Why leaders must play politics
Flickr user Victor1558
(MoneyWatch) Outlined below is a question -- how you answer it can determine your effectiveness as a leader.
Which of the following senior executives would you rather work for? Both are well paid and seasoned. Both are men of about the same age. Let's call one Aspirational, because that's his leadership style. He reaches for people's better sides, for the truth within them. He practices leadership-by-inspiration. He sits with the front-line employees of his company, who call him by his first name. He's a nice man, and he leads from the Good.
The second plays politics, and plays to win, so let's call him Political. If you ask him for a role model (which I have), it's someone like former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. His ethos is that you rise by any means necessary, and only when you get to the top can you make things better.
This exec got to the top five years ago, and now finds the organization he leads only responds to fear, intimidation, and threats. So that's how he leads. He listens to the grapevine, always knowing who is making a political play or who might be undercutting him. He publicly embarrasses his managers in meetings, especially those he hears may be jockeying for advancement. His motto is justice first, compassion later. Didn't hit your numbers? You're out. And we'll wish you well on your way out the door.
So there's your choice. Would you rather work for Aspirational or Political? Without a doubt, I'd rather work for Political. The reason is simple: Aspirational is fired executive walking. It's only a matter of time before Political leader takes him out.
There's another reason I'd rather work for Political: He's the better leader. My co-author Steve Zaffron and I defined leadership as "making something happen that wasn't going to happen anyway" in our book "The Three Laws of Performance." Which person is better able to get things done? Without a doubt, it is Political. This kind of leader will weather economic downturns, survive acquisitions, and fend off hostile takeovers.
So what's the advice here?
First, if you are like Aspirational leader, learn the dark arts of power. My personal blog this week gives some details as to how to do that. Make someone like Political Leader your mentor in this regard.
Second, if you are more Political leader, learn the light arts of aspirations, values, noble causes, and vision. Read books about your inner self, the truth that lies within, and all that. Find something that trumps your need to achieve. Because unless you lead with a higher purpose in mind, you'll live longer than Aspirational but get taken out by someone even more Political than you are. Worst of all, you'll look back and wish you'd been just a little more like Aspirational.
The point is simple: You need to be both, all the time. Aspirational without Political is ineffective. Political without Aspirational is soulless. Put them together, and you've got the Holy Grail of leadership.
Image courtesy of Flickr user Victor1558
Popular on MoneyWatch
- Bernanke sends stocks, bonds skittering
- Reverse cell phone lookup service is free and simple
- Why geniuses don't have jobs
- Bernanke holds the line on Fed monetary policy
- Microsoft slashes Surface prices to lure buyers
- Have you mastered the art of listening?
- Fed says it will continue $85B in bond purchases
- Service helps you use Twitter to find a job
Politics in business is a given, but the question was "who would you rather WORK FOR". Aspiration is always the better person to work for. I have worked for the political, they suck. Their idea of vision is watching their behinds and kicking yours!
Regards,
DA
Face it, if the premise of this guy's article was the intuitive answer (and correct one, btw) - that the Aspirational leader is better than the Political leader - you would be less likely to forward this link to a friend, less likely to discuss it, and certainly less likely to buy the guy's book. The author, Dave Logan, is trying to sell a book - if the premise of this post(and his book) was something that agreed with your intuition or seemed obvious to you, what reason would you possibly have to buy the book? So he comes up with this counter-intuitive premise and turns it into a book, suggesting you might have valuable insight to be gained from buying the aforementioned book.
I won't waste your time or mine with a detailed critique of the logic used by Logan to arrive at his conclusions - you either see the flaws already, or you don't. I will instead say this - it has been my experience that managers become "Political leaders" because they have to, not because they want to or because it's inherently better. It is the only way they are able to become leaders given that they typically lack the qualities that would enable them to be good "Aspirational leaders" (depending on the industry, this would typically include technical, product-specific, or analytical skills, knowledge, or aptitude). Sure, political skills are valuable tools in corporate management - and some would say a requirement, but that idea by itself is certainly not rocket science or even article-worthy.
In summary, this article is total garbage and a lame attempt at promoting what is sure to be a worthless book - which will serve only to make a few more bad managers in the world.
I just accidentally added a +1 Google rating ... I'll try to fix that.
There are so many effective ways to engage in productive conflict and professional disagreement without abusing others - and you don't burn through your human capital in the process.
It makes me ill that Logan is touting success by abuse as a good thing.
I work with billionaires and owners of multi-national corporations day in and day out and I can tell you not one of them would say that their wealth or power makes them or anyone else any happier than they were without it. The reality is being a good person and doing good things for others makes the world a better place and you don't need power or money to do either. You can't buy peace or happiness.
I life spent as a dictator at work is a wasted life spent making others miserable for the sake of the mistaken idea that power and wealth are what you need to change things. Even if one does do some good while on top it doesn't change what you did to get there. If you bake a cake with ****, just because you put icing on top of it doesn't make it any less putrid.
I would challenge any "leader" who thinks that stepping on others in pursuit of ones own ideals is the best way to lead and to live to get themselves out of the animal kingdom and into the 21st century and just try leading with dignity courage and mutual respect and see how far you get. And I assure you when a dictator does come for you see how many people rally around you in support and help you triumph. Let's evolve and put these disgusting myths to rest!
I agree that a good boss will have qualities of "Aspirational" and "Political" Leader that you describe. But a good boss treats all employees with respect, tries to bring out the best in his/her team, mentors people, provides constructive, if hard to hear, feedback and above all is honest in dealing with his/her colleagues. While you may have described an extreme case, unfortunately, the "Political Boss" that you describe does exist. But to give advice that someone choose to work for an "Abusive Boss" is just plain stupid. And to say that the Political Leader that you describe (he leads an "organization that only responds to fear, intimidation and threats...publicly embarrasses managers...rises to the top by any means necessary") is a "better leader" ...utter nonsense. This attitude is what gave us Enron, Adelphia, MF Global, etc., and any number of business scandals that have damaged companies and destroyed shareholder value. Good advice would be to change jobs and find a new boss and say why, in a professional manner, in the exit process to the Political Boss' superiors. What's wrong with businesses that allow abusively political bosses to survive is that they perpetuate the abusive culture in a company. People see that behavior as acceptable and repeat it.