Send to KindleI once worked for a leader who was genuinely liked, maybe even loved, by everyone in the organization. He was very successful in leading the organization as long as everything was running along relatively smoothly. One of the things we subordinate leaders liked about him was that he did not interfere in our areas. All this was great until a crises arose and strong leadership meant stopping some bad behavior and insisting on returning to standards which were being ignored. At that point, our leader found it difficult to take the tough action that was required. As a result of his slow response the organization suffered.
As my own leadership development took me to higher levels of responsibility, I never forgot that lesson. Though I had a tremendous amount of respect for this particular leader, I knew I could not emulate that aspect of his leadership style. It had become obvious to me that being an effective leader and being liked by subordinates are two different things. Hopefully, as a result of good leadership, I would be liked by most subordinates, but I knew that could not be the goal. An effective leader strives to accomplish the organization’s goals while supporting and developing subordinates and, as a result, will find most subordinates like and appreciate that approach. But subordinate’s affection is not a measurement of leadership effectiveness.
Though I don’t know if he actually said it, Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying something like, “You can please all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but not all the people all the time.” Over the years, I’ve developed a theory, much like the quote, that has never failed me. A leader who is loved by all is probably not an effective leader. A leader who is hated by all is also most likely ineffective. A leader who is loved (or at least liked) by most but disliked by a few is probably the most effective leader.
Some years ago, Paul Hersey and Kevin Blanchard proposed the theory of Situational Leadership. To give a very simplified synopsis; Hersey and Blanchard stated that the style of leadership used should be determined by the type of follower and their readiness for the task. That means leaders must adapt their style of leadership, not according to popularity ratings, but according to the readiness of their followers. Leaders must know their followers, understanding both their overall readiness to be led, and their readiness to perform a specific task or adhere to a particular standard. Interestingly, just as the leader must adapt the leadership style to the follower, the follower will often adapt to the leaders style. If that sounds confusing, think about your own situations where you have had a leader who used a style that was appropriate compared to another leader who used a style that was less appropriate. Didn’t you want to adapt your own followership to the leader who used the style you felt was more appropriate?
As you develop as a leader and most importantly, as you develop new leaders, don’t lose site of this important point. Popularity comes from good leadership. But popularity isn’t your goal as a leader and you must be willing to forgo it in favor of the organizations standards and goals.
