I recently watched a “TED” video in which the renowned orchestra leader Itay Talgam, pointed to  several 20^th century conductor ‘greats’ and the lessons their leadership held for business leaders of today.   The connection to business leadership is especially fascinating once we realize that no verbal exchanges take place when conducting the orchestra and still, the group, or team if you will, have the potential of making the most beautiful music … and that requires cooperation, willingness to be part of a team and a sense of responsibility both to the individual musician’s role and that of the full orchestra.

Appropriately intrigued I wanted to explore the connection between conducting music and leading an organization, a department or a group.    I came upon an article in which Jazz maestro Dominic Alldis was interviewed and the resulting article, “Symphony of Leadership”.   I challenge that as you to read the key points Alldis has identified, you forget it being written from a music perspective and enjoy the similarity to effectively leading within a business organization:  The most significant connections include:

• Conducting represents the corporate world.  “It conveys metaphors of collaboration (not competition), appreciation of diversity and creativity, and culture and tradition.
• There is a periodic ‘check-in’ with the leader/conductor although an individual’s focus is on their personal tasks, .  This provides the reassurance from their leader that they are on the right path and serves to add energy to their performance.  Being an effective team player also requires periodic acknowledgement of the leader at key moments while continuing to perform in one’s specific area.
• “A leader is crucial to bring together varying voices and give it a sense of unity.”
• It conveys the importance of listening quietly and patiently.
• The conductor is akin to leading in business.  The making of eye contact with each of his team members, gesticulating with his hands and managing to convey to each the highs and lows that they must take in order to produce beautiful music.”  Such eye contact and other non-verbal communication allows people to know they are respected, have a true value and are contributing to the whole.
• The conductor is the only person in the orchestra who makes no sound. He is merely there to help his team members make music. “This just goes to prove that leadership is never about control or dominance, it is all about support, understanding, and effective and timely communication.”

So to any of us who equate effectively leading as being verbally forceful and communicating in a loud and clear voice … maybe not.  When Teddy Roosevelt said “speak softly and carry a big stick: you will go far” … maybe he was a fan of music.  I don’t know about you yet the music conductor metaphor seems to provide an interesting model and something to strive for.  Does it make sense from your experience?  I’d love to read your comments!

Mike

Today I read a very interesting article related to the personality types of leaders … specifically the introverted vs. the extroverted leader.  The author is Megan McNeill and is entitled Leadership and Personality: Introverts can Lead, Too.    In the article Ms. McNeill says “it makes sense that we often associate effective leaders with big personalities – their voices tend to carry after all. Many of the world’s leaders have been extroverts and it has served them well – their people skills and energy can draw crowds and inspire action.”  However she quotes from another article that makes the point that we often “prize leaders who are eager talkers over those who have something to say.  A skilled talker isn’t necessarily a skilled leader. If one’s talk of ideas is just that – talk – there can be no real leadership.”  Amen say me!

In general, after reading this I began thinking about how important the personality distinction is today … a time when so many are working hard to emerge to the threatening times encountered during the recent 3+ years.  Is the ‘talker’ still the one to sell what has to happen or is the ‘talker’ going to be resisted because it’s less than believable?  What do those we lead really need and want today … truth? … honesty? … confidence? … and is one personality better able to provide and convey that than the other?  The question of what makes for an effective leader is one that I believe has the potential of changing with the times.  From the exposure we get to various businesses, I believe that succeeding in the environment of this day blurs the line that might differentiate introvert and extrovert as one being more appropriate or ‘better’ than the other.  It ‘s more about every personality type having the ability to facilitate the development of a clearly defined vision, getting the leadership team aligned behind it and doing so in a way that gives all a sense of individual and shared responsibility.  Ultimately they must have the ability to work effectively together to make it happen.  Regardless of one’s individual personality type, there needs to be talk that really does convey what is important to say.  These are serious recovery times and that warrants leaders as effective communicators who instill the desire in others to follow.  No time for the stereotypical image of the used car, fender slapping salesperson here!

Do you see it differently?  Perhaps another spin?  I’d love to read your comment.

Mike

I am always reading articles pertaining to effective leadership or leadership practices that WORK which probably wouldn’t surprise anyone who knows what I do (as in Leadership Coaching).  And frankly I am struck by things common to these various opinions regardless of the country of origin for any particular author.  What it amounts to is that effective leadership is just that … or not.

I just read “In a Nutshell: The five core principles of effective leadership” written by one Wendy Brooks.  It appeared in HRZone located in the UK.  In that nutshell, the five principles are …

1. Be an active learner and foster learning in others
2. Share a clear and compelling vision
3. Prioritize activity based on the business context
4. Lead with integrity, honesty and consistency
5. Develop leadership capacity at all levels of the organization

Personally I think this is a good basic list.  Obviously we can find others to add or replace and there is a very important add-on to just about every article we read of this nature.  Knowing the core principles is ONLY the start.  Applying them is the key to being successful in the leader’s role.   It seems that too often, there is too little  training around leadership effectiveness methods and the person is left to their own devices and their sense of how a leader leads.  The result we see is that a group of leaders within the same organization are employing their well-intended, yet, often different and sometimes ineffective ways of carrying their area forward.

The rewarding part … and yes, even the fun part … of what we get to do is help the leader become comfortable in this aspect of their role in steps.   The core principals are right on and still one needs to learn how to instill them into their own personal approach and that takes practice … practice … practice.