Most of us have experienced many different types of leaders throughout our career. In turn, we have then been able to take away the good qualities and demonstrate them within our own leadership opportunities. Additionally, we are also reminded of the ones we never want to duplicate, and do our very best to ensure they are never identified as one of our own leadership traits.
The one leadership behavior that has confused me the most, has been the one of the “easy” leader. This individual can best be described as the one who checks in from time to time and appears to agree with any new initiatives you might have. The “easy” leader will not micro-manage you, but will hold you accountable to deadlines. They are the leader you enjoy working for and makes going to work fun. They appear to resemble a stronger leadership association to “consideration behavior”. This type of behavior is “essentially relationship behaviors and include building camaraderie, respect, trust and liking between leaders and followers” (Northouse, P.G.). As opposed to “initiating structure” where “behaviors are essentially task behaviors, including such acts as organizing work, giving structure to the work context, defining role responsibilities, and scheduling work activities” (Northouse, P.G.)
You might be wondering, “what’s wrong that”; isn’t this the leader everyone wants to work for? Or are they? My question is, “do they trust you, or are they disengaged with you?” For example, if they aren’t actively scheduling time with you, but rather waiting for you to approach them with new ideas and issues, do they even care about what you are doing? Are they concerned with elevating your performance, or do they expect you to elevate your own? They could be seen as a leader who believes in you, and knows you are going to push yourself regardless. Knowing this might allow them to spend more time coaching your fellow colleagues who might need it more, resulting in less time spent with you. Or, they simply don’t see the value you bring to the table, and instead are disengaged with trying to coach you and are hoping you might move on, rather than being forced to terminate your employment.
My hope is the “easy” leader can be compared to the parent of several children, of which the child who gets into more trouble is the child who will require more attention. The parent realizes the other child(ren) have an understanding of what needs to be done, and how they need to behave. They do not discount the other child(ren) on purpose, but rather trust they have the skills to maintain accountability and behaviors. Ideally this is the same mentality showcased by the “easy” leader.
Regardless, it’s extremely important that leaders always maintain good communication with their followers regarding performance expectations, and is supported by the behaviors they display. Allowing a follower to question their worth, could ultimately lead to the loss of a valuable employee from an organization. In 2018 employers are competing to maintain top talent, and they can’t afford to dismiss the positive reinforcement due to such employees.
Resource:
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. p72
Christine R Campbell says
HI Catherine,
I agree with your analysis of what the “easy leader” may be thinking but I’m finding in my own personal situation that employees nowadays are in search of continuous feedback. With that said, I have seen times when an “easy leader” had no idea that things were so bad when an issue was brought to Human Resources. This was because the employee felt frustrated and thought the “easy leader” wouldn’t do anything if they went straight to the leader with the problem. Is this “easy leader” an experience you have been through personally, and if so, are you able to elaborate on the emotional and social intelligence of the leader?
kmm6507 says
To play devil’s advocate, and speaking purely from my personal experience, the expectations of leadership are changing. In order to keep organizations as “flat” as possible, individual contributor responsibilities upon leadership are increasing along with span of control. Along with these changes, organizations are starting to put the onus on the employee for many of the items you mentioned: scheduling time, sharing of ideas, as well as individual growth and development. One of the criticisms outlined in our book of the trait approach is the failure to “take situations into account (Northouse, p. 31).”
As you’ve pointed out, there are serious consequences if leaders fail to communicate effectively with their teams. To be able to adjust to the changing expectations, I would recommend that organizations seek out leaders who strongly exhibit the trait of determination. Those with determination are “proactive, and have the capacity to persevere in the face of obstacles (Northouse, p. 25).” Leaders with determination would recognize the shifting responsibilities, yet understand that the motivation and “health” of their team remains critical for success.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Inc.
Hannah J Mcmanis says
Hi Catherine!
Reading your post gave me a flash back! So I have been a manager for a big box auto retailer for a few years now, and have been with the company for 6 years overall. I’ve worked in now 4 different stores and my last store, in Boston, my general manager was definitely one of the “easy” leaders you described in your post. I would definitely say he was more disengaged than just paying more attention to the other managers he was responsible for. A lot of times he was nonexistent, and while some people thought, like you said, maybe he trusts you all to just do your job and make decisions without coming to him for every little thing, but it couldn’t be farther from the truth. I’m not really sure why he was the way he was, but he was very hands-off, and at times his treatment of me in particular was unfair, and could even be interpreted as sexist. I always felt as though he treated me differently than the other male managers, holding me accountable for not doing things, but not doing so for the two men if they also did not do the same things. I struggled with this for about a year and a half, wondering if it was me, and my performance, doubting myself constantly because of the way he acted. My husband kept me sane through hit all, and eventually gave me the push I needed to go to HR and report all of it.
You are 100% right when you said in your post that allowing someone to question their worth could lead to losing a valuable employee from an organization. This is exactly how I felt for most of the time from January 2016 until August of 2017. I have given a lot to my company and relocated now three different times in 3.5-4 years, and his actions made me feel like I wasn’t any good at my job, and made me contemplate whether or not I wanted to stay at all. Luckily another relocation opportunity came shortly after my HR case was closed and my husband and I jumped at it.
Overall, I think you did an amazing job identifying these types of leaders, and how their personalities can be construed. Great job!!!