Empower or Overpower?

By: Tom Shaw
Submitted: 2007-01-17 12:45:44
Print this article | Tell a friend | For publisher |

Rating:

 

As a freshly promoted sergeant in the British Army, I was thoroughly enjoying the status and perceived power of my new position. Part of my job was to conduct the morning parade at which I had to inspect the junior soldiers to make sure that they were “All Present & Correct”, (clean uniforms, shiny boots, faces freshly shaved and hair well trimmed.)

In those days the regulations stated that a beret had to be worn tilted to the right and with the cap badge directly over the left eye. One young Private, lets call him Smith, enjoyed looking 'cool', by wearing the badge in the middle of his forehead, and with both sides of the beret tilted. After having corrected this several times, I started to get a bit annoyed. He would turn up wearing it correctly, but as soon as the parade was over, he would re-adjust it to his own style. This irked me tremendously, and I became determined to teach him a lesson. I ordered him to wear his steel battle helmet instead of the beret. This of course caused him to be ridiculed by his peers, but I was absolutely sure that I was “doing the right thing”.

For whatever reason, this soldier must have been just as determined as me, and at every opportunity, he would revert to his favourite style, and the war of wills continued. The crunch came one day when I sent a Lance Corporal to bring Private Smith to the guardroom where I was on duty. The corporal came back with the message that Smith “would be down later”. Feeling that my authority was being challenged, I re-dispatched the corporal, with two other soldiers, to bring the Private to me “under escort”, and immediately.

When they returned soon afterwards, I stood Smith rigidly to attention and gave him the biggest dressing-down imaginable. I verbally assaulted him by ranting and raving about how useless he was, what a waste of space and so on. I was so intent on making sure that Smith learned his lesson, and so certain of my own Rightness, that I forgot that here stood another human being. Eventually I paused and looked more closely at the man. And there, while he stood stiff as a pole, trickling down his cheek was the saddest little tear that I have ever seen.

In those days incidents of this type were not uncommon, and were often used to effect “good order and discipline”. Thirty years on I can now say that the person who learned most from the episode was me.

During my later years in industry I haven’t seen a conflict quite so dramatic or one sided. I have certainly witnessed hundreds of examples of similar polarisation however, where both parties dig deeper in to their respective positions. This has often been to the detriment of not only themselves, but the environment in which they work. Polarisation can start with a simple difference of opinion, leading to a perceived insult. Resentment can build, and the virus can spread. Other people can become involved, and before long the rivalry has poisoned the whole workplace. Sometimes “it” is ignored, and lies festering just below the surface. Work proceeds ‘as normal’ but tasks are carried out unwillingly and without enthusiasm. Once again, the whole workplace can become infected. When this atmosphere is detected by customers, trade drops off and pressure increases as fear of layoffs emerges. The downward spiral continues as this dry rot eats away at morale. The go-getters find employment elsewhere, and those who stay feel trapped in an environment that they have come to loathe.

Prevention is better than cure is the old adage. How much better would it be to nip this dry rot in the bud, before it really takes a grip? Can it be done? The answer is a resounding YES.

The whole idea of Management has become subject to some intense scrutiny over the last few years and the notion of Leadership has emerged to take its place. Traditionally management has been about task allocation with minimal input from the person actually doing the job. “Fix this” or “Process that” and “Come back when you’ve finished”. Leadership on the other hand tends to be more like “This is what needs fixing, how do you propose to go about it?” People nowadays seem to have an innate aversion to being managed, but they don’t mind so much being led.

If you see yourself as a Manager, with all the implications and trappings of POWER, perhaps you should ask yourself how your subordinates see you. When you allocate a task to a staff member, does he leap to it immediately with zeal and enthusiasm? Or with a grunt of acquiescence? How does he like to be ‘Managed’? To help with your answer, how do YOU like to be ‘Managed’?

So how does Leadership help prevent the dry rot previously mentioned? There is enough evidence around now to indicate that where a worker has been involved in the initial planning of the task, and helped to define the Goal, he is more inclined to OWN the job, and carry it out with greater conscientiousness.

Author's bio available at http://www.gettingrealseminars.com/Tom_Shaw.html

Article source: Expert Articles