2. Process change is leadership
As in section 1 investigated, when leadership levels result in either positive change or friction, due to communication between them and among the stakeholders, then it can be assumed that process change is the result of leadership. Davenport (1993) found that “…successful transformation is 70 to 90 percent leadership and only 10 to 30 percent management” (p26). This then may lead to the question what leadership really is? Following, it will be examined what leadership is and what styles may be of value in process re-engineering.
2.1. What is leadership?
Bass (1960) spoke of leadership as the method of changing organizational processes. The organizational resources such as the people who work these processes are affected by change, and change is the foundation of conflict. The affected people are either followers or resisters (p.83).
In contrast to Machiavelli (1994), Bass (1960) explained that less conflict results in more effectiveness and more conflict results in less effectiveness (p.335). With this in mind, Bass suggested avoiding conflict, while Machiavelli (1994), proposed doing as the Romans did, which was: The Romans rather promoted a conflict today than avoid it until tomorrow. They believed that avoiding conflict would result in the opponents’ favor (p.12). This means in other words that avoiding conflict and even creating conflict can be the means to an end. Whatever diplomacy, pressure, conflict, or recognition and esteem-building takes place between the power person and the person onto whom power is applied, the outcome is the measure for leadership effectiveness. Following, these various proposed styles by Goleman et al (2002) will be discussed in connection to leadership.
2.1.1. Fiedler’s situational leadership style
Because of personality, cultural, and situational differences, one style might be more effective than another (Goleman et al, 2002, p.85-86). The good that can be said about dissonant styles is that when applied in a well balanced combination with resonant styles, they will provide effective leadership and create the best followership.
2.1.2. Resonant and dissonant leadership during change
During change, those that are affected by it will follow with excitement, follow hesitantly, may not follow at all, or oppose the leadership change initiative. Depending on the situation and whether the change initiative may have a long-term or short-term transition target time-line, it will require the right portion of leadership style applied. There are two main types of leadership styles. One is resonant and the other is dissonant.
2. 2. Resonant leadership
Goleman, et al, (2002), identified resonant leadership as the emotions interacting with leadership, which is the determining factor of effectiveness (p.34). To name one example of a resonant leadership catalyst, Goleman, et al, (2002), referred to a study on laughter and leadership by Fabio Sala, a Ph.D. Dissertation at Boston University Graduate School of Arts and Science, 2000, titled: “Relationship between Executive's Spontaneous Use of Humor and Effective Leadership" (p.33). Laughter, explained Goleman et al (2002), creates an environment in which the participants communicate a clear vision and understanding. All affected leaders and stakeholders improve communication, which results in greater leadership effectiveness.
2. 2. 1. Visionary style-Resonant
The visionary style is most effective in radical and transformational change because of its focus on sharing information with subordinates and including them in the decision making process.
Goleman, et al. (2002), stated: "While some managers might have the miss-impression that withholding information gives them power, visionary leaders understand that distributing knowledge is the secret to success; as a result, they share it openly and in large doses." (p.58 pp.4), "…visionary leaders articulate a purpose that rings true for themselves and attune it to values shared by the people they lead". (Goleman, et al, (2002), p.58),
According to Goleman (2002), et al, out of the six styles he reviewed, the visionary style is the most effective one when it comes to turn-around operations. (Turning around an operation is reengineering). Visionary leaders believe and support their own vision. They have their heart in it. Machiavelli's ‘The Prince’ (1994), stated that those who most effectively lead, referring to the visionary leaders, have their heart in it and make even personal sacrifices, while mercenaries (outsourced service providers-consultants), have only their own safety and financial profits in sight (p.40-45).
2. 2. 2. Coaching style-Resonant
Coaching leaders take personal mentor-protégé-interest in subordinates/followers. They help build their subordinates’ long-term goals (school, career, and counsel in climbing-the-corporate-ladder), and help them reach those goals "that tie in to their dreams, identity, and aspirations." (Goleman, et al, 2002 p.59-65),
"Coaches are also good…"-(Goleman et al. 2002, p.61), at building relationships, with the focus on meeting the followers' needs, which result in employee loyalty, productivity increase, and employee retention (p.63).
But Goleman et al (2002), also cautioned against coaching methods used in leadership that appear controlling, looking over one's shoulders, and excessive supervision (p.61). Excessive coaching behavior will convey mistrust and lack of independent-self-leader development.
"Not surprisingly, coaching works best with employees who show initiative and want more professional development" (Goleman at al, 2002, p.61). In other words, the best coaching respondents are those individuals who demonstrate ambitions for self-improvement.
2. 2. 3. Affiliative style-Resonant
Especially "…during hard times…" does the affiliative leader demonstrate sympathy, "…offering them" -employees-"emotional support…” (Goleman, et al, 2002, p.83). Affiliative leaders share personal experiences, and they praise their teams and individuals. Praise and recognition create a positive work-follower environment and increase productivity (Goleman, et al, 2002, p83). The affiliative style develops team spirit, responds to crisis situations among employees/followers, and focuses on emotional interaction (Goleman et al, 2002, p.65).
One caution to the affiliative style: "…it should not be used alone…" (Goleman et al, 2002, p.66). Followers need a balance of support, praise, recognition, and performance measure. When the performance slacks in spite of all praises and recognition, the followers need someone to remind them of their goals. This style works best in combination with the coaching and visionary styles.
2. 2. 4. Democratic style-Resonant
Goleman et al. (2002) preached the philosophy of sharing and being open: "There's no problem we can't solve if we can be open about it" (p.68).
Goleman (2002) referred to an example of a democratic style: a catholic school was ordered to shut its doors (p.66). Instead of complying with a "next day close", and shocking all those affected, the leader wanted to leave with a good feeling and understanding of the decision among all affected. So the director invited the parents of the children who attended the school and requested participation in finding a solution.
By requesting participation, offering a choice of solutions-one solution to be the closing of the school-the participants soon found no better answer than to close the school. The advantage of having asked for the participants' advice was that everyone accepted the decision at the time of the closing. They felt they were part of the decision and therefore bought into the decision easier than having the door slammed into their children’s faces. At the end, there were no bad feelings and the director probably improved the Catholic Church’s reputation.
Whether it is to make cut-back decisions or to come up with productivity solutions, with the democratic style, when asking the participants for advice (receiving employee input and contribution), the leaders receive greater buy-in to their initiatives than with affiliative and coaching styles.
2. 3. Dissonant leadership
Goleman, et al. (2002), spoke about dissonant leadership as fear and threat demoralizing followers and their desires to follow (p.24). If a person creates fear, negative emotions, or anger, the respondents become polarized. Fear disables sociability, productivity, and effective reasoning.
According to Goleman et al. (2002), when leaders create a hostile environment, followers become resistant and either will not comply or they do their job poorly. In any hostile relationship, according to Goleman (2002), the logical brain functionality is decreasing and reduces the ability to think and respond positively to the leadership requests (p.24). In contrast to a resonant interaction, in dissonant leadership, followers become counter productive and even sabotage projects.
2. 3. 1. Pace-setting-Dissonant
Pacesetting is a style that is strictly based on task performances and numbers, rather than on relationship building (Goleman et al., 2002, p.72). Performance is measured based on numbers. The number objective sets the pace and the tone. The people who are ideal pacesetters are sales persons that measure effective followership performance based on their own successes and how they have done it or how they think it should be done. It is a process standard based on number achievements and not a performance standard based on personality, strengths, and individualism. Having a pacesetter as a leader might require of you to memorize a script that might not fit your personality. However, it will work for the pacesetter who designed the script.
Pacesetters, according to Goleman et al (2002), can be careless; they are cruel, when it comes to corresponding to human needs, desires, and personality differences. They want you to meet the numbers, which they have set out for you to reach. Goleman et al (2002) said that pacesetting results in an excellent sprint-last-minute performance, when needed (p.72). But on a long-term perspective, pacesetting creates stressful competition among followers, which results in lower "innovative thinking" and reduces performance. This style is rather beneficial for the individual and not the team spirit.
Self motivated team members and individuals who do not require detailed communication or a relationship with their leaders and their peers, walk in a path of preset standards, which they need in order to succeed (p.74). According to Goleman et al (2002), followers get burned out long-term (p.73).
The number-based goals without the employee-boss-relationship will not motivate followership. When working alone and self-motivated, and a follower is quite content with a pacesetting leader, the most effective pacesetters-followers might not need a leader. They might just need a goal.
2. 3. 2. Commanding-Dissonant
"In the end, the company was saved-at least in the short term-but at a high price" (Goleman, et al, 2002, p.75). Such a price could be the cutting of jobs in a reengineering project. This example defines the short-term decision of a commanding leader in charge, but with a greater long-term impact. Goleman et al (2002), described "a modern-day Genghis Kahn: he bullied and demeaned his executives, roaring his displeasure at the least misstep" (p.75 pp4).
A company bully-turn-around sacrifices good spirits, emotional wellbeing, morale, vision, and relationships; it creates a hostile environment in which people-the followers- fear for their jobs, hate their jobs, and want to quit. Just like Machiavelli (1994), described, a commanding leader leads rather with fear than with love (p.55).
In conclusion, knowing which leadership style, resonant or dissonant styles, to apply in which situation, will improve followership during a leadership change initiative. This initiative can be a minor change or might call for drastic change, either mild or radical change. Either way, a change in direction takes place more and more, and more frequently, said Toffler (1970) in the 1970. This also means that the more leadership interaction subject to the situation, and applying the appropriate situational style needed at the time, it will improve change process and process reengineering outcomes.