In the old workplace, the hierarchical isolation occurred in tiers. The manager was looked upon as a deity. They were supposed to see all and know all. Managers, then, could not ask questions to their employees about the on-the ground work; they were supposed to have all of the answers through supervision of labor. It is universally agreed that those at the top of the organisations only know a fraction of the solutions needed to overcome the problems faced by the organisations that they lead (Obolensky, 2014, p. 35). Therefore, the information given to those at the very top was the perception from the manager's perspective, not necessarily the workers' reality.
The manager told employees what to do. They evaluated work by whether it was right or wrong based on initial training. If it was consistently incorrect (according to the training), the person would be fired. It was as if workers were parts of a simple machine. If a part slowed down, sped up, or otherwise did something out of character, it was examined and, and if it made a product that was different from the rest, it needed to be replaced. But what if the "different" product was better?
It simply could not be, because changing the process to recreate a different product would be challenging - it would make the entire process more complex. There is a fear of complexity. However, businesses must face this with excitement. Is it better to stay the same, and fear complexity, or change in order to remain in existence? Things are changing, therefore we must adapt.
An organization with employees that take the initiative to get involved and find solutions will benefit over those who rely solely on the leadership. What happens where eager new employees get stamped out and poked as if to say, "fall in line"? It slows down progress and minimizes our ability to bank on creativity and innovation, and to empower and appreciate (Green, 2013). Remember that term "new blood"? I love it! I've been in Housing since 2007, and I try to make sure I am never doing things the same way I was back then. Technology is a factor in the shift in leadership. Our staff no longer just listens to us; they can hop online and find out how other resident assistants are programming, their responsibilities, their pay,.etc. They know they have rights; this should not scared middle management! In fact, the ideas and opinions workers receive from such information makes them wonderful resources for those of us who are office-dwellers.
Leadership has never been a static role. Society has changed over time, thus the expectations and key functions of leadership have also changed. One of the reasons for the change is the complexity with organizational structure and strategy within the market they operate. Managers that lead their organization are more stressed; challenged and confused today more than they have ever before (Obolensky, 2014, p. 37). I believe the biggest reason for the shift in leadership is the workforce population’s desire to be more involved with their organization. The problems entry-level employees see on a daily basis can directly affect their work performance. It is unrealistic to assume the leadership of an organization would know what problems are stressing everyone out in front of house operations. That is unless those problems are specifically brought to the leadership's attention, or of the leadership is keen enough, they will maintain a relationship with low-level employees in order to stay on top of the issues. As Obolensky notes, “subordinates need to challenge in order to follow, and superiors must listen in order to lead” (2014, p.38).
Not only does “servant leadership” play a huge role in the way I lead within my department, it also is displayed in the relationships that have been built between other University departments and the community. If there is a problem, concern, or question about the department or my coworkers, people may be intimidated of my director, but they tend to see me as approachable and effective at resolving issues. I am also adamant about connecting with my supervisees' supervisees - I enjoy having them come in my office and tell me about their residents, their programs and their ups and downs of being a student. Sometimes being an RA can feel like everyone's problems are on your shoulders - I want the student workers to know that they have a place to come to de-stress (Kelley, 1988). The environment constructed from such efforts has made employees feel heard and valued.
References
Green, Alison. (2013). 10 Ways You’re Annoying Your Employees. The Fast Track. Accessed at http://quickbase.intuit.com/blog/2013/03/12/10-ways-youre-annoying-your-employees/
Kelley, R. E. (1988). In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.
Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty (2nd ed.). Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing Company.
No comments:
Post a Comment