Arrogance in leadership

Is there a phrase such as arrogance in leadership? Arrogance in leadership may sound new and odd but it occurs to many individuals who occupies a leadership position.  This kind of leadership character manifest itself when the leader doesn’t want to be upstaged by someone in the organization.

Arrogance in leadership occurs as well when a leader centralizes leadership power and authority to oneself. He doesn’t want to share his leadership power and authority with anyone.  This also happens when the leader thinks that nobody is capable in the organization but himself.

A leader who is arrogant doesn’t purposely develop other leaders in his organization. Why? For the simple reason that he is afraid to be upstaged by the leaders that he would develop. Thus, leaders who are arrogant destroys the principle of effective leadership. Because effective and good leaders create and develop new leaders along their journey of leadership.

Likewise, leaders who are arrogant do not know when to relinquish their leadership power and authority. They would desperately cling to it for as long as their organization would allow them.   Even if they are not anymore effective in their function of leadership.

Do you have this kind of leader in your organization? -  Marino J. Dasmarinas

On conflicts

What do you normally do when there’s conflict in your department? For example, your officemates were engaged in a heated shouting match. Which nearly resulted to physical confrontation and it happened that you were there. Naturally, their issue was immediately brought to the attention of the human resource department.

For the reason of your presence in that conflict your attention was called by the HR manager.   What should you do? Should you immediately take sides and favor the person who is your close friend even if she was at fault?

The best action to do is not to take sides except the right side. Regardless who is at fault take the right side. If the one at fault is your close friend you have to be impartial. Thus, you have to take the side of the person who was in the right side. 

Even if you don’t know well the person who was right you have to take her side for that is the right action to do. Many of us might commit the mistake of mindlessly rushing to take the side of the person who is a friend. Even if that friend whom we have favored is at fault.

We must not commit the mistake of siding with the friend who is at fault. Why? For the simple reason that there surely would be an impartial investigation that will take place. And in that impartial investigation the real culprit will be unraveled. Would it not be a shame if it comes out that we sided with the wrong person because she is a friend?

You therefore have to be impartial when you are called to be a witness in an organizational conflict. Don’t side or favor anyone except the right side. For the simple reason that this will save you from trouble and this is always the right action to do. – Marino J. Dasmarinas

On giving keynote address

John is a CEO in a conglomerate of business was invited to give the keynote address in a call center company under his line of authority. He accepted the invitation without any reservations but he did not prepare the theme of his keynote address.

When he arrived at the venue he was enthusiastically welcomed by the excited crowd. Who would not be excited when you are visited and given the keynote address by the top official of your organization? When John’s name was introduced, they all stood up and were actively clapping their hands.

When John started to talk he was mumbling his words for the simple reason that he did not prepare. His words were like a headless chicken straying anywhere without a sense of purpose and direction. The enthusiastic crowd became unenthusiastic and disappointment could easily be seen from their facial expressions. 

The speaker must prepare when giving a keynote address. He must also see to it that at least 50% of his theme is related with the job environment of his crowd. He can start with an interesting story to immediately capture the attention of his audience. He should also ask questions to engaged his audience and to promote mental dialogue with them. 

To promote light-heartedness the speaker could also inject humor that connects with the work environment of his audience.  Make it short, 15 to 20 minutes is enough; historically speeches that carves a space in the hearts of the audience are short.

Last but certainly not the least, practice your keynote address in front of the mirror or an imagined audience. Why? So that there’s no need for you to read it, you will be spontaneous and you create connection with your real-life audience. – Marino J. Dasmarinas

On arguments in the workplace

Donald, Nancy and Chuck are line managers in an organization. Their departments function are connected with each other. Therefore, every now and then they would exchange their views and these exchanges of views sometimes turns into arguments.

One morning, there was a meeting among line managers of their organization. After the meeting the trio of Donald, Nancy and Charles were at it again exchanging their views while walking in the hallway. The exchange of view became heated and it morphed into arguments.

No one among the three would give in, they wanted their views and ideas to be heard first. So, they were cutting each other’s voice because nobody wants to be upstaged. Before they knew it, they were already being watched by their subordinates, colleagues and superiors. Their disagreement and lack of decorum were in full view.

Arguments and exchange of views are part and parcel of organizational life. This is for the reason that it is in these exchanges of views and arguments that problems are threshed out and misunderstanding ironed out. However, there must be civility and respect during these arguments, there must be no cutting of each other’s voice.

There must be no shouting but only calm and civil exposition of ideas. We must let the person who is taking be heard first before we talk for it’s a sign of respect, decorum and education. There must always be an observance of respect and decorum during exchange of ideas and arguments.

For how can we command respect if we don’t know how to observe respect? – Marino J. Dasmarinas      

The magic of apology

Emmanuel is a Chief Executive Officer in a multinational corporation. While he was presiding a meeting, he offended a subordinate by berating her in-front of her peers. Having realized his arrogance Sean immediately apologized to her. 

Have you been in a situation where you offended a subordinate or an officemate? What did you do? Did you simply ignore your arrogance? You are the boss anyway! Or you immediately apologized because you’ve realized your mistake.

Many of us may not know this but offensive words hurt more than a knife being thrust into one’s body. That’s how demotivating and morale downing arrogant and offensive words are. However, there is a saving grace whenever we display our arrogance and offensive behavior. And this saving grace is to apologize.

But not everyone is willing to apologize because many of us have a selective method of apologizing. We usually immediately apologize to our superior but not to our subordinates many of us would say, “My subordinates are my underlings, why should I apologize to them?”

When we are not willing to apologize, we open ourselves to retaliation. Retaliation that will come to us when we least expect it. Retaliation that will certainly diminish our standing in our organization. Therefore, we have to humble ourselves whenever we offend anyone in our organization. And this we can do best when we apologize regardless of the status of the person we have offended.

Believe it or not the magic of apology is real, it heals strained organizational relationship and it renews broken friendship. – Marino J. Dasmarinas

On flip-flopping decisions

In a faraway place lived a leader who often flip-flops on his decisions. He would make decisions but after a few days he would take it back and would say that he did not make that decision even if the documents say otherwise.  Flip-flopping would always be in the menu of his exercise of leadership. For the reason of his flip-flopping this leader was slowly but surely losing his credibility among his subordinates.

Do you sometimes make decisions and regret doing so afterwards? You suddenly had a second thought and wished that you did not make that decision? This is a clear example of flip-flop decision making which if not corrected would surely hasten the fall of a leader/manager. Leaders/managers are supposed to be good decision makers they make their decision/s based on facts.

A leader/manager who flip-flops is someone who doesn’t carefully think of his decisions. He makes decision based on the spur of the moment. He immediately decides without carefully processing in his mind the implications of his decisions. Therefore, when he is questioned by his superiors or by his subordinates why he made that decision. He cannot stand on that decision for the simple reason that it’s a baseless decision.

The question now is, can flip-flopping be avoided? Of course, it can always be avoided. How? By means of not making spur of the moment decisions or impulsive decisions. Unless it’s a life and death situation an excellent and brilliant leader manager must not make spur of the moment or impulsive decisions. Why? Because these decisions are sure to be regretted afterwards or after a few days. – Marino J. Dasmarinas

Do not limit your motivational instrument with reward and punishment

Do you still use the traditional method of motivation called reward and punishment? Reward and punishment or the carrot and stick method of motivation goes this way: Rewards are given to an employee to sustain a positive behavior. For example: promotion, monetary incentive, recognition and the like.  The punishment is administered to force an employee to correct an errant behavior or to push an employee to correct an errant behavior. This has been the traditional motivation approach.

Is this kind of motivation technique still effective in this modern time and with millennial human resource around? Not anymore, the human resource one hundred to fifty years ago is very much different from the human resource today. The human resource then, did not have the luxury of technological modernity. So different from the present-day human resource where they can navigate the world anytime using their smart phones.

Therefore, there should be additional upgrades when motivating the millennial human resource today. The number one upgrade is to insert social relevance to the work that they are doing. For example, a call center agent should not only be told to sell products or solicit clients.

They must be informed of the relevance of what they are doing in relation to his family and his personal wellbeing. If the organization could inject this idea in the mindset of its human resource. It would serve as a point of motivation for them not only to work hard but to put more value into their assigned work.

The organization could also make the work environment homey and environmental friendly.  This could be done by creating a relaxed and plant friendly atmosphere. If the organization would innovate this way, this would certainly serve as a new motivational tool for its human resource. Who would not be motivated to work in this kind of atmosphere?   

The organization should also encourage participation of its human resource in decision making most especially in their work area. Gone are the days wherein management would always force its ideas on their workers. And the workers would have no other choice but to simply accept the decisions of management whether they like it or not.  

As technology evolves and upgrades motivational approaches of organizations toward its modern-day human resource must also evolve and upgrade. Otherwise they would be left behind and be extinct eventually. – Marino J. Dasmarinas