O medo, a mudança e a esperança

A Burocracia Mecânica, designação proposta por Mintzberg, há muito tempo que é uma forma obsoleta de pensar e fazer a gestão. A grande maioria de nós já compreendeu, social e economicamente, quais são as suas ameaças, fraquezas e mau funcionamento. Então, temos de refletir, propor e praticar novas formas de construir a atenção para com o ser humano, numa atitude de sustentável e aceitável mudança desse status quo. Podemos considerar que os sistemas de comando e controle refletem, como foi anteriormente afirmado pela teoria clássica da administração, uma desconfiança profunda face ao compromisso e à competência dos funcionários. Eles também tendem a exagerar os acontecimentos negativos, assim, as sanções surgem como uma maneira de forçar a conformidade e a ordem. Talvez seja por isso que muitas organizações estejam cheias de funcionários ansiosos que estão hesitantes em tomar a iniciativa ou em confiar no seu próprio julgamento. A adaptabilidade organizacional, a inovação, a autenticidade e o engajamento dos funcionários só pode acontecer numa cultura de alta confiança, com baixo medo e com significado. Num tal ambiente, a informação é amplamente compartilhada, as opiniões controversas são livremente expressas e aceites, a assunção de riscos é incentivada e o fracasso não é exorcizado. O medo paralisa, cria desconfiança, desmoraliza e limita as pessoas — deve ser expulso dos nossos sistemas de gestão. A era do “Grande homem”, o todo-sábio, o todo-poderoso líder-como-decisor já dura há bastante tempo. Os líderes devem tornar-se arquitetos sociais esclarecidos — indivíduos que são capazes de co-criar ambientes que engendram uma realização extraordinária e preenchida. Para fazer essa transição do "comando e controle" para o "motivar e orientar", as organizações precisam desenvolver líderes que acreditem que é fundamental criar o comprometimento e o alinhamento sem recorrer a instrumentos tradicionais de controle burocrático. O Verdadeiro Norte será uma organização repleta de líderes autênticos que com toda a esperança nos elevem a todos. Já não é suficiente apenas ter um excelente fluxo de caixa. As partes interessadas e os consumidores tornaram-se exigentes e o tempo/dinheiro não é tudo. As organizações resilientes devem ser flexíveis, inovadoras, inspiradoras, significativas e socialmente responsáveis. Isso significa que têm que recriar as bases da liderança de pensamento e das práticas. Os estudiosos e os práticos devem procurar novos princípios em campos tão diversos como a antropologia e a cultura, a biologia e a entropia, o desenho e o Urbanismo, mergulhando nas ciências políticas e na democracia, na ecologia e na economia sustentável, na gestão e no poder. É definitivamente tempo de mudarmos e de respeitarmos os outros.

A emoção na liderança

A Inteligência Emocional, conceito associado à liderança por GOLEMAN, BOYATSIS e MCKEE (2002), aponta para um leque de aptidões tais como, identificar, distinguir e utilizar os próprios sentimentos e os dos outros, no sentido de orientar pensamentos e acções. De acordo com CUNHA e REGO (2009, p.240), “a inteligência emocional é uma competência (ou um conjunto de competências) de grande relevância nos vários domínios da vida humana e social” e traduz “a capacidade para conciliar emoções e razão”, ou seja “usar as emoções para facilitar a razão” e também “raciocinar inteligentemente acerca das emoções”. A liderança depende da relação emocional que se estabelece com os outros. A forma como os líderes gerem os sentimentos, e os conduzem de modo a que o grupo atinja os seus objectivos, depende da inteligência emocional. O líder, seja por posição ou influência, pode estabelecer atitudes de comportamento positivas em relação à forma como gere as emoções e os relacionamentos. "Os processos de desenvolvimento de lideranças fortes estão focados na aprendizagem emocional e intelectual e constroem-se no trabalho participativo ativo: aprendizagem na ação e no coaching, onde as pessoas usam o que aprenderam para diagnosticar e resolver problemas reais das suas organizações." (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002, p. 234.)

The impeccable authentic leadership 3

Authentic Leadership AL emerged as an important component in the positive leadership studies since its initial conceptualization, in late 1970, until its theoretical maturity as a "root construct of leadership theory” (Gardner, Avolio, & 2005 p. 315). The construct AL was initially proposed by Luthans and Avolio (2003) and was developed by Gardner et al. (2005) and Avolio and Luthans (2006). However, Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa & May (2004) were the first to propose this as a theoretical model, derived from the positive organizational behavior, in which leaders are deeply aware of how people think and behave, the context in which they operate and are perceived by others, as well as some are aware of values/morals systems, knowledge, perspective and own and others strengths. In this way, the theoretical model of AL includes not only leader behaviors but also the characteristics of the followers and leaders, such as their levels of psychological capital, suggesting a more integrated approach to study leadership and organizational behavior (Gardner et al., 2005; Luthans, Norman, & Hughes, 2006). Authentic leaders will be those "who know who they are and know what they believe (Avolio, Gardner & Walumbwa, 2005, p. 13). In AL there are four characteristics dimensions that describe leaders’ behavior and allow its recognition as authentic:

When leaders are aware of how their own actions affect those who are around them, being open and transparent to the processes and influences within and outside of their organizations, the followers have a better sense of the organizational goals/challenges. So, measure the AL will be based not only on the followers’ perceptions as well as those of the leaders (Authentic Leadership Questionnaire, Walumbwa et al., 2008. However, despite this last current of AL be the most publicized of all, there are others that deserve our reference. The origin of the elements of the AL model, according to Gardner and Avolio (2005), flows from the work of Kernis (2003) about the optimal theory of self-esteem, in which he identifies four key elements of authenticity: the self-awareness, unbiased rendering of information, authenticity and relational/authentic behavior action. Ilies, Nahrang & Morgeson (2005) also use the same elements in their model on the eudamonic welfare (happiness) of leaders and followers. Sparrowe (2005) puts already the frame of self-narrative at the heart of AL. The author suggests that authenticity is not achieved by self-awareness, nor by the values and internal purposes, but by the leader’s narrative process in what others have fundamental importance. This position is close to the Shamir and Eilam (2005) one who base AL on the self-concept of the leader. These authors associate the development of leaders to his life story, insofar as AL lays fundamentally on the relevant senses of leader's life experiences. The life story of the leaders gives followers a broader basis to judge the authenticity of their leader. In this sense the authors advance with four authentic leaders underlying settings:

Michie and Gooty (2005), in turn, have developed an alternative approach of AL based on the role of emotions in the lead. From the theory of emotions and positive psychology, the authors argue that the self-transcendent values (universal-social justice, fairness and open-mindedness; benevolent-honesty, loyalty and responsibility) and positive emotions towards others (gratitude, compassion, goodwill) are AL fundamental determinants. Also Yamarino, Dione, Scriesheim & Dansereau (2008) proceeded to the integration with the positive organizational behavior, using a meso and multilevel perspective. So, if we take the AL in terms of multilevel analysis, it promotes various criteria of first level and results of positive organizational behavior (e.g. optimism, self-efficacy of individual leaders and followers) that, in turn, improve several second-level criteria and performance results (e.g. individual results, team and organizational). In another perspective, Eagly (2005) raises the question that the leaders are asked more than act according to their own values. I.e., getting a relational authenticity and obvious requires that the followers give leaders the legitimacy of promoting a framework of values on behalf of the community. For Klenke (2004, 2005 and 2007), which proposes an integrated model of contextual elements, cognitive, affective, pro-active and spiritual, spirituality and spiritual identity are at the core of AL. Also curious is the Douglas, Ferris & Perrewé (2005) approach which places AL at the heart of the role of political qualities of the leader. I.e., the leader who has propensity to exercise political positions has greater ability to inspire trust and authenticity as mechanisms which cause the motivation, commitment and productivity of the follower. In a next line of thought, Chan, Hannah & Gardner (2005) argue that the AL can constitute a multiplier of leaders, building the foundation of a virtuous cycle of performance and learning for leaders, followers and organizations. The authors emphasize the power of example as AL enhancer element. Finally, we resist not talking about that current which considers authenticity is best understood in the context, whether it involves action. In a study by Puente, Crous & Venter (2007), the "engine" of AL are the so-called "trigger events" . The development of AL tends to be catalyzed by "trigger events", hence it is of all recommended that these events have positive force. PS: if you want to finish the reading of this paper ( The impeccable authentic leadership 4) go to htpp//remodealdreu.blogspot.pt/ . 

The impeccable authentic leadership 2

The background The foundation of our writings is in the transformational leadership current (Bass 1985, 1990), through which the leader manages followers to results extraordinary effects. The transformational leadership requires the leader to transmit a positive and powerful vision, in addition to support individual needs of his followers (Walumbwa et al., 2008). However, in the development of studies on transformational leadership emerged a paradox: the transformational leader being dishonest. I.e. the transformational leader had not, necessarily, act in moral and ethics way (Furmanczyk, 2010). As already mentioned, the people felt betrayed and many organizations collapsed for lack of integrity of their leaders (Smith, Bhindi, Hansen, Riley & Rall, 2008). Thus, in an increasingly complex and demanding context in terms of patterns of leadership, emerged a new paradigm focused on people and sustained on trust, fairness, ethics in guidance for values and compassion: authentic leadership. Organizational and relational nature Words that are more associated to AL, while construct which, as we have seen previously, is related to positive psychology, are: genuine, reliable, likely and hope engine. All this contributes to the sense of authenticity being essential in these troubled times, when the environment changes, in which rules, effective previously, collapse and leaders cannot avoid being transparent (Cameron et al., 2003). AL has been built from the contributions of both leaders and followers. In fact, as Kets de Vries (2009) said, the leadership is a team sport. For example, Goffee and Jones (2000 and 2006), based on experience gained over ten years of consulting in companies of the United States and Europe, have introduced the idea that the leaders could do nothing without followers. That is, a relationship in which the followers want:

And if it is difficult to find followers, more complicated is to answer the question: what to do so that the followers choose to follow someone? Following closely Goffee and Jones (2000 and 2006), the leaders that inspire the followers to follow them, share "four unexpected qualities, we describe: i) Selectively, show their weaknesses. Expose a weakness shows that we need the others, which is perfectly normal. Because if leaders do not show weaknesses, followers eventually discover, quickly, some. But watch out for the expose the weaknesses, i.e. you need to be selective in their choice of art showing weakness, because it cannot be critical to the activity that develops (for example, the fact that a school Director not knowing how to deal with disciplinary problems of students). ii) Bet strongly on their intuition when define the moments and ways of acting. Leaders should trust their instincts. Goffee and Jones call these leaders "good detectors of situations". This can cause problems because, on the one hand, the anticipation of situations can lead to conflicts and loss of confidence of followers, and by another, because a sensation can interfere with the natural course of things, namely truth. Thus, leaders must, in their own interest, validate their feelings with the help of trusted members of his team. iii) Manage the relationship with the followers with though empathy. There are no relationship recipes with followers. Soon, the empathic relationship leader/followers must be strictly that the followers need to develop their work. In other words, the leader cannot bring its followers to "lap". There are times when they have to take risks and there, yes the empathy must be strong. iv) Clearly reveal their differences. One of the ways the leaders remain in this condition is to use, clearly, what are unique. A difference only confers advantage if it is known and accepted by others. And this difference need not be grandiose, overwhelming, just that is subtly effective. It is not enough to be competent in what one does, it is necessary to continue to want to do it every time better, every day that passes. Without deviate from the followers are these differences that leaders must communicate them. Everything Goffee and Jones being proposed must be framed in a challenge that, no recipes included, obliges each of the leaders to be more capable, keeping equal to themselves. "The four qualities of leadership are a first step. All together appeal to leaders to be authentic "(2000, p. 8). Recent studies carried out in different parts of the world, from China (Walumbwa et al., 2008) to New Zealand (Caza, Bagozzi, Wooley, Levy & Caza, 2010), passing, as is inevitable, by United States (Walumbwa, Luthans, Avey & Oke, 2011), and utilizing the ALQ (Authentic Leadership Questionaire, Walumbwa et al., 2008), show that there is a positive relationship between AL and multivariate psychosocial and organizational, as for example, psychological capital, followers satisfaction at work and with the leader, organizational citizenship behavior, confidence, organizational commitment, involvement and the efficiency at work.