I do get some questions from my readers, and I love it when I do. However I notice a trend in the questions being about leaders that are not available. Finding time to align your thoughts with your manager is a challenging quest. Everybody knows that managers are busy. Maybe your boss is too busy to care about you?
I actually remember one of my initial thoughts the first time I took the DiSC test. This test determines your personality type, by asking a lot of multiple choice questions. It determines if you are a person of action or inspiration. You will find out if you are extrovert or introvert, if you like routines or are tending more to a creative space. Back to my initial thought, I felt that if the world is according to the DiSC test every company should have two different people running it – A strong D and a strong I as a team. The D is the action oriented person – the person that gets things done. Everybody wants this person as a leader, as they are clear and gets things done. But wait. The strong D lacks people skills. They tend to run the machine even if people get in the way. The strong I is an inspiration, they speak well and can persuade a rock to believe it can fly. The D however might just pick up the rock and throw it. The I are often found in sales or on the stage giving a great speech about motivation. Nevertheless the I is all about talk and no action.
[quote]Two leaders in a company? I like this idea from @frodeheimen | http://www.nevermindthemanager.com/?p=1149 #leadership – Tweet this[/quote]
I hate to label people in groups, so understand that this is the outer edges. But if we include another dimension to this equation – time. Time is precious, and a material almost out of stock with most leaders. This is why your company would benefit from having two people in charge? A manager and a leader.
The I and the D
There is no I and D in TEAM, however there is in DRIVE. What if the D could be the CEO, running the business, crunching the numbers, facing the board and external contracts? Doing what the CEO does best. And the other boss, the I – could cheer the crowds, be there for the people. Hold the inspiring speeches, and bringing enthusiasm into the organization. This person’s only agenda is to interact with the people. Imagine if your new found happy and engaged employees would increase their effort with 10-15 %? I guess you could afford to invest in a chief of motivation and engagement, and then you as the CEO could use the time on stuff you feel is important.
Wouldn’t you just love to work for that kind of company?