Jack,
Functional management has been used for over 30 years now in a wide range of
industries and professional areas. As a management consultant and former
manager of a training division and later a training company I have been through
the whole range of management theories and 'guesses' but as yet haven't found
anything to peak it.
Essentially, Functional Leadership acknowledges that leadership is for a
purpose - usually the achievement of a task or job that itself has specific
needs (eg, produce a plan, identify the objectives, relay these to the team and
so on) which must be fulfilled if the task or job is to be successfully
undertaken. It also recognises that as leaders we must pull together a team of
people to achieve the objectives of the job or task (otherwise we wouldn't be
leaders, merely the person doing the job, and therefore not really in need of
leadership skills and knowledge), and this team must work together in a
cohesive and unified way. In other words, as a team rather than as a gaggle of
people. Finally, Functional Leadership acknowledges that each team is made up
of a lot of people, and each of these has needs important to them as
individuals (which is where SL fits in quite neatly). This picks up on all the
other theories which spend a great deal of time concentrating on the needs of
the individual and often leave the other two elements to look after themselves.
These three areas overlap in that any activity the leader carries out in one is
going to have an effect in the other two. For example, making people work a
sixteen hour day to complete a high priority job could see some individuals
become concerned that their individual needs aren't being meet (rest, extra
pay, concern for home etc.) and through this begin to disrupt the team unity.
Another example, where an individual has a personal problem that isn't being
adequately addressed this could see his/her concentration on the job start to
wain and as a result create difficulties for the rest of the team.
Functional Leadership simply states that as opposed to those theories that
state that a leader can only be effective if he/she has the competencies (read
traits) right from the start, people can be taught leadership. This starts from
an approach that clearly articulates the functions that a leader must perform
if he/she is to be effective (eg, train the team and each individual within it,
communicate the plan and provide feedback on progress, and so on).
Did that help?
Phil Rutherford
Cerva, Jack wrote:
> Howdy All,
>
> Of late (thankfully) there has been allot of discussion on which instrument
> is 'recommended' or most useful, and there have been many listed. For
> instance:
>
> Phil Rutherford, listed Ldshp Style Instrument, Sit. Ldshp(SL), and one I
> haven't heard much about- Functional Leadership (like to know more about
> this one)!