32
lea
ding (^) i
de
as
stra
tegy
+bus
ines
s^ iss
ue^9
6
because these individuals will create different types of processes and procedures
and ways of working.
So we’ve identified the structural issue: We need less centralization. And a
functional issue: HR plays a key role in bringing emotion into the workplace. But
this is just the starting point. The idea of the emotionally intelligent organization
is one that requires more work, and that’s what I’m currently focused on.
S+B: You’ve also studied the role of company leaders in creating a particular type
of emotional environment. What do these findings show?
MENGES: There are many forces that drive emotions in organiza tions, but one
key reason that people feel the way they do is the leaders in the business, both
directly in their units, and of the business as a whole. In those places where we see
posi tive, upbeat emotions, the leaders tend to be charismatic.
These leaders are able to identify a common emotion in groups of people.
For example, they can spot when the whole organization is tired because it has
gone through too many transformations. Or when the whole organization is an-
gry because of the way that employees have been led in the past. The charis-
matic leader then expresses that emotion, too, and in so doing becomes a mem-
ber of the group.
Through feeling the same way others do, charismatic leaders legiti mize their
leadership ambition. But it also leads them to question the kinds of emotions that
they share with others. They say, “Well, we’re all angry, and it can’t go on like
this. But should we be so angry?” People start to question whether it’s the ap-
propriate emotion. The leader then offers an alternative — if we only did this
instead, then we could all feel differently.
When listening to a charismatic leader, people tend to put aside their con-
cerns and follow him or her, something I call the awestruck effect. It’s great if you
want to push large-scale change in an organization. But it can have a downside,
in that peo ple may set aside justified concerns and thus follow too willingly a
flawed path of action.
My preliminary findings show that the awestruck effect can be off set with
a second leadership style, which is called individualized con sideration. In my
view, the best kinds of leaders are those who can be charismatic “onstage” and