I’m continually seeing the downside of the leadership strengths movement in organizations. While it seems like a good idea to focus on developing those areas where leaders are naturally talented, too much of a good thing is often worse.
The over-extension of a strength becomes a weakness. We know this because we’ve seen plenty of examples of it. Most managers can point to a leader who was so strong in one aspect of leading they overplayed their strengths with toxic effects.
Here are few examples that come to mind:
- The results-based, hard-driving leader is admired and promoted yet his people are less than fully engaged and enthusiastic. People complain that he over uses power and control and doesn’t listen to suggestions. They stop participating fully.
- The brilliant leader is impressive in her intellectual power and is quick to see problems and their origins. While she is looked to for solutions, her people don’t always understand or feel connected or needed.
- Then there are those leaders who go overboard to listen and understand their people, who solicit input from everyone. But there again, instead of truly effective leadership, people complain this leader lacks decisiveness and timely results.
In the framework of The Leadership Circle, there are three major ways leaders think and organize their mental world:
- Intellectual: There are those who rely on their intellectual strengths. These are leaders who have risen because of their highly efficient intellectual powers. They rely on being able to quickly grasp any situation, see the problems, and find solutions.
- Relational: There are other leaders who shine in their relational and social intelligence. They are confident there isn’t a soul with whom they can’t connect, establish trust, and gain influence. They rise to high levels of authority through networking and alliances, and accomplish great things through others.
- Executional: A third group of leaders include those who execute and achieve goals others might deem impossible. They are hard-driving, results-oriented people who will find a way to accomplish what’s necessary in spite of obstacles.
Viewed from this perspective, each has a down side. The intellectual leader protects their ego by being critical, arrogant, and distant. The relational leader is similarly protective of their beliefs by becoming pleasing and passive. And the executionally-adept leader drives people too much by being autocratic and controlling.
Here we have the three types of reactive responses in ineffective leaders who are exercising their strengths: Protective, Complying and Controlling.
I’ll be writing more about these reactive responses but in the meantime, I ask you to reflect on your own tendencies. Which of these three mental models do you use?
I’d love to hear from you. I can be reached at 425-533-4330 or email Marty@VondrellLeadership.com, here or on LinkedIn.