# Managing Groups and Teams/What should a New Leader do when entering into an existing team?

## Introduction

"The actions you take during your first three months in a new job will
largely determine whether you succeed or fail. Transitions are periods
of opportunity, a chance to start afresh and to make needed changes in
an organization. But they are also periods of acute vulnerability,
because you lack established working relationships and a detailed
understanding of your new role.",[^1] These words by Michael Watkins,
author of The First 90 Days, are a great summary of new leader
transition within an organization or a group. In general, team leader
transitions fall into two categories. The first category is better known
as "internal leader transition" and occurs when a team member is
ascended as team leader from within the very same team. The second
category, better known as "external leader transition" occurs when a new
leader, from outside the team, is assigned to an existing team.

The distinction from internal or external leadership is important
because the costs, risks and effects between the internal and the
external leader transition differ substantially. The difference is
attributed to several factors that Manderscheid [^2] summarizes below:

-   Outside executives are not as familiar with the organization's
    structure and the existence of informal networks of information and
    communication.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Outside hires are not familiar with the corporate culture and
    therefore have greater difficulty assimilating.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   External candidates are unknown to the organization and therefore do
    not have the same credibility as someone who is promoted within.

The effects produced by a new leader joining an existing team depend on
the intervention to prepare and adapt the new leader to the new team and
the organization and vice versa. This intervention is known as leader
assimilation.

According to the consulted literature on leader transitions, although
several authors recognize the importance of an intervention in leader
assimilation, little research has been conducted to explore its
effectiveness. (Manderscheid, 2008)

Recent research made by Alexcel and the Institute of Executive
Development [^3] contains interesting data from 150 executives and
talent professionals across diverse industries and companies. A summary
of this study prepared by Cindy Kraft [^4] concludes that:

1\. Global CEO turnover is approximately 15% according to a 2007 study
by Booz Allen, a decade--high number. Other studies suggest 40% of new
leaders fail within the first 18 months. And Aon Consulting reports a
50% chance an executive will quit or be fired within his first three
years.

2\. Ninety two percent (92%) of respondents said it takes 90+ days to
reach productivity and 62% said 6+months. And even after making it
through the first 90 days and the first 180 days, a significant
percentage of external executive hires are gone within two years.

3\. While not as long as with external hires, 72% of respondents said
internal executives need more than the "first 90 days" to get up to
speed, and 25% said 6+ months were needed.

4\. Thirty percent (30%) of external hires fail to meet expectations in
two years and the fail rate of internal senior executive transitions is
20%, representing millions of dollars in losses at the executive level.
Among all respondents, 68% indicated fail rates are related to a lack of
interpersonal and leadership skills; 45% of respondents indicated it was
a lack of personal skills; and 41% of respondents attributed
underperformance to goal conflicts between the executive and the
organization.

## What circumstances prompt a change in leadership?

There can be internal and external circumstances in an organization
environment that require a change in leadership. These various factors
could be organized in three main groups:

1.  **Changes in the environment** - Usually, changes in the external
    circumstances of an organization require a change in leadership to
    help the organization to adapt to the new environment. There could
    be changes in technology, competitors, suppliers, buyers,
    substitutes and potential entrants that require some radical changes
    in leadership to solve the new challenges.
2.  **Changes in the architecture of the organization** - The internal
    circumstances usually prompted by alliances, joint ventures or
    merger and acquisitions demand changes in the structure of the
    organization, as well as changes in leadership to rebuild the
    organization according to these changes.
3.  **Changes in the vision of the organization** - In general, there
    could be changes in goals, scope, competitive advantage, logic of an
    organization that could be prompted by internal or external changes,
    or simply as a way to change the path of the organization thinking
    about the future.

Leadership transition in any group or organization is going to raise
some questions from both internal and external stakeholders of the
group. Some of the questions that may arise during these transition
periods can be:

-   Vision: What's the company's strategic story going forward?
-   Vision: Does the organization need the successor to be a visionary?
-   Architecture: What are the operating requirements over a three- to
    five-year time horizon?
-   Architecture: How is the organization changing?
-   Environment: How will the top executive roles need to change to fit
    new business demands?
-   Environment: Should the person have deep operational credibility and
    experience?

!Chart 3- time to
productivity\|500px[^5]

The above chart depicts the amount of time that can be be needed if the
new leader is coming from outside of the organization or group. The
analysis emphasizes two points; first that the amount of time for an
external candidate to adapt to their new environment can be considerable
and second; that planned leadership changes can be the most successful
in preparing both the new leader and the team by allotting more time and
resources to create a successful transition.

The most crucial time in the integration process is labeled the
transition phase. During this period both the team leader and team
members should focus on activities related to structuring the team,
planning the team's work, and evaluating the team's performance such
that the team will ultimately be able to achieve its goal or objective
in order to establish the structures and processes that will enable
future effectiveness.[^6]

Although there is no comprehensive data comparing planned vs. unexpected
leadership changes, the importance of a planned transition phase that
helps create a functional team is supported by the fact that external
executives can take less time to be productive or to jump from the
transition to the action phase leadership functions, if they integrate
successfully to the team and the organization, which is the objective of
the transition phase.

## What are the advantages of bringing in a new leader

New leader assimilation is a difficult task that usually represents a
large investment for an organization. The high rate of failure in new
leader assimilation requires a process to create a successful transition
to reduce the high cost and frustration in this process [^7]. High costs
and risks associated to bringing an external new leader have to be
inferior to those associated to promoting an internal new leader as it
is compared in the chart below:

!Chart 4\|500px\|center[^8]

A list of circumstances in which hiring an external leader could be more
beneficial than hiring an internal one can include:

-   New thoughts/ideas: Usually a new leader can bring new perspectives
    and ideas to solve innovation and change problems in an organization
    that the same organization cannot solve using its own resources. As
    we talked earlier, there could be radical changes in the
    environment, the architecture and the vision of an organization that
    could require new leaders to affront these new challenges.
-   Solve conflicts or evaluate processes: There is a dispute that
    cannot be solved using internal resources, and it is required to
    hire somebody else to establish a new order.
-   Lack of resources: Organization does not have internal resources to
    provide the desired leadership and need to hire an external one, but
    this circumstance can be a good opportunity to hire somebody who
    could inject fresh blood to the organization.
-   Experience in new markets or cultures: Expansion usually requires
    experience in new markets and cultures that the organization does
    not have. Internal experts usually make assumptions from their own
    market experience that cannot be applied directly in new markets or
    cultures.
-   Gain Industry experience: Before a company is launching a new
    product or entering a new industry, they might look to external
    hires for industry expertise in order to minimize risks and maximize
    opportunities.
-   Rapid growth: Companies can grow rapidly and they simply do not have
    the internal resources to provide leadership into the expansion and
    creation of new functional areas or divisions.

## What are the possible difficulties (and possible solutions) faced by the new leader?

We most often see organisations looking to outside sources for
leadership change. That is to say, for a leadership change that will
cause cascading changes that permeate throughout the organisation. While
a new leader brings new perspectives, new thought processes, new
decision making styles and other numerous advantages, it also brings
challenges. In the Harvard Business article, Right from the Start, the
article opens with the story of a new leader joining an organisation as
an "outsider". Some things he lacked that the insider would know would
be the detailed knowledge of the organisation, its structure and
systems, its politics and culture. \"His situation was complicated
because, coming from the outside, he had to simultaneously manage a
personal transition and lead an organisational transformation, in
addition to managing their accession to the top job. Together, these
elements of transition, transformation and succession constitute a
challenging scenario for a new corporate leader." (Ciampa & Watkins,
2005)

Challenges resulting from the change in leadership are not just had by
the new leader but they are faced by many throughout the organisation.
The comfort that is felt by choosing an "insider" isn't just a comfort
for those managing the position but it is a comfort for those who are
being led by that position. A new leader can face an assortment of
challenges from subordinates, especially if they were more in favour of
a different candidate to be their new boss. A new leader has the
possible situation of managing those who were interested in, and perhaps
applied for, the position. You might find your team has no want of a
leader and they feel they can manage the tasks at hand without your
help. Additionally, a new leader can find themselves in a situation
where their team has no desire for change or growth or see no need for
enhancement. Perhaps the individual whose position you are taking has
been absent (emotionally, mentally, or literally) from the team for such
a great deal of time, your new employees aren't sure how a "leader" fits
into the group.

The following five challenges, along with possible resolutions to such
challenges, are discussed by Ciampa and Watkins in the same article,
Right from the Start.

1.  **Acquiring needed knowledge quickly** - If you've been in a new
    leadership position you've probably expressed something similar to
    "there was so much I didn't know." We know some of what we don't
    know and yet there are things that we don't know we don't know. Find
    them out. The learning curve is steep and there is little time
    available during this early transition period for considerable
    error. You must move quickly to make the transition for yourself and
    the organisation. "The new leader may lack critical knowledge in any
    or all of three domains -- technical, cultural, or political."
    `<ref>`{=html}. Ciampa, D., & Watkins, M. (2005). Right from the
    Start: Taking Charge in a New Leadership Role. Harvard Business
    School Press , 336.

```{=html}
</ref>
```
1.  **Establishing new working relationships** - The challenge comes
    because you are leaving a comfortable, secure environment where you
    know the people and have established relationships to enter a
    situation where you know no one and have no connections. It is
    impossible to function at a high capacity without the essential
    components of relationships and networking in place. It makes it
    vital to establish productive, working relationships and build
    credibility as soon as possible. "Even under the best of
    circumstances, it takes time to establish productive working
    relationships. The new leader will have met few of his peers and
    subordinates, and his knowledge of their expectations, hopes, and
    concerns will be based largely on the opinions of others. New
    leaders cannot fully control how they are perceived by the people
    who in large part will determine their success." `<ref>`{=html}.
    Ciampa, D., & Watkins, M. (2005). Right from the Start: Taking
    Charge in a New Leadership Role. Harvard Business School Press ,
    336.

```{=html}
</ref>
```
1.  **Juggling organisational and personal transitions** - It's
    important not to just be reactionary when entering this new
    organisation full of unknowns and uncertainty. Establish the
    prevailing tone and pace you desire to utilise to shape the
    organisational change that has been the aspiration for your addition
    to the company. Recognise that the change mandate may have been
    recently delivered to the employees, possibly in the same breath
    that they are told 'Oh yeah, we also have a new leader coming on
    board.' Recognise that you will have a variety of employee
    perspectives from anxiously awaiting change, to sceptical and
    unbelieving, and perhaps still others threatened by the arrival of
    an unknown person to this position of power. It might be difficult
    to recognise who is reacting in what manner at first but little if
    anything can be done to avoid this. Understand and anticipate that
    you might have little control over some aspects of this situation
    but still try to make the best of it in whatever means possible.
2.  **Managing expectations** - The expectations start as early as the
    first phone call. The search team and you, as the candidate, both
    had expectations of this new situation. Both wanted to give and
    receive something from the formation of this new possible
    relationship. It is important to manage and set reasonable
    expectations throughout this time. Additionally, employees'
    expectations are inevitably affected by rumours and hearsay as well
    as the official declaration when a new leader is announced.
    Unfortunately, a new leader has little to no control over this. "All
    he can do, typically, is to try to comprehend the prevailing
    expectations and to deflate--carefully--those that are dangerously
    high while taking advantage of those that are useful."
    `<ref>`{=html}. Ciampa, D., & Watkins, M. (2005). Right from the
    Start: Taking Charge in a New Leadership Role. Harvard Business
    School Press , 336.

```{=html}
</ref>
```
1.  **Maintaining personal equilibrium** - "Some version of the first
    four challenges confronts all new leaders during their transitions.
    Handling them successfully often depends on maintaining emotional
    balance and exercising clear-headed judgement." `<ref>`{=html}.
    Ciampa, D., & Watkins, M. (2005). Right from the Start: Taking
    Charge in a New Leadership Role. Harvard Business School Press ,
    336.

```{=html}
</ref>
```
You will inevitably feel a mix of emotions when taking a new leadership
position: anticipation, excitement, fear, uncertainty. This is natural.
The important part is keeping balance of all aspects of your life and
recognising you are setting a standard by how you react to these
emotions. Is work/life balance important? What is a "normal" work week?
Remember that others are watching your reactions and you are in fact
modelling the behaviour which can set the tone for your tenure of
leadership as well as the tone for your organisation.

Overcoming obstacles of possible conflict before they become
insurmountable is extremely important in this new undertaking. Asserting
oneself and reaffirming that you were the best possible choice for the
position while not offending or isolating your new team is a complicated
process. It's important to create momentum from the beginning and to
harness any excitement and positive components that you've got going for
you.

One of the key decisions that you need to make, when you are replacing
the leader of a team, is whether to promote someone from within the
team, or to look for someone from outside of the group. Both of these
options have advantages in certain situations, and both present
challenges to overcome as well.

## When replacing a leader, what are the advantages of promoting someone from within the group?

When you are replacing a leader who has been doing a good job, and the
team is on the right track, it is often a good idea to promote a new
team leader from within the existing team. One of the major advantages
of promoting from within is consistency. Leaders promoted from within
the team already know what is going on. They are familiar with the
team\'s goals, processes, and culture, and therefore can usually step
right in to the leadership role and keep things going with a very short
transition period needed.

`   Promoting from within also sends signals to the rest of the members of the team. When a teammate is promoted to a leadership position it signals to others that there are opportunities for growth within the organization. It also signals to the team that they are on the right track and they are doing a good job. Both of these signals can help to support the morale of the team members and encourage them to keep moving forward.`

`   There are some challenges that may arise from promoting a member of the team to a leadership position. The new leader may struggle to make the transition from a team member and friend to leader and boss. Some members of the team may feel that they are more qualified for leadership position. Others may feel that their existing friendship with the new leader entitle them to special privileges above the rest of the team. “Allying the jealousy and winning the trust of those left behind, while still asserting authority, requires a diplomacy and agility that many [new leaders] lack. But they must master those skills if they hope to get ahead.” `[^9]

## What are the advantages of bringing someone in from outside the group?

When the group is struggling to accomplish their goals and drastic
change is needed, bringing in a new leader from outside of the
organization can help to correct the course. A new leader who is
previously not connected to the team can bring fresh ideas and insights
to the table. They may also be able to refocus the team on the goals and
can help to shift an ineffective culture.

`   Again, making the decision to hire a new team leader from outside of the organization sends signals to the members of the team. In this case, the new leader signals that there are needed changes in the teams operations, and that the way things have been done in the past may not be acceptable in the future. The hiring of an outsider puts all team members on notice that their position within the team is not secure, and that other changes may follow if results are not achieved.`

`   It is likely that a new leader who was not a member of the group will always be viewed as an outsider. This view creates challenges in getting cooperation from the team members, and in maintaining high morale. It takes time for a team to make an effective transition to a new leader in any event. If the leader is an outsider this transition usually takes longer and requires patience both from the new leader and the organization as a whole.`

`   Rarely is the decision of whether to promote from within or hire from outside a clear black and white scenario. In most cases there are some things the team is doing well, and so some continuity is desired. At the same time there are usually some areas in which improvement is needed and change is desired. There are also issues regarding whether or not any of the team members are prepared to take on a leadership role which also must be taken into account when making the decision on where to look for a new team leader. The most important thing when making this choice is to be aware of the consequences (both good and bad) of that choice, and be prepared to help your new leader to be successful in their role.`

We have examined the effects of a new team leader joining an existing
team and in this section we will focus on how a new team leader can take
advantage of the opportunity that initially exists without becoming
prone to the vulnerabilities that also exist.

## The transition process plan. Tools and resources.

There are a number of traps that can await a new leader throughout the
transition, however if the leader can focus on key points during this
time they can be much more successful both in the short term and long
term. In a letter written to Vikram Pandit during his transition to CEO
of Citigroup Michael Watkins and Dan Ciampa noted the six leadership
lessons that they have learned through their research of leadership
transitions. [^10] A summary of these lessons is below:

1.  **Identify critical alliances within the group and organization** --
    This step of the process involves identifying powerful internal and
    external constituencies and gaining their support. If a new leader
    can convince these influential individuals that it is in their
    interest for the leader and their strategy/goals to be successful
    they can quickly gain their much needed support during the
    transition. Examples of these influential individuals which the new
    leader will want to identify include key senior members of the
    group, leaders of other groups within the organization, executives
    or board members within the organization and influencers within the
    partner or customer organizations.
2.  **Get the right team in place fast** -- As a new leader transitions
    into his role within the group or organization it is inevitable that
    they will inherit senior members of the team which are holdovers
    from the previous leader. The key here is to identify those with the
    skills, knowledge and background to help the new leader and their
    goals succeed. The most difficult task as a new leader is to remove
    or disrupt the senior membership of the team or organization but is
    essential for both the short and long term success of the leader. If
    they want to create a successful team that will share their vision
    it is important to get the right team in place fast; even if it
    requires replacing key people from the previous leader's team.
3.  **Secure early wins** -- As seen in the movie 12 o'clock high it is
    important for a new leader to demonstrate tangible successes to the
    team as soon as possible following the transition. The wins do not
    have to be large relative to the overall goal of the team; in fact
    it is suggested that they are small but the necessary component is
    that the results are tangible so that the group can experience
    success early on under the new leadership. Pick the low hanging
    fruit first.
4.  **Lay the groundwork for effective communication** -- As a new
    leader joins a team everyone is closely watching their actions and
    listening to their words searching for signals and directions as
    they try to figure out who the leader is and what the new leader is
    all about. This is why it is crucial to clearly define and
    communicate your priorities, values and expectations early in the
    transition. If you want to influence the group and get buy-in as the
    leader it is key for them to know who you are and what you are all
    about. One effective method to accomplish this is through a new team
    leader assimilation meeting. In this meeting the team leader simply
    presents himself and who he is, both personally and professionally,
    and asks his team members do to the same. This open and
    collaborative communication early in the process allows for barriers
    to be broken down between the new leader and the team's members.
5.  **Shape your vision** -- This is not the mission of the company or
    the group, rather it is a vivid mental image of what the new leader
    sees as the future for the group. It should be a picture of what is
    seen, heard, and felt when the group fulfills its mission and
    objectives. The key people within the group must be inspired by this
    vision if it is to be effective.
6.  **Build and use a balanced advice network** -- This could be the
    most important of all of the key areas to focus on. Too often new
    leaders come in with an attitude that they are in place because they
    know everything about the group's objective or process. This is most
    likely not the case and new leaders can run into troubles when they
    are in fear of the vulnerability which can be created by showing
    their lack of specific knowledge related to the group and make a
    decision simply because "they are the leader". To avoid this trap,
    new leaders should build a well balanced network of individuals
    within and outside of the group. This allows for the new leader to
    accelerate the learning process when it comes to group culture,
    market trends, products, etc. This can be the most effective tool in
    the new leader's arsenal.

Successful transitions within a group can also be influenced by actions
taken by the organization or team prior to the change in leadership.
Many companies and groups develop succession plans in advance of the
departure of the current leader as a way to lessen the downtime and
soften the negative effects which result from leadership transitions.
Perhaps the greatest benefit among these plans is the ability to
transfer organizational knowledge from the outgoing leader to the
incoming leader however to effectively accomplish this it is important
to identify potential new leaders in the early stages of the succession
plan [^11].

## Recommended steps for a new team leader

Lessons learned from leadership transitions in the political arena can
also be applied to new team leaders in the business sector. In an
article discussing the quick departure of New York Governor Elliott
Spitzer and the accession of then Lieutenant Governor David Paterson,
Rick Lash, North American director of the leadership and talent practice
at Hay Group identified five critical points to aide in a smooth
transition. [^12].

1.  **Don't step into the old leaders shoes** -- If following a well
    liked leader it is important not to get into a popularity contest;
    conversely if you are following a leader that experienced negativity
    throughout their time in the role you do not want to be overly
    concerned with making the same mistakes. Simply put you need to be
    yourself and follow your own vision. In establishing credibility and
    a loyal following amongst the team it is important that they see you
    for you and not a mold of the previous leader.
2.  **Stand up for what you believe in** -- One of the first steps is to
    let those around you within the group to know what you stand for.
    Often as a new leader you have skills, values and beliefs that
    others aspire to have and it is essential that you communicate this
    to those within the group.
3.  **The great pretender** -- All new leaders stepping into a role
    within the group are going to have some knowledge gap of essential
    information specific to the group which they will have to learn.
    There is always going to be the fear of being ill-prepared as the
    new leader, however those that are successful are the ones that
    effectively deal with this natural anxiety as they step into their
    new role.
4.  **Listen and learn** -- A new leader of a group should not be
    completely consumed with wanting to take action in the beginning of
    the transition. While it will be important for them to share some
    small successes with their team early on, it is also important to
    listen with an open mind. This step can help the new leader in
    gathering important information that may aide them in making future
    decisions which may have gone unnoticed or overlooked if they are
    only concerned with taking action and making changes in the early
    stages of them assuming their new role.
5.  **Seek advice** -- This can be the most problematic and difficult
    trap for a new leader to overcome. After taking over a group new
    leaders tend not to reach out to others for advice, rather they
    solve problems and uphold their image as the leader at all costs.
    The reality is that the best leaders are those that are able to
    recognize their weaknesses and seek out advice to make the most
    informed decision possible.

Both Gilmore and Watkins suggest the same basic tools for a new team
leader to have a successful transition including effective communication
and building an environment of collaboration around you. In addition
Peter Fischer offers a framework for effective leaders to avoid typical
pitfalls and mistakes during their transition in his book "The new boss:
How to survive the first 100 days." This framework which has been
summarized by the Leading Blog website emphasizes the new leaders
ability to identify and prioritize what is important and more
importantly what is not, their desire to develop key relationships early
in the process and most importantly the leaders ability to impart
confidence and trust throughout the transition by communicating their
vision [^13].

  Leaders who make transitions successfully                                                                                Leaders that are less successful in transitions
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Possess superior knowledge and familiarity with the field and readily distinguish between what is important and what is not                                            Often come from outside the field and take too long to get their bearings
  Recognize and develop key relationships, deal adroitly with hidden rivals and predecessors, build networks in the organization, and show that they are team-oriented   Focus too much on the tasks to be accomplished, neglect the development of working relations built on trust, and tend to prefer to work things out alone
  Know how to group the many issues and problems into a vision and to motivate the employees                                                                             Pursue too many approaches at the same time without a persuasive strategy and focus on eliminating weak points
  Communicate with senior management on strategy and style of leadership                                                                                Accept unclear expectations from senior management
  Have knowledge about the process of changing leadership and impart confidence and trust because they can assess developments                                           Are too easily surprised, concentrate only on changes and thereby neglect the employees' need for stability and security

## References

[^1]: . Watkins, M. (2003). The First 90 Days. Boston, Massachusetts:
    Harvard Business School Publishing.

[^2]: . Manderscheid, S. V. (2008). New Leader Assimilation: An
    Intervention for Leaders in Transition. Advances in Developing Human
    Resources 2008 10 , 686 - 702.

[^3]: . Alexel / Institute of Executive Development. (2008). Executive
    Transition Market Study.
    <https://www.execsight.com/Resources/View.php?id=323>.

[^4]: . Kraft, C. (2008). Executive Transition Market Study.
    <http://www.cfo-coach.com/2008/06/executive-transitions-market-study.html>
    , 1.

[^5]: . Alexel / Institute of Executive Development. (2008). Executive
    Transition Market Study.
    <https://www.execsight.com/Resources/View.php?id=323>.

[^6]: . Frederick P. Morgeson, D. S. (2009). Leadership in Teams: A
    Functional Approach to Understanding Leadership Structures and
    Processes. Journal of Management 2010 36 , 5-39..

[^7]: . Alexel / Institute of Executive Development. (2008). Executive
    Transition Market Study.
    <https://www.execsight.com/Resources/View.php?id=323>.

[^8]: . Alexel / Institute of Executive Development. (2008). Executive
    Transition Market Study.
    <https://www.execsight.com/Resources/View.php?id=323>.

[^9]: `. David Koeppel, “Executive Life; A Tough Transition: Friend to Supervisor” New York Times March 16, 2003`

[^10]: . Michael Watkins, D. C. (2007, December 18). Advice for Vikram
    Pandit, the New CEO of Citigroup. Retrieved October 2010, from
    Harvard Business Review:
    <http://blogs.hbr.org/watkins/2007/12/advice_for_vikram_pandit_the_n_1.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-listserv-_-APR_2008-_-leadership>

[^11]: . Hakala, D. (2008, August 21). Promoting from within. Retrieved
    October 2010, from HR World:
    <http://www.hrworld.com/features/promoting-within-082108/>

[^12]: . Gilmore, A. (2008, April). In With the New: Leader Dos and
    Don'ts. Retrieved October 2010, from Talent Managment:
    <http://www.talentmgt.com/newsletters/talent_management_perspectives/2008/April/587/index.php>

[^13]: . The Leading Blog. (2008, June 13). Retrieved October 2010, from
    www.leadershipnow.com:
    <http://www.leadershipnow.com/leadingblog/2008/06/how_to_survive_the_first_100_d.html>


# Managing Groups and Teams/A balance between management and leadership

In the business world of today, there seems to be a halo afixed to the
term *Leader*, while the term *Manager* is seen to have something of a
stigma. \"Leader\" brings to mind heroic figures rallying people
together to give their all for a cause, while \"Manager\" brings to mind
less-charismatic individuals trying to make people into more effecient
cogs in the corporate machine.\'\'

When one considers this definition of Management (from Wikipedia) one
can see that Leadership is actually a sub-catergory of Management:
\"*Management* (from Old French ménagement \"the art of conducting,
directing\", from Latin *manu agere* \"to lead by the hand\")
characterises the process of leading and directing all or part of an
organization, often a business, through the deployment and manipulation
of resources (human, financial, material, intellectual or intangible).\"

One can manage their time, their budget, their fuel, and yes, their
people, but one can only lead people (or to be more inclusive, we should
say one can only lead intelligent living things, since shepards and
dog-trainers would object to a homo sapiens-centric definition).

Then perhaps the perception of a cog-manipulating manager is rooted in
this difference between animate and inanimate objects. It is when we
feel used, manipulated, or led against our will by a person in authority
over us, we feel as if we are being treated like an inanimate object. We
say the person in authority is a lousy manager. But when the person in
authority increases our own autonomy, makes us feel at liberty to accept
or reject his/her vision, and fills us with a real personal desire to
bring this vision to life, we say he/she is a great leader.

When applying these concepts for \"manager\" and \"leader\" in the
setting of a team, we find interesting results: If there is a team
leader that is perceived to be unconcerned with the team members needs,
or has a personal agenda more important than the team\'s goals, then the
leader is perceived to be more of a \"manager\" and becomes estranged
from the team members. Conversely, the team leaders most admired and
loyally followed are those who show concern for the team members as
individuals with real needs, and are those who put \"The Cause\" of the
team above their own persona agenda.

Realistically, most organizations do need leaders who sometimes look at
their teams with cold, analytical eyes, evaluating inefficiencies and
making unpopular choices. But it would be a mistake to think that one
has to be an \"estranged, unliked manager\" in order to execute these
responsibilities. If a team leader\'s tasks such as efficiency analysis
were done hand in hand with sincerely seeking to know team members
individual needs, then the team leader would be perceived to have a
genuine desire to make the team more successful. Additionally,
ineffective leaders may hide an unwillingness to make tough decisions by
faking the \"touchy-feely\" attitudes associated with great leaders with
high emotional-intelligence.

It is my opinion that effective leadership is a uniquely human
institution, and there isn\'t a team that couldn\'t profit through
better \"leaders\" rather than better \"managers\" --using the titles as
metaphors, of course. One can still balance all the practical demands of
a \"manager\" with the beneficial traits of an inspiring \"leader.\"


# Managing Groups and Teams/Effective Team Leadership

There are many elements that create and are essential to be an effective
leader that has the power to motivate a team and drive success. There is
often a balancing act that the leader must manage between being a leader
and a member while ensuring the goal is clear and obtainable. There are
six leadership competencies that are the building blocks to becoming an
effective leader; focus on the goal, ensure a collaborative climate,
build confidence, demonstrate sufficient technical know-how, set
priorities, and manage performance as described *When Teams Work Best*
by LaFasto and Larson. Therefore, the question arises, "Does an
effective team leader both merge into the group as a member of the team
and also maintain a leadership role? And if so, how?"

A leader is the key player in the game that is comprised of challenge
and risk. Therefore, an effective team leader must be both a component
to the team and also a leader to manage the team's progress. The leader
cannot possibly be competent in every area without being engaged in the
team. The leader must know each member and the team as a whole in order
to bring them all together and create a process that is open,
productive, and promotes confidence. An effective leader uses each
member's contributions and energy to focus on a common goal.
Essentially, a leader's job is to add importance to the team's effort,
which cannot be done without being a member.

It is very common for a team leader to be in the dark about their team
and the everyday operations. This is a consequence of a leader's
disengagement and lack of membership with the team. Moreover, the team's
contention usually gives birth at this point and lends itself to
decreased productivity and satisfaction. An effective leader needs to be
able to pinpoint problems and praise excellence within the group, which
cannot be done from the sideline.

The leader is a part of the overall process; therefore, a relationship
naturally exists. However, it is up to the leader whether to nurture
that relationship or minimize its importance. The team leader must
understand the team's vision and clearly define the goal to guarantee
success and member loyalty. One cannot lead a team without knowing the
purpose and goal of the team. Furthermore, a team leader must create a
collaborative climate to ensure that the best thinking and ideas of the
team are represented. Again, a wholesome climate cannot be established
without knowing the members and becoming engaged in the team.

The foundation of a highly motivated and successful team is the member's
understanding and relevance of their goal. An effective leader's trust
in the team goal is vital to the member's commitment. The members become
isolated and discouraged when the leader's investment is minimal. Team
members want the opportunity to prove their value and worth to the goal
and the leader. The leader must be involved and a member of the team to
effectively influence the member's productivity and function in the
grand scheme of things.

There has been a gradual progression and contemporary focus on the
leader's mutual relationship with the members as opposed to the
authority position in the modern day. This leader-member relationship
breeds trust, confidence, stimulation, responsiveness, and problem
solving which are the keys for success and satisfaction. As
demonstrated, an effective leader should be a part and merge with the
team and simultaneously lead and encourage it's constituents toward the
goal. The leader can bring inspiring growth or demise to a team and
company; therefore, it is essential for a leader to be effective and
powerful.


# Managing Groups and Teams/Dictatorship vs Leadership

The glory of a leader can be plagued and overshadowed by many concerns
that can affect the team's success. A leader must wear many hats and be
able to lead and encourage a team to perform. It is necessary for a
leader to become an engaged member of the team, but be able to lead at
the same time. It is inevitable that different personalities,
industries, and goals will force any leader to adapt and mold to fit the
current environment. What is the best way to successfully encourage and
lead a team? This is the million dollar question. Although each
situation will present various opportunities and needs that a leader
must meet, there will be some leadership styles that will impede the
group each time.

What is the appropriate balance between being a dictator and being weak
or a push over? A leader must be able to relate to the team and earn
their respect and loyalty to the goal. This cannot be accomplished by
being a dictator and micro managing the team and the members. A leader
must manage and master the core competencies as illustrated in *When
Teams Work Best* by LaFasto and Larson to be effective and respected.
When a leader is a dictator it violates the concept of the leader being
a part of the team. However, when a leader is not active or an integral
link in the process then an unqualified leader evolves from the team
pool, which creates dysfunction and chaos.

At one extreme of the leadership spectrum is dictatorship. When a leader
is a dictator they feel better because they have control and power.
Leaders that have a high desire for control will have a significant
impact on the team. Team members can identify when a dictator emerges
and at that point it is very difficult for the leader to break out of
this defined mold. As a result, the members shut down because they feel
their contribution and ideas are not valued. This hampers the team's
identity, confidence, openness, and supportiveness. The ideas and
actions now become that of the leader rather than a unique collection of
the team.

Conversely, the other end of the leadership spectrum involves being a
push over or what can be interpreted as being disinterested or
possessing little passion. When a designated leader expresses little
desire or interest in the team goal then it is quite natural for an
informal leader to emerge from the team. Consequently, the road toward
the vision and goal becomes blocked with obstacles and the goal is more
distant and foggy. Moreover, the members feel abandoned when the leader
does not demonstrate a concern or responsibility in the decision. This
forces the members to guess the leader's perspective and ultimately they
begin to question their ability to lead, which devalues their trust and
confidence in their leader. The ideas and actions of the group become
less creative and effective because the members don't feel important.

Therefore, a leader must discover the appropriate balance and walk the
fine line. An effective leader needs to provide direction and share
their ideas while building the member's confidence. It is much easier
for a leader to argue and fight for their point of view when they
haven't transformed into a dictator. A leader should manage their
control and exhibit their care and passion by sharing the control with
the team. When the control and power is balanced and shared between the
leader and the team issues such as what gets discussed and possible
solutions and actions now become a collective effort. Resultantly, this
type of relationship and arrangement leads to a high level of trust and
satisfaction. And it is common knowledge that these are fundamental
elements for a productive and happy team and group.


# Managing Groups and Teams/Discipline

So, how much should your team be disciplined? As team leader, are you
wholly responsible? Clearly, whatever procedures and policies exist for
your organization should be followed, but what if a team member is
consistently late for meetings? Or if someone is social loafing? Should
you be the one, as team leader, to correct the problem? Maybe not.

Balancing between disciplining your team and building your team can
sometimes be difficult and is often viewed as two opposite behaviors.
However, by building a stronger team, you can also develop a team that
essentially self-disciplines. By building in mutual accountability into
your team, the team will become self-disciplining. Team building, to
this end, should focus on gaining common goals, purpose, and process.

Following the guidelines for team building can be essential in creating
a self-disciplining team. Developing ground rules and assigning the task
of ensuring each rule is followed to individual team members can be key.
Additionally, spend some team time discussing and planning consequences
for discipline. It can also be helpful for the team to create a visible
method of logging or recording team measures, which should include:

-   the agreed standards to which the team is working to
-   how frequently each of the measures will normally be repeated
-   who should receive feedback on the results (this would normally be
    the team, but can include people outside the team if it is
    appropriate)
-   who is responsible for initiating the re-measurement process

Team fun should be planned around the goals (both short term and long
term). For example, team building "ice breakers" are great only if they
further the mission and function of the team. Select "ice breakers"
based on goals for that particular meeting. Need to increase
communication among members? Play a game of "telephone." Need to work on
creativity? Play a "think outside the box" game. Additionally, though,
don't de-value general bonding and getting to know team members.
Supporting the team barbecue or coffee break can go a long way toward
improving team morale, as well as creating a team that knows and trusts
each other better.

In reality, though, teams may not easily become self-disciplining. How
do you, as a team leader, then discipline a team in the real world
without losing all the fun? If someone on your team is not pulling their
weight, it is highly possible they are blissfully unaware of the
problem. Find an appropriate way to talk to them about, be it during a
team meeting (especially if it's a concern with more than one member) or
one-on-one, using a task-oriented approach rather than a personal one.
Perhaps there is another issue that needs to be addressed that you are
unaware of. One of the worse things you could do as team leader, though,
is to ignore the problem -- it will no go away or get better unless you
can address it. Remember, too, that you may need to ultimately remove
someone from your team, if there is no resolution, no solution, and the
team and the team goal are suffering.

Finding that balance between fun and discipline is largely dependent on
the goal of the team, and the situation and relationships of the team
and you. It's largely a personal choice -- but a great team cannot exist
without both. Ask for help from the team and share the responsibility of
discipline. Keep track of expectations and progress and share the
information with the whole team. Build the team to trust each other and
perform for each other. Teamwork is difficult, but with a well lead team
results can be fantastic, and yes, even fun.


# Managing Groups and Teams/Poor Leadership

## Introduction

When studying the topic of leadership as a whole, academic thinkers have
generally ignored the concept of poor leadership. This was, in fact, a
major obstacle to our research. The death of poor leadership research is
in stark contrast to the numerous volumes of books that have been
written on how to be an outstanding leader. This presents a bit of a
paradox---how can we hope to teach good leadership without explaining
the pitfalls of bad leadership? To exclude bad leadership from the
\"conversation and curriculum is misguided, tantamount to a medical
school that would claim to teach health while ignoring disease\"
(Kellerman, 11). Modern leadership literature is biased towards a
positive representation of leadership: \"\[the literature\] assumes that
people can learn to be leaders and that to be a leader is to be a person
of competence and character\" (Kellerman, 4). Further, this bias is a
recent one. Before the twentieth century, leadership was viewed more as
a question of how to control bad leaders than how to create good
leaders. For example, Machiavelli did not consider morality in his
treatise on leadership. In fact, he stated that "A prince never lacks
legitimate reasons to break his promise" (Machiavelli). He assumed that
brutality was simply a part of leadership and the world. The U.S.
Constitution and the protections built into it were primarily designed
to stop bad leadership and protect people from it (Kellerman, 6).
Nowadays, however, we tend to look for the good in our leaders rather
than dealing with the reality of bad leadership. Leadership studies,
therefore, reflect the positive associations that modern American
business and cultural thinkers have attached to the term rather than the
more neutral view that might also be applied. Almost all contemporary
work focuses on this as well. The implicit assumption in most leadership
literature is that we can learn to be leaders if we try hard enough.

Well, what happens if your leader has not learned to be a good leader?
Our goal in this chapter is to expose readers to the varieties and signs
of bad leadership, and in so doing better prepare them for the
inevitable time when they have to deal with poor leadership in their own
lives. Since there are many, many shades of gray to leadership (both
good and bad), we cannot hope to address all possible situations in this
paper. What we can do, though, is provide the reader with a sense of
what to be aware of and on the lookout for, and how to take preventative
measure to curb the spread of bad leadership. Ultimately it is up to
each individual how to approach a bad leader or deal with an instance of
poor leadership.

## What Is a Leader?

For the purposes of our discussion, leaders are people who are making
decisions on behalf of a team or group. Followers are everyone else in
the affected group that gives at least limited deference to the decision
maker. This broad definition can encompass small and well defined groups
such as sports teams as well as large groups like major corporations.
Regardless of the size of the organization there is almost always a
leader somewhere in it. In this context, leadership requires
followership. Leaders simply do not happen if others fail to follow
them. Further, good leadership can be undone by bad followership and
good followership is useless without good leadership. Bad leadership and
bad followership often go together although the former is often a
catalyst for the latter. To understand the bad leader/follower
relationship, first we must define what a bad leader is. According to
Kellerman, there are seven different types of poor leadership.

## Types of Poor Leadership

Incompetent
:   *"The Leader and at least some followers lack the will or skill (or
    both) to sustain effective action"* (51).
:   An incompetent leader may, for example, not be comfortable with
    technology or may not have the foresight to see challenges on the
    horizon. Whatever the issue, this leader's lack of ability will have
    a negative affect on the team. Some followers may take advantage of
    the leader's incompetence while others may not perform optimally
    simply because the leader is incapable of challenging them to do
    their best. The end result can be a dysfunctional team where few
    goals are accomplished.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Rigid
:   *"The leader and at least some followers are stiff and unyielding"*
    (75).
:   Rigid leaders, unlike incompetent leaders, are capable of doing all
    that is necessary for the team to succeed. In the case of a rigid
    leader, the problem lies in the fact that the leader is unwilling to
    do the things required in order for the team to succeed. "\[T\]he
    key to the leader's evolving role always lies in understanding what
    the team needs and does not need from the leader in order to
    perform" (Katzenbach, 133), so leaders that are not willing to adapt
    and evolve pose a significant threat to their team's success. An
    unwillingness to change can be an attractive attribute to some
    followers and can lead the entire team towards solutions that are
    unimaginative and even counter productive.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Intemperate
:   *"The leader lacks self-control and is aided and abetted by
    followers who are unwilling or unable to effectively intervene"*
    (95).
:   Even the most talented leader can lead a team to foreseeable
    disaster due to a lack of control. An intemperate leader is like a
    gifted child who is incapable to controlling his or her basic
    desires, and thus cannot achieve the higher goals of the team. The
    leader's position of power may be used as a tool to satisfy the
    leader's personal desires. The end result can be devastating to the
    group through the loss of time and effort on things unrelated to the
    end goal.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Callous
:   *"The leader and at least some followers are uncaring or unkind"*
    (119).
:   Compassion and empathy towards fellow team members is what leads to
    trust. Trust is essential if a team is to "be comfortable being
    open, even exposed, to one another around their failures,
    weaknesses, even fears" (Lencioni, 14). Teams must be able to make
    progress; a good leader must "put team performance first"
    (Katzenbach, 131). A callous leader will destroy any good will that
    exists amongst team members leading to a fundamental breakdown of
    trust. The result is often that nobody will be willing to take risks
    or put forward new ideas for fear that the leader (or the entire
    team) will react with contempt or scorn.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Corrupt
:   *"The leader and at least some followers lie, cheat or steal"*
    (147).
:   Leaders lead by example. The result of corruption is going to be
    more corruption. Different team members will react to this in
    different ways. Some may feel alienated, others may take advantage
    of the situation. The worst case scenario is that other team members
    will want to resort to similar behavior as the leader.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Insular
:   *"The leader and at least some followers minimize or disregard the
    health and welfare of people outside of the team"* (169).
:   This can result in the team becoming the needless enemy of people
    who could otherwise make valuable contributions to the work of the
    team. While the team may have a great working relationship
    internally, members are always going to feel as though they are
    "under siege."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```

Evil
:   *"The leader and at least some followers commit atrocities"* (191).
:   Regrettably some of the most evil people---such as Hitler---have had
    some of the best leadership skills. Evil leaders present a whole
    different problem and motivational scheme, and we do not address
    evil leaders in this paper. If you are working under an evil leader,
    we suggest you focus on your own welfare and get out immediately, if
    possible.

## Why Is There Bad Leadership?

Bad leadership can be divided into two main categories; leadership
skills and character traits. A leader\'s character traits will often
determine his or her skill set. Leadership skills might include things
like communication skills, organization, or responsiveness to others.
Character traits would include things like intransigence, intelligence,
or anything that is integral to the person and cannot be changed through
education and reasonable effort. A leader can enroll in a workshop to
improve a skill; on the other hand, extensive counseling might be
required to change a character trait. This division of skills and traits
has many shades of grey, but is useful for analyzing what is going wrong
in a team.

Good followers are distinguished by traits such as being self-directed,
independent, and reliable. In this sense good followers make up integral
parts of the teams they are involved in. Bad followers, by contrast,
\"are weak and dependent, and they refuse in any significant way to
commit or contribute to the group\" (Kellerman, 33). How followers act
can be analyzed through Maslow\'s Hierarchy of Needs. In essence, every
follower is constantly weighing the benefit of following against the
benefit of not following. For every person there is a point when the
benefit they derive is outweighed by the harm that is caused to them
from their current course. At this point followers are likely to try to
change their situation.

This reality is encompassed in the behavior of followers. Followers will
go along with bad leaders who fulfill their needs. If safety is the
primary concern and a greedy tyrant can provide it, then followers are
likely to consider that situation an acceptable one. But why would
people in less extreme situations fail to act? They might not want to
rock the boat. \"Getting along by going along\" (Kellerman, 23) is the
primary goal in these cases. Someone with a steady job---under a
terrible leader---who needs the job would have an incentive not to risk
his career. Going along with bad leadership sometimes simplifies our
lives and makes things easier. This may be the case even when we know
something is wrong in the abstract (Kellerman, 24). We might look at the
political decisions of many people across the world as an example of
this type of thinking, such as those who have chosen in the past to
follow leaders such as Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, or Saddam
Hussein. Following bad leaders may help to \"quell our uncertainty\" as
Kellerman puts it (24). Leadership can help to eliminate the dissonance
that we might otherwise encounter, even if leadership is flawed. Bad
leaders may provide benefits to the group as well, such as order, work,
or identity (Kellerman, 24). These are in addition to the benefits that
the individual receives and in some cases might override them. We as
groups are dependent on leaders to organize us. It may therefore be
inconvenient to throw them out, and risky to everyone involved
(Kellerman, 25). The interdependence we see in teams also occurs more
generally between leaders and followers. It is bad followers that allow,
and even encourage, bad leaders. If we are to stem the tide of poor
leadership, we must exert effort at the follower level as well.

## Cost-Benefit and Skill-Trait Analysis

At the core, we as followers make decisions based on a simple analysis
of the costs and benefits. Everyone will follow to a certain point
beyond which they are unlikely to continue to do so. This point is
different for everyone. As followers, therefore, we need to keep in mind
how well the team is doing and how it affects us. Almost everyone is
engaged in a continual cost-benefit analysis of their actions. We
suggest bringing this analytical perspective to the forefront when
analyzing groups and teams. When analyzing the leader, it is appropriate
to ask whether the problem stems from character traits or leadership
skills. Followers should question what their commitment to the team is,
what rewards it brings, what potential costs exist, and what the
likelihood of success is. Finally, a follower needs to have a good sense
of his or her relative power within the organization. Followers are
capable of making informed decisions about their own future and their
current situation, but only if they are armed with all the relative
information about the situation.

Followers must start by figuring out if the offending action on the part
of the leader is caused by a character trait or poor leadership skills.
Often the direct cause of the problem may be a poor leadership skill
while the underlying cause of this poor skill is a character trait. The
answer to this question is likely to determine how the problem can be
addressed. A character trait is almost certainly beyond the ability of a
follower in a group to address. In this case, followers need to simply
continue to a basic cost-benefit analysis of the situation to decide
what to do. Some problems may be possible to manage or avoid, but others
may be so egregious that the follower is compelled to leave the team or
organization.

A problem stemming from poor leadership skills may have a more
manageable solution, but followers must be realistically aware of what
is required to change the skill. As in the case of problems stemming
from character traits, there are no clear answers. Followers must simply
evaluate the situation to the best of their abilities and continue from
there. For example, a follower may be faced with a manager who
constantly questions them about their use of time. While this is a
direct problem with a specific way of managing people, it is probably
caused either by a lack of management training or the manager's
insecurity about his or her position and the work of the other members
of the organization. The follower in this case should attempt to
ascertain where the problem is originating from.

After figuring out exactly what the problem is, followers can continue
with a cost-benefit analysis. Followers in an organization need to ask
themselves what benefits they are getting and what they might lose if
they choose to change their behavior. When contemplating change,
followers should also be willing to look at the new situation and
recognize that there is a point where they will no longer participate.
These situations vary among people and contexts, but each follower
should make a conscious effort to define his or her own limits. For
example, a player on a recreational soccer team will probably stop
playing if she breaks her leg, but not if she skins her knee. In the
case of a broken leg, it is more important to get to a doctor than to
finish out the soccer game. The employee in the previous example might
decide that the real issue is that the manager has no leadership skills
and is insecure about this. In this case the employee would be forced to
evaluate the manager's possible reaction to suggestions that they get
more training or change responsibilities. These situations both
illustrate the type of analysis that must take place.

Followers may decide that the current situation may be unsatisfactory
but they are unwilling to walk away. In this case, the goal changes from
effecting change on the part of the leader to simply finding a balance
where the situation is acceptable in some sense. This boils down to
simply asking if the situation is tolerable---at least for the time
being---and managing oneself and others to minimize damage or
discomfort. Followers should also be looking to do things that will
increase their relative benefits or decrease the costs for other
actions. This will increase power relative to other people in the
organization.

This is only a framework for analyzing choices. Each situation will be
different, but this type of cost-benefit analysis will give team members
a good sense of how things really are. Followers, especially good
followers, should be continually evaluating other people's actions and
their own place within a situation, group or organization.

## What Should You Do if You Encounter Bad Leadership?

Working in a situation dominated by poor leadership can be frustrating
and intimidating. If team members are not confident in their leader,
what should they do? This is one of the most difficult questions to
answer, since there are no easy or clear answers. The best we can hope
to do is provide a framework for thinking through these complex issues
and devising an approach that is likely to be effective. Hopefully you
have already begun to understand what sort of thinking must take place
in these complex and delicate situations.

Perhaps the most proactive stance to take is to hold our leaders
responsible for their actions and/or misconduct. Followers should "seek
to effect institutional changes that will make leaders more responsible
and accountable" (Kellerman, 242). This could include implementing a
system of checks and balance (restrictions on the leader's power), and
should probably also include---if the team is a corporate
one---strengthening the board of directors. In order to ensure that the
board exercises sufficient oversight, boards should "consider reforms
such as: establishing a governance committee; ...dividing the
responsibilities of the chair of the board from those of the chief
executive officer; and opening regular channels of communication to
those on the outside" (Kellerman, 242). Followers can also act as
watchdogs themselves, reporting fraud or negligence when they see it. It
should be noted here that employees should watch out for themselves in
the case of fraud---if an employee is involved in fraud, even at a
minute level (such as knowing about it and not reporting it), he or she
is likely to be brought down with the major players; this is an added
incentive to monitor leaders and report illegal activity immediately
(Maher, lecture).

In addition to taking action, followers can help prevent bad leadership
simply by being aware and prepared. Followers should be skeptical of
what their leaders say and do. Leaders are real people, and subject to
the same human downfalls and errors in judgment we all are. Followers
must empower themselves, so that if the time comes they will be able to
take a stand and halt or deter bad leadership. According to Kellerman,
"people who think of themselves as followers don't usually think of
themselves as powerful. But they are or...can be" (239).

A good way to achieve empowerment is to band together; as we all know,
there is strength in numbers. Followers should seek information from
people other than the leader in order to gather "correct and complete
information" (Kellerman, 241). If a follower (or group of followers)
does decide to take action, collective action is best. Collective action
could come in the form of a meeting to discuss strategies or "getting a
small group of people together to talk to the boss" (Kellerman, 241).
This is far preferable to speaking with the boss alone (at least
regarding the poor quality of his or her leadership), and will help to
prevent bullying or coercive groupthink. In some organizations, going
over the boss's head is seen as politicking and inappropriate---we leave
it to followers to decide what is appropriate and manageable in their
own group or corporation. If nothing else, having a group of people who
are in agreement aids in getting complaints heard and in substantiating
claims of bad leadership. It also reduces a single employee's chances of
getting hung out to dry, so to speak.

As you may have experienced (or may be experiencing now), it can be
extremely difficult to resolve these states of affairs (and improve or
oust bad leaders) once the team or situation is already underway. If
your organization does not have guidelines or conflict management
channels in place, it can be near impossible to even approach your
leader regarding his or her behavior---let alone change it. With this in
mind, we recommend that every organization employ some sort of
ombudsman, employee rights activist, or conflict manager for just such
occasions. This position---or positions---would be responsible for
handling disputes, especially those involving management. They could
provide guidelines for approaching a problematic leader, and could even
mediate the discussion. This position would ensure that employees would
not be punished for bringing these situations or problems to light.
There should also be clear lines of communication, so that followers and
leaders know who to talk to regarding any concerns they do have. If we
are to eradicate bad leadership, followers must be able to feel safe
addressing their concerns. If your organization does not yet have an
ombudsman or a similar position, we suggest you strive to implement
one---before you need one.

While there cannot be an exact prescription of what to do in any given
scenario, we hope that this chapter provides new and comprehensive ways
of analyzing and approaching the problem of ineffective or bad
leadership. We cannot tell you exactly what to do, because every leader,
every follower and every situation is different. The main thing to
remember is that "once they're entrenched, bad leaders seldom change or
quit of their own volition. This means it's up to us to insist either on
change---or on an early exit" (Kellerman, 243). While it is of course
best to prevent bad leadership from occurring in the first place (if
possible), there are a number of ways to slow or stop it. If your
efforts to improve poor leadership meet with blank stares---or worse
yet, retaliation---it may be time to perform another cost-benefit
analysis and decide if this organization is really right for you.

## Conclusions

Every person who joins a team makes a decision to be a part of that team
and has at least some form of commitment to the team's goals. Teams
frequently have complex dynamics that team members need to be aware of
from the beginning. It is useful for people to ask clarifying questions
of themselves, of other team members, and of the leader---at the
inception of the team and as the team progresses. Some or all of these
may seem like common sense, but they need to be asked nonetheless.

-   Is there a clear and elevating goal? Can the team leader express it?
-   To what degree are other team members and I committed to the goals
    of the team? How has the leader influenced this?
-   Do I get along with other team members? Are poor relationships a
    result of poor leadership?
-   Have team rules been created, and are they being followed? Is the
    team leader supporting this?
-   What methods of conflict resolution are in place? Does the leader
    act as a mediator between team members, does the leader defer to
    another mediator when there is conflict between a member of the team
    and the leader?

The answers to these questions should provide clues as to where any
dysfunction is occurring. Followers can then choose to act as they see
fit for the situation at hand. We advise all team members to analyze
their teams and their leaders frequently and, if possible, to institute
measures early to control and prevent bad leadership. If frameworks and
communication channels are in place early on, it will be much easier to
address concerns if and when they do occur. We regret that we are not
able to offer conclusive advice for specific situations or types of poor
leadership, but there is so much room for interpretation that we would
not feel comfortable doing so. We hope to have given the reader an idea
of what to expect from a poor leader, and ways to approach the situation
and the leader to determine the most appropriate course of action.

## References

-   Katzenbach, Jon R. and Douglas K. Smith. The Wisdom of Teams.
    McKinsey and Company, Inc., 1993.
-   Kellerman, Barbara. Bad Leadership. Harvard Business School
    Publishing, 2004
-   Lencioni, Patrick. Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team.
    Jossey-Bass, 2005.
-   Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. University of Chicago Press, 1998.
-   Maher, Michael. Lecture, MGT 271, UC Davis Graduate School of
    Management, Spring 2006.