Strategy & Leadership

The DNA of leadership

November 04, 2014

Global

November 04, 2014

Global
David Henderson

Senior lecturer in management

David worked as a senior lecturer in Management at Cass Business School, part of City University London. He was also a lecturer in Organizational Behaviour at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He graduated with a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago with an emphasis on organisational behaviour, human resource management and leadership in 2009. Prior to this he obtained two Masters Degrees: one in International Business and the other in French Language and Linguistics from the University of Florida. He is an internationally recognised speaker, writer, and teacher in the fields of leadership and cross-cultural management. 

Leadership is all about social power, argues Dr David Henderson, a leadership and international business expert.

Leadership comes with social power, that is, the ability to move mountains through human connection. In modern business, employees and customers are becoming more flexible to diverse types of leadership progression (i.e., outside contenders or successful entrepreneurs coming into top roles). Tastes and attitudes are becoming more open in leadership preference in response to a growing demand for expert leaders to solve increasingly complex social, economic and political dilemmas. Thus, knowing how to build a relational power base with employees and customers, or “followers”, is more vital for business leaders than ever. 

A relational power base is a means of holding influence because others want to identify and be affiliated with you. They like and trust you and therefore want to be a part of your team. In the early stages of one’s career with a group of followers, showing one’s social status can be an effective means of creating a relational power base. Take middle and low-level managers, for example. Early in their careers, these managers typically make many references to their academic affiliations in order to win approval and liking.

As one’s leadership matures, and followers become confident in a leader’s abilities, she or he is able to move into a more intimate position. The use of status to generate a relational power base will fall aside to some degree such that the business leader becomes more respected and can show more eccentricities and potential deviations from social expectations. Social psychologists call this “idiosyncrasy credit”. 

An example is Martha Stewart, an American entrepreneur. As she became more successful she got increasingly viewed as hard-edged, while gaining public support. Showcasing such an image would not have been appropriate initially because, as a woman, she may have received a strong backlash for crossing gender stereotypes in leadership. Unfortunately, being “tough” is still more readily accepted when one is male.

Being one’s self in a leadership role takes courage, and certain personality traits may limit success in this domain. Individuals with an external locus of control (the belief that external events control them) may become overly fearful of how followers will respond if they show their true self to them. Individuals who are narcissistic may expose too much of themselves. Giving followers information about one’s self that brings into question one’s core competencies as a leader may turn them off. Finally, managers who are risk averse may release information about themselves in an awkward manner, which may then bring into question their self-confidence.

Giving it all—one’s potential, past, and presence—to followers is not easy for everyone. Leaders should find a coach that will take their personality into consideration when teaching them how to be relational. But rest assured that once you have chosen the tools best suited to your personality, your relationships with your employees and customers will prosper. 

This blog is part of a series managed by The Economist Intelligence Unit for the new Audi A7. Click here for more information about the research programme.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited (EIU) or any other member of The Economist Group. The Economist Group (including the EIU) cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this article or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in the article.

Enjoy in-depth insights and expert analysis - subscribe to our Perspectives newsletter, delivered every week