By Mohammad Tariqur Rahman
There is a long list of leadership qualities that include but are not limited to communication skills, empathy, vision, sincerity, wisdom, knowledge, accountability, conflict resolution ability, attentiveness, motivating or inspiring skill, accountability and responsibility, integrity and transparency, openness, management skill, and courage. Not all leaders have it all. It is also subjective to identify the minimum qualities that are needed to be a leader.
However, some leaders are stronger in certain qualities than others – and that is their strength. Nevertheless, making a delicate balance in leadership qualities is rather a complex task for any individual with a responsibility of leadership. However, how a leader is committed to a given responsibility can be observed based on how a leader is engaged with everyone under his/her jurisdiction.
An engaging leader facilitates, strengthens, connects, and inspires followers to increase their support and participation in their agenda. The level of engagement of a leader with his/her employees in an organization varies. It not only depends on how a leader wants to facilitate, strengthen, connect, and inspire an employee. It also depends on the readiness and acceptance of an employee to receive their leader’s way of engagement.
In other words, engaging leadership is a two-directional endeavour – between the leader and a group of loyal and committed followers. Be it in a political or organizational arena, there is always a group of loyal and committed followers of a leader. And there is always a group that responds in diametric contrast to the loyal and committed group. In between, there is a group who sway their loyalty and commitment as their perception of the leader changes with changes in circumstances. There is also a group who will vow their loyalty and commitment no matter who the leader is.
Albeit, leadership is a complex responsibility because of the existence of such a diverse array of supporters and opponents with diverse and often opposing demands and expectations.
Most likely, a discourse to examine the ethical and moral ground of the opposing expectations and demands, i.e., principles and purpose based on which an individual vows their loyalty and commitment, might lead to a dead end. That is because ethical and moral values are more subjective than universal.
It is rather easier to evaluate if leaders are engaging in their obligation and commitment. As I started, an engaging leader facilitates, strengthens, connects, and inspires followers. That engagement can vary in scale, starting from merely a lip service full of hollow commitments to realistic all-out support. A truly engaging leader would make an effort to offer all-out support.
On the contrary, escaping leaders would dodge their responsibilities to facilitate, strengthen, connect, and inspire followers. Their efforts would be more of a leap service, and they rely on imposing commands without any realistic support. While engaging leaders would never hesitate to lend their hand to assist the employee in completing a task, escaping leaders would limit their “engagement” by dictating to the employees and escaping their responsibility and accountability.
Perhaps the most important quality of an engaging leader is to give the highest priority to the benefits and well-being of everyone in his/her jurisdiction, not only to his/her core followers – even if that means a possibility of losing the leadership position. An escaping leader, on the other hand, will make an all-out effort to hold the position as the leader – even if that necessitates sacrificing the well-being of others.
Engaging leaders would never think they are inevitable in the position; rather, they will groom future leaders who could replace them with no delay. In contrast to an engaging leader, an escaping leader will not only try to prove themselves inevitable, but they also stop any potential leader from entering their territory.
In Applied Behavior Analysis, an escaping behaviour refers to any behaviour that primarily happens to avoid, delay, or end something unpleasant. Hence, as the name implies, escaping leadership could be defined as a kind of leadership that avoids leadership responsibility, delays the execution of the assigned or required tasks, and finally creates an unpleasant environment for the rest to work as a team.
In summary, an engaging leader commits to the responsibility with equal priority to the wellbeing of everyone in his/her jurisdiction, and an escaping leader has the highest priority to “lead” even if s/he needs to escape (or evade) the responsibility and accountability for the wellbeing of the fellow followers. Engaging leaders strive for the survival and existence of everyone, and escaping leaders strive for their own survival as leaders.
Prof Mohammad is the Deputy Executive Director (Development, Research & Innovation) at International Institute of Public Policy and Management (INPUMA), Universiti Malaya.
Leave a comment