In response to Ryan Morrow’s original post surrounding a leader’s ability to develop personal goals at the same time aligning with the greater common goals of the group, Morrow asks us “how then should a leader respond to an individual who is no longer working towards the common goal”? The question is valid, and one in which we encounter throughout our lives – just think teenagers living in your home. From my experience within the workplace, I have to respond to these scenarios on a regular basis and find myself looking at it as an opportunity for growth. My main source of respite when managing rogue activity within a group first lies with self-reflection as it relates to how I can better identify interests and needs of the individual in question. Second, my obligation to let the individual know that they have been heard is key, but as a consequence of including the entire group in the visioning process communicating the value to individuals and the group as a whole, each individual is granted inclusive rights in the group. This approach builds trust and respect regardless who abstains from a commitment to the goal; therefore, I would much rather solicit buy-in through a transformational versus transactional style of leadership every time.
Matt