Authority
versus persuasión
It is always
debatable as to whether the leader should base his management on authority
or on persuasion.
Both concepts
are important. The leader has to be a person
capable of using his authority and capable of persuading.
In most
cases leadership should be based on persuasion:
convince the subordinates that they have to act in a certain way.
A person
gives more when they know what they are doing.
The employee
will consider these decisions as his own and will feel more integrated
in the organization (he will believe they care about him).
The leader
should be an authentic expert in the art of persuading; he should
be a convincing person.
When the
leader tries to persuade he will exchange ideas with people: the leader
exposes (sells) his objectives, he tries to convince, but he bears
in mind the collaborator’s opinion.
However,
in certain occasions the leader should use his
authority and use it with determination.
If the
team rejects the leader’s proposal, if it is a problematic group,
in front of a crisis, etc. the leader should impose his authority
even it if may be unpopular.
However,
the leader should not abuse the use of his authority.
The employees
know perfectly when his use is justified and when it is carried out
on a whim.
In every
case, his use of authority should go together with his great respect
towards people.
The leader
has the right to demand, to give orders, etc. What he doesn’t
have the right to is abuse, tyrannize or humiliate people.
If the
leader unjustly uses his authority it will negatively affect the union
between the leader and his employees.
Nobody
appreciates being continuously ordered about. The employees are over
18 years old and they generally know how to behave.
Receiving
an order is not very motivating. The employee will probably ensure
he carries out his tasks and not a lot more (he will do the minimum
to avoid being punished).
When the
management of a group is based on “ordering and commanding”
it is credulous to try and get the employee to feel motivated, he
will not be giving his best.
Over using
authority (“because I said so”) creates a tense atmosphere
that affects the integration of the staff with the company.
If the
leader abuses his authority, his subordinates will do the same (but
multiplied) with inferior levels, generating a tense atmosphere, sometimes
unbearable.
On the
contrary, if the leader promotes a participating management, this
model will work better as it will extend to all levels of the company.
You have
to reject the idea that basing leadership on persuasion and not on
authority is a sign of weakness.
The work
environment radically improves, people feel satisfied, they actively
participate, with the will do to things.
It is necessary
to know that even if you are managing using the persuasion method,
you shouldn’t be demanding less.
In a competitive
world like the one we live in, demanding a lot is essential if the
company is to survive.
Demanding
a lot doesn’t necessary demand acting like a tyrant.
Finally,
to point out that although you are looking to generate a friendly
and participating work environment, avoid unnecessary tension. The
employees should have it clear in their minds that the leader will
not tolerate, under any condition, the smallest amount of indiscipline.
