A friend of mine called recently to discuss his business. He wants his employees to assume more ownership for their work and take more initiative on their own, without having to be asked to do something. He wants to lead an organization that produces innovative leaders, not a bunch of managed followers. Knowing a little about his workplace, I asked him an important question. “Have you created an environment conducive to produce the kind of employees you say you want?”
The way an organization is structured (often called the DNA of the organization) determines the type of employee it attracts and retains. An atmosphere that produces innovative leaders, for example, has more to do with the culture of the organization than it does specific programs or activities the organization does. Leaders determine, therefore, whether they will create an environment that can produce innovative leaders or whether they will be an environment that merely produces managed followers. Here are some general characteristics of those two environments:
One that produces innovative leaders
- More rewarding
- More entrepreneurial
- More freedom
- More encouragement
- More open-minded
- More creative
- More informal
- More changeable
- More risk-taking
- More trusting
One that produces managed followers
- More oversight
- More corporate
- More rules
- More controlling
- More closed-minded
- More defined
- More formal
- More static
- More penalties for failure
- More critical
I realize there are not clear-cut divisions between the two types of environments. Obviously “more” is a subjective word, but if you apply these broad characteristics to most major corporations you can probably tell which ones attempt to encourage innovation and which encourage a more compliant environment. If you are a leader, ask yourself which of the two descriptions fits your organization best. Then ask yourself if this is the environment you want to lead. (If you really want to know the correct answer, let your employees answer a survey anonymously. You may be surprised at their response.)
What other characteristics would you add to the lists above?
(My next few posts will have further thoughts on this issue, including some specific activities to help foster innovation among your team, but remember, it begins with culture, not activities.)
My name is Nath and I want to discus on this topic…"Financing a growing Church" I can be reached with my email. [email protected]
Remain bless
Thanks Ron. really digging into this thought process currently. i am in a totally new field for the past year and find it much more challenging than where i used to be…but so necessary. great words, and great encouragement.
Thanks Doug
great post. both of your lists are right on. unfortunately, for me, the “mores” on your 2nd list sound way too familiar
.-= Aaron´s last blog ..Creative Dissatisfaction =-.
This is the perfect description of my last job and the current one! I’m a firm believer that “managed followers” will stay away from becoming good leaders… and that the leaders of managed followers aren’t really leading at all.
.-= Steve Murphy´s last blog ..Some one is always watching =-.
Agree whole-heartedly. My company sits in the middle which is why I think that we sometimes miss the boat. I’d have to say that our company is creative and risk-taking when it comes to pleasing the clients or planning long term strategies, but when it comes to the staff they are more corporate, formal, critical, rules-based and less rewarding.
Looking forward to seeing some of your ideas on how to foster innovative environments.
.-= Grady Bauer´s last blog ..Fear of falling =-.
Love this discussion. Can’t wait to hear more.
.-= Jenni Catron´s last blog ..Sunday Highlights =-.