by Gill Corkindale | 2:30 PM April 12, 2007
Of all the leadership theories, the one I have never fully understood is “authentic leadership.” The word authentic is now used so widely – and loosely – that it has left me wondering whether anyone knows what it means anymore. I come across so many clients who have added become an authentic leader to their to-do lists that I have started to do my own informal research on the subject. Here are a few of the definitions from businesspeople, academics, and consultants:
Being true to your roots (London professor)
Having a purpose (Leader in German telecom company)
Becoming who you are meant to be (Canadian CEO)
Serving others (Indian MBA student)
Having “soul” (Australian consultant)
Vision and values (Swiss manager)
Finding your path (Saudi entrepreneur)
Being ethical (Dutch lawyer)
Having a purpose (Leader in German telecom company)
Becoming who you are meant to be (Canadian CEO)
Serving others (Indian MBA student)
Having “soul” (Australian consultant)
Vision and values (Swiss manager)
Finding your path (Saudi entrepreneur)
Being ethical (Dutch lawyer)
There seem to be a number of themes here. On the personal front, it’s apparently about who you are or are becoming (being yourself, fulfilling your potential). But it’s also about where you are going (vision, values, and direction), what you do along the way (serving others), and how you do things (ethics and “soul”). I’d be interested to find out if there is an answer to the why question. Why do leaders need to be authentic?
If we look at the list above, it’s easy to see how some of these things can be positively detrimental in a leader. One could argue that business is neither about “soul” nor serving others and it is not always (culturally) appropriate to be true to your roots. Similarly, for many of us, work is not the path to becoming who we want to be or finding our purpose, however much we enjoy it.
In Authentic Leadership, Bill George defined the concept as understanding your purpose, practicing solid values, leading with your heart, establishing connected relationships, and demonstrating self-discipline. In other words, not presenting a false corporate image or trying to emulate the leadership style or characteristics of others. This seems like a good, commonsense answer. Yet, so often, authenticity seems to be explained as a farrago of Maslowian/Jungian notions of self-actualization/individuation with some ethics, personal development, and vision thrown in for good measure.
At least authenticity has some traction in terms of a personal journey. On the organizational front, the confusion runs deep. Here, the need for authentic leadership is unquestioned. There is no shortage of courses, books, and articles on the subject, with definitions running from “being a devoted advocate of organizational vibrancy” to “individuals and institutions who seek to manifest their destiny in the world.” Authenticity is linked to high concepts such as servant leadership, spiral dynamics, and spiritual intelligence and the more prosaic ideas of scenario planning, change management, sustainable development, and storytelling. In short, it can be linked to anything and everything.
It’s time to step back and think a little more critically about authentic leadership. Why has the concept become so embedded in business consciousness and what, exactly, have been the benefits? Can anyone show us some authentic leaders and organizations and tell us what they do (or don’t do)? And how does this work as a concept outside of Europe and the U.S.?
GILL CORKINDALE
Gill Corkindale is an executive coach and writer based in London, focusing on global management and leadership. She was formerly management editor of the Financial Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment