The Leadership Book Club, at R&D Mx, is sometimes hosted by motivated colleagues, sometimes by me. It is a great space to meet coworkers that I wouldn’t usually bump into. This time, we picked a book that takes us back to the basics (and, in doing so, invites many aspiring leaders) while promising to take us beyond the theory of most other leadership books: ‘Becoming a Technical Leader’ by Gerald M. Weinberg.
If you are looking for a copy and don’t mind an eBook, I recommend ordering via Leanpub, for author payment transparency.
I began reading this book with 6 parts excitement and 4 parts skepticism. After all, many leadership books of today fall short of practical tips — focusing on the ‘what’ and not necessarily as much on the ‘how’. Gerald assured me, in his Preface, that what he had collected in his pages is genre-redefining and challenges the status quo. Ken Orr seconds this in his Foreword, comparing Gerald’s collected leadership wisdom to an onion where each layer reads differently - where the reader may be left with a different meaning, each deeper than its forebearer.
At this point, my skepticism peaked — was I here, yet again, reading a philosophical, anecdotal take on leadership that misses the mark of teaching it well? Another couple of pages in, and Gerald compels me to reconsider.
He asks questions that I have longed to find answers to.
- How can I be a leader and keep up my technical skills at the same time?
- How much of my technical expertise do I sacrifice?
- What will I get in return?
- What else (than reading books) can I do to learn?
- Why don’t people see me as a leader, when I feel quite capable?
He follows this with more questions that make me uncomfortable while I silently admire their necessity and the bold thoughts that birthed these.
And, he pens words that will have my admiration for years to come.
Whenever I want to learn something, I arrange to teach a course on the subject. After I’ve taught the course enough to learn something, I write a book.
Gerald spends most of Chapter 1 listing the differences between organic and linear models of leadership — to define the complexity in defining leadership.
Organic models may be characterized by “systems thinking”: the belief that event X is the outcome of hundreds of other factors, including the passage of time.
I found myself laughing in recognition of the truth of the above statement. That something so obvious is worthy of mention because we elude ourselves of it, in our race to perfection (of change management).
One weakness of organic models is that they may prevent us from acting at all. Effective leaders often have to act when they don’t understand all possible factors. In order to use organic models, you must be able to live with the occasional error.
Gerald gains my appreciation in critically listing the pros and cons of the revered organic models. He reminds me, rather smoothly, that we are all human and a ‘good’ leader knows to be resourceful, rather than affronted, in the face of limitations.
Linear models become less useful when they slip over into defining people in terms of what they should be. If people differ in their thinking, feeling, or acting from this ideal, they may be “treated” with attempts to cut them down to size, or stretch them out.
The above statement is a reminder to exercise leadership with kindness and understanding, not the easiest job in groups.
And as I read more, I see why Ken Orr calls it equal parts philosophical and practical —
The two persons, regardless of their roles in the current situation, are presumed equal in their life significance [the philosophy]. Organic models lead toward problem solving in which everyone benefits [the motive]. When we act in this way toward other people, our most common emotion is joy of discovery [the effect]. Sometimes, however, we get so wrapped up in this joy that we fail to get the job done, if there is a job to do [the counterweight].
[…]
Instead of leading people, as in the threat/reward model, organic leadership leads the process. Leading people requires that they relinquish control over their lives. Leading the process is responsive to people, giving them choices and leaving them in control. […] It’s especially useful in technical work because […] it allows us to take innovation into account. Innovation is concerned with redefining a task or the way the task is done. Linear definitions of leadership assume that observers have a perfect understanding of the task. Such definitions filter out innovation.
Gerald ends chapter 1 by asking a few uncomfortable yet necessary questions which reinstates my faith in his knowledge on the subject.
- Observe someone you consider a leader. How is this person’s life different from yours? Which of these differences are a result of being a leader? Which of them are a cause of being a leader?
- How would your life change for the better (and worse) if your leadership skills increased?
- Make a list of situations in which your presence seems to increase (and decrease) productivity of others.
- Based on these two lists, are you statistically an asset or a liability to groups?
These questions are vital for every individual to introspect and discover. The answers will chart their leadership growth path — identify motivation, role models, strengths, weaknesses, impact — a fabulous mirror.
I leave chapter 1 with renewed enthusiasm for the promise it offers. I find myself teetering on the brink of chapter 2, with 8.5 parts excitement and 2.5 parts skepticism.