Every manager has his/her firewall and the name is "Secretary". It is a common practise for all CEO to be all time busy and non available and ... despite the fact that they are just sitting and laughing with their subsistent workers...

Every manager has his/her firewall and the name is "Secretary". It is a common practise for all CEO to be all time busy and non available and ... despite the fact that they are just sitting and laughing with their subsistent workers...

There are instances when leaders are shielded from their employees by the visible and invisible firewalls around them. As a result they will lose the reality of their organization and may be contributing to its downfall. If there is a “Mirror” then the leaders can see how they are contributing to the betterment or downfall of their organization. Capable leaders probably would have found a way to see their own contribution to lower trust, and they are able to change things themselves in their organization. If not, some assistance need to be provided for them.

Sometimes people are asking for a firewall, particularly in the case of a monarchy. Delegating power to the few by many is very irrational and requires an mythic construction such like a firewall of arrogance or the untouchable position of the leader. This mythic construction is based on a cyclic mechanism of fear and admiration, sustainted be pseudo religious rituals like general meetings, national days, anual celebrations around memoreals

"According to neurologists at the University of California, San Diego, our brains have a set of neurons, called mirror neurons, that are specialized so we can observe and copy the behaviour of others." ... It is worth to read this page about Mirroring Leadership, link follows!

http://www.wilsonleadershipgroup.com/mirroring-leadership/

Dr. Ljubomir Jacić thank you for sharing a nice article...

Dr.Demetris Christopoulos - at times to avoid embarrassing scenes, Manager's use this technique of keeping themselves away through their Secretaries...However Mirroring a Projection technique... might be it will project them as a distanced person... it will prove to be a CATARACT to reality on ground as per Dr. Nageswara Posinasetti......and on if they do not correct themselves will prove Dr. C. Lewis Kausel version.

Be what ever... in Management there are situations where a WIN-WIN can be very difficult to be reached due to various constraints ... therefore to delay or avoid or postpone, so that the eventualities of the process concerned also finds a conclusion during TIME GONE....

Dear Krishnam, can you define your term "Mirroring Leadership" as you better understand it?

Mirroring has been a Y component as proposed in the X_Y Theory in management styles; .........A leader should be open, listen, be transparent and also accept failure (as per Kamal Bani-Hani).....Delegating power to skilled subordinates, Admiration on achievements(as per Dr.Guido J. M. Verstraeten)......and "Walk the Talk"(as per Dr. Ljubomir Jacić).

Enclosing a PPT made on a MDP for a Pump Manufacturing Organization in India, way back in 2005...

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Krishnan_Umachandran/contributions?ev=prf_act

A Leader does not require firewall around him. Further arrogance is not an attribute of leadership. Leader is required to provide value based ethical leadership and must create conducive organization culture through his/her decision making pattern and value system, for the growth and development of the organization. There is no place for any sort of arrogance, either intellectual arrogance or arrogance of power, for successful leaders.

Hmmmm, I think we may be mixing our understanding of Leaders and Managers. The two are really not interchangeable although some simplistic dictionary definitions have them as being synonymous. Having said that I am sure there may be many managers who retitled themselves as "Leaders" even though they continue to act as managers controlling process through their policies and direction. As Jaharkanti said Leaders do not required firewalls, and Krishnan your comments about delegation, accepting failure, transparency are just some of the many items that help towards motivation rather than direction. Managerial practice is not leadership despite what a number of people wish to think and whilst there may be many good managers there are many many fewer Leaders. A Leader can not be taught, only the competencies needed for leadership can be taught, however it requires the person to embrace those competencies and demonstrate to those around before they can start their development towards being a leader. Just because they have attended some Leadership course does not automatically make them a leader.

I agree Dr.Lindsay Tremethick and Dr.Jaharkanti Dattagupta that there is a lot of difference between leaders and Managers; towards direction and not motivation, Managers cannot automatically become leaders.... Competencies demonstrated are valuable points..

I don't think that arrogance could help a leadership. It is a thing from dictators from the past. A leadership must be wise, cleaver and communicative to be successful, with some personal charisma. However creating or having a firewall with efficient and collaborative people could be useful for better running the organization or the institution. In fact a leader must be a good manager too. I think a leader could delegate responsibilities and organize tasks to his collaborative but shouldn't delegate the power of decision. A good leader must be a good listener and a good reviewer of his staff's work. His decisions must be built on skilled studies, ideas, debates (public or privates depending on the weight of the decision) and discussions he could ask for. A firewall of money and power, make him vulnerable, under influence of personal benefits which are usually against the organization or institution interests.

Dr.Fairouz Bettayeb thank you for your practical tips, unlike Managers, leaders have greater quest and continuous search for excellence, they keep moving and imbibing the latest in trends and technology which satisfy there goals of accomplishments...A leader may be vacillating at time whereas a manager may not...

Dear Krishnan,

I share the opinion of Lindsay: the leader and the manager are not intergangeable and share the idea of Fairouz in deffault of Firewal, distancing can facilitate the specific function of the leader.

I agree with Jaharkanti, there is no place for arrogance in leading but the whole place for ethics and greater consideration for others. All human enterprise and project are made to satisfy the common interest but not the aspirations of a tyrant.

Jean.

"Looking in the Leadership Mirror Image Good leadership coaches utilize a 360-degree feedback tool to provide input from peers, subordinates and supervisors." Yes!

https://hubpages.com/health/httphubpagescomhub-The-Reflection-in-my-Mirror

Thank you Dr.J Perriot for your inputs & Dr. Ljubomir Jacić on 360 degree and the apt image. As many have told that arrogance shouldn't find a place - ideally right and suit Mirroring..that is one of the strong firewalls.

As an eye-opener for Leadership mirroring, enclosed ...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262117349_Leadership_Mirroring_Process?ev=prf_pub

Data Leadership Mirroring Process

Dear Krishnan,

The scheme is very clear. I plainly agree;

Many thanks.

Jean.

Krishnan:

Many successful leaders today do not create firewalls with arrogance; and not it is not a necessary evil (See Googolplex; JetBlue; Southwest Airlines; Whole Foods, Chic-fil-A). Mirroring leadership welcomes new ideas and nurture creativity. These leadership behaviors are critical for the moderation of an organization’s employees and for the growth of the company. An effective and successful leader creates a culture that encourages employees to take risks, ask questions, and have the freedom to try their ideas and restart the process if they fail. Empowered human capital is quickly becoming the main contributor of organizational success Managers are in a prime position as leaders to empower workers. The CEO of JetBlue, Barger stated “It's the culture that can't be replicated. It's how we treat each other. Do we trust each other? Can we push back on each other? The human side of the equation is the most important part of what we're doing."

By empowering workers, a productive division of duties takes place between them and the managers; therefore increasing the company’s growth potential. In America organizational leadership is definitely shifting away from the "good-ole-boy" approach. Moving in a Clan-type culture is proving to lead to a better ROI.

Best regards,

Marilyn

Lindsay:

In so many ways managers are leaders. For without their leadership skills; CEO's and Founders, could not hold competitive advantage. Midlevel management for instance holds one of the most important leadership positions in an organization. Internal communication is key to a companys' success. The power of a company’s executives in creating an organizational environment of high values and well-being are immeasurable. They must “walk the walk” towards organizational wellness and lead through example. However, the workers are more likely to mirror their immediate supervisors or managers. Employee actions will come more easily if the managers actions are aligned with the Executative leades' core beliefs and values. A healthy workplace culture comes first from a deep understanding of “why” the leaders want to see a high level of productivity; which comes along with employee satisfaction. Leading by example provides a first hand look at the benefits associated with growth and organizational change. When executives create a design process, it is important that they see it through, and make sure it trickles down to the management or they may create a situation where the employees question why they should follow rules if the rule makers act as if they were made to be broken.

@ Dr. Marilyn B Field - agree that mirroring creates new avenues, and the examples stated on industry leaders (evolved from Managers) are enterprise centric and "be-good" for better returns; while Leadership mirroring (@Dr.J Perriot on not interchangeable; @Ljubomir Jacić on 360 degree; @Dr.Lindsay on need direction) includes this to some extend, but goes beyond on a holistic search of reflections.

Kirshnan: I was wondering what your opinion is about the following Organizational Leadership: style: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC78JbHRALs

Organization welfare has two aspects 1. Statutory welfare 2. Non-Statutory welfare... Google has gone well beyond Non-Statutory welfare, it is good... however when it comes comes to evaluation - ideally , @ Dr. Marilyn B Field employees across all organizations would like to work in organizations such as Google.... in reality the apportioning of returns may not be possible in various business / enterprises...I conduct annual survey of salaries in India...currently, especially in Manufacturing the profit margin to company is around 10 to 12% on revenue, Service sector has 25-30%; IT has 40-45%; ITES has around 50%. of these.. the HR Cost the Average Cost to Company (CTC avg) in % is as follows Manufacturing 8 - 12% ie. the maximum is by the OEMs... Not only IT / ITES but across the industries Contracting or Outsourcing or OFF-ROLLS; has gained rather great speeds...predominantly Mfg (35-40%); Service (20-25%); IT (30%); ITES (around 50%)...these wonderful videos we see are of the employees ON-ROLLS where as the plight of OFF-ROLLS is not photo shot, ... these are the people who actually perform for the organization....If the debate on it continues it would lead like "Which part of a human body is important?"; we require all the parts.... hence in Business and Managing enterprises.... .... there is no real RIGHT or WRONG answer... it is the run of business cycle with course corrections now, then and ever....

Now coming to ORGANIZATIONAL Leadership the question is AS A LEADER WHAT SHOULD BE SCOPE OF STATUTORY WELFARE or NON-STATUTORY WELFARE... because if an organization can cover every facility, then a t what cost and why... it may devoid the employee the need of DOMESTIC NEEDS...

Krishnan: you asked if an organization can cover every facility, then at what cost and why? Googleplex is an amplified example of a clan-type organizational culture. The more productive organizations are in any country the less devoid the are the employees of domestic needs. I agree Organizational Change is a constant; therefore, a company's resiliencey through tough economic conditions; is reflected in the work satisfaction of its employees. Actually, at Googleplex the plight of OFF-ROLLS; "Google has offices all around the world and dozens of languages are spoken by Googlers, from Turkish to Telugu, name it. The result is a team that reflects the global audience Google serves". I only am discussing Google as an example; the same leadership style would work in a Duncan Donuts. See http://blog.kissmetrics.com/googles-culture-of-success/

Dr. Field:

Whilst a Leader can be a manager, a manager does not automatically become a leader. Sure their subordinates may well "follow" their directions but it can be as a result of their "pay packets depends upon it". Doing what you are directed to do, is not following a leader.

Sure I will agree with you that there are some managers who could easily be retitled as leaders but there are many more who simply don't make the grade. Retitling every manager as a leader simply devalues those who are true leaders. I do not believe you have presented a robust argument that all managers are leaders, but of course that is my opinion and who (other than me) is to say I am correct.

I guess we could discuss this issue back and forth "until the cows came home", I could quote several authors supporting my view, whilst you could well quote others supporting your view but in the end it doesn't make either of us

I guess we may agree upon is that we disagree!

Hmm well I seem to have lost the plot on the end of my post........

trying again;

I could quote several authors supporting my view, whilst you could well quote others supporting your view but in the end it doesn't make either of us more correct.

I guess we may have to agree to disagree!

Lindsay,

Of course all managers are not leaders. When you use the term Leader, are you specifically referring to upper level management, or CEOs and owners. Your statement "Sure their subordinates may well "follow" their directions but it can be as a result of their "pay packets depends upon it". Just the terminology and the negative view of "subordinates" (co-workers, shareholders, employees, etc) is exactly the type of leadership style that lends itself to workers following their job description and that's it. Without the workers' emotional investment in the betterment of the organization, the company's ROI suffers. When people work out of fear of losing their job they can become anxious. Anxious workers are less productive because they are afraid of making a wrong decision, taking a risk, or reporting any workplace issues. Fear is oppressive and threatening and leads to chronic stress and higher degrees of physical illness.

Regards,

Marilyn

Though seriously Stereotyping is not required, but for sustenance of Organizational Activities on a preset directions, it is required to groom the positioned Managers to become Leaders....

For the Managers to be polished as to evolve as LEADERS, we carry out INTERVENTIONS as attached https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262676866_UNFREEZE_REFREEZE_LEADERSHIP_COMPETENCIES?ev=prf_pub

Data UNFREEZE REFREEZE LEADERSHIP COMPETENCIES

Dr, Field

Your writings are just a little bit puzzling, your first response to my post started with "In so many ways managers are leaders." but then your response to my second post states "Of course all managers are not leaders."

In one post you seem to disagree, whilst in the next you appear to agree.

However "the waters become more murky" when after quoting from my text an example of what could only be described as management you make the statement "Just the negative view of "subordinates" (co-workers, shareholders, employees, etc) is exactly the type of leadership style that lends itself to workers following their job description and that's it.." With that statement you have illustrated the exact point of my postings. All too often managers may choose to re-title themselves as "leaders" and start talking about their "leadership styles" whilst continuing to practice purely as a manager.

To dwell for a moment on a part of your statement " the negative view of "subordinates", could NEVER be described as leadership, it is purely a management trait and an oppressive one at that.

A leader is one who tends to be (for want of a better description) more people focused and can demonstrate competence, character, motivation, vision, humility, responsibility, encouragement and inspiration, to name a few qualities. The leader doesn't have to be the CEO or the Founder they can be your co-worker, your senior or your junior.

Whilst Leadership and management are different they do function together and are in many ways complimentary and it is possibly unlikely that company could successfully follow the vision of a leader without those who have the high level management skills.

The online Wall Street Journal have some nice and simple postings which present some of the differences between leadership and management.

That's enough from me!

Organizations need is a mirror for leaders so they can see their own contribution to solve the problems. Subordinates watch their leaders in microscopic detail and try to copy their leaders’ style.

Krishnan:

We may be headed in a similar direction in our conversation and maybe there is a bit of semantics involved. When you first associated Leaders with money, power, and arrogance, it sounded to me like someone I surely would not want to mirror. Many organizations are starting to adopt a Clan oriented culture, where the workers have much greater decision making and feedback opportunities, they are family-like, with a focus on mentoring, nurturing, and “doing things together. (Cameron & Quinnm 2003).” However, after reading and thinking about your post, I can see that it depends on the goals of the company. Hierarchy oriented cultures are structured and controlled, with a focus on efficiency, stability and “doing things right. Also a very important style. I am glad we had this discussion because it made me stop and think about the term subordinate. I hope that is not enough from you. I have studied the organizational leadership styles from various types and sizes of organizations. Whole Foods, Southwest Airlines, JetBlu, Chick-fil-A, and Sam's Club are a few of the companies I studied. The leaders set the stage for the health and wellness of their company. --Marilyn

@Dr. Marilyn B Field

I practice and teach management.... Management is an ART and it fine tunes to specialize with various other parameters.... Mere reading a leadership style would not be enough to cherish the unfolds of management ....let us understand and discuss further concluding that "some managers with either acquired or in-born leadership traits can evolve as they try and apply their skills at the right opportunity /surrounding them to become Leaders ".... My experiential learning is that Management is an evolving SCIENTIFIC-ART...

Kirshnan:

I agree 100%. It is so interesting to think about the two constructs: acquired or in-born........genetic vs environment. I suppose your question calls for a biological twin study. I agree that you cannot read a leadership style and "adopt" the personality trait. Excellent answer to finalize the question, Krishnan. You presented an inarguable statement. (If there is such a thing, LOL)

Marilyn

Management is a Situational Science! It needs artistic skills in handling people of that situation. Added with technological knowledge and making use of opportunities in the right way' leaders evolve. The leader in one situation may be a failure in another. So, finding common leadership qualities which will fit for all situations may be a ghost chase.

I fully agree all your opinions.

Why are we looking at Leadership Styles only?

Should we not look at Leader - Subordinate styles?

Rather, I would go further and say that we must look at Leader - Subordinate - Environment Styles to get a total picture.

Good, as suggested we need to also look into the FOLLOWERS to LEADERS, as to "what makes them to follow".... May be looking forward to @Kamal, @ Nageswara Rao, @Ljubomir Jacić, @Lindsay , @J Perriot, @Demetris @ Sadagopan @ Mahfuz @ Cecilia Lewis... everyone please contribute your thoughts,

The subordinate behavior has mellowed down some of the industry leaders. Added to this government intervention and community perceptions have altered the course of leadership styles. Hence, if we plot the graph of any industry leader, it has gone changing over time with pressure from subordinates, government and environment.

It is therefore necessary to attach time and place value to leadership styles making it more 'Multidimensional'.

The point of Follower behavior derailing the leadership is an anarchic style; leading to chaotic environmental / situational / contextual degradation... is well stood... thanks

@ Sadagopan Parthasarathy

Things change with the point of view, there are Leaders who attract and carry with them a bigger mass of people at the same time there are also leaders who cannot leverage the people strength.... so we Now need to see

1. Leadership from Followers point of view and

2. Management from a Subordinate's view point.

Indeed it is so essential field of study and needs further empirical investigation.

May be researchers in and off the thread can take this as a future research topic...

@ Ra'ed (Moh'd Taisir) Masa'deh

Yes you have rightly said the scope is available for logical derivation from experimentation, investigation and observation.

@ Adel, you have rightly said that the barrier distances the Leader and the follower in general context (Superior and a Subordinate in an Organization context).... But the mirroring is a felt characteristic, which is more of perception based...From the followers eye, the leader's influencing

1. Personal Characteristics

2. Performance Characteristics

3. other characteristics

play a vital part... as per Gestalt's the sum is more than the components....

(Carlson and Heth, 2010), gestalt effect is the capability of our brain to generate whole forms, particularly with respect to the visual recognition of global figures instead of just collections of simpler and unrelated elements.....

Dear Krishna

This is beautiful question; i wished I had noticed it early. Most leaders think that things would be improve if others would be more dedicated, smart, open, cooperative, trustworthy, etc.. But a better approach would be to identify a "Mirror Coach." This is an individual whom this leader really does trust (there is always someone). This person is the key to making the leader begin to think that s/he is frequently operating at cross purposes to her intent. In most cases leaders want higher productivity, greater teamwork, people showing initiatives, good attitudes, a pleasant place to work, etc., but on a daily basis they do things that take the organization in the wrong direction.

Once a leader begins to ask, "What do I need to change in my own behaviors and style to have the kind of results I want from my team?" the door is open to better leadership. Definitely, mirroring can deliver amazing results if the leader thinks on these lines.

The French philosopher Rivarol wrote "Freedom for man is to do what he wants in what he can, as its reason is not wanting everything he can"...it may be the same in management: enabling people to reveal their skills and doing the best without suffer...and so, to raise our own expertise in leadership and the trust of our collaborators.

Sorry @Debi we missed you....thanks for your valuable insight... in full agreement to your "Mirror Coach" concept, as essential input for leadership development...

That organizations and those challenged with the task of leading improvements fall into two similar categories:

Look through the window

Leaders who choose to see the world through the window are those who also believe that there is opportunity beyond the glass. Their cup is half full and they have faith that things can improve, They see opportunity through the window and are ready to grasp it when ready. (Suitable when Market is booming)

Look in the mirror

A fixation on the mirror may result in leaders resting on their laurels , become self-absorbed: they are not open to new ideas nor opportunities preferring to maintain the status quo (Suitable during recession period)

http://www.dougblackie.com/2011/09/a-mirror-or-window/

Sharing link:

https://books.google.es/books?id=kjLspnsZS4UC&pg=PA371&lpg=PA371&dq=Is+Mirroring+Leadership+good+to+an+Organization+and+those+in+power,+do+they+ever+attempt+it?&source=bl&ots=mdF0YnLXtV&sig=4437U3fVV91gI5e7Q_ztCVLrGxY&hl=ca&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiaiNbBg8jZAhWBVxQKHWx2CCIQ6AEwAnoECAUQAQ#v=onepage&q=Is%20Mirroring%20Leadership%20good%20to%20an%20Organization%20and%20those%20in%20power%2C%20do%20they%20ever%20attempt%20it%3F&f=false

Regards!

Looking into the Mirror and Modifying the things, I can Change

When I look into the mirror at me, I see someone who has come across a lot of good and some not so good experience. However, I know I must be ready to go through a never-felt-before sense of clarity, purpose and try not to allow life to overwhelm me with too much stress that I lose my reflection in the mirror. One will think it is easy to look into a mirror and see the reflection to be what you want to be, except it not that simple. Some look into the mirror and hate what they see, I look into the mirror to see my “Authentic” self and strive to live the life I want and deserve.

Sometimes it not easy to change things in your life as we all like. Nonetheless, I can start with something that is in my control like changing my thoughts and words. Words and ideas can make an unbelievable amount of difference in anyone life. From life experience, I learn the power of words and ideas hold high authority and is mind-blowing especially when used in a proper way they can change many situations. We can speak our future into existent and ideas help us to think of what our life has to offer. I altered my mind and words and learned my positive words help me look into my mirror with confident, see the reflection, but the impact of my negative words took away my reflection from all my trying times.

https://hubpages.com/health/httphubpagescomhub-The-Reflection-in-my-Mirror