For the past decade, I have had regular conversations with a woman who leads an academic department in a US university.  She was a long-time insider suffering under the yoke of the previous leader and thrilled to be appointed chair of the department when he retired.  She was determined not only to not repeat his mistakes but to also put her stamp on things, clean up the financial mess he left and change the culture.  She would be reasonable where he was capricious, transparent where he was obtuse, energetic where he was lazy and communicative where he was absent (concerned about his own affairs rather than the department’s).  In short, she wanted to be a transformative leader. This was to be the pinnacle of her career.

She did indeed create change, much of which could be objectively measured.  The finances radically improved, all departmental space department was cleaned and spruced up with fresh paint, the departmental output increased and student satisfaction demonstrably improved.  As her competence and confidence grew, she began to believe her leadership would outlast even her tenure.  So secure was she in how well she had done, she announced that she planned to retire, an announcement two years ahead of schedule honoring her values of open communication and rational planning.

But, often there are unintended consequences of our decisions and when accompanied by faulty assumptions.  When the remaining faculty and staff started holding meetings and sending emails about the future, she found their behavior tactless and unseemly.  “I’m not dead yet,” she would tell them failing to recognize that they were worried about the future and were simply trying to put a decent succession plan in place with which they could live rather than have one foisted on them by the institution.  She experienced each new initiative, each new idea, as a personal affront and an attack on all for which she and on everything she had accomplished.

She neither anticipated what happens when people sense a leadership vacuum (even when it is two years away) nor realized the extent of the appetite for change that had slowly been building over the years.  Her strong personality and charismatic, visionary leadership style were exactly what was needed at the start of her leadership tenure; No one would dispute her passion or single-minded devotion and dedication to her own concept of service to the department. But, while these characteristics inspired some, they alienated others.  She was unaware that she was sometimes seen as mercurial and dictatorial, that she could ride roughshod over dissenting views, and she could be quite polarizing with favorites allowed into the inner circle while others were not to share the spotlight.

She was horrified to learn that the next leadership iteration the department members sought was a more consensus-based, low-key form.  Stepping back and seeing the situation through a less personal lens, she saw the department had evolved and changed, and it was now ready for something different.  No single individual wanted to carry the load of leadership, but they all wanted to participate in making sense of things, articulating the vision for the future and making decisions about how the department would run.  Their concern was for equity, balance, collaboration and participation. They wanted responsibilities – and credit – to be distributed across the leadership team and not concentrated in a single person’s hands.  They may well face conflict or analysis paralysis when run by a committee, as she scathingly predicts, but they are looking forward to the change.

The biggest “aha” for me from this story was with regard to the temporary nature of leadership. No matter how successfully the leadership is exercised, it is, indeed, temporary.  It is important to realize that leadership is a prize you may achieve in your career, but do not fall into the trap of believing you will hold it in perpetuity or that your influence will last forever.  The pharaohs, emperors and kings of the past, and the dictators and democratically elected heads of government in the present, all have to cede their crowns sooner or later.  And, as countries, institutions and organizations evolve, the need for different types of leadership shifts.

So, if you are aspiring to or are in a leadership position in your organization, remember it is a transitory phase in your career. Ask yourself how you can hold it as well as you can while you have it. Then ask yourself how you plan to eventually let go with elegance.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself:

• What impact do you want to have as a leader?
• What strengths do you bring to the role?
• What is your “signature” leadership style?
• What are the organization’s current leadership needs?
• What gaps are there?
• How can you best shore them up?
• What legacy do you want to leave behind?
• What are your succession plans for the next leader to step into your shoes?

Fredia Woolf, Founder of Woolf Consulting, writes about career and workplace issues.  She coaches leaders on how to reach their people, their goals and their potential, and designs programs for organizations to enhance their effectiveness and the quality of their leadership.  She can be contacted at fwoolf@woolfconsulting.com.

Last updated on May 26th, 2011 at 05:01 pm