Decision-Making

Leadership and Action: Elizabeth 1

We associate effective leadership (and followership) with action. The leader identifies and issue or opportunity and takes action. When we hire, there is evidence that someone perceived to be “agentive” (those who take action) is more likely to be considered than someone who is “socio-emotional” (or people oriented).

But sometimes taking action can have negative results. The other day I was chatting with one of my favourite history professors. She teaches a wonderful course on Elizabethan history. And Lizzie was an amazing leader. She led her country through war, poverty and the social upheaval of the reformation successfully. England became more prosperous and peaceful than ever in its history during her reign. It also built the foundations of what would become the British empire during her reign.

Poor old Lizzie was often accused of dithering, of being uncertain and unwilling to take action. This was attributed to her inherent weakness as a woman. But she was really playing for time and playing various competing courtiers against each other. She kept various groups competing against each other by taking no action. This meant that they could not collaborate to challenge her rule because they were too busy infighting.  Often, these problems resolved themselves or went away completely as a result of her stalling tactics. If she had acted, there was greater risk and uncertainty than if she stalled.

Sometimes the best leadership action is taking no action. Our society feels profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of a leader taking no action.  Every business case I’ve ever taught asks What should she/he do?  Perhaps cases should ask What should he/she not do? Are there items on your to do list where taking action might be the wrong thing to do?

About these ads

3 replies »

  1. I believe you are speaking of the leadership style of my hero, Garfield. When he feels that compelling urge to take action he will simply lie down and nap until the feeling goes away. Works for me.

  2. Sometimes, either intentionally or unintentionally, a leader will step back from making any move towards a decision or action. It could be to avoid micromanaging. But, in some instances, a leader will do this to empower is group or team (company or department) to come up with answers and solutions themselves. Although it is a great risk, at times, to do this, the results may not only be favorable, but could also be quite surprising; not to mention inspirational for all involved.

    Infighting, on the other hand, is not recommended. However, an educated, and quite observant leader will allow for infighting if he feels that the leaders within the group will rise to the occasion and take charge and take appropriate action, by organizing the group to follow a certain path.

    GREAT POST!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s