There are words that carry with them a very strong meaning and impact on our lives. Leadership is one of them, especially when we find ourselves in the job market holding positions that involve team management, influence and responsibility over people. This is when the figure of the leader is formed, with the role of guiding and looking after a team. But is a leader necessarily someone who holds a specific position in the organizational hierarchy? Are those we call leaders really leaders or just bosses? What characterizes true leadership?
To start the debate, I consulted the academic literature to find the concept of leadership (as a former master's student, I strongly believe that scientific studies carried out in the academic environment can help us understand the world of organizations). Among the various authors specializing in the subject, I'm left with Smircich & Morgan's (1982) definition: leadership is creating meaning for people in relation to the context or environment in which they operate, orienting and guiding their behaviour. In other words, a leader is someone who can create a purpose for people and inspire them to make their own decisions.
Leadership is not directly associated with hierarchical positions. If we observe unstructured groups, such as children playing, friends organizing a trip, or even primitive societies, we see that some people naturally emerge as a reference and guide for others. These people earn the right to lead others because of certain characteristics:
- Authenticity: the leader demonstrates consistency between their speeches and actions, conveying trust and credibility to other people (translating into corporate jargon, "walk the talk")
- Responsibility: in addition to authenticity, the leader demonstrates, through their attitudes and speeches, a genuine concern for their impact on others and the well-being of the group.
- Ability: the leader has skills and competencies (technical or behavioral) that stand out from the rest and give them the know-how to perform that role. They are considered a benchmark in some subject or skill
Two points are worth highlighting in this discussion. The first is that leadership is an achievement. True leadership is not imposed by the leader: in fact, those being led accept someone taking on the role of leader because the characteristics mentioned above stand out in that person, making others feel secure and confident in their guidance and actions.
The second point is that the figure of a leader is not necessarily associated with a position in the organizational hierarchy, although they can coincide. In our careers we meet bosses or people in higher positions who are real inspirations and references for us, to whom we give that extra mile at work because we see a purpose in what is being asked of us. On many occasions, these people become our mentors in the professional environment, extrapolating the relationship beyond the hierarchy. At the same time, it's possible that many of the bosses we work with are just bosses, and not leaders: they are people in higher positions than us, from whom we receive guidance and direction, but who don't inspire us or we don't see them as a reference. In this context, we are more likely to look for leadership in other people, someone we can look to for inspiration when doing our work or for guidance and advice.
Leadership is therefore a result of genuine interaction between people. This means that anyone can be a leader, as long as they exercise the necessary skills and are interested in the development of others. At different times we will be leaders, at other times we will be led. At various times we will seek leadership within the company hierarchy, at other times outside it. What matters is that we will always need other people to be able to evolve in our careers, at the same time as we need to give of ourselves so that other people can evolve too.
