Translate

lunes, 2 de julio de 2012

The paradox of motivational leadership.

A paradox expresses a contradiction, and it's a stimulus for reflection.
Motivational leadership seems to enclose some contrast in these days.
It's not possible to inspire to another person if we aren’t capable to get inspiration by ourselves. The process of influence works in this way.

The current principles of motivational leadership are linked to this types of essential qualities:

To appreciate people.
 Honesty, trustworthy.
 Exemplary.
 Encourage people.
 Positive attitude, enthusiastic.
 Watch out, watch for others.
 Respectful Treatment
 Commitment.
 To be kind.
 Picky on liability with people.

These qualities are learned behaviors that guide to the organization members.
We assume that leaders are constituted on this basis, and their role will be vital to carry out the plans of the company.
Now the question is whether these learned behaviors represent "respected values" by the group.
With great concern we see daily that there is a significant deterioration in what I call "conceptual institutions."

These are concerned with the lost meanings of words.

For example, "justice".

While there is "justice institution" which is represented by the courthouse, judges, prosecutors, assistants, records, procedures, laws, etc., this does not justify its existence.

When a criminal is loose in the streets and is not learned, or when it is learned but not properly be imprisoned because of legal or expertise of its lawyers, etc.., the conceptual institution disappears. The social feeling of the community is "injustice."

¿Are we capable to know what is the meaning of "fairness", or "commitment", or "respect", for our society?

Daily we see in the streets of our cities, houses, monuments, traffic signs, defaced, altered or overwritten. Papers strewn on the street; people offering sex in the light of day; people protesting for their rights but violating different rules of the society, cutting avenues or wreaking havoc in the streets. We could go on to show that the original word and its meaning were changing until to get a free and a new interpretation of themselves. Yes, we have new interpretations of the society rules.

The same society from which the workers, employees and managers are.

The question is:

Is valuable for part of our people the classic values as the trustworthiness, respectful treatment, etc?, Are those principles that characterize the new groups of workers?

Principles such as honesty are not a central value today. We are immersed in a survival culture in which "being honest" is often synonymous with "little ambitious "or "people without attitude to achieve economic and social improvements".

During the period in where mix of values and conceptual institutions falls, the leader must achieve influence your group to do their best in the business, so as to improve productivity within the work hours planning.


The task of the leader is not easy.

What are the motivational factors by which employees or company workers would work in order to improve your productivity?, It is known today that retirement ages arrive at 65 and the companies don't want hiring employees over 45 years old. This means that a person must find a good financial position before it meets the 45 years of age.

Could leaders ensure "stability" to their team members if they work well and strictly comply with the labor contract?, Could leaders keep their workers in their jobs?, Could leaders keep the motivation of the teamwork’s if the unions become human resource managers to be the ones who get improvements in pay and working conditions?

Could a leader fight alone against these internal and external cultural problems?

The answer to this situation is to fall into the organizational simplification. This is where the leadership gives way to hierarchies, and where actions to persuade and move give way to "orders" simple and straightforward.

Leaders became in chiefs due to they can't manage rewards or decisions related to their people.

Is it the end of motivational leadership then?

In no way.... in countries like Argentina, as in others, it's time to jump to a more rational cultural dimension. Context is always important; the collective imagination is nurtured by leaders.

There is much ground for change and revival of the original values and principles. What we have in mind is that organizational leaders are people of flesh and blood, which play a role with the raw material available.

There is much room for improvement in culture and education in society and in business (in the latter by the hand of the training programs tailored to requirements, induction and strengthening the good existing cultural patterns.) There is also ample room on Sustainable Organizations because companies will also have to restructure its programs and activities if they want to make a "rational contribution" to the system since the inclusion of retirement programs to outplacement plans, through the creation of lines of inclusive business by personnel out of range (age).


It is possible to "humanize" companies for profit without losing profitability and avoiding the hard interventions of the unions.



Human capabilities are linked to the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual.
Among the new challenges of the leader we find the working in the spiritual and formative concepts and on the leadership styles too. In terms of organizations, there is fertile ground working on his missions and visions and on his values and principles structures too.



The DorBaires Team
www.dorbaires.com

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario