It seems like every other day a new, “hot” book is published regarding leadership and organizational theory. I confess that I just can’t keep up. In an effort to separate the wheat from the chaff I often research the authors rather than grab the latest and greatest from the best-seller-with-a-bullet headlines. One of the authors with whom I don’t always agree but, nevertheless, respect for his scholarly and well researched work is Jeffrey Pfeffer, author of over a dozen books which are highly regarded among his peers. Pfeffer is the Thomas D. Dee professor of organizational behavior, graduate school of business at Stanford University. He is a big deal. Not only does he know his stuff but he backs it up with exhaustive research and references. Among the touchy freely field of so-called leadership experts, he’s the Sgt. Joe Friday guy – the facts and only the facts, ma’am. Pfeffer is of the Ed Deming school of “measure to manage” or “don’t tell me – show me”. And he is brutally frank when it comes to his critiques of leadership training and behavior when, in fact, many successful leaders are not just behaving badly but getting away with it while being rewarded for their bad behavior. He’s a tough read for warm and fuzzy types like myself. He suffers neither fools nor charlatans. His constructive critique of “servant leadership” is brilliantly devastating (and, I think, the best for developing true servant leadership). Nevertheless, it’s my perception that he works hard to balance the bottom line with the worker bees at the bottom . He genuinely cares about people. And he cares enough for both leaders and workers to insure they are mutually successful.
I regret to say that Jeffrey Pfeffer makes me think. It’s just not an option. He challenges my personal perceptions and often gets a rise out of me when some of my most cherished notions are proven to be just that: things I imagine and want to be true without ever having tested their validity. Don’t you just hate that? One of the most sacred of cows in modern business is the idea that good leaders “take care of their people”. After all, among most religions and civilized cultures caring for each other is a sacred, time-honored belief. It’s the glue that unites and stabilizes communities. The gospel according to accepted leadership doctrine is good leaders are connected caretakers of those whom they lead. In combat such a connection is essential, but there very well may be a vast gulf between business units and combat units. Pfeffer dares to ask questions like: “How are organizational resources divided? Do leaders partake of what is left after their people are cared for, or do they cut to the front of the line and scoop up as much as they can? And when a work organization encounters difficulties and faces reduced resources, including jobs and money, how does the reduction, the economic stringency, get apportioned between leaders and others?” The answer to those questions requires the proverbial proof to be in the pudding. Yet, instead of just making an indictment of “selfish” leadership, Pfeffer, the good seeker of truth, does the hard work of understanding why such behavior occurs. To me, that separates an inquisitor from a scholar.
Selfless leaders, those willing to take the business downturn bullet for their employees, are the exception to the rule. It’s simply the way things usually work at the top although there are rare and generous exceptions. To not proportionally share the company pain is evidence cited by Pfeffer that “senior people mostly use their power to protect both their jobs and their salaries and perquisites” (perks, to a guy like me). He also cites a study by organizational psychologists John Freeman and Michael Hannan that provides an answer as to why administrative overhead seems to grow in an organization. Having been somewhat of an activist in helping turn around our failed, local school district it rang the bell of truth when I understood the dynamic of “the top takes care of the top”. Freeman and Hannan documented that in school districts when times are good, the number of administrators grows. So far, so good. Yet, when times get tough those at the top protect their jobs while others further down the food chain get cut. (Ever been told by management to do more with less?) What ends up happening is the district becomes top heavy with administrators as those in power exercise job and income protection and put their personal interests ahead of those below them. I dare anyone to tell me that is the exception rather than the rule. Pfeffer even goes to far as to express “for the most part leaders just take care of themselves, regardless of what they should do either to adhere to moral strictures or to make their organization perform better”. And he doesn’t express it as an indictment. Instead, he proposes that in order to go forward we must first take a factual look at the reality of where we are and they way things are actually done. Years ago I crossed paths with a brainiac I hadn’t seen since high school. In cordial conversation he told me he’d retired from a major defense contractor and had actually spent time as a civilian on nuclear submarines. His area of expertise was developing accurate targeting of Polaris nuclear missiles. Of course, I asked how accurate they were and expressed my amazement when he said they could shoot halfway around the world and hit within the area of a football field. He explained what was more amazing than the target accuracy was sitting in the middle of a vast ocean and being able to calculate to the precise foot exactly where one was shooting from. Jeffrey Pfeffer’s work on leadership and organizational theory is similar. It doesn’t matter how we want things to be in the workplace. What matters is knowing and owning up to how they really are before pressing the change/launch button.
Originally published in Beaumont Business Journal, Heat And Humanity Column
