Side by Side Leadership: Side by Side Coaching

Figure 2 shows the increased responsibility and commitment when there has been mutual leadership.

In one of the organizations for which I provide consulting, the manager did most of the talking during the first meeting. He handed out all of the action items at the end of the meeting. I left the meeting and accomplished my tasks, but it was hard for me to feel responsible for the total success of the project. My potential commitment and sense of responsibility had been narrowly channeled into a few, fairly concrete tasks. After completing the tasks, I was confused about how the results contributed to the group's goals.

Without mutual leadership created commitment, individuals perform as robots. If managers don't create Side by Side commitment then they have to get it 100% right using only their own resources.

This leader is puzzled as to why his "team" does not perform the action items he delegates and why the overall results of his organization are inferior. He had all of the commitment to the task or goal in the above figure. His one-way directive leadership actually reduced the follower's commitment. The followers leave the interaction with less commitment.

Ironically, this leader thinks he is excellent at motivating his people because he tells people what to do with such energy and enthusiasm. I am working to show him other thoughtful and non-confrontational ways to work and motivate people, which would help reduce the 60-70 hours a week he is now spending at work doing this. I know Side by Side Leadership could help him. I would value any ideas from the members of the Leadership Community to help show him a different way to lead. Please email me with your thoughts.

Team mutual leadership promotes the total commitment of everyone on the team. Another leader that I work with asks for my ideas, presents her ideas and then together we pick the best ideas. With this leader, I leave the meeting always thinking of how I can help her organization improve in its results. As Figure 2 depicts, shared leadership with two-way interaction results in the follower leaving the meeting with equal commitment and transformed into a contributor.

An effective team leader facilitates the team in transforming desired upper management business results into compelling team goals. The leader must facilitate or have another facilitate the creative participation of every team member in the goal and action plan development. The heart of team leadership is drawing the knowledge and creative ideas out of the team members to achieve shared goals, contrasted against the leader who gives all of the direction and solutions. The research supported leadership principle is: The more effective the facilitation of mutual leadership, the greater the commitment by all towards the shared goals.

Figure 1 presents the comparison of low mutuality and subsequent commitment and responsibility. The empty circle of commitment depicts no commitment from one-way leadership.

Figure 2 shows the increased responsibility and commitment when there has been mutual leadership. In one of the organizations for which I provide consulting, the manager did most of the talking during the first meeting. He handed out all of the action items at the end of the meeting. I left the meeting and accomplished my tasks, but it was hard for me to feel responsible for the total success of the project. My potential commitment and sense of responsibility had been narrowly channeled into a few, fairly concrete tasks. After completing the tasks, I was confused about how the results contributed to the group's goals. Without mutual leadership created commitment, individuals perform as robots. If managers don't create Side by Side commitment then they have to get it 100% right using only their own resources. This leader is puzzled as to why his "team" does not perform the action items he delegates and why the overall results of his organization are inferior. He had all of the commitment to the task or goal in the above figure. His one-way directive leadership actually reduced the follower's commitment. The followers leave the interaction with less commitment. Ironically, this leader thinks he is excellent at motivating his people because he tells people what to do with such energy and enthusiasm. I am working to show him other thoughtful and non-confrontational ways to work and motivate people, which would help reduce the 60-70 hours a week he is now spending at work doing this. I know Side by Side Leadership could help him. I would value any ideas from the members of the Leadership Community to help show him a different way to lead. Please email me with your thoughts. Team mutual leadership promotes the total commitment of everyone on the team. Another leader that I work with asks for my ideas, presents her ideas and then together we pick the best ideas. With this leader, I leave the meeting always thinking of how I can help her organization improve in its results. As Figure 2 depicts, shared leadership with two-way interaction results in the follower leaving the meeting with equal commitment and transformed into a contributor.
© Dennis A. Romig, 2002