The dark side of leadership: : Abuse of power

JOHN MARK T. MARUQUIN

Ph.D. Major in Development Management

Divine Word College of Laoag, Ilocos Norte Philippines

Abstract

Leadership does not endure without power. Thus, we have to emulate power in order to have a strong foundation for responsible leadership. Leaders need motivation and predispositions and subordinates adjuncts have risen to define the abuse of power as a significant organizational concern. Because of the manifestation and needfulness of power of accountability and transparency mechanisms, including the code of conduct and ethical behavioral standards, should be standardized that serves as against abuse of power. Leaders generally defy accountability mechanisms; they are essential for maintaining employee confidence and credibility. Therefore, the “dark side of leadership” may be restructured or aggravated by the type of personality and task of the leader, or even a disparity of leadership.

Keywords: leadership, abuse, power, dark side

Introduction 

In my eleven years working in a government hospital, I have heard two questions more than any other. How do I work with a bad leader? How I overcome bad leaders/s in my workplace? People struggle working for those who are not as good as any leaders or working with leaders less talented than they are. Everything rises and falls on leadership. If you work for a bad leader, you probably feel like it mostly falls on you!

This article discusses this issue on leadership and abuse of power. Finding a strategy for success when dealing with a leader who is difficult to work with. My statement going in is that you have already tried to be cooperative and work things with him or her. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Though you don’t have any control over that you can control what you do, and how you can respond.

If things don’t go the way you planned, it may be time to move on or decide to stay and try to make the best of the situation. I believe leaders are responsible for who and what they lead. Bad bosses often shirk their responsibilities and try to place them on the follower and you end up carrying the load. Whenever this happens, as far as it’s possible, you should attempt to ask questions of your leader in such a way that the responsibility goes back on his or her shoulders where it belongs.

Defining Leader, Leadership, and Power

A Leader is a person who has an unusual degree of power to create the conditions under which other people must live and move and have their being, conditions that can be either as illuminating as heaven or as shadowy as hell. A leader must take special responsibility for what is going on inside his or her own self, inside his or her consciousness, lest the act of leadership creates more harm than good (http://www.netmba.com/mgt).

Leadership is an area of study that has been subjected to whims, has been subjected to intense scrutiny, and has developed an almost iconic glow of the leader as all things to all people. Globalization’s push has spurred new thinking in numerous directions as it pertains to leadership in general and educational leadership specifically. Among some of the greatest influences are global views that are generally corporatist in nature (Waite & Waite, 2010). This tends to guide leadership towards a much more managerial aspect (White & Cooper, 2017).

Power, the need for power distinguishes itself into two sub-categories: the need for institutional power and the need for personal power. Leaders who have a high need for institutional power focus their energies on organizing the efforts of others for the accomplishment of organizational goals. Leaders who have a high need for institutional power generally make more effective leaders than those with a high need for personal power because of their motivation to pursue a unified effort toward organizational success. Although attracted to positions of power and influence, leaders with a high need for personal power seek primarily to control others’ behaviors. They often lack the required adaptability and emotional intelligence to succeed in such positions (http://www.netmba.com/mgt/ob/motivation.mccleland). 

Power Issues: Relationships, Power, and Abuse

Relationships are involvements, affiliations, or connections between people. The leader/follower relationship is defined by their interaction and mutual connectivity within an organization. Power is defined as the exercise of authority, which results in the governing of others’ behaviors. Power represents the currency in organizations that allow individuals and groups to satisfy needs and achieve objectives, as well as stems from the follower’s belief in the legitimacy of the leader’s right to influence and give orders and the follower’s obligation to comply. Abuse is the inappropriate use of power. Power is abusive to subordinates when its outcomes are injurious to their dignity and dysfunctional for performance or rewards (http://www.netmba.com/mgt/ob/motivation/mccleland). 

Legitimate power is positional power, replete with a title that signifies the parameters of authority to which the individual is entitled. Judicious power refers to the just, equitable and fair use and/or distribution of power by those in authority who laid claim to legitimate power. This is where intent comes in. Only the seeker of power may know the reasons for the acquisition of any particular form of power. Those who tend to seek power for its own sake, or who seek power to gain influence, or to abuse power in the form of bullying behaviors serve only themselves. It is self-serving power that leads to abuse of power, as decisions tend to be made in light of ones own “dark” needs (White, & Young, 2018)

DARK SIDE OF LEADERSHIP 

Harvard professor Barbara Kellerman believes that limiting our understanding of leadership solely to good leadership ignores the reality that a great many leaders engage in destructive behaviors. Kellerman says, undermines our attempts to promote good leadership: “I take it as a given that we promote good leadership not by ignoring bad leadership, nor by presuming that it is immutable, but rather by attacking it as we would a disease that is always pernicious and sometimes deadly”.

According to Barbara Kellerman, bad leaders can be ineffective or unethical. She identifies seven types of bad leaders:

Incompetent. Leaders do not have the motivation or the ability to sustain effective action. They may lack emotional or academic intelligence, for example, or be careless, distracted, or sloppy. Some cannot function under stress and their communication and decisions suffer as a result.

Rigid. Rigid leaders may be competent, but they are unyielding, unable to accept new ideas, new information, or changing conditions.

Intemperate. Intemperate leaders lack self-control and are enabled by followers, who do not want to intervene or cannot.

Callous. The callous leader is uncaring or unkind, ignoring or downplaying the needs, wants and wishes of followers.

Corrupt. These leaders and at least some of their followers lie, cheat, and steal. They put self-interest ahead of the public interest.

Insular. The insular leader draws a clear boundary between the welfare of his or her immediate group or organization and outsiders.

Evil. Evil leaders commit atrocities, using their power to inflict severe physical or psychological harm (http://www.netmba.com/mgt/ob/motivation).

DARK SIDE OF ABUSE OF POWER

Power is the foundation for influence attempts. The more power we have, the more likely others are to comply with our wishes. Power comes from a variety of sources. Soft power is based on attracting others rather than forcing them or inducing them to comply. Leaders use soft power when they set a worthy example, create an inspiring vision, and build positive relationships with subordinates.

Leaders typically draw on more than one power source. The manager who is appointed to lead a task force is granted legitimate power that enables her to reward or punish. Yet in order to be successful, have to demonstrate her knowledge of the topic, skillfully direct the group process and earn the respect of task force members through hard work and commitment to the group.

Unfortunately, abuse of power is an all-too-common fact of life in modern organizations. In one survey, 90% of those responding reported that they had experienced disrespect from a boss at some time during their working careers; 20% said they were currently working for an abusive leader. “Brutal bosses” regularly engage in the following behaviors, some of which are the following:

            Deceit. Lying and giving false or misleading information.

Constraint. Restricting follower’s activities outside work, such as telling them whom they can befriend, where they can live, with whom they can live and civic activities they can participate in.

Coercion. Making inappropriate or excessive threats for not complying with the leader’s directives. 

Selfishness. Blaming subordinates and making them scapegoats.

Inequity. Supplying unequal benefits or punishments based on favoritism or criteria unrelated to the job.

Cruelty. Harming subordinates in such illegitimate ways as name-calling or public humiliation.

Disregard. Ignoring normal standards of politeness, obvious disregard for what is happening in the lives of followers.

Deification. Creating a master-servant relationship in which bosses can do whatever they want because they feel superior (http://www.netmba.com/mgt/).

The greater a leader’s power, the greater the potential for abuse. This prompted Britain’s Lord to observe that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. The long shadow cast by absolute power, as in the case of North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il and until recently, the military junta in Burma, can be seen in censorship, repression, torture, imprisonment, murder, and starvation. Business and other organizations of power through top-down structures that emphasize status differences, loyalty, dependence, fear, and obedience while celebrating “tough bosses” and business practices like hard bargaining and aggressive marketing tactics.

Conclusions

It is well known that effective leadership behavior depends, in large measure, upon the leader's ability to solve complex social problems that arise in organizations (Mumford, et al., 2000). Also, it has long been known that employees with weak or lower levels of social adaptability report heightened job tension, including emotional exhaustion. This malaise extends, as well, to lessened job satisfaction and to lower work effort when abusive supervision or power increases. The reverse is also true. Employees with greater social adaptability skills were less strongly affected by perceptions of abusive supervision (Mackey, et al., 2013).

Leaders are always in danger of abusing their power. When leaders learn and live good values, they make themselves more valuable and lift the value of other people. Leaders with a high need for influential power possess the self-knowledge, people skills, and general emotional intelligence to cultivate a culture of freedom, creativity, and transformation in organizations. As such, they are generally more successful as leaders than those with a high need for personal power because leaders with a high need for personal power tends to lack flexibility and people skills.

Leaders with a high need for institutional power has been shown to be more effective than leaders with a high need for affiliation because leaders with a high need for affiliation tend to prioritize harmony in their relationships above objective decision-making. Leaders with a high need for influential power may also be more effective than those with a high need for achievement because leaders with a high need for achievement tend to avoid conflict and can be risk-averse.

Nevertheless the possibilities that no dominant trait may yield all the necessary ingredients for exemplary leadership, and that savvy leaders learn to surround themselves with people who possess complementary strengths, leaders in every category have the responsibility to exercise power appropriately and with respect for the dignity of others. It is morally imperative that leaders begin to recognize their unmet needs and make every responsible effort to address them in ways that avoid the abuse of power in relationships with followers. 

 

References

 

Journal of Strategic Leadership, Vol. 1 Issue. 1, 2008, pp. 2-8
© 2008 School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship, Regent University ISSN 1941-4668

Retrieved from http://www.netmba.com/mgt.

Mackey, J. D., Ellen, B. P. & W. A. Hochwarter, G. R. F., 2013. Subordinate social adaptability and the consequences of abusive supervision perceptions in two samples. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), pp. 7232-746.

Mumford, M. D., Zaccharo, S. J., F. D. Harding, T. O. J. & Fleishman, E. A., 2000. Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving a complex social problems. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), pp. 11-35.

Waite, D. & Waite, S. F., 2010. Corporatism and its corruption of democracy and education. Journal of Education and Humanities, 1(2), pp. 81-106.

White, R. E. & Cooper, K., 2018. Contexts of Canadian educational leadership. In I. Bogotch & D. Waite. In: The international handbook of educational leadership. Hoboken,: NJ: Wiley- Blackwell, pp. 433-451

White, R. E. & Cooper, K., 2016. Globalization’s promise: Different, like everyone else. In B. Gonzalez. Globalization. Economic, Political, and Social Issues, pp. 1-19.

White, R. E. & Cooper, K. E., 2012. Critical leadership and social justice: Research, policy, and educational practice. US-China Education Review, 2(5), pp. 517-532.

 

 

 

Relationship building toward an effective leadership

Article by Jefferson V. Baloaloa

Divine Word College of Laoag

jvbaloaloa@yahoo.com

Abstract

            Leaders strive every day to become successful in leading the organization. Encouraging collaborative and productive team relationships is one of the solutions. To be successful, it is believed that a leader must be able to bring out the best in each team member and the team as a whole. This article proves this claim as it analyzed the importance of relationship building towards effective leadership. Relational leadership theories were reviewed and it emphasizes the importance of leaders building quality relationships with their followers to achieve individual and organizational effectiveness. Both theories also demonstrate the importance of effective communication that allows both leaders and followers to build trust and commitment. It was found out that the quality of the relationship followers has with their leader is the primary driver of these feelings of engagement. Therefore, relationships really matter as a fundamental enabler of the organization’s ability to attract, keep and get the very best out of the people. In this article, various concepts were discussed to help leaders equip the necessary characteristics in becoming an effective leader. Further, effective leaders must be open and transparent with their followers and serve the community in a way that benefits everyone.

Keywords: Leadership, Building Relationship and Relational Leadership Theories

Introduction

             People are at the center of all leadership efforts. Leaders cannot lead unless they understand the people they are leading. One way to look at leadership is that the function of a leader is to lead and guide people who will follow with the same values. An effective leader thus must be able to build relationships and create communities. We can define leadership as inspiring people and planning for the future with the motivating factors of relationship building and community service. Relationships can happen between concepts, actions, and values.

The management gurus James Kouzes and Barry Posner discussed the importance of relational leadership in their book, The Leadership Challenge. They state, “When leadership is a relationship founded on trust and confidence, people take risks, make changes, keep organizations, and movements alive. Through that relationship, leaders turn their constituents into leaders themselves” (Kouzes & Posner, 2007).

However, leaders’ relationships with their people are somewhat strained these days. Trust, a key part of any relationship, has been damaged by the financial crisis, the recession, corporate responses to the recession that were often necessary, but also very difficult. Rebuilding leadership trust and relationships is a critical component of engagement and for moving forward.

If leadership is a relationship, how do real relationships is built? The focus is not on the tasks and activities needed to get work done but relationships creating a work environment where the sum is greater than the parts. Leaders with strong, trusting and authentic relationships with their teams know that investing time in building these bonds makes them more effective overall.

Relational Leadership Model

Relational leadership is a relational process of people together attempting to accomplish change or make a difference to benefit the common good (Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R., 1998). This philosophy values being ethical and inclusive. It acknowledges the diverse talents of group members and trust the process to bring good thinking to the socially responsible changes group members agree they want to work toward. Relationships are the key to leadership effectiveness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Relational Leadership Model

Relational leadership involves a focus on five primary components:

• Ethics: Upholds values and standards of morality.
• Purpose: Having a common set of values and vision to move an initiative forward. This means having an individual commitment to a goal or activity. It is also the individual ability to collaborate and find common ground with others to establish a common purpose, vision for a group, or work toward the public.
• Empowerment: Sharing power with others to embrace what they have to offer.
• Inclusivity: Welcoming and open to diverse points of view and diverse identities.
• Process-Orientation: The focus is on the group and how the group works together remaining a group, and accomplishing the group’s purpose.

Relational Leadership Theories

Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX). The first leadership theory is leader-member exchange (LMX) and focuses on the relationship between leaders and followers. This theory focuses on the relationship between the leader and each subordinate or dyad, so the theory posits that leaders develop an exchange with each of their subordinates and is a two-way interaction. The theory suggests that each of these relationships are unique and that the quality of the leader-member exchange relationships influence subordinates’ responsibility, decisions, and access to resources and performance (Bauer & Ergoden, 2015).

The relationships are based on trust and respect and extend beyond transactional, business relationships. Subordinates who develop strong emotional attachments with their mentors tend to engage more fully within the organization and become effective team members (Day & Miscenko, 2016).

Servant Leadership Theory. The servant leadership theory is based on the premise that leaders are effective when they first serve their followers. Essentially, the leader is not in a position of power above the followers, but the emphasis is on the leader meeting the concerns of the followers (Northouse, 2013). An effective servant leader empathizes with their followers and nurtures and empowers them to help them reach their full potential (Greenleaf, 2012).

There are ten characteristics that are central to the concept of servant leadership. It includes listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community.

Communication is an important skill for all leaders yet servant leadership emphasizes the value of listening intently to others. The servant-leader seeks to identify the aims and goals of the group and helps them fulfill this mission. The servant-leader is receptive to what is being said within the group. One of the hallmarks of a servant-leader is the ability to balance listening with periods of reflection to consider what they can offer the group (Greenleaf, 2012).

The servant-leader also strives to empathize with others and accepts their individual characteristics. So, although the servant-leader might not like something that they did, they choose not to reject them as people. Effective servant-leaders are also able to heal through forgiveness of themselves and of others. Servant leaders also recognize that they have the ability to help those who have been emotionally hurt and so they strive to help them when they come into contact.

Another characteristic of servant-leaders is that they are self-aware and so have strong ethical standards and values. Having this strong sense of morality enables servant-leaders to have a holistic view of the organization. Servant-leaders have an inner peace yet are also able to tackle and challenge thorny issues within the organization that are based on their code of ethics (Greenleaf, 2012).

Three Characteristics of Servant-Leaders

There are three characteristics of servant-leaders that show a commitment to the community and people in organizations. These are stewardship, commitment, and building community.

Stewardship. Stewardship means serving the needs of others to serve the greater good. Stewardship occurs when the servant-leader views the organization as an institution that exists for the greater good of society. This stewardship emphasizes the main goal of servant-leadership which is first and foremost a commitment to serving the needs of others coupled with an ability to persuade and to be open rather than to control others.

Commitment. Servant-leaders are committed to nurturing individuals and their potential. This stewardship is also revealed in the commitment that servant-leaders have for the growth of people. Servant-leaders believe that people have an intrinsic value beyond their contributions as employees so they engage in nurturing each individual within the organization.

Building Community. Role modeling helps build communities that hold together. Finally, servant-leaders are adept in building community particularly after the change has occurred and people feel they have lost some of the familiarity of old-style organizations. In order to build and rebuild communities, servant-leaders just need to show the way through demonstrating their own unlimited liability. In fact, mass movement is not needed but just for the servant-leader to be an excellent role model for others (Greenleaf, 2012).

Defining Relational Leadership Theories

Relational leadership theories shift attention to what transpires between individuals and center relationship as the locus of leadership. While academics and practitioners participate in the relational turn, they develop different philosophical understandings about the study of relationships of leadership.

The meeting place of all these different understandings is the awareness that leadership is not alone, secluded action. Instead, leadership lies in the collective action of interconnected individuals, an the outlook that challenges deep-held assumptions about leadership, such as individualism, agency, and independence.

Responding to these challenges requires first to distinguish between the different philosophical understandings around relational leadership to then move on to a discussion about what these offer to the conception of leadership. Views about relationality in today’s leadership arena fall into the following two broad philosophical domains: entitative and processual stances.

Entitative Perspective on Relational Leadership. This views leadership as starting from individuals and extending into the collaboration between one or more sides (Bolden et al. 2011). Leadership is produced by interacting individuals that are in relationships, with the production of leadership available from others than the appointed leader. The underlying premise is that one an individual cannot embody all the capacity needed to deal with organizational reality; therefore, there is the need to shift attention from individual to diffused forms of leadership.

This diffusion brings about an arrangement or a network of interacting individuals that come to form relationships. The entitative philosophical domain on relational leadership is primarily concerned with examining the conditions of diffusing leadership to achieve organizationally goals, under the assumption that interacting individuals are separated from each other before coming to form relationships.

Processual Perspective on Relational Leadership. Processual perspective on relational leadership conceptually demotions the role of the individual (Hosking 2011). This ontological position contests the hegemony of the bounded individual as well as the separation between leader and followers. Leadership is not an outcome of the action that can be traced back to individuals or networks of individuals; it is a process.

This implies that relationships are not independent of the individuals making them; they go on among individuals and the only the characterization that would then be possible about individuals is that they are temporary expressions of these relationships (Gergen 2009). Such a processual understanding questions individual agency as the source of leadership and redefines participants engaged in leadership beyond rational and self-contained entities.

Rather than the producers of leadership, individuals are relational participants in the process of leading. Instead of separating between leaders and followers, leadership becomes a process of negotiating social order, where the labels “leaders” or “followers” do not exist in advance. Labels do not come before relational processes; they become in the process.

The processual philosophical domain on relational leadership is primarily concerned with studying leadership in action. Starting from the premise that leadership does not precede relational interaction, the focus is on studying how relating to one another brings about orientation and organizational achievements – leadership direction.

Building Trust in Relationship

Effective leaders recognize the importance of building solid relationships. They spend time focusing their efforts in key areas that will build connections with the people they lead. These three simple tools that great leaders use to improve their working relationships:

Listen. Leaders let other people talk and they pay attention to what they’re saying. They remove anything that would distract from their conversations and focus on what people are trying to convey.

Understand. They appreciate what other people do and value their contributions. Leaders are not only open to new ideas but are also eager to learn new things. They know that taking the time to understand where people are coming from will pay dividends in the long run.

Acknowledge. Leaders acknowledge the contributions of others. They are quick to give credit to others for their successes. They celebrate achievements and delight in the accomplishments of their team. They know that people will be more motivated to work hard and try new things if their leader acknowledges their efforts.

In his book, The Trusted Advisor, David Maister discusses the trust equation, a formula for building sustained partnership with others. While he discusses the equation’s importance to business advisors, it describes the elements of trust that are key to real leadership.

The trust equation is:

Trust = C + R + I
        S

C is credibility. Leadership credibility has two components. The first is how much the team believes the words and actions of the leader. The second is to what degree the leader has the know-how, experience, or background to know what he is talking about. On the one hand, it is objective — does he has the ‘qualifications’ to be a leader. On the other hand, it’s an emotional response. Does he perceive himself as being believable? Does his actions reflect truthfulness? Does he have truthful intent? How many experiences have the team all had over the past 18 months that made them question the truthfulness of those they considered leaders? What’s the lingering impact on their workplaces?

R is reliability. People need to know they can count on leaders, that the leader will walk the walk and talk the talk. Leaders need to follow- through on promises and follow-up on commitments. There needs to be a sense of predictability and fairness in the way a leader approaches situations and people every single day. Otherwise, the relational bank account that funds trust goes into the red.

I is intimacy or the ability to create a personal connection. This does not mean that the leader needs to share his private life or dwell on the private lives of his people. It means recognizing that work is a personal place and issues like career development, promotions, compensation, reorganizations, hiring and firing are intensely personal. As a leader, the willingness to have emotional honesty about these and other issues in the workplace increases the trust that the team has in him and the commitment they have to his agenda.

Credibility, reliability and intimacy’s additive effect is mitigated by how much others perceive a leader is acting primarily out of self-concern. If others believe a leader building a ‘relationship’ primarily to serve his or her own interests — i.e., to advance his or her career, to manipulate a situation for advantage without regard to the goals, needs and struggles of others, to push off responsibility and blame others– trust is destroyed, the relationship is seen as disingenuous and engagement and commitment plummet.

According to Oxford Group (2019), there are five key conversations that a leader can have to transform trust and develop more effective workplace relationships. These are the following:

Establishing a trusting relationship. A conversation with a team member to share a deep, mutual understanding of the respective drivers, preferences, motivators, and demotivators for high performance at work, and to understand what makes each other tick.

Agreeing with mutual expectations. A conversation about not only what the team are both trying to achieve at work, but also why, and the expectations the leader can have to support each other in achieving these outcomes.

Showing genuine appreciation. A conversation to help a team member focus on where they are being successful, to jointly understand the reasons for their success, to say how much they appreciate their contribution and find further ways in which they can deploy their skills and talents to benefit both themselves and the organization.

Challenging unhelpful behavior. A conversation to agree on a new and more effective set of behaviors where what a team member or colleague is saying or doing is getting in the way of team performance.

Building for the future. A conversation to explore the future career aspirations of a team member and give the leader the best possible chance of creating conditions that will enable them to build that future career within his organization rather than elsewhere.

Relationship Building: Skills Needed by Leaders

In the recent two studies conducted by the Center for Creative Leadership (2020), relationship building was identified as a key skill for leaders. Whether he is the CEO of a or the principal of an elementary school, relationship skills matter a lot. Leaders who are skilled at building and maintaining relationships share several traits. Here’s what many effective leaders have in common in terms of relationship skills:

A leader must be self-aware. Self-awareness includes knowing your strengths and weaknesses, but also the impact that your behavior has on others. For example, say a small business owner takes pride in personally managing client relationships. She also realizes that her hands-on style can frustrate her staff by creating the appearance that she doesn’t trust or appreciate them. By taking into account the impact of her behavior, the business owner can adjust how she relates to her clients and employees.

An effective leader should be willing to delegate important tasks and decision making. Delegating — besides being an efficient way to lead — helps to build experience and confidence in others. It also forces leaders to give honest, consistent feedback and to motivate and reward people for their hard work. Think about the parent who teaches his kid to pick up after herself. While it may be slow-going at first, eventually the child develops the skill and is able to help around the house.

Skilled leaders must also have good interpersonal skills. They should be able to negotiate and handle work problems without alienating others. This requires an understanding of others’ perspectives and needs. Leaders with honed relationship skills develop a rapport with all kinds of people. Have you ever known a school principal who is equally comfortable with students, parents, teaching staff, and school board? If so, you’ve seen people skills at their best.

Effective leaders must have a participative management style. Strong leaders use effective listening skills and communication to involve others, build consensus, and influence decisions. Compare the styles of 2 city mayors, for example. One mayor is participative; the other autocratic. Initially, the mayor who values relationships and broad communication appear to be less effective than the more independent-minded mayor. But, as time passes, the participative mayor is able to build support for key initiatives and is considered a good leader and skilled administrator. In contrast, the authoritarian mayor faces many political roadblocks and becomes highly controversial.

One other significant point — the importance of feedback. Giving and receiving effective feedback is one of the best ways leaders can improve their relationship skills. Feedback lets people know how they’re doing reinforces goals and encourages strong effort. When giving feedback, make sure to focus on a single message, being specific, and be sensitive. And remember to judge the behavior, not the person.

Being good at relationships isn’t just a personality trait. And the good news for everyday leaders is that we can all improve.

Conclusion

The leader of today is no longer the lone hero who can do it all. It is critical for leaders now to encourage collaborative, productive team relationships while leading. To be successful, a leader must be able to bring out the best in each team member and the team as a whole. One of the key practice areas effective leaders demonstrate is Enable Others to Act, which focuses on the importance of building trust and relationships within the team. Relational leadership theories emphasized the importance of leaders building quality relationships with their followers in order to achieve individual and organizational effectiveness. Both theories demonstrated the importance of effective communication that allows both leaders and followers to build trust and commitment. The theories also show how power and coercion are unnecessary sanctions that only exist to harm the organization. The most effective leaders are those who are open and transparent with their followers and serve the community in a way that benefits everyone.

Therefore, when employees have high levels of engagement this has a significant, measurable, and transformational impact on organizational performance. Research shows that it is the quality of the relationship people feel they have with their immediate leader or manager that is the primary driver of these feelings of engagement. So, relationships really matter. They are not an optional take it or leave it factor. They are a fundamental enabler of the organization’s ability to attract, keep, and get the very best out of the people. Effective leaders know that leadership is a relationship, and leaders and managers with poor or toxic relationships with their teams will see performance suffer.

Without relationship, there is no trust. Without relationship, there is no extra effort. Day after day, people do not come to work for a time clock. They come to work for a person. And for them to give anything other than the minimum, they must have relationships with that person.

References:

1)      Bolden, R., Hawkins, B., Gosling, J., & Taylor S (2011) Exploring Leadership: Individual, Organizational & Societal Perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford

2)      Center for Creative Leadership. 2020. 4 Relationship Skills You Need in the Office. Retrieved from https://www.ccl.org/multimedia/podcast/everyday-leaders-can-you-relate/2. Retrieved on July 22, 2020.

3)      Gergen, K.J. (2009) Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press

4)      Harvey, E. O. (2020). Let’s Change the Change Paradigm. Retrieved from https://nextbridgeconsulting.com/leadership-is-a-relationship/. Retrieved on July 20, 2020.

5)      Hopkin, M. R.  (2011). Leadership is Relationship. Retrieved from https://leadonpurposeblog.com/2011/11/26/leadership-is-a-relationship/. Retrieved on July 21, 2020.

6)      Hosking, D. M. (2011) Moving relationality: meditations on a relational approach to leadership. In: Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K, Jackson B, Uhl-Bien M (eds) The SAGE handbook of leadership. Sage, London, pp 455–467

7)      Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (1998). Exploring leadership: For college students who want to make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

8)      Molinario, F. (2020). In Leadership, Relationships Matter Most. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2018/10/24/in-leadership-relationships-matter-most/#315131974207. Retrieved on July 24, 2020.

9)      Mugavin, B. (2020). Leadership is All About Relationships When Leading Virtually. Retrieved from https://www.flashpointleadership.com/blog/leadership-is-all-about-relationships-when-leading-virtually. Retrieved on July 25, 2020.

10)  Schaefer, B. (2015). On Becoming a Leader: Building Relationships and Creating Communities. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2015/10/on-becoming-a-leader-building-relationships-and-creating-communities. Retrieved on July 20, 2020.

11)  The Oxford Group. (2019). Why Leadership is about Relationships. Retrieved from https://www.oxford-group.com/insights/why-leadership-about-relationships. Retrieved on July 21, 2020.

12)  Towler, A. (2018). Leadership as a relationship: Why "we" matters more than I". Retrieved from https://www.ckju.net/en/dossier/leadership-relationship-why-we-matters-more-i#:~:text=They%20state%2C%20%E2%80%9CWhen%20leadership%20is,Kouzes%20%26%20Posner%2C%202007). Retrieved on July 23, 2020.

Uhl-Bien M, & Ospina, S.M. (2012) Advancing relational leadership research: a dialogue among perspectives. Charlotte:  Information Age