Discussion: View Thread

Dutch Driver wrote:
>I almost hate to say it, but problem-solving is more in line with
>management than leadership. And, I will go further--a person is either a
>leader or not. I do not allow for a fudging of the lines with terms like
>"leadership skills" and "management skills." If these are different sets,
>then the people who use them effectively are are also different.

Dutch--
I both like and enjoy your posts to this rather exciting new list
(Kudos to Charlie for devoting the time and the energy to create this
exciting dialogue list that seems to be building new bridges between
academics and industry professionals! Impressive!). I especially liked
your past comments about business presentation and the need to teach
business students how to tell stories and how to use persuasive narrative
logic as a means of creating a certain _authenticity_ with one's audience.
I wholeheartedly agreed with your creative stance in terms of teaching
business communication along such important lines.

About the above paragraph, I have a few questions: What do you
really mean when you say you believe that "a person is either a leader or
not?" I ask this because I'm afraid that you are returning us to the older
theories of "trait leadership" rather than addressing what I think are very
important concepts to employ with all students, namely that leadership is a
"behavior" that can and should be engendered in as many organizational
members as possible.

I ask about this, not to put you on the proverbial spot--and,
surely with a sincere, open mind---but I think that this point is vitally
important in both management and/or leadership concerned arenas. (

(Somewhat of an aside: Also, while it isn't always raised as such
much of the time, I think this particular view of "who" can or can't be a
_natural_leader, due to some kind of inborn _trait_ is very often a major
stumbling block in why many diversity understanding/management
interventions often fail on company soil. More importantly, perhaps, it
may also be the _secret_ to why more workers/managers or staff/managers do
not 'want to communicate with one another'--a paraphrase of Kemper's
previous post urging to __engender__ org communication.)

Thank you for taking the time to answer my question? If I've
misinterpreted your last post in any way, please help me to better
understand the point you were making about how a person either is or isn't
a leader.

Sincerely,

Michele Grottola
ABD, Cornell University
Adjunct Instructor, NLU-Chicago
Master's Program in HRM&OD

Re: leader vs. non-leader discussion:

In twenty years of consulting to Fortune 500 companies and academic
institutions, I've seen numerous situations in which people were assessed
and branded as "duds" in terms of their leadership capabilities by upper
management and others (usually based on selective perceptions of past
performance by certain people, leadership competency models, and even
psychological testing), only to find those same individuals rise and shine
as strong leaders when promoted or faced with a crisis situation. In my
opinion, it's often the environment or situation in which a person finds
himself/herself, and the people who believe in the person that brings out
and determines excellent leadership. MacGregor is still alive and well!
Precriptive models of leadership and psychological assessments can be
useful but one must remember they are reductionistic in nature and can be
short sighted and dangerous. The true test of leadership involves providing
the right skills, believing in the person's ability to achieve, challenging
the person, helping to create a supportive climate, letting the person go
to it in the real world (not just an assessment center environment), and
giving appropriate feedback. Ergo: the true test of leadership is when the
rubber meets the road under the proper conditions.

Just some thoughts.

Chet



>Dutch Driver wrote:
>>I almost hate to say it, but problem-solving is more in line with
>>management than leadership. And, I will go further--a person is either a
>>leader or not. I do not allow for a fudging of the lines with terms like
>>"leadership skills" and "management skills." If these are different sets,
>>then the people who use them effectively are are also different.
>
>Dutch--
> I both like and enjoy your posts to this rather exciting new list
>(Kudos to Charlie for devoting the time and the energy to create this
>exciting dialogue list that seems to be building new bridges between
>academics and industry professionals! Impressive!). I especially liked
>your past comments about business presentation and the need to teach
>business students how to tell stories and how to use persuasive narrative
>logic as a means of creating a certain _authenticity_ with one's audience.
>I wholeheartedly agreed with your creative stance in terms of teaching
>business communication along such important lines.
>
> About the above paragraph, I have a few questions: What do you
>really mean when you say you believe that "a person is either a leader or
>not?" I ask this because I'm afraid that you are returning us to the older
>theories of "trait leadership" rather than addressing what I think are very
>important concepts to employ with all students, namely that leadership is a
>"behavior" that can and should be engendered in as many organizational
>members as possible.
>
> I ask about this, not to put you on the proverbial spot--and,
>surely with a sincere, open mind---but I think that this point is vitally
>important in both management and/or leadership concerned arenas. (
>
> (Somewhat of an aside: Also, while it isn't always raised as such
>much of the time, I think this particular view of "who" can or can't be a
>_natural_leader, due to some kind of inborn _trait_ is very often a major
>stumbling block in why many diversity understanding/management
>interventions often fail on company soil. More importantly, perhaps, it
>may also be the _secret_ to why more workers/managers or staff/managers do
>not 'want to communicate with one another'--a paraphrase of Kemper's
>previous post urging to __engender__ org communication.)
>
> Thank you for taking the time to answer my question? If I've
>misinterpreted your last post in any way, please help me to better
>understand the point you were making about how a person either is or isn't
>a leader.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Michele Grottola
>ABD, Cornell University
>Adjunct Instructor, NLU-Chicago
>Master's Program in HRM&OD


Chet Warzynski
Organizational Development
20 Thornwood Drive, Suite 106
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-254-8308
Fax:607-254-8364

It is patently obvious that leadership is the proper conjunction of an =
individual with the appropriate innate qualities and the proper =
historical moment. Ulysses S. Grant and Harry Truman were =
unprepossessing individuals who found their proper historical moment. =
More to the point - they were willing to accept the responsibilites of =
leadership. I think it should be abundantly clear to anyone with any =
life experience that many of the most talented among us can not accept =
the burden of leadership with its concommitant possibility of failure.=20

----------
From: Chester C. Warzynski[SMTP:ccw7@CORNELL.EDU]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 1997 7:16 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list MG-ED-DV
Subject: Re: MG-ED-DV Digest - 15 Jan 1997 to 16 Jan 1997

Re: leader vs. non-leader discussion:

In twenty years of consulting to Fortune 500 companies and academic
institutions, I've seen numerous situations in which people were =
assessed
and branded as "duds" in terms of their leadership capabilities by upper
management and others (usually based on selective perceptions of past
performance by certain people, leadership competency models, and even
psychological testing), only to find those same individuals rise and =
shine
as strong leaders when promoted or faced with a crisis situation. In my
opinion, it's often the environment or situation in which a person finds
himself/herself, and the people who believe in the person that brings =
out
and determines excellent leadership. MacGregor is still alive and well!
Precriptive models of leadership and psychological assessments can be
useful but one must remember they are reductionistic in nature and can =
be
short sighted and dangerous. The true test of leadership involves =
providing
the right skills, believing in the person's ability to achieve, =
challenging
the person, helping to create a supportive climate, letting the person =
go
to it in the real world (not just an assessment center environment), and
giving appropriate feedback. Ergo: the true test of leadership is when =
the
rubber meets the road under the proper conditions.

Just some thoughts.

Chet



>Dutch Driver wrote:
>>I almost hate to say it, but problem-solving is more in line with
>>management than leadership. And, I will go further--a person is =
either a
>>leader or not. I do not allow for a fudging of the lines with terms =
like
>>"leadership skills" and "management skills." If these are different =
sets,
>>then the people who use them effectively are are also different.
>
>Dutch--
> I both like and enjoy your posts to this rather exciting new =
list
>(Kudos to Charlie for devoting the time and the energy to create this
>exciting dialogue list that seems to be building new bridges between
>academics and industry professionals! Impressive!). I especially =
liked
>your past comments about business presentation and the need to teach
>business students how to tell stories and how to use persuasive =
narrative
>logic as a means of creating a certain _authenticity_ with one's =
audience.
>I wholeheartedly agreed with your creative stance in terms of teaching
>business communication along such important lines.
>
> About the above paragraph, I have a few questions: What do you
>really mean when you say you believe that "a person is either a leader =
or
>not?" I ask this because I'm afraid that you are returning us to the =
older
>theories of "trait leadership" rather than addressing what I think are =
very
>important concepts to employ with all students, namely that leadership =
is a
>"behavior" that can and should be engendered in as many organizational
>members as possible.
>
> I ask about this, not to put you on the proverbial spot--and,
>surely with a sincere, open mind---but I think that this point is =
vitally
>important in both management and/or leadership concerned arenas. (
>
> (Somewhat of an aside: Also, while it isn't always raised as =
such
>much of the time, I think this particular view of "who" can or can't be =
a
>_natural_leader, due to some kind of inborn _trait_ is very often a =
major
>stumbling block in why many diversity understanding/management
>interventions often fail on company soil. More importantly, perhaps, =
it
>may also be the _secret_ to why more workers/managers or staff/managers =
do
>not 'want to communicate with one another'--a paraphrase of Kemper's
>previous post urging to __engender__ org communication.)
>
> Thank you for taking the time to answer my question? If I've
>misinterpreted your last post in any way, please help me to better
>understand the point you were making about how a person either is or =
isn't
>a leader.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Michele Grottola
>ABD, Cornell University
>Adjunct Instructor, NLU-Chicago
>Master's Program in HRM&OD


Chet Warzynski

Organizational Development
20 Thornwood Drive, Suite 106
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-254-8308
Fax:607-254-8364

Chester C. Warzynski wrote:
>
> Re: leader vs. non-leader discussion:
>
> In twenty years of consulting to Fortune 500 companies and academic
> institutions, I've seen numerous situations in which people were assessed
> and branded as "duds" in terms of their leadership capabilities by upper
> management and others (usually based on selective perceptions of past
> performance by certain people, leadership competency models, and even
> psychological testing), only to find those same individuals rise and shine
> as strong leaders when promoted or faced with a crisis situation. In my
> opinion, it's often the environment or situation in which a person finds
> himself/herself, and the people who believe in the person that brings out
> and determines excellent leadership. MacGregor is still alive and well!
> Precriptive models of leadership and psychological assessments can be
> useful but one must remember they are reductionistic in nature and can be
> short sighted and dangerous. The true test of leadership involves providing
> the right skills, believing in the person's ability to achieve, challenging
> the person, helping to create a supportive climate, letting the person go
> to it in the real world (not just an assessment center environment), and
> giving appropriate feedback. Ergo: the true test of leadership is when the
> rubber meets the road under the proper conditions.
>
> Just some thoughts.
>
> Chet
>
> >Dutch Driver wrote:
> >>I almost hate to say it, but problem-solving is more in line with
> >>management than leadership. And, I will go further--a person is either a
> >>leader or not. I do not allow for a fudging of the lines with terms like
> >>"leadership skills" and "management skills." If these are different sets,
> >>then the people who use them effectively are are also different.
> >
> >Dutch--
> > I both like and enjoy your posts to this rather exciting new list
> >(Kudos to Charlie for devoting the time and the energy to create this
> >exciting dialogue list that seems to be building new bridges between
> >academics and industry professionals! Impressive!). I especially liked
> >your past comments about business presentation and the need to teach
> >business students how to tell stories and how to use persuasive narrative
> >logic as a means of creating a certain _authenticity_ with one's audience.
> >I wholeheartedly agreed with your creative stance in terms of teaching
> >business communication along such important lines.
> >
> > About the above paragraph, I have a few questions: What do you
> >really mean when you say you believe that "a person is either a leader or
> >not?" I ask this because I'm afraid that you are returning us to the older
> >theories of "trait leadership" rather than addressing what I think are very
> >important concepts to employ with all students, namely that leadership is a
> >"behavior" that can and should be engendered in as many organizational
> >members as possible.
> >
> > I ask about this, not to put you on the proverbial spot--and,
> >surely with a sincere, open mind---but I think that this point is vitally
> >important in both management and/or leadership concerned arenas. (
> >
> > (Somewhat of an aside: Also, while it isn't always raised as such
> >much of the time, I think this particular view of "who" can or can't be a
> >_natural_leader, due to some kind of inborn _trait_ is very often a major
> >stumbling block in why many diversity understanding/management
> >interventions often fail on company soil. More importantly, perhaps, it
> >may also be the _secret_ to why more workers/managers or staff/managers do
> >not 'want to communicate with one another'--a paraphrase of Kemper's
> >previous post urging to __engender__ org communication.)
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to answer my question? If I've
> >misinterpreted your last post in any way, please help me to better
> >understand the point you were making about how a person either is or isn't
> >a leader.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Michele Grottola


Chester,


I strongly agree with your position. I have been studying the role of
CIOs and its impact on firms performance and that is quite measurable.
I would also like to add that in my 25 years experience as a
professional, ten of those as a manager, it is during crisis that most
of the authentic leadership skills surface.


Ron Klein, DSc
Canadian Tire Corporation
Ryerson Polytechnic University
Toronto, Canada

Could I repeat Charlie's plea: PLEASE don't put the long quote-backs in your
postings. It wastes download time, it's expensive for anyone who has to pay
for that and for storage, and finally it wastes everyone's time hunting for
the sapling of reply amongst the forest of quoteback.

Thanks
Hugh Gunz

These are some of the first real-life good views on the subject I have heard
here. Good job!

>Re: leader vs. non-leader discussion:
>
>In twenty years of consulting to Fortune 500 companies and academic
>institutions, I've seen numerous situations in which people were assessed
>and branded as "duds" in terms of their leadership capabilities by upper
>management and others (usually based on selective perceptions of past
>performance by certain people, leadership competency models, and even
>psychological testing), only to find those same individuals rise and shine
>as strong leaders when promoted or faced with a crisis situation. In my
>opinion, it's often the environment or situation in which a person finds
>himself/herself, and the people who believe in the person that brings out
>and determines excellent leadership. MacGregor is still alive and well!
>Precriptive models of leadership and psychological assessments can be
>useful but one must remember they are reductionistic in nature and can be
>short sighted and dangerous. The true test of leadership involves providing
>the right skills, believing in the person's ability to achieve, challenging
>the person, helping to create a supportive climate, letting the person go
>to it in the real world (not just an assessment center environment), and
>giving appropriate feedback. Ergo: the true test of leadership is when the
>rubber meets the road under the proper conditions.
>
>Just some thoughts.
>
>Chet
>
>
>
>>Dutch Driver wrote:
>>>I almost hate to say it, but problem-solving is more in line with
>>>management than leadership. And, I will go further--a person is either a
>>>leader or not. I do not allow for a fudging of the lines with terms like
>>>"leadership skills" and "management skills." If these are different sets,
>>>then the people who use them effectively are are also different.
>>
>>Dutch--
>> I both like and enjoy your posts to this rather exciting new list
>>(Kudos to Charlie for devoting the time and the energy to create this
>>exciting dialogue list that seems to be building new bridges between
>>academics and industry professionals! Impressive!). I especially liked
>>your past comments about business presentation and the need to teach
>>business students how to tell stories and how to use persuasive narrative
>>logic as a means of creating a certain _authenticity_ with one's audience.
>>I wholeheartedly agreed with your creative stance in terms of teaching
>>business communication along such important lines.
>>
>> About the above paragraph, I have a few questions: What do you
>>really mean when you say you believe that "a person is either a leader or
>>not?" I ask this because I'm afraid that you are returning us to the older
>>theories of "trait leadership" rather than addressing what I think are very
>>important concepts to employ with all students, namely that leadership is a
>>"behavior" that can and should be engendered in as many organizational
>>members as possible.
>>
>> I ask about this, not to put you on the proverbial spot--and,
>>surely with a sincere, open mind---but I think that this point is vitally
>>important in both management and/or leadership concerned arenas. (
>>
>> (Somewhat of an aside: Also, while it isn't always raised as such
>>much of the time, I think this particular view of "who" can or can't be a
>>_natural_leader, due to some kind of inborn _trait_ is very often a major
>>stumbling block in why many diversity understanding/management
>>interventions often fail on company soil. More importantly, perhaps, it
>>may also be the _secret_ to why more workers/managers or staff/managers do
>>not 'want to communicate with one another'--a paraphrase of Kemper's
>>previous post urging to __engender__ org communication.)
>>
>> Thank you for taking the time to answer my question? If I've
>>misinterpreted your last post in any way, please help me to better
>>understand the point you were making about how a person either is or isn't
>>a leader.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Michele Grottola
>>ABD, Cornell University
>>Adjunct Instructor, NLU-Chicago
>>Master's Program in HRM&OD
>
>
>Chet Warzynski
>Organizational Development
>20 Thornwood Drive, Suite 106
>Ithaca, NY 14850
>607-254-8308
>Fax:607-254-8364
>
>