In an interview a few months back, Brian Chesky, the CEO of AirBnB, said that he has reoriented his management style and is giving final approvals on every aspect of his business. At first glance, it looks as if the CEO has become the constraint to faster growth of the organisation. But Chesky claimed it is necessary to ensure that only changes that align closely with the CEO’s vision have to be executed. There is only so much appetite for change within and with customers.
But modern management wisdom advocates allowing lower-level leaders to take crucial calls. Micromanaging, getting into details beyond a point, etc., are considered “non-empowering” traits.
Elon Musk slept on the floor of Tesla’s workshop. You can see him get into the nuts and bolts of Tesla’s FSD upgrades. In X, everything from the bookmark button to the logo and small suggestions made on the platform gets his acknowledgement.
Then, you hear post-match conversations of MS Dhoni, filled with such details. He once said that his team lost the match because the bowlers did not shine the ball properly or because of any strategic error!
Similarly, Parameswaran Iyer, the former head of “Swachh Bharat Mission,” detailed in his book how Prime Minister Modi went into the details of building toilets, the messages to be painted on the walls, and other nitty-gritty. Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, in a lecture, mentioned a similar trait: the Prime Minister asked for the minute details on new railway stations that were being planned. PM Modi urged the railway officials to imagine the amenities required for the next thirty years.
In both cases, the Prime Minister could not have bothered, given that both Messers Vaishnaw and Iyer are fine professionals. But that is where leadership style comes into play, stemming from the instinct of someone who has spent decades among the people. All actions taken should align with the vision of a New India that the Prime Minister wants to build. The spirit of Antyodaya lies in the details of execution!
“Some leaders push innovations by being good at the big picture. Others do so by mastering details. Jobs did both, relentlessly. As a result he launched a series of products over three decades that transformed whole industries.”, writes Walter Isaacson in Steve Jobs’s biography.
The focus on details ensures that the executors do not miss high-quality input from the top boss, who always keeps an eye on the user’s needs. God is in the details!
Theories for dummies?
But what leadership style works? Are actions of successful modern-day leaders compatible with the preaching of management gurus?
The Late Harvard professor Clayton Christensen said, “Management is the opportunity to help people become better people. Practiced that way, it’s a magnificent profession.” In The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Steven Covey says, “Seek first to understand, then be understood.”
The creator of Dilbert, Scott Adams, classifies execution styles as “Simplifiers and Optimisers”. In his “How to Fail at Everything and Still Win Big”, he says some people can tease out the essentials from a complex situation, while others embrace complexity by going the extra mile.
Take the anarchist literature on movement building. In the “Blueprint for Revolution,” Srdja Popovich stresses likability as a key criterion for a leader. He says, “Often, it is about no more than holding hands in a crowded square or singing the right song.”
Only a successful practitioner would know innately what leadership works in a context because she would have developed those intuitions while working her way up the ladder. (Captains ask cricket debutants to stick to what worked for them in domestic cricket.)
What is the leader’s actual job?
Author Ajay Singh says in his “Architect of the New BJP”, “The leader has three key functions. He is, first, the compromiser of factional disputes. Second, he is the source of prestige to the members of the party. And, third, he is an absolute source for the articulation of values held by the group, and he may, as Gandhi did, articulate a new set of values”.
Leadership and Management are mangled in modern-day usage, thanks to the general culture of “word inflation.” Today, “leadership style” is used in lieu (and in vogue) of “management style.” (The mid-level manager who leaves the organisation is appreciated for his “leadership” during farewells, even if he managed just two people!).
It is not straightforward how leadership, which is woozy and hard to define, translates to the finer details of managing, which are easy to see. In the next part, we will explore a few spiritual attributes of leadership and what mortals can do to become leaders.
