Leadership is presented in today’s world as becoming increasingly complex. Some may experience it that way. In a way, I can understand it when I see what is recommended to managers, which must be taken to heart if you want to lead effectively. The vast majority of these recommendations are mere advice. Advice is also blows. I would like to bear this in mind and recommend that anyone who has leadership responsibilities do not allow themselves to be influenced by false advisors.
However, leadership is also presented as time-consuming or at least time-consuming. From my point of view, this is only the case if one tries to approach the matter methodically. Leadership is not suitable for methodical processing. Leadership also has nothing to do with “leadership technique”. Nothing is more time-consuming, energy-consuming and motivational than the application of leadership methods that do not help those who are led. The people you lead directly, who report to you, need the same thing as I do: orientation. I get the most of it when I ask how they want me to be a leader. The leaders get the most out of it when I say what I want, giving free dreams and setting boundaries.
Leadership, or leadership, means nothing more than ensuring that others become successful or, if they already are, remain successful. Leadership is neither a question of a certain investment of time nor a special method, as you find them in abundance in unhelpful books. Leadership is solely the question of a good leadership relationship with focused result orientation and clarity that cannot be surpassed.
You have to see things so deeply that they become easy. In concrete terms, this means: Who will be led? Let’s call these people “responsible for action” because leaders are “leaders”. What do I want as a manager? The answer should be known to those responsible for action who have been reported to me. If not, I urgently need to catch up and provide clarity. Facts save time, assumptions rob them.
Leadership is a form of service. Let’s assume that I expect commitment, reliability and professionalism from those responsible for action, and of course also that they achieve results that are pre-formulated as goals. Assuming this, there is only one question for those responsible for action: “How do they imagine my leadership?” Or to put it another way: What does the individual need from me in order to be able to meet my requirements? Concretely, not in generalities. It will become apparent that the needs can be quite different. Quite simply, because every person is an individual, as unique as his fingerprint.
If there are points among the respondents’ ideas that I can fulfill, there is no need for further discussion. It is perfectly sufficient if I align myself with it. If there are points among the leadership expectations that I cannot fulfill, I say it openly and justify why. I do the same when I don’t want to fulfill certain points. On this basis, I make agreements that cultivate the management relationship. As a leader, I keep my promises. I expect the leaders to keep their promises. Commitment and trust should be a matter of course within this framework.
Effective and efficient leadership, and thus time-saving effective leadership, is possible if the interpersonal atmosphere between those responsible for action and leadership is right and the mutual expectations are clear. What managers need most urgently to get there is attention and the ability to introduce the actors with their topics, interests, expectations, motives and potentials. Look closely. Listen carefully.
In the second place of the leadership requirements comes clarity in sending messages, that is, clearly stating what I want and asking just as clearly how and where I can support the respective Direct Report in meeting my expectations. Leadership can be so easy if you ignore the flourishes of leadership techniques and rely on mutually appreciative communication.
