One school of thought, the proponents of Unconditional Love (UL) in Leadership, say it is practicable. On the opposite side are those who brand their proposition as wishful thinking. But it seems to me that, to stand any chance of a headway with this issue, we must allow ourselves personal visits to the topic under discussion.
While the argument rages in our various `thought rooms’, class rooms or internet forum, we must ask ourselves, and be honest as we attempt an answer, can we manage our respective `dominions’ with unconditional love? If we cannot manage our micro environment through unconditional love, how can we market the idea to the macro environment?
Are you managing your household, loving unconditionally? Or rather more to the home front, are you managing yourself `loving all aspect of you unconditionally’? Do you feed your stomach and care less about applying cream to your hair before you leave your house? Do you rub cream to your face and legs, while ignoring your toe or ankle area? These are simple tests and there is a saying among Christians that he `who is faithful in little is faithful in much’.
Unconditional love should be an unequivocal spread of compassion and humane feeling across and around every member of the in-group, such that no one should at any time, feel left out or cheated out of an opportunity. Clearly, the manager has a tough job doing this. As it stands now, leaders already have enough difficulty `being fair’, which by itself, has been given a relative interpretation, conditioned by contingencies.
Strategic management thinkers know that contingencies and a leader’s response to them test his proficiency. It is on the basis of these tests that he can be assessed and qualified as either `good’, `bad` or `great’. These qualities, themselves, are often contestable. But if contingencies test a leader’s proficiency, unconditional love in leadership is his/her ultimate test.
Proponents of Unconditional Love in leadership, include my good friend Jane Barrash, Executive Director of the Continuum Center.
In a paper presented at the Institute of Leadership and Global Education in Canada earlier this month, Jane clamoured for a quantum shift, such that will bring a new paradigm of leadership and love. In her words …” Our Quantum leaders will be role models for the change that starts within and moves you to a deep connection with others…"
Jane concluded by saying that … “The Cartesian, mechanistic, rational paradigm has steered us into many walls of anxiety and overwhelm, isolation and incarceration. It's time for entering a new universe of possibility, where the inner world is a gold mind and self-discovery leads to a new sense of relationship to everyone and everything else. At a time that rates of employee dissatisfaction are high, and loyalty rates are low, the kinds of trainings and environments most needed and in demand by employees are those that promote positive internal emotional states and, because those internal states are linked to high performance, those are benefits leaders want as well.”
Jane must know, for other than this gradual change, which must start with self-examination, analysis and change, much of what are put out there in defence of UL are imaginary impracticalities.
However, as any student of policy and strategic studies know, contingencies often call for decisions that may not be fair or generally popular. Popularity is an evidence of fairness of decision makers.
In `Managing Compassionately’, Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn wrote that “compassion”, not unconditional love, “can be thought”. And in as much as a leader is encouraged to lead with compassion, he must be wise, for he advised that “Wisdom without compassion is ruthlessness, compassion without wisdom is folly”.
The `litmus test’ of the practicality of UL in leadership will include:
a)how to choose and maintain fairness between two competing extremes.
b)how to be fair when a leader is faced with a strategic decision, much of which won’t necessarily have to be made public.
c)Determining how to communicate bad news and still keep the face smiling.
d)How to show unconditional love to subordinates who challenge you.
e)Whether to accept that unconditional love in leadership must be conditional.
f)Deciding the borderline between UL and foolishness, especially when being taken for a ride.
The challenge may yet be huge and to teach unconditional love in leadership, even as development programs, we must articulate adequately.
<>-----------------------------<>
Benson Agoha is the founder of Woolwich Online.
<>-----------------------------<>
Articles for publication must have full contact details, including name, address and telephone number of sender and sent by email to: onlinewoolwich@yahoo.co.uk.
No comments:
Post a Comment