Union managers or leaders?
06/Feb/2007 15:14
The role,
responsibilities and actions of union managers come
into play in just about every case discussed in this
leadership program. The predominant view is that
union managers (people employed or elected to direct
union programs and/or staff) should conduct
themselves more as leaders than as managers.
What is the difference?
What is the difference?
Management
theory generally holds that managers:
• Cope with complexity
• Plan and budget
• Set targets and goals
• Organize staff
• Control and problem solve
• Control spending
• Seek stability and predictability
Leadership, on the other hand, has a different emphasis. Leaders are expected to:
• Cope with change
• Set direction
• Articulate a vision
• Tell us “who we are”
• Align others to the vision
• Motivate new people
• Develop new leaders
• Shake things up
How much authority and responsibility a hired union manager has (relative to an elected leader) varies from union to union, as do the lines of accountability. But regardless of level of authority or scope of responsibility, hired union managers should apply leadership principles to their work. A senior staff manager who presented to the class explained it to me this way: “I am more organizer than manager. It’s not that I don’t worry about management issues, like spending, performance and all of that. But my approach to the job is that I am hired to make sure that the decisions of the leadership and membership are implemented and the best way to do that is to work with my staff--to lead, not manage them in the traditional sense. This means helping to set goals collectively, fostering creativity, mentoring, inspiring and motivating.”
The argument is that good leadership, as opposed to good management, is key to union renewal and transformation. Leadership, not management, is the best way to build organizational capacity. The following table illustrates how exercising leadership functions can take an organization from a position of weakness (disorganization) to a state of strength (organization):
Disorganized State Leadership Function Organized State
Reactive……………...................Strategize…….………………........Proactive
Passive………………………...........Motivate.........……………………..Participatory
Divided……………………...........…Build relationships……......…….United
Confused…………….........……….Interpret………………….........…..Understands
Inactive……………….........………Mobilize………….........…....……...Active
This view that good union managers need to be good leaders has implications for their selection and training. Often management training is suggested as the way to make union managers more effective. Perhaps a better solution is leadership training—as long as the leadership training is about learning how to strategize, motivate, build relationships, interpret (decisions, policy, etc), mobilize and constructively shake things up. A number of unions are taking this approach as part of their union renewal strategy. They are also applying leadership screens to their selection procedures. But more on that in a future post on staff hiring.
• Cope with complexity
• Plan and budget
• Set targets and goals
• Organize staff
• Control and problem solve
• Control spending
• Seek stability and predictability
Leadership, on the other hand, has a different emphasis. Leaders are expected to:
• Cope with change
• Set direction
• Articulate a vision
• Tell us “who we are”
• Align others to the vision
• Motivate new people
• Develop new leaders
• Shake things up
How much authority and responsibility a hired union manager has (relative to an elected leader) varies from union to union, as do the lines of accountability. But regardless of level of authority or scope of responsibility, hired union managers should apply leadership principles to their work. A senior staff manager who presented to the class explained it to me this way: “I am more organizer than manager. It’s not that I don’t worry about management issues, like spending, performance and all of that. But my approach to the job is that I am hired to make sure that the decisions of the leadership and membership are implemented and the best way to do that is to work with my staff--to lead, not manage them in the traditional sense. This means helping to set goals collectively, fostering creativity, mentoring, inspiring and motivating.”
The argument is that good leadership, as opposed to good management, is key to union renewal and transformation. Leadership, not management, is the best way to build organizational capacity. The following table illustrates how exercising leadership functions can take an organization from a position of weakness (disorganization) to a state of strength (organization):
Disorganized State Leadership Function Organized State
Reactive……………...................Strategize…….………………........Proactive
Passive………………………...........Motivate.........……………………..Participatory
Divided……………………...........…Build relationships……......…….United
Confused…………….........……….Interpret………………….........…..Understands
Inactive……………….........………Mobilize………….........…....……...Active
This view that good union managers need to be good leaders has implications for their selection and training. Often management training is suggested as the way to make union managers more effective. Perhaps a better solution is leadership training—as long as the leadership training is about learning how to strategize, motivate, build relationships, interpret (decisions, policy, etc), mobilize and constructively shake things up. A number of unions are taking this approach as part of their union renewal strategy. They are also applying leadership screens to their selection procedures. But more on that in a future post on staff hiring.
|