QUESTION
"People are likely to accept as a leader only someone who has demonstrated an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects others to perform."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
ESSAY RESPONSE
Acceptance of a leader is essential to the effectiveness of that individual. While the organization may thrive without the leader, the leader cannot succeed without the full buy-in of the organization. This essay will provide evidence, drawn from my personal experience and from corporate history, that leaders must not have demonstrated capabilities in the tasks of their team members. Instead, other characteristics, such as active listening, people development, and the ability to build morale, are more critical to the acceptance of a leader.
First, from my experience being placed at the head of acquired companies, I can say that leaders need not have demonstrated ability in the activities of their team members. The last line of code I wrote was in high school, yet I have been able to turn around three different software companies in the last three years. Similarly, most, if not all, of the existing employees of our acquired companies possessed many years more knowledge in terms of the details of the product and the specifics of the industry. However, despite these shortcomings, I found that by listening attentively to people's challenges, and providing them with the tools and opportunities to succeed in their roles, I was accepted as a leader. Granted, I was put into a de facto position of leadership by being the figurehead for the acquiring company; however, I found that my effectiveness as a leader did not materialize until I had the buy-in of my staff.
It is not only in my personal experience that I can find examples of leaders who have excelled without knowing the intricacies of all their subordinates' activities, but also from corporate history. Two examples, in particular, come to mind. IBM's spectacular turnaround during the early 1990's was led by an outsider, Lou Gerstner, who was admittedly not a 'techie' and who had built his resume in financial and professional services with American Express and McKinsey. It is safe to say Lou had little knowledge of the inner workings of computers, code or networks. Similarly, although a longtime member of the automotive industry, Alfred Sloan could rarely be said to be on the factory line assembling parts or installing fenders. Instead, both of these leaders relied on systems, trust in their people, and fanatical competitive spirits to boost their companies to heights they had never imagined.
While demonstrated ability in an area can certainly help a leader build credibility within an organization, it is not an essential condition. My personal experiences in corporate mergers and acquisitions, and the tales of leaders from Lou Gerster and Alfred Sloan support this position.
"People are likely to accept as a leader only someone who has demonstrated an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects others to perform."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
ESSAY RESPONSE
Acceptance of a leader is essential to the effectiveness of that individual. While the organization may thrive without the leader, the leader cannot succeed without the full buy-in of the organization. This essay will provide evidence, drawn from my personal experience and from corporate history, that leaders must not have demonstrated capabilities in the tasks of their team members. Instead, other characteristics, such as active listening, people development, and the ability to build morale, are more critical to the acceptance of a leader.
First, from my experience being placed at the head of acquired companies, I can say that leaders need not have demonstrated ability in the activities of their team members. The last line of code I wrote was in high school, yet I have been able to turn around three different software companies in the last three years. Similarly, most, if not all, of the existing employees of our acquired companies possessed many years more knowledge in terms of the details of the product and the specifics of the industry. However, despite these shortcomings, I found that by listening attentively to people's challenges, and providing them with the tools and opportunities to succeed in their roles, I was accepted as a leader. Granted, I was put into a de facto position of leadership by being the figurehead for the acquiring company; however, I found that my effectiveness as a leader did not materialize until I had the buy-in of my staff.
It is not only in my personal experience that I can find examples of leaders who have excelled without knowing the intricacies of all their subordinates' activities, but also from corporate history. Two examples, in particular, come to mind. IBM's spectacular turnaround during the early 1990's was led by an outsider, Lou Gerstner, who was admittedly not a 'techie' and who had built his resume in financial and professional services with American Express and McKinsey. It is safe to say Lou had little knowledge of the inner workings of computers, code or networks. Similarly, although a longtime member of the automotive industry, Alfred Sloan could rarely be said to be on the factory line assembling parts or installing fenders. Instead, both of these leaders relied on systems, trust in their people, and fanatical competitive spirits to boost their companies to heights they had never imagined.
While demonstrated ability in an area can certainly help a leader build credibility within an organization, it is not an essential condition. My personal experiences in corporate mergers and acquisitions, and the tales of leaders from Lou Gerster and Alfred Sloan support this position.
