Management Engineering - Leadership & Innovation

Lessons 1 and 2

Divided by topic

28/02/22 LI-02 What is Leadership and how to read a leader Leadership and management are di fferent? Leaders manage and managers lead , but the two activities are not synonymous (by Bernard Bass, an American scholar in the fields of leadership studies and organisational behaviour). Management Managers are those who are supposed to get things done: they de fine processes, KPIsÉ They also need to be good with people, have interpersonal skills, be able to communicate and be trustworthy from a technical, human and conceptual point of view. For managers, the aim is to get things done through other people in the organisation —> Planning and organizing. Leadership Leaders are more connected to influence group of individuals to something that is new (achievement of a vision or goal) and provide support (it’s a process) —> Inspire and motivate. 1.leadership is a process between a leader and followers. 2.leadership involves social influence. 3.leadership occurs at multiple levels in an organisation. 4.leadership focuses on goal accomplishment. To be a leader we have to achieve goals too, even if the process can be different. What is the di fference between them? The leader brings the people do new things not the standard ones. The professor doesn’t believe in this distinction, he believes that you have to work on both sides in order to be a good manager. In fact, t he words are changing though: we are creating and looking for more and more complex kind of people who are both leaders and managers , that need to have a vision and an idea and that are able to control that things are getting done. EXAMPLE The sustainable leadership of Patagonia : at the core of Patagonia is its founder, Yvon Chouinard, a man who is saving the world one fleece jacket at a time. A legendary climber, surfer, entrepreneur, environmentalist, and philanthropist, he is justly famous for success on his own terms. His company has a vision that is based on working on quality. They started thinking about functional things, they advertised the product with the commercial “don’t buy this jacket” (they want you to buy the right one and come to them when you basically cannot use it anymore). It is not only about the product, but the philosophy. As a leader, Chouinard tries to work on the purpose and on people, even if there is a strong focus on performance. He says that they have a huge amount of people who want to work for him. There is only one thing that nobody really catches when he speaks that is the very strong point on performance . They can create that kind of environment because they perform. He doesn’t care about how his employees dress, where they work and so on as long as they perform well. At the end of the day, the real answer to the question “are you a leader?" is all about the results and how you get to the performance may be different. Leadership functions: Purpose and vision •Purpose —> Envision + Align + Establish direction •People —> Engage, inspire, motivate + Empower, coach + Lead by example •Performance —> Challenge + Support Vision ◊ A big picture on the way things ought to be. A billboard image of what we are working towards. Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce. (John F. Kennedy) How to create a vision? Dreaming is the first step. Dare to dream. Dreaming big allows us to think about ideas that may not seem likely, yet are in fact possible. Nothing happens without a dream. The daydreaming mind will wander to something greater than the conscious mind could ever have imagined... The more you visualise your dream, the more you understand it. That's how you begin. Soon you're on the road to realising your dream. (Lili Fini Zanuck, director and producer) …but people may think your big picture is a meaningless mirage if you don’t give them some ideas as to how things can actually change —> We should develop also practical details. What are the traits of a Leader? A trait is a genetic determined characteristic and, if you have those traits, you are more probably a leader in your environment. We are talking about some inborn abilities that could be either physical or personality traits . SOME EXAMPLE OF TRAITS: At the very beginning, researchers tried to look for physical characteristics: there are some physical characteristics that can help you become a leader, but that doesn’t mean that you have to be good looking to become a leader, even if we tend to connect a meaning to a certain set of characteristics. Some of these characteristics can be intelligence , dominance, task relevant knowledge , self-confidence and in many cases, when we recognise someone as leader, they are energetic and active , because it is not easy to see them tired. ENERGY is one of the main traits that makes you a leader. In general there are 5 big personality dimensions: Even though we moved from physical to personality traits, 
 we are still looking for characteristics. So, what is wrong with this theory? Traits are good in predicting the emergence of leaders, but may fail in distinguishing between effective and ineffective leaders —> Traits are important, but they are not enough to de fine a leader, as different leaders are completely different among them . -Innovator -Con fident -Persuasive -Inspiring -Motivator -Empowering-Visionary -Intelligence -Dominant -Self con fident -Energetic -Task-relevant knowledge Nature VS Nurture Were you born as a leader or can you become a leader during your lifetime? In our culture, we accept that if people have a physical problem, they can overcome it, learning to do things in a di fferent way. On the other side, some of us are struggling a lot with changing how we behave. What makes you a leader? Traits are inherited, you have them and you are who you are, but we can learn how to behave and so we can show externally a complete di fferent emotions than what we have inside. To what extent can we learn? Can we learn to behave in a different way and train ourselves to behave in that way? EXAMPLES •Alex Zanardi experience video —> Typical reactions are: “Wow, I can do everything (nothing is impossible)” or “I’m wasting my time". He learnt something that is mechanical and physical at the same time. •Bram Cohen —> CEO of BitTorrent, he was 28 years old when was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that is characterised by signi ficant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behaviour and interests. He learnt how to understand human expressions, follow social cues, use eye contact, developing a kind of social algorithm. He learnt how to “crack the code” and he is now able to recognise the “hidden” meaning behind people’s actions. Through practice, learning, dedication and motivation it is possible to overcome nature. We can always improve and the same happens with leadership: some people were born leaders, but it is not enough, they need to train themselves. Is Leadership a Trait? •Leadership skills of CEOs are not predictive of which companies will succeed —> There are no connections with the traits of a CEO and companies results. •Little evidence linking personality to leadership. •“Head of the table” effect. •“Fewest chair” effect. There are 2 different approaches: 1.TRAIT APPROACH —> Leadership is an acquired skill, highly in fluenced by the environment. 2.INCREMENTAL APPROACH —> Leadership is a trait or a set of abilities. Blake & Mouton model Could leadership be more related to behaviours than traits?We can be a mix of the two or oriented to one of the behaviours. We can have both of them and we should be able to combine them, in order to maintain good relationships It’s important to change according to the situation. EXAMPLE Mary Clearance in “Sister Act" (1992) —> High concern for people (listen to them, very kind and thoughtful about their felling) and she behaves in different ways with different nuns and Low concern for production (she is concerned with the results, but wants to have the old nun inside, so, instead of taking complete leadership, she prefers to have everybody on board) —> Collaborative and motivating. Other examples from notes: •Dewey Finn in "School of Rock” (2003) —> Low concern for people (doesn’t care about the education or the feelings of the students, he steals food…) and Low concern for production (doesn’t care that his student learns anything, because, for him, the only thing you can learn is recess) —> Aggressive and arrogant. •Miranda Priestly in “The Devil Wears Prada” (2006) —> Low concern for people (everyone is scared of her) and High concern for production (monitor everything that’s going on and she is respected for her job: everything she says is "do this” “do that”, “call me at this time” and so on) —> Bossy and authoritarian. •To n y D’Amato in "Any Given Sunday" (1999) —> High concern for people (he motivates the team stressing on cooperation and using a lot of "us” and a lot of “we": the team is all about how players interact together) and High concern for production (he stresses out that they need to win and he is completely concerned with the final results) —> Inspirational and persuasive. Managerial grid – Blake & Mouton As of this model we can distinguish at least 5 main styles: 1.Country-club management —> Patagonia and Mary Clearance; 2.Authority-compliance management —> Miranda Priestly;3.Impoverished management —> Dewey Finn; 4.Team managemen t —> To n y D’Amato; 5.Middle of the road management —> In many cases, people who behave in this way do not have a strong connotation and try to do all the things. None of this is better than the other, they just fit better in different situations: each one is good, but only in certain situation, this is a kind of situational model. Country Club management —> Or "accommodating" style of manager, is most concerned about team members' needs and feelings. He assumes that, as long as they are happy and secure, they will work hard. What tends to be the result is a work environment that is very relaxed and fun, but where productivity su ffers because there is a lack of direction and control 
 It is very good when you have an employee dealing with personal problems. Example of use: when an employee is dealing with personal problems Te a m management —> Team or "sound" managers commit to their organisation's goals and mission, motivate the people who report to them, and work hard to get people to stretch themselves to deliver great results. But, at the same time, they're inspiring figures who look after their teams. Someone led by a Team manager feels respected and empowered, and is committed to achieving her goals. Team managers prioritise both the organisation's production needs and their people's needs. They do this by making sure that their team members understand the organization's purpose and by involving them in determining production needs. When people are committed to, and have a stake in, the organisation's success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates an environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction, motivation and excellent results. Team managers likely adopt the Theory Y approach to motivation, as we mentioned above It is not the best as it may seem, because it is only easy to put in place in short-term projects that are carried out by experienced employees.
 Example of use: Short term big projects and also startups generally situation with milestones and deadlines are needed Middle-of-the-Road management —> The manager tries to balance results and people, but this strategy is not as effective as it may sound. Through continual compromise , he fails to inspire high performance and also fails to meet people's needs fully. The result is that his team will likely deliver only mediocre performance 
 It is perfect when there is pressure of time (such as meeting deadlines) and it is a good way to encourage people. Example of use: The situation is balanced and so I can change the focus from the people to the production and viceversa as needed. Impoverished management —> With a low regard for creating systems that get the job done, and with little interest in creating a satisfying or motivating team environment, the results are inevitably disorganisation, dissatisfaction and disharmony Minimum effort is enough for defining organisational belonging. Example of use: When we want people to develop their independence and finding their own way Authority-compliance management —> People in this category believe that their team members are simply a means to an end. The team's needs are always secondary to its productivity. This type of manager is autocratic , has strict work rules, policies and procedures, and can view punishment as an effective way of motivating team members. This approach can drive impressive production results at first, but low team morale and motivation will ultimately affect people's performance, and this type of leader will struggle to retain high performers 
 When unpopular measures are taken (like cutbacks or reorganisations). Example of use: When we don’t have time so we go for a more rigid and autocratic style When Blake & Mouton created the model, they thought that managers behaviours were fixed (It is also called fixed behaviours model/ matrix) . They thought that people couldn’t change their behaviours , meaning that you cannot be a good leader in different situations (when the situation changes, the leader needs to be changed too ), even if they didn’t consider traits. We behave in a certain way and changing our behaviour is extremely difficult, so in some way, they were right as many people are not able to adapt to different situations: they identi fied 5 macro-descriptions for behaviours and recognised that none of them is better than the other. Their “only" mistake was thinking that people couldn’t change their behaviours, but we know that great leaders should change their behaviour according to different situations. What is right is that the behaviour are not fixed, but on the other hand we have to take into account that people might don’t want to change so we don’t have to overestimate them. So in general there are people willing to change but also there are people good for some situation and not for others.