Discussions of Steve Jobs and his amazing contribution to the success of Apple, have confirmed my suspicions that we haven’t yet captured all we need to know about effective leadership. In spite of the fact that Apple was left in experienced hands, speculation continues as to how Apple will continue without its leader.
Why the nerves?
Jobs’ leadership skills remain legendary, and surely possess all of the nuances, and often unquantifiable components of leadership that current theories may not fully consider. Not only did Jobs display the gift of vision, but the skills to set his vision in motion, both within the organization, and into the external environment.
Current leadership theory may not be robust enough for those interested in Apple, to make a confident prediction about how the future will unfold without Jobs. Moreover, this lack of confidence, may directly relate to the state of our skill set concerning the selection and development of leaders. This affects all organizations who depend on their leaders for guidance and vision.
The Elements of Leadership Have Been Debated for Decades
Leadership is one of the most well researched workplace topics – and with good reason. Relevant theories of leadership have the potential to have a significant impact upon organizations. There is a great body of existing theory – but are current leadership theories delivering what organizations really need? The answer might be no. Here is what we may be need now to move forward effectively:
A Broader & More Flexible View of Leadership
There has been an emphasis on specific elements of leadership – but the we seem to be missing the larger picture. We may need to step back and take a wider view of leadership that examines a leader’s overall ability to flex in response to the varying situations encountered. Organizations are dynamic entities, which require leaders to change their strategies as well. For example, we could refocus on the idea of a leader’s skill level to develop the right “script” for a specific a leadership challenge. Jobs hasn’t always described as being easy to be around, but he was able to choose the situations when taking a tougher stance was appropriate.
Leader “Sensitivity” to the Organizational Environment
Identifying a new leader through succession planning or hiring an industry specialist is one thing. Being sure the leader can navigate the organization and gain acceptance is another. Does the leader have the capacity to be sensitive to the prevailing organizational mindset? (Think of the debacle at Time, Inc.) Culture of the organization is no longer on the fringes – but a critical element when choosing strategy going forward. A leader must possess the skill to read and absorb this mindset.
Organizations Require Leadership Training Opportunities
By and large, if a theory doesn’t allow for the formation of real leadership development efforts within organizations, it seems relegated to a “read only, nice to know” status. Descriptive theories are necessary, but more of a focus on useable training points is needed. Does exposure to extremely difficult situations, even failure (as Jobs was), enhance a potentials leader’s skill set? These are things to consider.
An Integrative Approach to Leadership Theory
Leaders don’t lead in a vacuum, and an approach that considers not only the leader, but followers, corporate culture and the external conditions simultaneously is needed. As discussed in the American Psychologist (Avolio, 2007), integrating the elements is the future of leadership theory. Jobs would not be as successful of a leader if he wasn’t keenly aware of the external customer environment.
As all organizations strive to innovate and remain competitive, effective theories of leadership will remain a focus. Hopefully, theories will continue to evolve and capture the synergy of elements contributing to leader success.
Dr. Marla Gottschalk is a Workplace Psychologist in East Lansing, Michigan. You can find her on Twitter and Linkedin.
