Its objective is clear when you simply look at the word the theory is built around: But how do you get people to follow a vision?
Linda Ackerman Anderson Introduction Command and control is by far the most common change leadership style. But as a change leader, you must. Command and control as a change leadership style destroys virtually any chance of success in nine out of ten transformational change efforts.
For starters, command and control: As you read, recall the unique features of transformational change: Command and Control Is Based on a Number of Erroneous Assumptions Command and control is based on establishing and maintaining power over, and control of, people and organizational processes.
On the surface, this sounds like a good idea: A number of usually unspoken assumptions drive the use of command and control. As you read them, imagine the behavior of change leaders you know who believe in these assumptions: Needing to alter change plans connotes leadership failure and means that the change leaders did not plan thoroughly enough You can argue that these assumptions are somewhat applicable for two types of organizational change—developmental and transitional change.
However, they are completely false and inappropriate for transformational changes. In projects that can be isolated from their environment e. In these cases, a predetermined outcome and project plan can be established and executed through a relatively stable set of circumstances.
Keep in mind, however, that making command and control work in such developmental or transitional change projects is a far cry from making the projects extremely successful. Command and control seldom leads to optimal results in any type of change.
The above assumptions are erroneous regarding transformational changes for a number of reasons. These changes are not isolated events, but in this day and age, continuous.
Consequently, change leaders can never be sure of their destination when they begin their change efforts. More often than not, circumstances are likely to arise that demand a change in direction. Since change leaders cannot protect their change efforts from the significant influences of the environment, they cannot create a plan and expect to control all of the dynamics that may impact its execution.
They will need to continuously alter or course correct both their plan and their destination throughout the change. Consequently, to have any level of success, change leaders need many eyes and ears tuned to the change effort, marketplace, and customer dynamics, as well as internal organizational forces.
Whose eyes and ears do they need? Employees frequently receive critical data for course correction long before leaders because employees are closer to the action. They are key to the early warning system for needed adjustments to both the goals of the transformation and the plans for getting there.
Therefore, employees need to participate as full players, not coerced victims. Both leaders and employees must evolve their mindsets about how work gets done, their role in the work, and the way the organization functions.
For instance, they might need to embrace new business models, develop partnership relationships with previously adversarial departments, design radically new work processes, take on more responsibility, etc.
Leaders can command and control employees to learn new technical skills, but they cannot coerce this level of personal change.
That can only be accomplished by willing participants— willing because they see the value and necessity for both themselves and the organization.
Where change leaders operating in a command and control orientation often miss wake-up calls for alteration and march down paths doomed for failure, co-creative change leaders hear these wake-up calls and engage with employees to figure out how to handle them successfully i.
From their worldview, these leaders could not see simple solutions to their people and process implementation problems, and would not accept our input about critical change strategies; they just did not think what we offered was necessary or valid. This program is our method for experientially introducing leaders to cocreating and demonstrating the profound benefits and tangible change results this orientation can deliver to their bottom line.
We devised a strategy for Daryl that included training, coaching, and numerous follow-up sessions doing real-time change strategy development with him and his team.
The net result was a substantial increase in performance and change leadership effectiveness for his team and organization.Table 1. Dimensions of Transformational Leadership. Nevertheless, it is clear that general understandings of transformational leadership are dominated by acceptance of the four dimensions set out in the left-hand column of Table 1 (see, for example, Stone, Russell & Patterson ()).
The impact of transformational leadership on organizational and leadership effectiveness: The Turkish case Article (PDF Available) in Journal of Management Development 27(7) · .
Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill encompassing the ability of an individual or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations.
 Specialist literature debates various viewpoints, contrasting Eastern and Western approaches to leadership, and also (within the West) United States versus European approaches. But be careful, Eyring advises – some transformational leadership techniques can actually harm employees’ performance.
“For example, leaders with a laissez-faire or hands-off approach impact performance negatively,” she says. ABOUT OUR PROGRAM. The ELOC program caters to experienced professionals and aims to release leadership aptitude.
Our focus is on action learning, emotional competencies, teamwork, collaboration and relationship building. The Transformational leadership style has been with us for thousands of years — being both praised and cursed. Discover what it is & why it’s important for organizations that .