The unreliable car and the winding road
Over millennia, the role of leadership in the dynamics of the groups, organisations, countries has been recognised as crucial.
From Sun Tzu to Clausewitz, the importance of understandings and the vision of the general are the backbones of martial teachings. Machiavelli, with insight, elaborated what the behavioural alternatives of the political ruler should be.
The discourse of the military leader assumes that the objective is to win the war. In political action, however, it is clear for the Florence-based diplomat that the perception (or the choice) of the vision to be assumed shapes decisions - whoever wishes for permanent success must constantly change his conduct over time.
Two leadership styles stand out: the one that favours dynamics and the one that favours structure - a better designation than transformers and situationists. A great allegory could be made resorting to the car that transports us: the mechanic looks at the machine, the driver has his eyes on the road.
Organisations stall and become stiff when mechanics take the wheel. Organisations break apart when drivers neglect to oil the gears.
These two groups fear each other. For the ones obsessed for perfectionism, the unreasonable actions of those favouring dynamics endanger the delight in the beauty of an oiled performance. In the vertigo of any imminent breakthrough, the constraints and demands from those giving priority to structure frustrate, thwart and foil the delight in the achievement of the ones granting privilege to action.
While managing a group, a research institution, a university, a government our a country, it is essential that we ask ourselves: what’s our condition, what forces are currently dominating, what kind of machine do we have, where are we going. In fact, there are only two possible cases when a group doesn’t crush the other: in opposition and in combination.
One of the solutions is a stalemate: no one has the necessary strength to enforce its course, but there are plenty of means to prevent supremacy of the other party. This equilibrium uses the appeal to common sense as an effective damper of any action.
The other balance is creative: those from the structure take advantage of the transforming energies to improve the machine, while those from the dynamics take advantage of the most effective car in order to continue driving the highway. This balance uses common sense as an optimiser.
From the four combinations - situation only, achievement only, the stiffening poise, the transforming balance - only one of them is worthy. A fortunate organisation, country, the one that achieves this synergy in its leaderships.
Governing is making the others believe, wrote Machiavelli. It is a caveat: designs are not enough, it is necessary to have fortune in the choice of protagonists and understanding of the sentiment of those that are governed. A lot can be said about the tragic misfortune of not having the right leaders in the historic occasion and about the immense blessing of having them. We, better than anyone, know about that - from king Afonso I to Nuno Álvares Pereira, from Henry the Navigator to king John II and Afonso de Albuquerque, from Marquis of Pombal to King John VI of Portugal and Brazil, all relevant figures of the Portuguese History at crossroad times - and to the prime movers of the April 25th Democratic Revolution, as the calendar keeps the event alive with recurring and beautiful stubbornness.
Photo credits: Wikipedia
