No one likes a tyrannical, controlling, and disempowering boss.
A heavily top-down approach might have worked in the past but this style of boss management is increasingly ineffective and alienating to employees.
In the modern workplace, the best managers have instead embraced a more empowering and collaborative method known as lead management.
While most companies are already adopting a version of lead management, it is pertinent to keep this distinction fresh in our minds, particularly as we step into managerial roles.
People who engage in boss management behaviors nowadays often do so unknowingly and unintentionally, which makes such practices all the more toxic.
I discuss the distinction between boss and lead management in this 2-part article, hoping to bring to light the reasons why managers might tend to pursue the former despite it being to their own detriment. In this article, I introduce the principles and typical outcomes of these distinct management styles.
Boss Management
Traditional management (also known as “boss management”), places strong emphasis on hierarchy and control — the key objective is to keep staff in line and focused on their respective tasks, without any questions asked.
This is very much a “my way or the highway” model where staff are expected to obey directives and execute tasks without offering their own opinions.
Unsurprisingly, boss management is problematic for the following three related reasons:
- Lack of Innovation: Boss management is fundamentally a top-down approach where decisions come from the top and there is little room for employee input. This closed mindedness hinders creative problem-solving, which can stifle and innovation and company growth.
- Alienation of Employees: Under this management regime, employees are likely to feel disengaged and disconnected from their work. The lack of autonomy and involvement in decision-making can lead to a sense of detachment from the company’s mission and goals. Their daily tasks might even border on becoming mind-numbing as employees trudge on purposelessly from day to day. Particularly for young ambitious employees who thrive in an environment that values agency and collaboration, boss management fails to provide the motivation and engagement necessary for high performance.
- Resistance and Conflict: When workers feel overly controlled and stifled, they are likely to resist management directives and subvert organisational goals. For instance, staff may engage in passive resistance via feigned ignorance, procrastination, work slowdowns, reduced initiative, and by compromising the quality of work or customer interactions. Staff may also actively obstruct management intentions via strikes, sabotage, or open criticism and defiance. Resistance from staff, in turn, can lead to confrontations and threats from management, creating a hostile work environment.
Lead Management
In contrast, lead management is characterized by trust, empowerment, and motivation through purpose.
In this model, managers trust their teams to take ownership of their work and contribute their unique insights and skills. Their role is that of facilitator, visionary, and empowerer — to strengthen and guide employees to realise their fullest potential.
Lead management recognises the paramount importance of aligning employees with the organisation’s mission and values. By emphasising the significance of each team member’s role in achieving broader goals, employees find meaning and motivation in their work.
Lead management can generate huge interpersonal and organisational benefits.
- Collaboration and Innovation: As employees work with one another in new, creative, and unexpected ways, it is inevitable that new ideas spring forth. If they are further empowered to share and execute these ideas, innovation is sure to follow. This all stems from the manager’s role in fostering open communication within their teams, actively seeking input from each and every team member, and encouraging diverse perspectives. While boss managers only see their way, lead managers are open — even excited — to see things in alternative ways.
- Productivity and Retention: When employees feel empowered and valued, they tend to be more productive and committed to their work. After all, why wouldn’t an individual give their best to a team or organisation that treats them like a key asset? Downstream, as this high productivity gets rewarded and further developed, these same employees are likely to stay and grow with the team, becoming long-serving pillars of the organisation.
- Motivation and Trust: In teams where everyone is treated by their managers as respected and trustworthy key contributors, there is a natural impetus to likewise trust and support one another. And when everyone is lending each other helping hands, the entire team moves forward with a positive, hopeful spirit.
Crucially, being a lead manager is not about being every employee’s friend. Leadership and friendship are fundamentally distinct and should never be conflated. While building strong interpersonal relationships will certainly contribute to strong professional relationships, they exist in different contexts and should be treated as distinct. Being a lead manager is about treating every employee as a capable team member deserving of respect, guidance, and empowerment — to lead is to bring out the best in one’s team.
Final thoughts
It is clear as day that, from a theoretical standpoint, lead management is superior to boss management. The principles instinctively sound more appealing, and the typical outcomes are more beneficial for the manager and the organisation itself.
Yet, it is curious that managers (often unwittingly) choose the style of boss management, particularly in tough situations! I discuss and share a possible analysis of this in the next article.
Lucas Foo is a Philosophy and Linguistics Undergraduate at the University of Oxford. He enjoys drawing insights from ambiguity to create real and positive impact.
Image: DALL-E 3