Business Administration Education pp 3-17 | Cite as
The Essence of Being There: Wakefulness as a Strategic Leadership Tool
Abstract
In the twentieth century, leaders, especially those at strategic levels, became increasingly disconnected from their workforce. As competition became more fierce and widespread, shareholders became less tolerant about error or longitudinal processes, and their demands for rapid returns on investments increased. The augmented pressure from investors kept a parallel trend with the disengagement between leaders and their workforce: as leaders were given less time to deliver results, they had to focus more on corporate strategies and sacrifice their involvement with the workforce. However, now that a shift occurs in awareness among workforce members, through a multiplicity of occurrences, expectations are changing. Twenty-first-century workers are better educated and more aware of their rights, options, and desires, and expect their leaders to be visible, actively participating, respectful, and open to suggestions from employees at all levels. Motivation and collaboration start with connection. Today’s flattening organizational structures, along with less formal yet more diverse and complex work environments, require leaders to be aware of (1) their own strengths and weaknesses, (2) their attitude, including their “soft” and “hard” skills, (3) their short- and long-term goals, (4) their responsibility toward various stakeholder groups, and (5) the legacy they want to leave. While considering the past and working toward the future, leaders have to understand the art of being there.
Keywords
Emotional Intelligence Executive Compensation Soft Skill Leadership Quality Corporate LeaderPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Andrews, H. and Furniss, P. 2009. “a Successful Leader Or a Psychopathic Individual?” Management Services 53(4): 22–24.Google Scholar
- Burnes, B. 2009. “Reflections: Ethics and Organizational Change—Time for a Return to Lewinian Values.” Journal of Change Management 9(4): 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Collins, J. 2005. Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap … and Others Don’t. San Francisco: Harper Business.Google Scholar
- Davis, G. 2009. “The Rise and Fall of Finance and the End of the Society of Organizations.” Academy of Management Perspectives 23(3): 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dixon, J., Belnap, C., Albrecht, C., and Lee, K. 2010. “The Importance of Soft Skills.” Corporate Finance Review 14(6): 35–38.Google Scholar
- Fong, E. 2010. “ceo Pay Fairness as a Predictor of Stakeholder Management.” Journal of Business Research 63(4): 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gaillour, F. R. 2004. “Want to Be CEO? Focus on Finesse.” Physician Executive 30(4): 14–16Google Scholar
- Goleman, D. March-April, 2000. “Leadership That Gets Results,” Harvard Business Review 78(2): 78–90Google Scholar
- Hannah, D., and Zatzick, C. 2008. “An Examination of Leader Portrayals in the U.S. Business Press Following the Landmark Scandals of the Early 21st Century.” Journal of Business Ethics 79(4): 361–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hind, P., Wilson, A., and Lenssen, G. 2009. “Developing Leaders for Sustainable Business.” Corporate Governance 9(1): 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maccoby, M. 2002. “Do You Know If You Are Trusted?” Research Technology Management 45(4): 59–60.Google Scholar
- Nyman, M. 2006. “Want to Be a Topflight Leader? Hone Your People-Skills.” Chemical Engineering 113(8): 63–65.Google Scholar
- Pepper, T. 2005. “Of Criminals and CEOs.” Newsweek (June 21): 48.Google Scholar
- Wade, J., O’Reilly, I., and Pollock, T. 2006. “Overpaid CEOs and Underpaid Managers: Fairness and Executive Compensation.” Organization Science 17(5): 527–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Warrick, D. D. 2002. “The Illusion of Doing Well while the Organization Is Regressing.” Organization Development Journal 20(1): 56–61.Google Scholar