I am an HR professional working with one of the leading automotive companies in India. I am looking forward to taking a session for my team where I want to discuss whether leaders should focus more on results or on the potential of people. I request everybody to provide their inputs or share any reading material (PPT, doc, PDF, etc.), if available.
Thanks for the support.
Regards
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1Thanks for the support.
Regards
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Some would call what I am doing now spoon-feeding, which a number of our bloggers seem to depend upon. As I am not an HR expert, I searched the web using keywords from your question and found many links at https://www.google.co.uk/#q=should+l...ted+or+results.
Now, may I request you to kindly tell us what you think a leader should be and whether he or she can be consistent in the use of one or the other. I also appeal to other members not to kindly post their answers until the blogger has responded to mine.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Now, may I request you to kindly tell us what you think a leader should be and whether he or she can be consistent in the use of one or the other. I also appeal to other members not to kindly post their answers until the blogger has responded to mine.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dear Simhan, thank you for the quick response. In my opinion, it's difficult to provide a quote on this because no particular style alone can guarantee success for the organization. It has to be a combination of styles.
Leadership Focus: People and Potential
As a leader, I believe one must first focus on people and their potential, and then enable them to effectively perform the desired tasks.
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Leadership Focus: People and Potential
As a leader, I believe one must first focus on people and their potential, and then enable them to effectively perform the desired tasks.
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Result-Oriented vs. People-Oriented Leadership
A result-oriented leader may believe in the principle that the ends will justify the means, which means going all out for what he wants without caring about how he achieves it.
A people-oriented leader may believe in the principle that the means must be as pure as the ends, which means that the people through whom he achieves the results must be as important as the results. If he takes care of the people, the results will take care of themselves.
Now, I leave it to your wisdom to decide which leader is better.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A result-oriented leader may believe in the principle that the ends will justify the means, which means going all out for what he wants without caring about how he achieves it.
A people-oriented leader may believe in the principle that the means must be as pure as the ends, which means that the people through whom he achieves the results must be as important as the results. If he takes care of the people, the results will take care of themselves.
Now, I leave it to your wisdom to decide which leader is better.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have a valid query. Being a trainer, I have been asked the same question many times in my sessions. Do look at Ken Blanchard's Situational Leadership Model for a probable answer. I mention a probable answer as this would vary according to the individual, the team member, and the situation. Apart from this, you could also look for answers in HBR Classic on Leadership.
Regards,
Rajiv
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
Rajiv
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Leaders utilize people to achieve results, so they have to be people-oriented. This includes picking the right people, grooming them appropriately, giving them their goals and targets, and enabling them to achieve these goals by providing the right tools and processes.
A people-oriented leader does not, however, mean a non-result-oriented person; such a leader may not hesitate to get rid of people who are non-performers. As a leader, it is their business to ensure the timely achievement of all objectives.
A true leader is the owner of all failures but passes on the credit for success to the people whom he/she leads.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A people-oriented leader does not, however, mean a non-result-oriented person; such a leader may not hesitate to get rid of people who are non-performers. As a leader, it is their business to ensure the timely achievement of all objectives.
A true leader is the owner of all failures but passes on the credit for success to the people whom he/she leads.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my earlier post, I responded based on the headline of the thread under which you posed the query. Upon a second reading of the post, I understood that the actual input you needed is regarding the query of whether you should focus more on the results of only potential people. My response in relation to this specific query is as follows:
Balancing Focus: Star Performers and Steady Performers
An organization consists of both star performers and steady performers. Normally, organizations tend to pay more attention to these star performers since they bring revenue, create a brand for the company, and meet the company's challenges. They are provided with all opportunities to grow, such as special training and mentoring, given more responsibilities, and groomed to head critical functions. However, they constitute about 20% or 25% of the organization. An organization does not merely thrive because of these 1/4th super category employees.
To deliver critical services or functions, there needs to be myriad routine and supportive or ancillary functions performed. These functions are carried out by the steady performers. These steady performers may not exceed the expectations of the management or impact the bottom line as star performers do, but they are as important as blood, bones, and nerves to enable the key five senses of the body (sense of sight, hearing, taste, touch, etc.) to perform their functions. These steady performers constitute 75% to 80% of the organization. They too add value to the organization in their own right, though they may not fall into the critical value category.
Therefore, an organization cannot ignore these 80% of its workforce as it may ultimately impact the critical functions. If it does, it does so at its own peril. An organization needs to design programs to enhance their skills or at least hone their existing skills. Who knows, there may emerge a star performer from them if the right opportunities are provided to them. An organization shall not risk ignoring this steady majority and should develop them along with the star performers.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Balancing Focus: Star Performers and Steady Performers
An organization consists of both star performers and steady performers. Normally, organizations tend to pay more attention to these star performers since they bring revenue, create a brand for the company, and meet the company's challenges. They are provided with all opportunities to grow, such as special training and mentoring, given more responsibilities, and groomed to head critical functions. However, they constitute about 20% or 25% of the organization. An organization does not merely thrive because of these 1/4th super category employees.
To deliver critical services or functions, there needs to be myriad routine and supportive or ancillary functions performed. These functions are carried out by the steady performers. These steady performers may not exceed the expectations of the management or impact the bottom line as star performers do, but they are as important as blood, bones, and nerves to enable the key five senses of the body (sense of sight, hearing, taste, touch, etc.) to perform their functions. These steady performers constitute 75% to 80% of the organization. They too add value to the organization in their own right, though they may not fall into the critical value category.
Therefore, an organization cannot ignore these 80% of its workforce as it may ultimately impact the critical functions. If it does, it does so at its own peril. An organization needs to design programs to enhance their skills or at least hone their existing skills. Who knows, there may emerge a star performer from them if the right opportunities are provided to them. An organization shall not risk ignoring this steady majority and should develop them along with the star performers.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
LEADERSHIP STYLE Self Assesment.pdf
Leadership and Organizational Politics - CHR.ppt