The Leadership Dilemma
David L. Bevett, BS, MPH
March 2, 2002
Leadership, a word that after exhaustive amounts of research and evaluation still somehow defies
definition. Change management paradigms such as TQM (Total Quality Management) have been
implemented and later discarded after failed attempts to “operationalize” the models. The same fate
has befallen much of the information and techniques learned through leadership programs and
seminars. Yet, as change and uncertainty in the global environment increase the need for leadership
increases. In part, due to society’s fear of chaos, resulting in “Leaders [having] become an important
avenue for humans to act out and continue to believe in their own efficacy as a species” (Trice &
Beyer, 1993, p.254). Hence, the stage has been set for leaders to make their value known as
integrators, agents of change, servant of people, and problem solvers. However, leaders must be
considered competent to be trusted and, in turn, trusted to be effective. And thus the leadership
dilemma: how does a leader demonstrate competence and establish trust in an ever-changing
competitive world?
Management paradigms ranging from empowerment to independent work teams, and an assortment
of evaluative mechanisms have alternately been considered cutting-edge. Yet, with all of the available
methodologies, what choice is the best choice? Which models are the most effective? Should the
models be used collectively or individually? Should every manager within an organization integrate a
particular model? Likewise, do the different paradigms and methodologies work with every type of
organization? If so, do they work in every industry? If the techniques or steps are implemented
properly are the results guaranteed or measurable? If so, what evaluation instruments should be
utilized? Is it possible for leaders to learn, apply and be knowledgeable of every model or technique?
Competition in today's global technology-driven marketplace requires leaders to choose from a variety
of methodologies to reduce cost, increase efficiency, maintain solidarity and morale in the workplace,
achieve ever-higher levels of quality and customer satisfaction, while simultaneously adjusting to
downsizing, policy changes, mergers and acquisitions, and organizational restructuring. Further,
dealing with issues such as the need for cultural competency, gender sensitivity, and diversity and
language barriers in a highly competitive marketplace have stretched managers to the limit. Which
leads one to question the net impact of these complex challenges on “how leaders influence the
development and expression of culture in their organizations” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.255)?
Increasing concerns about environmental regulation and community reinvestment must also be given
serious consideration. Consequently, organizations “…that face both strong institutional and
instrumental sectors have a difficult balancing act” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.306). Yet, which issues
take priority? And how much input should be solicited “When the managers sense demands from
their organizations’ environments, [and] they have three logical options: (1) …try to adapt their
organizations to whatever the environment seems to require; (2) …try to reduce the effects of
environmentally induced uncertainty through buffering; or (3) …try to influence their environments in
ways that lessen their dependency” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.308)? Should the leaders communicate
their concerns, shortcomings, and personal issues with staff? Or simply brandish the winner’s smile?
As a result, many managers understandably hide beneath the cloak of title and position, revealing only
their positive attributes and never, never expressing anger, fear, disappointment or frustration. With
such a comprehensive list of challenges and responsibilities, how does a leader demonstrate
competence?
Leaders are individuals who have transcended traditional management roles and functions to provide
direction through innovation, vision, and commitment. Commitment, as stated above, that
encompasses the needs and obstacles facing the workforce, the organization, and the communities in
which they do business. Leaders hold themselves accountable for the success or failure of their
projects, departments, and organizations: leaders provide inspiration by example. Leaders are
individuals who are exceptionally adept at communicating their vision and the immediate and future
challenges to their organization, and possess the unique ability to realize and harness the skills, talents,
and enthusiasm of the workforce in overcoming obstacles and meeting challenges. Leadership “…is
crucial to both continuity and change” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.258).
However, in today’s fast-paced ever-changing business environment, managers are often promoted
out of necessity and are subsequently left without benefit of adequate time and opportunity for
technical and interpersonal skills development. The result being a proliferation of relatively novice
managers ill-prepared for leadership and the corporate and environmental challenges they must face.
Though promotion to management based solely on quality of work seems beneficial, the end-result is
often a mix of frustration and, ultimately, organizational dysfunction. And the dysfunction is
inevitable because “the pattern of organization of any living system…is the configuration of
relationships among the system’s components that determines the system’s essential characteristics”
(Capra, 1996, 158). Thus, levels of resentment from employees and senior management working
with new managers builds, and the employees become inclined to “…band together and develop
countercultural norms to support and protect deviant practices…”(Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.254).
Under these conditions, how can leaders establish trust?
The response to organizational dysfunction is often to invest in management consultants and training
courses to create change in the organization’s structure and culture. However, a CEO might consider
bringing together a leadership team made up informal leaders from line staff, functional managers,
and hiring a transformational or charismatic leader to guide the cultural intervention. Because it may
be possible to “push for major cultural change before the organization experiences a crises.” And
“…cultural leadership involves not only leaders who originate new cultures or change existing ones,
but also subsequent leaders who carry forward others’ cultural innovations” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.
259-273). The cultural change leader could secondarily act as a role model for employees, managers
and other leaders within the organization “…by inspiring them with a new and radical vision of what
is possible” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.259).
The change team could then serve as a model and communication nexus to “…set processes in
motion to achieve their visions of what the organization(s) should be like and what they should try to
accomplish.” And for “New ideologies [to] arise through the relatively direct influence of leaders who
communicate new ideas, or more indirectly when leaders use cultural forms or their behaviors to
carry new cultural messages to members of a group” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.262-264). Upon the
successful implementation of the intervention, one or more team members could be selected to
facilitate the integration and institutionalization of the changes. Thus, a competent and effective leader-
role-model guiding a cross-sectional team of informal leaders and managers representing diverse
groups and needs could facilitate and maintain cultural change, and help to reestablish trust: hence,
providing part of the solution to addressing the leadership dilemma.
References
Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing
Group, Inc.
Trice, H.M., & Beyer, J.M. (1993). The Cultures of Work Organization. Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
David L. Bevett, BS, MPH
March 2, 2002
Leadership, a word that after exhaustive amounts of research and evaluation still somehow defies
definition. Change management paradigms such as TQM (Total Quality Management) have been
implemented and later discarded after failed attempts to “operationalize” the models. The same fate
has befallen much of the information and techniques learned through leadership programs and
seminars. Yet, as change and uncertainty in the global environment increase the need for leadership
increases. In part, due to society’s fear of chaos, resulting in “Leaders [having] become an important
avenue for humans to act out and continue to believe in their own efficacy as a species” (Trice &
Beyer, 1993, p.254). Hence, the stage has been set for leaders to make their value known as
integrators, agents of change, servant of people, and problem solvers. However, leaders must be
considered competent to be trusted and, in turn, trusted to be effective. And thus the leadership
dilemma: how does a leader demonstrate competence and establish trust in an ever-changing
competitive world?
Management paradigms ranging from empowerment to independent work teams, and an assortment
of evaluative mechanisms have alternately been considered cutting-edge. Yet, with all of the available
methodologies, what choice is the best choice? Which models are the most effective? Should the
models be used collectively or individually? Should every manager within an organization integrate a
particular model? Likewise, do the different paradigms and methodologies work with every type of
organization? If so, do they work in every industry? If the techniques or steps are implemented
properly are the results guaranteed or measurable? If so, what evaluation instruments should be
utilized? Is it possible for leaders to learn, apply and be knowledgeable of every model or technique?
Competition in today's global technology-driven marketplace requires leaders to choose from a variety
of methodologies to reduce cost, increase efficiency, maintain solidarity and morale in the workplace,
achieve ever-higher levels of quality and customer satisfaction, while simultaneously adjusting to
downsizing, policy changes, mergers and acquisitions, and organizational restructuring. Further,
dealing with issues such as the need for cultural competency, gender sensitivity, and diversity and
language barriers in a highly competitive marketplace have stretched managers to the limit. Which
leads one to question the net impact of these complex challenges on “how leaders influence the
development and expression of culture in their organizations” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.255)?
Increasing concerns about environmental regulation and community reinvestment must also be given
serious consideration. Consequently, organizations “…that face both strong institutional and
instrumental sectors have a difficult balancing act” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.306). Yet, which issues
take priority? And how much input should be solicited “When the managers sense demands from
their organizations’ environments, [and] they have three logical options: (1) …try to adapt their
organizations to whatever the environment seems to require; (2) …try to reduce the effects of
environmentally induced uncertainty through buffering; or (3) …try to influence their environments in
ways that lessen their dependency” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.308)? Should the leaders communicate
their concerns, shortcomings, and personal issues with staff? Or simply brandish the winner’s smile?
As a result, many managers understandably hide beneath the cloak of title and position, revealing only
their positive attributes and never, never expressing anger, fear, disappointment or frustration. With
such a comprehensive list of challenges and responsibilities, how does a leader demonstrate
competence?
Leaders are individuals who have transcended traditional management roles and functions to provide
direction through innovation, vision, and commitment. Commitment, as stated above, that
encompasses the needs and obstacles facing the workforce, the organization, and the communities in
which they do business. Leaders hold themselves accountable for the success or failure of their
projects, departments, and organizations: leaders provide inspiration by example. Leaders are
individuals who are exceptionally adept at communicating their vision and the immediate and future
challenges to their organization, and possess the unique ability to realize and harness the skills, talents,
and enthusiasm of the workforce in overcoming obstacles and meeting challenges. Leadership “…is
crucial to both continuity and change” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.258).
However, in today’s fast-paced ever-changing business environment, managers are often promoted
out of necessity and are subsequently left without benefit of adequate time and opportunity for
technical and interpersonal skills development. The result being a proliferation of relatively novice
managers ill-prepared for leadership and the corporate and environmental challenges they must face.
Though promotion to management based solely on quality of work seems beneficial, the end-result is
often a mix of frustration and, ultimately, organizational dysfunction. And the dysfunction is
inevitable because “the pattern of organization of any living system…is the configuration of
relationships among the system’s components that determines the system’s essential characteristics”
(Capra, 1996, 158). Thus, levels of resentment from employees and senior management working
with new managers builds, and the employees become inclined to “…band together and develop
countercultural norms to support and protect deviant practices…”(Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.254).
Under these conditions, how can leaders establish trust?
The response to organizational dysfunction is often to invest in management consultants and training
courses to create change in the organization’s structure and culture. However, a CEO might consider
bringing together a leadership team made up informal leaders from line staff, functional managers,
and hiring a transformational or charismatic leader to guide the cultural intervention. Because it may
be possible to “push for major cultural change before the organization experiences a crises.” And
“…cultural leadership involves not only leaders who originate new cultures or change existing ones,
but also subsequent leaders who carry forward others’ cultural innovations” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.
259-273). The cultural change leader could secondarily act as a role model for employees, managers
and other leaders within the organization “…by inspiring them with a new and radical vision of what
is possible” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.259).
The change team could then serve as a model and communication nexus to “…set processes in
motion to achieve their visions of what the organization(s) should be like and what they should try to
accomplish.” And for “New ideologies [to] arise through the relatively direct influence of leaders who
communicate new ideas, or more indirectly when leaders use cultural forms or their behaviors to
carry new cultural messages to members of a group” (Trice & Beyer, 1993, p.262-264). Upon the
successful implementation of the intervention, one or more team members could be selected to
facilitate the integration and institutionalization of the changes. Thus, a competent and effective leader-
role-model guiding a cross-sectional team of informal leaders and managers representing diverse
groups and needs could facilitate and maintain cultural change, and help to reestablish trust: hence,
providing part of the solution to addressing the leadership dilemma.
References
Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing
Group, Inc.
Trice, H.M., & Beyer, J.M. (1993). The Cultures of Work Organization. Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
| Copyright © Knowledgeark.net, 2016 |
| Terms and Conditions |
Knowledgeark.net > Leadership Development > The Leadership Dilemma
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |