Leading with Authority? Oh, yes, Please!
Admittedly, the term authority does not go down like oil at first. In my mind’s eye, images of white men in suits emerge who, sitting in heavy leather armchairs, await obedience and duty. Authority is an emotionally charged term that causes very few people to feel good. In most people, it is more likely to arouse dislike and a sense of being at the mercy. Hardly any of us, however, will have the original meaning of auctoritas (lat.) in mind, which means something like dignity, reputation, and influence. These are powerful words. At the same time, authority is not something that can be given to oneself, but rather that is always ascribed to a person by third parties. This requires recognizable actions from this person, which contribute to an understanding of authority.
How Do Authority and Leadership Go Together?
First of all, we have to recognize that organizations with a low level of complexity need decision-making functions in order to be able to maintain their stability. In almost all organizations, these decision-making functions are equated with leadership. However, as we know from the instructive example of Spotify, these decision-making functions do not necessarily have to result in a classic hierarchy. From a systemic point of view, leadership should rather be understood as a means to an end through which certain goals are to be achieved within an existing context. Leadership is always about getting people within an organization to work together to create a new reality (or, to put it more simply: situation or state) – and to do this, the old must be overcome. This is where leadership begins, accompanying from the old to the new.
Leadership is not only legitimate within an organization but above all necessary for the continued existence of the organization. Without a functioning relationship between managers and employees, however, this will hardly be possible. As I wrote in my article, Managing is Not Leading, it is up to the leader to establish this relationship. And for that she uses communication. How conducive or hindering this communication is depends closely on the personal maturity, mindset, and attitude of the leader as well as the respective context.
In most organizations, however, leadership is reduced to actions that have a controlling character and are based on a simple either/or scheme: either reward(e.g. bonuses, status, privileges, etc.) or punishment (e.g. warning, exclusion, etc.). In such a context, a lively leadership relationship can only be marginally successful. Their importance is seen there in conflict situations, but their structure and maintenance in normal operations are almost completely neglected. Why should? Everything is going well.
For the success of a leadership relationship, you need leaders who not only have appropriate communication that is based on a people-centered and cooperative attitude but who are also aware of their own effectiveness and want to live this for the organization. This is where Baumann-Habersack’s considerations on the New Authority in leadership come in (see Baumann-Habersack 2015).
A New Understanding of Authority
Accordingly, they describe a leader as a person who fundamentally prefers the development of his personal strengths to the pursuit of power in an organization. Leaders who embody a New Authority rely on presence and stable relationships. They work on themselves and less on others by practicing self-reflectioninstead of assigning blame. You implement transparent cooperation and collaborative structures instead of playing people off against each other. Their maxim is to get better together instead of self-optimization at the expense of others.
New Authority does not mean learning new tools or another leadership style. Rather, it is about developing a leadership awareness that arises from the will and desire to have contact with people and want to work. Leaders who live such a modern understanding of authority work without additional effort: They are visible. They convey security and stability. They provide orientation and they are culture-changing. When I look around today’s organizations, I come to the conclusion that it is urgent to combine leadership with a new understanding of authority.