What are the traits of an Empowering Leader?
Effective leaders exhibit common characteristics. The following list are ten traits that you, as a leader, need to demonstrate if you want to be considered an empowering leader.
- Honesty and integrity
- Confidence
- Inspiring Others
- Commitment and Passion
- Good Communicator
- Decision Making Capabilities
- Accountability
- Delegation and Empowerment
- Creativity and Innovation
- Empathy
For a more in-depth look at the above traits read this article from TaskQue.com. It is short, sweet and to the point and will give you a great starting point for your own reflection on whether you currently operate as an empowering leader.
Case study
The Scenario
We have two leaders, Steven and Sally, in the same organisation who are tied together by process. One leaders’ team output drives the other leaders’ team workload.
Steven – New Leadership Role and Work Area
Steven has commenced in a new role leading a large team that processes applications from clients.
Some things to know about Steven:
- This is a sideways move for Steven to broaden his leadership experience.
- He is a young ‘go getter’ the organisation wishes to develop.
- Steven need to develop his leadership skills and he has been advised of this.
- Steven sees himself as a ‘hands on’ leader and wants to establish himself quickly in his new leadership role.
- As Steven started his career in the company as a junior team member of his new team, he feels he already knows how things work.
Things to know about Steven’s new team:
- Stevens’ team is a well-established team.
- Team members have been given authority and delegations to enable them to approve applications themselves if clients meet specific criteria.
- The delegations and authority have been in place for a while following a complete reengineer of the process.
- They have had robust training and quality control assessments are regularly undertaken to ensure no approvals are given outside the criteria set by the organisation and communicated to them through their training.
Steven’s Approach to Establishing Himself
Steven immediately struggles to see what his role is if his team now has the delegations and authority they didn’t have when he was a team member. He decides to go back to the process of the leader making the decision on approvals and makes it mandatory he review all approvals prior to notification to the clients. Each application is to be accompanied by a short summary of the recommended decision and the reason for the recommendation. His rationale is that this will cement himself as not only the leader but the sole decision maker to demonstrate his value, knowledge of the subject and accountability for the outcomes of his team.
Steven did not discuss inserting himself into the process and adding an additional process task with his team or his boss prior to implementing the change. Despite advice from team after the announcement that it was not in the interests of the team, he forced the change to happen.
Steven rejects 15% of the applications that his team has recommended for approval after the established process is re-engineered to accommodate his approval step.
Sally – Experience Leader and Subject Matter Expert
Sally manages a small team in the same branch as Stevens’ team that processes requests for review of rejection decisions made by Stevens’ team. The company views applications for review as complaints in their overall measurement of client satisfaction.
Some things to know about Sally and her team:
- Sally is an experienced leader
- She who was instrumental in implementing improvements to the client applications end to end process flows prior to taking on her current role the year before.
- The workload is therefore directly impacted by the number of rejections made by Stevens’ team and generally follow a pattern of 15% of initial rejections resulting in a request for review.
- Of those less than 1% have their rejection overturned. This low number is attributed to the robustness of the initial assessment process and quality of client communications.
- Sally’s team also has delegation to make decisions based on a stringent set of criteria. Sally however must review and approve all decisions which overturn the original decision made by Stevens’ team.
- When Sally commenced as the Team Leader, she undertook the same training her team does knows the degree of due diligence her team applies through the assessment process.
- Sally trusts her team to make the right decisions.
What’s happens?
In the weeks following Steven taking on sole approval accountability, his team performance measures for processing applications have increased and there are days when the team numbers are down due to unexpected leave. Steven is working long hours to keep up with his workload.
His team morale has declined, as has their due diligence as Steven is making judgement calls rather than sticking to the specific assessment criteria when reviewing each application.
Sally can see from her performance measures that the numbers of clients seeking review of applications has sharply increased above the standard ratio of rejections to review applications. Upon analysis Sally determines that the percentage of the applications that are recommended to be overturned by her team has also sharply increased to 5%.
Sally has been approached separately by some of Stevens’ team with complaints he is ‘taking them backwards’. With her knowledge and experience she can draw a direct correlation between changes made by Steven to her performance measure. Sally attempts to discuss the issue with Steven but he brushes her off.
Sally and Steven attend the monthly Team Leads meeting of her boss and peers to discuss the previous month’s performance. This is Steven’s first meeting and he complains he is having to pick up the slack for his teams’ lack of attention to detail and wondered about previous performance.
Sally raises the issue of her increased workload and, upon questioning by the boss, Steven admits to making a change to his process. Sally is unimpressed as the ‘blip’ in the performance of both teams reflects badly on the branch, and ignores the effort that went into re-engineering the process following a costly review. Steven is directed in the meeting by the boss to change the process back to what was in place before he made his solo decision.
Separately, Steven is reprimanded by the boss for making such an important decision without considering the recent history and the new way of dealing with clients that adds self-assessment as Step 1. Steven is deflated and his confidence takes a beating. His team quickly reverts to the original process after he advises them it is not working, and performance improves. His team however now have doubts about him as an effective and empowering leader and team player, and so do his peers.
What could Steven have done differently?
There are several reasons why things have played out for Steven and Sally as a direct result of Stevens’ action to put himself in the approval process based on what he knew historically and his discomfort as a leader not a manager.
Steven’s approach to establishing himself has clearly backfired on him.
Here are some examples of what Steven could have done differently.
- Admitting he had a history in the team and acknowledging time has moved on would have been more productive. His boss and his peers would have welcomed helping him come up to speed quickly given the situation if one fails, all fail. Sally and the team would have been able to direct him to process flows, and instructions and training had he asked her.
- Once he understood how the process now worked, he could have spent some time sitting with members of the team to see how they apply the process.
- By applying active listening and questioning skills he would have built rapport with his team and built his own trust that the organisations decisions re process change and delegations and authority was based on consultancy advice and was tried and tested over the last year or so. If something wasn’t working, his team would have been the first to raise it with him.
- Putting his ego ‘in his pocket’ and thinking more broadly than just himself, his team and his immediate need to establish himself in his new role using a leadership style that was no longer appropriate for the area.
By taking this time Steven would have had no reason to make the initial changes he did. His team wouldn’t have been disempowered, his performance measures wouldn’t have been ‘interrupted’, and he wouldn’t have gotten off on the wrong foot with his peers, such as Sally.
What lessons can be taken from this Case Study?
Taking the time to learn the business while allowing your team to get on with the day to day without jumping to snap decisions or being a micro manager from the outset is demonstrating you are an empowering leader. This might sound like a small thing but to evolve as an empowering leader you must be able enable your people get on with it.
You can find more about the most productive and effective actions to take when commencing in a new leadership role here. All these actions will set you on the path to be an empowering leader.
If you like the photo I used for this blog article you’ll find more like it from You-X Ventures on Unsplash
