“In a real crisis, like say if an asteroid threatens to strike the planet, I want Tim Tebow as my leader.”—Sally Jenkins, Washington Post
I intentionally shy away from sports metaphors primarily because sports examples are overused and some people simply don’t get them. However, in the case of Tim Tebow, I will make an exception. According to the experts, Tebow is one of those rare athletes who has managed to transcend his sport. His name recognition extends well beyond professional football. In fact, like Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan, Tebow’s name is widely known by non-sports types. In addition, according to ESPN, the mere mention of Tebow’s name automatically increases the number of readers, listeners and viewers.
The real reason I chose to mention Tebow was Sally Jenkin’s excellent article on leadership in the Washington Post. Jenkins uses sports examples to illustrate her points and solid research to provide background on the subject of leadership. I have long had more than a passing interest in the subject. In fact, the subject of my doctoral dissertation was leadership. However, it was not until I became the principal of a “failing school” did I learn firsthand what real leadership was all about.
As Michael Fullan points out in his new book, Change Leader: Learning To Do What Matters Most, “practice drives theory” and “doing is the crucible of change.” In other words, I learned about real leadership through practice, and related what I learned to theory and research later on—it made more sense to me that way.
Control or Cooperation?
One of the most important lessons I learned was that intention drives behavior. If a leader’s intention is to control, then his or her behavior will consist of controlling behaviors—telling and directing, not selling and persuading. This idea applies to classroom leaders, teachers. I often ask teachers, “would you rather have control over your students or cooperation from your students?” After thinking about it, most respond that they would prefer cooperation, because, they reason, if I have cooperation, I don’t need control. My next question is “How would a teacher teach if she wanted cooperation?”
In a past entry on this blog I wrote “the essential question that every school leader and classroom leader must ask is “Do I want control or cooperation?” The answer to that question creates an intention that drives all future behavior. A school leader or classroom leader who seeks cooperation will think and behave much differently than one who seeks control. I contend that, if one has cooperation, control is unnecessary. However, it is the illusion of control or the fear of losing control that drives many leaders to engage in the kind of close-minded, top-down styles of interacting that erode relationships, stifle dialogue, and connote a lack of respect. Are you willing to give up a little control in order to get more cooperation? Are you willing to spend more time making decisions in order to make better decisions? Are you okay with not knowing all the answers? Are you willing to ask more questions?
Ask yourself if you would you rather have control or cooperation? The answer to that question will define your leadership style.
Multipliers or Diminshers
“I always demand more of myself than anyone else expects of me.”—Julius Irving
In research that led to their book Multipliers: How the Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter, Liz Wiseman and Greg Mckeown found that some leaders multiply the capabilities of their followers. These leaders actually make everyone smarter. The most effective leaders create an environment that allows people to maximize their potential. They help create the conditions that multiply the talents of their colleagues. These leaders grow leaders and encourage people to take action, to take risks, and to seize opportunities and to grow personally and professionally. In words, effective leaders intentionally seek cooperation not control. Conversely, ineffective leaders actually diminish the talents of their followers. “Diminishers” cause everyone to underperform.
Warlord or Leader?
Jenkins points out that “Tebow grasps something about leadership that (others) have yet to learn: It’s not about domination but about persuasion. Someone who tries to force others to do his bidding isn’t a leader; he’s a warlord. Leadership only works when other people find you credible and grant you their cooperation.” Leadership, then, is earned not given. It’s about cooperation.
Learning from OPE
Investors get rich by using OPM—Other Peoples’ Money. Leaders are effective because they learn from OPE—Other Peoples’ Experience. Jenkins points out several examples of “coaches (who) have given clinics in failed leadership. The Washington Capitals staged a virtual work stoppage on the ice under Boudreau. The Maryland football team quit so badly on Edsall, they lost seven consecutive games by double digits. And the Washington Redskins lost six in a row thanks in part to Mike Shanahan’s misjudgment that the happy-talk of quarterback John Beck was leadership, only it turns out they trust Beck’s fellow signal-caller Rex Grossman more, even when he throws interceptions.”
In Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, researcher Carol Dweck, explores the contrasting leadership styles of two highly successful college basketball coaches, John Wooden and Bobby Knight.
A Mysterious Quality
‘So what exactly is that mysterious quality called leadership?” Jenkins asks. “It’s not exactly charisma; it doesn’t hurt that Tebow gleams like a superhero, but the worst despots are charismatic too. It’s not exactly talent, either. According to experts, one reason we struggle to define it is because we look at it from the wrong side up.”
Leadership Is Not About the Leader
“The academic study of leadership has failed, and the reason is that it focuses on the leader, when the appropriate focus is on the followers,” suggests research psychologist Robert Hogan, who profiles executives for Fortune 500 companies. When we flip the examination of leadership on its head and look at what followers will follow, we get a better idea of what quality we’re talking about.
What Followers Want
Leaders who seek voluntary cooperation focus on the “work force or the team, and what they perceive. Because if they don’t perceive the right thing in a leader, you’re through.”
According to Hogan, followers want four things:
- Integrity
- Confidence
- Decision-making
- Clarity
Conversely, Hogan knows what follower don’t want:
- Irritability
- Moodiness
- Untrustworthiness
- Indecisiveness
- Needless micro-management
- Excessive authority
“They (followers) perceive these things as incompetent, and pretty soon the leveling mechanism kicks in and there is a subtle rebellion.
Leadership Styles Affect Error Rate
Hogan cites one study that “found that the number of flight errors significantly correlated to the personality of the captain. Crews led by captains perceived as agreeable, self-confident and emotionally reliable made the fewest errors. Crews with captains considered arrogant, hostile, passive-aggressive or dictatorial made the most errors.”
Leaders lose their followers
“Leaders lose their teams, Hogan says, for the simple reason that followers withdraw their consent to be led. The late Red Auerbach, the legendary coach and executive with the Boston Celtics, always said that you don’t motivate teams, you motivate players, one by one, by building relationships.”
The Key
“The key to the relationship is trust, and if they don’t trust you, you’re done,” Hogan says.
The Bottom Line for School Leaders
“A leader is worth nothing without voluntary commitment, because the followers are actually more in charge of the outcome. Every aspiring leader should ask, “Would people choose to follow me?” and understand who the boss really is.”
Next: How do you earn trust?