Replying to LO28548 --
I suggest a leader is necessary, to answer the question 'who speaks for
your people?'. If it is a country in a global scenario, and a question of
international policy arises, there should be only one response from each
country or trading group, no divisiveness exhibited to onlookers. If it is
a workplace team the same applies, the CEO should be able to get the
consensus answer to a query from the team spokesperson (leader). I suggest
workplace team leaders should be nominated by the group, with the
understanding that the selected (elected?) person may be paid a loading
for the extra responsibility. I think you will find that in many
workplaces the person in the role of leader is a reluctant hero. Under
directive management systems that person is the most stressed in the
In one job I hads, a few years ago, recruitment of new personnel was
delegated to quite 'low down the hierarchy'. When selection is performed
by Technical Officers who really know the 'hands on' stuff, you get really
good staff selected. I suggest the same applies to selection of leaders.
I have seen many instances where people are 'pushed upstairs' by managers,
simply to get rid of them. Promotion of those who simply 'look good' to
middle managers, or who will advance a middle managers cause, is similarly
of doubtful benefit.
"Alan Cotterell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.