons. It might be that they truly respect the lone nut or first follower and will always follow them. It could be that they are bored and open for a new challenge. As the three are dancing in the field and other followers start to join, you can see that the idea is beginning to take hold and that it is now entirely safe for others to join in. As people join the group in twos and threes, more and more people join until there is now a large crowd dancing in the field. What's fascinating to me is that there was no big change management plan necessary to motivate this large crowd to get off their picnic blankets and into the open field to dance away. It was a spontaneous burst of energy inspired by the lone nut but made possible by the first follower.

Our research suggests that once there are three, or as we call it, the power of three, the environment is safe enough for voices to be heard and change to occur. Once the lone nut was surrounded not just by the first follower but by the second follower, there were three people up and dancing. The power of three in a team or a work group provides safety and enough support for each other that they can express their points of view in a constructive manner. As pressure mounts on boards of directors to become more diverse, there is a school of thought that gender and racial diversity on boards is imperative. Some proposals call for boards to have at least 40 percent gender diversity. Behind this research is the data that support the concept of the power of three and how it enables individuals to gain confidence in speaking up with opposing positions or points of view.

Why is it that followership has such a bad stigma in our society? In religious context, followership is worthy. Such was the case for the followers of Moses or Jesus. These followers believed in their leaders. They willingly chose to follow them. They trusted that these leaders had their best interests in mind and that they were there to serve them. The leaders showed their followers a better way to live. The leaders had a positive vision for the future and influenced their followers to take positive action to achieve the desired end state. Following is a basic human behavior, but courageous following is more difficult and can be developed.

Why do we follow? There are several reasons we may find ourselves following someone or something. Generally, as followers we are either obligated, compelled, or inspired. Obligatory followership comes into play in many aspects of our life, such as following traffic regulations, instructions from a teacher, visits to the DMV, and the like. Inspirational followership exists when we follow the purpose of an organization or our inner motives to take action. We may not be following the leader, but the cause the individual is trying to achieve.

One of the common themes from Amplifiers I've encountered over the years is how they frame their strategy and decision-making to support a greater purpose. Ann-Marie Campbell, executive vice president of U.S. Stores and International Operations at The Home Depot, advocates for “purpose over titles.” She favors purpose first, then position. If a customer needs something in the store, the purpose is to help the customer—the titles go out the door. She likens it to servant leadership, that leaders are there to serve the customers and store associates. Furthermore, Campbell dedicates substantial time walking the stores to better understand the consumer needs as well as those of The Home Depot associates on the front lines. By doing this, she is able to best understand the market that supports her decision-making, but more importantly, she scouts talent to find exemplary followers and future leaders of action and purpose.

The definition of followership is broken into three levels:

 The capacity or willingness to follow a leader. This is the most common definition and applies in the broadest setting.

 An individual who possesses the attributes of positive, active, and independent thinking; who evaluates actions and decisions as opposed to blindly accepting them; and who can succeed and lead others to success without the presence of the leader. We see this level of followership in many settings, including professional, societal, political, and personal.¹

 An interactive role individuals play that complements the leadership role and is equivalent to it in importance for achieving group and organizational performance. If you look over your life in professional and nonprofessional settings, review some of the most effective leaders and consider who were in their inner circle, chances are there were a few highly trusted people who had the ear of the leader and made them better. They had the courage to speak up, course correct the leader's thinking, and help the organization achieve greater performance.²

By definition, leaders need followers. But blind followers, those without the critical thinking required to independently assess what the leaders feed them, may lead to suboptimal outcomes. This is a far too common phenomenon in recent business, political, religious, and social settings. Great leaders grant their followers the right and obligation to challenge their point of view. This creates better outcomes, not the other way around. Poor or weak leaders demand compliance to their point of view. They reject outright differing points of view and publicly cast them and the people who profess them aside.

Some might argue that leaders create the vision, set the strategy, and arrange the resources in order for the organization to charge ahead. That is true in part, but I've found that in the most effective organizations, the leader themselves are in fact being led by a core group of trusted followers. This give-and-take dynamic between leader and follower creates the most enduring strategies. The leader needs the humility to accept the input, challenges, and critical adjustments necessary for them to refine the strategy and vision. It is precisely this input from followers that makes success possible.

Organizational culture plays a critical role in understanding followership at a company. For many large global or multinational companies that have been around for decades, there is a whole class of employees that exists just to get by. They have long since discarded their aspirations to ascend the corporate ladder and they have settled into comfortable positions where they have the skills necessary to perform their jobs. Yet there are some companies that have the ability to consistently reinvent themselves and followers in this context may look entirely different.

Robert Kelley published the seminal work on followership in his book, The Power of Followership, in 1992. In it, he described five core followership styles based on a two-by-two matrix in which the vertical axis is dependent/independent thinking and the horizontal axis is passive/active participation: passive followers, pragmatist followers, conformist followers, alienated followers, and exemplary followers.³

Passive followers do as they are told and rarely think critically. If they do, they generally keep it to themselves or share it with friends outside the work environment. Passive followers require consistent direction and oversight, yet they are able to effectively complete their tasks. Employees in this quadrant are commonly referred to as “sheep.” This group of followers are unlikely to resist change if the rest of the organization is already moving toward it because they see safety in masses.

The pragmatist followers are mediocre performers, somewhat stronger than the passive followers, but they are politically astute. This group of employees are considered “survivors” and they are primarily concerned with “what's in it for me.” They respond best to incremental improvements, incremental performance measurements, and incremental change. In most organizations, pragmatist followers represent a large proportion of the employee base. They will participate in change or transformation efforts after they know it is safe to do so. They generally hold key mid-level manager roles and are respected for their subject matter expertise. Pragmatist followers fully meet the expectations of leaders.

Let's look at the conformist followers. Generally speaking, there are more employees in this quadrant than there are in the alienated follower's quadrant. They represent the largest opportunity for leaders to effectuate change. These followers participate but they don't provide healthy criticism. They can be viewed as “yes” people. In big companies that have been successful over the years, many generally have a “nice” culture. The people tend to be cordial and have kind words to say. However safe it may seem, confronting the brutal facts is necessary for organizations to be better. Conformist followers exemplify nice at the cost of being most effective.

Regarding conformist followers, Calkins shared a story about one of his long-time mentees who was promoted behind him in many roles. Despite being a highly effective executive, his mentee was held back from reaching peak potential because they lacked the necessary follower trait of critical thinking. The mentee was an outstanding order taker, who would frequently say, “I'll do what you want me to do, just let me know.” Calkins emphasized that's not why they were promoted into the role. The mentee was encouraged to think independently so as to be able to present up what he felt was best for the function. If the leader constantly tells the follower what to do, the leader is not only doing his own job but the job of the follower. This follower always worried about what Calkins thought of him, not applying the critical thinking necessary to advocate for change in order to create greater business performance.

Alienated followers present particular challenges to leaders. They possess the independent and critical thinking necessary to be exemplary followers, but they do not channel this into active participation with the leadership. This group of employees are cynical but talented. One of the key challenges with this set of followers is that they generally have a following of their own due to their ability to think independently and their high level of capability. They may sit through a meeting in seeming agreement, then leave and assert that everything said in the meeting was off base and persuade the group to continue doing as they were. As such, there is a risk that alienated followers may lead others down the wrong path. Leaders need to either quickly convert alienated followers or remove them from the organization.

Over the countless interactions I've had with leaders and Amplifiers across a wide variety of size and complexity of organizations, one common theme has been the disappointment of conformist followers and the anger generated from the alienated followers. Passive and pragmatist followers don't elicit the same level of reaction that ignites the passion of leaders. I think it is because followers offer the greatest potential to change the trajectory or influence the organization's culture.

Alienated followers are critical and independent thinkers. They represent a smaller population within an organization because they have a tendency to self-select and leave the organization resulting in higher turnover. In my interactions with leaders across a wide variety of companies, I marvel at the optimism leaders have that they will be able to convert alienated followers into exemplary followers. Oftentimes, I wonder why the executives put up with alienated follower behavior. But because they are highly capable, and generally outperform the duties and responsibilities of their particular job role, their attitude is overlooked.

Being an exemplary follower is a prerequisite to becoming an Amplifier. These followers are a special breed of employee who seem to accomplish the impossible within organizations. They have a unique blend of independent and critical thinking combined with active participation to drive results. It is not difficult to spot an exemplary follower because they are often out front taking initiative, speaking or acting on behalf of leaders, are extremely competent in their job functions, and are adept at creatively solving problems facing the team or function. What's more, exemplary followers are those individuals who have the courage to speak truth to power—to tell the leaders when they are off track or making the wrong decision—but are able to do it in a constructive manner. In return, they earn the trust and respect of other leaders and their colleagues because their intentions are true, and their actions match the values of the organization.

Dan Calkins shared an experience when he was an exemplary follower, working for a terrible boss who lacked even the basic leadership skills. Calkins was out west, somewhat distanced from the New Jersey headquarters and therefore could be considered an absentee boss. Many of Calkins's peers who also reported to this boss had similar frustrations with the non-responsiveness. Instead of complaining, as a true Amplifier, Calkins set in motion a strategy to fill the leadership gap in a proactive way, clearly describing the decisions he would be making in the following week and why. He would follow that up with the decisions he made and the decisions he would be making in the subsequent week. He did not let the dysfunction of his boss slow down his need to grow the region. His peers were amazed how he could continue to execute the strategy and carry on in the absence of the decision-maker who was thought to be crucial for success.

When spotting leaders and followers, Tim Hassinger shared an experience with me that he learned in China. When you don't know the language, you learn to watch body language to identify leadership. Oftentimes, body language will give you many clues as to who commands leadership respect within a group. When observing a group of peers, notice when someone talks if the others take their phone out or if they sit upright. By observing, you can see who is really respected and who is ignored.

Effective leaders have a good understanding of what's in the minds and the inner psyche of their followers. These business leaders have invested in the tools to uncover and discover the styles, motives, and traits of the people in the organization. When these are understood in conjunction with performance measures, the full potential of the workforce is uncovered. With this information, the organization can ensure that the best possible people are assigned to the highest impact work. It's important to remember that followers are not cube dwellers. They are out and about throughout the organization and engaging in challenging ways. When reviewing the performance of these followers, there needs to be a core understanding of what makes an exemplary follower—and a sincere desire to extend beyond your core group to find others who fit the bill.