PANTALEON Song

Individual report: The manager face of leadership

PART ONE: Presentation

On the chapter 4 of the book (Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005), authors feature
different faces of leadership according to the most famous mythological characters.
Characters matching with the manager face of leadership are: Athena, Hephaestus and
Zeus (Ibid). Athena is the most relevant character for the manager face of leadership
(ibid). Indeed, she is a very rational and smart person, good at planning and strategy
and at making decisions (ibid). More, she is a disciplined person (ibid). In fact, the
goddess of war has never challenged her father, Zeus, to get at the top(ibid).
Nevertheless, her extreme rationality lets her emotionless even if she taught people
skills (ibid). She can only apply scientific knowledge (ibid). Hephaestus, the second
relevant character for the manager face of leadership, has the particularities to be
perfectionist, technique-oriented and down-to-earth (ibid). Then, the last mythological
character sharing characteristics with this face of leadership is Zeus, because of his
habit to be willing to control everything all the time (ibid).
The manager face of leadership is all those stated facets plus, the sense at organizing
things and tasks (ibid).

PART TWO: Personal Reflection

Even if the manager face of leadership is essential, it appears to be too restrictive
(ibid). According to authors, this face of leadership is only the first-level of efficient
leadership (ibid). Indeed, efficient leaders need rationality, organization, intelligence
but also values, emotions and creativity (Gill, 2012)(ibid). A leader that has only the
manager face of leadership looks more alike an automaton (Hatch; Kostera;
Kozminsky, 2005). But, as Smith (1937) said when rejecting Taylors rationality
(1911), rationalism only allows leaders to do the bare minimum (Hatch; Kostera;
Kozminsky, 2005)(Smith, 1937). More, leaders having only this face of leadership
can be changes blocker since they are not even challenger, risk-taker and creative
(Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005).
Managing human beings and organizations cannot be only about control system
(ibid). Indeed, each organizations actors and trend are not necessary predicable
(ibid). And so, everything cannot be known, ruled and controlled perfectly (ibid).
Even more, human beings behaviors are not only ruled by statistics and rational
theories (ibid). It is also ruled by emotions (ibid)(Gill, 2012).
Another issue with this face of leadership comes from its pragmatism (Hatch;
Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005). Its pragmatism results in down-to-earth given
information, lacking emotion and dreams (ibid). Though, to motivate people at
purpose e.g. vision; story telling has a greater impact than saying things as they are
(ibid)(Gill, 2012). People need dreams to escape from reality and to be motivated and
inspired for achieving things (Gill, 2012)(Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005). So,
telling them in a dry and dull way to work harder to increase organization
productivity, will not allow them to feel the needs (ibid).

PART THREE: The manager face of leadership is appropriated when

As said in the first part of our work, the manager face of leadership is about
rationality and pragmatism (ibid). This means that usually when they use story telling
to share information, they are more on a non-storytelling mode than a real playwright
(ibid). Even if storytelling is full of advantages, authors (2005) remind us that in the
past, theater was used to teach people worship but it failed since people were more
concerned in the playwright than in the worship service itself. In fact, theater art is
synonym of divertissement (ibid)(Collins, 2012). And so, people dont necessary
understand the hidden message behind the play (Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005).
Here comes the first reason of why pragmatism can be useful. A down-to-earth, clear,
not flowery message has much more chance to be understood by people, since it does
not require particular skills, reflection and sensitivity to be understood (ibid). Even if
dull and dry, the essential message will be shared by everyone (ibid).
Another part of the answer will be about one of the main organizations core theme:
trust values (Gill, 2012). To get a positive atmosphere in an organization, we need
trust and so transparency (ibid). Transparency is about being frank and not hiding
information (Collins, 2012). Though, impersonal talks and storytelling can be
misunderstood as an elaborated way to hide information (Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky,
2005)(Gill, 2012). A contrario, leaders that do not make uses of such talks would be
more easily trusted because of their frankness (Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005).
The manager face of leadership is appropriate to settle and control if security or
quality policies are respected (Gill, 2012) (Hatch; Kostera; Kozminsky, 2005). In
addition to this, the manager face of leadership is appropriate depending the type of
work or people in charge (McGregor, 1960) (Gill, 2012) e.g. Clerk of works required
to check if work done meets specifications. Moreover, in case of insufficient
competencies but sufficient motivation of employees, the manager face of leadership
should be use to order, organize and control or train employees before empowering
them (McGregor, 1960).



REFERENCES:

! Hatch M.J.; Kostera M.; Kozminsky A.K. 2005. The Three Faces of
Leadership: Manager, Artist, Priest: Blackwell Publishing
! Gill R. 2012. Theory and Practice of Leadership: Sage Publication
! McGregor D.M. 1957-1960. The Human side of entreprise: Management
Review
! Collins. 2012. Concise English Dictionary: Collins
! Smith A. 1937. The Wealth of Nations: The Modern Library
! Taylor F.W 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management: Harper &
Brothers Publishers