What Kind Of Person Is Suitable For Leadership?

You usually do not look for inspiration from the debate held every Wednesday in the British Parliament, or the prime minister's question and answer (PMQs), but in May 13th, the debate gave a useful exchange of two different approaches to leadership.

The background of this exchange is that some British parliamentarians' suspicious cost reimbursement triggered a persistent quarrel.

David Cameron, the Conservative leader, has clearly expressed his view: "isn't it time to stop the debate and endless meetings and begin to show some real leadership and make some real changes?"

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, explained his follow-up plan: "for all these issues, I will work hard to establish a political consensus on change..." (Gordon Brown)

Leadership refers to the overall political system responding to changes that need to be made.

Does "real leadership" mean just telling people what to do? Or does leadership mean building consensus? When you try to change, your organization can move forward and move forward together.

Leadership depends on circumstances.

In other words, context determines everything.

Few business leaders receive questions like prime minister's questions every week.

But in times of economic difficulties, enterprises and institutions do expect leaders to have clear thinking and decisive actions.

Therefore, which organizations will get through this period better? They are those who are quick at words and quick at action.

Or are those who want to agree before the action?

At the opening ceremony of the Cass Business School professional service center (CPSF) in London recently, I spent the evening discussing second options.

Laura Empson, director of CPSF, delivered a vivid speech at the beginning of the night: "in general, professionals do not want to be led, and in general, professionals do not want to be leaders." Laura

Lawyers, accountants and management consultants are often more willing to focus on their work: serving customers, building prestige and consolidating their position in the organization.

They don't like to work for bossy bosses.

Empson said that fuzzy level division, the pursuit of more common understanding, so that leadership can become a collective behavior and become a process, not just a series of stiff decisions made by one or two people, this method also has certain advantages.

But she added that in the economic crisis, such a sensitive approach to consensus building may suddenly become extremely intractable.

"The leader who is good at dealing with complex interpersonal relationships...

Perhaps lack of authority and ability to act decisively.

It's not easy to become a hero quickly. "

Faced with this argument, KPMG (KPMG) Europe, Middle East and Africa CEO John Griffith Jones (John Griffith-Jones) put forward, on the contrary, in the

During this period, "you need to increase rather than reduce consensus, which requires people to strengthen rather than weaken participation."

Griffith Jones admitted that when he became chief executive in 2006 after working for 31 years in KPMG, he thought he would eventually find the real power of the enterprise.

But when he boarded the top position, he found no special power tool in his new office.

Toni and Tony Angel were also involved in the discussion that evening.

Angel, a partner of Linklaters law firm last year, is currently managing director of Standard &Poor's, a rating agency.

He resolutely defended the value of leadership methods in professional service companies.

He said: "professional service companies have a wide range of leadership.

As a result, a framework that checks and balances and brings real challenges is formed, bringing even the most stubborn and arrogant leader to the point of view.

Because partners are the owners of an enterprise, business leaders often fail to win the trust of partners at the very beginning.

Angel said that sometimes you can not find a similar checks and balances in the listed companies.

Of course, there seems to be too much evidence in the financial services industry.

Some people prefer to be more linear, direct and explicit.

In Cameron's words, "real leadership."

For these people, the subtle and simple world of professional service companies may be mysterious and annoying.

But others believe that their colleagues need room for growth, and that leadership can become a product of collective efforts, which will create greater long-term advantages; for them, the approach of professional service companies will be very attractive.

You pay for yourself - by the hour - and then make your own choice.

How can this decentralised leadership model work? Peter says, pay close attention to Peter Drucker, who is known as the "key influence people".

They can promote or overturn any decision.

Attention must be paid to their concerns.

Don't worry about your lack of charm.

Management partner of an international law firm explained: "I don't need charm.

I let some attractive people around me - their team will follow them to the ends of the earth.

I just want to make sure that these attractive people are following me. "

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.