or overwhelmed with resistance and by “dropping out” of the solution-finding
process.- Identity
The group has not yet found its identity, i.e., the group is not yet sufficiently
interesting to the members for everyone to fully commit and be able to identify
with group decisions.
My colleagues and I have seen these thirteen disruptive factors time and again in
our work with executives. The list could of course be extended, but my goal here is
not exhaustiveness. I do however believe it makes good sense to always keep in
mind the range of possible problems associated with so-called “soft” factors.
Leadership is not child’s play, “management by”-style techniques are out, and
executives are not overpaid craftsmen. I think we need new ways to clarify the
importance of this issue. One such way has been suggested the Dutchman Joep P.M.
Schrijvers: in his book “The Way of the Rat,” which was voted management book
of the year in the Netherlands, Schrijvers unveils in an amusing way the usual
power games in modern companies – and shows how to best protect yourself from
them (see Schrijvers 2004).
Yet readers often choke on their laughter when they read Schrijvers’ not merely
cynical advice. A bittersweet sample: “I deliberately use here the terms preferred by
military leaders: the company as an advancing unit in which all internal rivalry and
autonomy is shut off, unless it serves to accelerate the achievement of the company
objectives (...). Any unifying language and staging is nothing more than calculated
‘good behavior,’ which hides the differences between ‘mine’ and ‘yours’ (...) Most
professionals know their own interests: they want a certain position, to get into this
or that salary group, have a certain standard of living, a lot of money for their
winter vacation, to eat in this or that restaurant and every now and then a sabbatical.
The interests of the company as a whole occur only sporadically on such lists”
(Schrijvers 2004, p. 40 ff.).
There is certainly some truth to Schrijvers’ statements, because sometimes those
who rely on fair play truly are the ones who end up playing the fool. Being shown
the machinations of the “rats” in the company by the author, readers learn much
about what rocky shoals they as leaders have to look out for, and what rules and
moves they have to master to do so.
And sometimes being a leader has little do with ivory towers of morality. As far
back as the early twentieth century, Max Weber not only investigated the forms of
legitimate rule but also distinguished between the ethics of attitude and the ethics of
responsibility (see Weber 1919). The ends (of companies) hardly suffice to justify
any means necessary, but responsibility also has many faces. And that means that,
in some cases, as a leader I must also make harsh decisions to guarantee the desired
results. This is not a call for making backhanded deals, but a reminder that exe-
cutives must at times defend their values tooth and nail. Not although, but precisely
becausethey want to lead systemically and successfully. Systemic thinking exe-
cutives are not naı ̈ve, something I feel it is important to mention.
194 4 More Than Just Talking or: The Instruments of Systemic Leadership