different leadership

i started a discussion the other day with a guy about leadership(even in wikipedia they talk about one). i wanted to communicate the problem i have with the corporate view on leaders. they say a group can have only one leader, who can make tough decisions when the group doesn’t agree. one leader that is representing this group, one leader that is the authority. well, i disagree. i think the new way and the way i like more is team leadership. it is hard work, but at the end it is more rewarding for everyone. the team makes all the decisions and these are not made until the team comes to an agreement. consensus is the key word. everyone has to be happy or at least be able to live with the decision without being angry afterwards.

the thing with one leader deciding on things is that very often you have someone left unhappy or even angry. future decisions lead to building up this anger and at last you have a very angry person, who probably doesn’t even remember when everything started. having one leader making decisions in my opinion is avoiding conflict now, but building up much greater conflicts for later. it is faster in the present for one person to make the decision, but it takes a longer time to work on the conflict afterwards.

i think that this way we build trust within the team and learn about our different skills among the team members and are able to do a much greater job together. don’t they say that to brains know more than one. imagine having a whole team of brains. anyway, i work with different teams for years now, and have this experience of team leadership, and i can say it works and i like it. i feel as an equal, i’m treated as an equal and have rights in this team as an equal. and it is amazing what we can do as a team, and how much less stressful it is to lead something as a team and not having to carry the burden by myself.

well, let me know what you think.

~ by msecen on September 17, 2007.