Leadership, Controllership, and Wimpership
July 20, 2012
Introduction
From the title of this article, it should be apparent that the three terms above pertain to styles of exercising some degree of power and authority over others or, at a minimum, providing guidance in some manner for something to be accomplished. Not all of these terms can be said to be a form of "leadership," since the last term refers to anything but leadership; since leadership should not be defined in terms of itself; and since "controllership" may not include much leadership.
Based upon this writer's experience in working for or with all of the above types; recruiting, interviewing, hiring, training and supervising nearly 1,000 people; analyzing labor-management problems for dozens of CEOs; and prior management experience in different capacities -- including leading a 20-office district for an international corporation -- many people who have titles that imply operating in a leadership capacity are primarily controllers, and not leaders. A lesser number could be classified as "rollers" (wimps). These are people who basically "go along to get along." (More on controllers and rollers can be found in this writer's book entitled, Controllers & Rollers: Do You Control Or Roll? Thinc Publishing, P.O. Box 14, Batesville, MS 38606).
The following sections deal with various aspects of the above styles.
Leadership
It would be easy to oversimplify the definition of a "leader" by merely saying that a leader is someone who is the opposite of a wimp or a roller, but there is much more to it than that. In fact, the extreme opposite of a roller is a controller. It is true that some people seem to handle leadership more naturally than others, and even with little prior experience, but most leadership is learned and earned.
It is easy to define a wimp as someone who goes along to get along, but a leader cannot be defined with so few words without doing injustice to the term or what the concept of leadership encompasses. Although someone may define a leader as someone who has followers (a true statement), the reasons for having followers begin to describe a leader more completely.
Suffice it to say that many books and articles have been written about "leadership" from many perspectives. In lieu of reviewing any number of these and quoting the ideas of others, this writer has chosen to draw upon his own experiences in other capacities as a director, manager and management consultant to proffer the following definition of one who is a leader:
"A leader is one who provides direction for, exercises authority over, and assumes responsibility for people and activities to achieve a goal."
The foregoing definition implies knowledge; confidence; assertiveness; the ability and willingness to make decisions; vision; the ability to operate pro-actively; and, overall, the ability and willingness to do what is necessary to achieve a goal. The definition also implies that a leader has followers.
A leader has the confidence and maturity to seek ways constantly to improve his or her leadership skills, including soliciting evaluations from superiors, peers and subordinates. As a part of this, a leader is willing to acknowledge shortcomings when and where found, and to act to correct them.
A true leader commands respect by not only how he or she functions as a leader, but by being a person of integrity and good character whose words and actions can be trusted, and one who can be counted upon to be fair on a consistent basis.
Anyone who is successful as a leader usually has very good communication skills, and is able to achieve shared understanding with those with whom he speaks. Good communication skills are also required to mentor and teach others to become better leaders and better employees. A leader talks WITH people, not AT them. Unfortunately, many who are designated as "leaders," or who have titles or positions that imply such, are not necessarily genuine leaders, but are primarily "controllers," and are not cognizant of the differences between controllership and leadership. Moreover, they would probably deny that they are controllers. More on this is found in the following section.
Controllership
Controllers are basically insecure, but are unlikely to recognize it and even less likely to acknowledge it if confronted about it. The main self-deception of a controller is that he believes that, if he prevails over someone, he is "right.," though he may be 100 percent wrong.
Because of their insecurity, controllers find it necessary to erect social buffer zones around themselves to keep others from getting too close to them and learning that they are insecure. Part of maintaining this buffer zone for self- protection is being demanding and critical of others. Characteristics of controllers include the following, some of which have been mentioned:
1. Proud, insecure, self-righteousAnyone who has worked for one or more controllers or who knows some could probably add a few characteristics to the above list, which does not purport to be exhaustive. For example, controllers seem to want to know about as many things as possible in case anything could become a threat or a challenge to their power and control (and their personal security). Consequently, they don't like extended periods of silence from those around them, since such may preclude them from knowing and being able to control as many people and activities as possible.
2. Manifest an attitude of superiority (to help overcome internal insecurities)
3. Selfish, demanding and critical (These often work together.)
4. Deny weaknesses as much as possible
5. Project faults onto others
6. Operate harshly at times
7. Do not like to be challenged
8. Manifest the "Big Kahuna" complex; "My way or the highway" thinking
9. Tend to micro-manage
10. Easily offended and/or upset by any who differ with them
11. May go overboard on worker discipline (Drive tacks with sledgehammers.)
12. Manifest more cockiness and self-righteousness than confidence
13. Cannot handle criticism, recommendations or suggestions well
14. Have to be "right" on virtually everything
15. Likely to operate with rudeness, brashness much of the time
16. Talk AT people instead of WITH them
17. May exercise little control of tongue or temper
18. Not concerned about the feelings of others
19. Not given to the use of common courtesies, such as "thank you" or "please"
20. Unwilling and unlikely to admit errors
21. Likely to demand more of others than of themselves
22. By their tactics, may destroy what they hope to create
23. By their tactics, may alienate and break the spirits of others
24. More concerned with putting people down than dealing with issues rationally
25. Like to be the center of attention.
Some of the foregoing characteristics combined translate into "bullying." Most controllers, by nature, are bullies of sorts -- whether males or females, and regardless of age. And, since they believe that their way is the right and best way, they may also try to enforce their perception of perfectionism. In confrontations with others, they tend to operate in the "attack mode" with an overwhelming flow of harsh words with voice volume and language increasing as deemed necessary to achieve or re-assert their power, authority, control and dominance. These tactics help to keep others at bay and decrease the likelihood of more challenges or confrontations.
Wimpership
"Wimpership" is far removed from either leadership or controllership in terms of how effective it is in the exercise of authority to accomplish much through others in a leadership capacity.
A wimp in a leadership capacity is usually someone who, though lacking leadership skills, was given a position of leadership as a favor; as a family member; as one who was "kicked upstairs;" or as one who was technically more proficient than his peers, but who (unfortunately) dreads and cannot exercise leadership responsibilities. In other words, his or her position was not learned, earned or deserved.
Although there are many wimps or rollers in subordinate capacities, the few who are appointed to positions of responsibility for leadership seldom last long. Among their shortcomings as leaders are the following:
1. Lack of experience
2. Lack of confidence
3. Unwillingness to be assertive, take charge and be responsible
4. Indecisiveness
5. Overly concerned about what others think
6. Don't want to risk offending anyone
7. Fear confrontation
8. Fear to take a strong stand on about anything at work
9. More interested in currying the favor of others than leading them; would rather be a "buddy" than a boss to people
10. Unwilling to discipline subordinates as needed
11. Too consumed with getting along to plan or have a vision for the future
12. Fear to take risks in general
13. Tendency to waive rules to avoid offending those breaking the rules
14. Inability to operate in a pro-active fashion
15. Too stressed from the foregoing to be effective in any aspect of leadership
16. Not goal-oriented (Rollers aren't "goalers," but largely let life happen to them.)
Anyone who has had a wimp in a supervisory capacity over him or her could probably add a few more shortcomings to this list. It is possible for a wimp or roller to be well-liked as a person, but to be disrespected very much as a "leader" or as a boss.
A wimp at the wheel of an organization usually means that it won't be long before the wheels of the organization start to come off. Other things being equal, wimps have difficulty enforcing production deadlines and quality standards. This will result in reduced sales and lower net profits or possibly losses, and perhaps business lost permanently.
Without a great deal of thought, possible negative consequences could be listed for each of the above shortcomings, but such will have to be the subject of another discourse, since this article deals primarily with differences among the three styles of leadership.
With good mentoring and increased assertiveness, combined with increased confidence from experience, some wimps can become leaders. A great amount of resolve and perseverance is required for this, since a wimp will also have to overcome earlier negative images of himself or herself as a leader and become consistent in a pro-active fashion. Subordinates will have to see that the change is real before their level of respect for the leader rises.
In contrast to wimps who obtained their leadership positions almost by default (in some cases), the next section deals with those who learned it and earned it, and, in some instances, came better equipped than others to take the reins of leadership to become successful leaders.
Conclusion
Prior to reading this article, most readers in leadership capacities probably knew which style of leadership was primarily theirs. It is also likely that those who are controllers are least likely to acknowledge any aspects of their controllership style. Acknowledgements of weaknesses or shortcomings are seen as undermining their aura of power, authority and control, which, because of their insecurity, they do not handle well.
Wimps usually know that they are wimps, but don't like to admit their style either. They usually also know that they don't belong in a leadership role, but may not be able to do much about it at the moment or want to do much, hoping that, somehow, the "leader" in them will assert itself and that they will be "okay." It's not likely to happen without some mentoring and much personal resolve and perseverance.
Leaders are usually unruffled by any of the foregoing considerations or variants of them, and are primarily interested in being good leaders and getting their jobs done as well as possible. The other two like to do this as well, but their predilections and styles preclude them from being able to achieve the same level of success (and consistently so) as a genuine leader.
Although a number of leaders seem to be "naturals," persistent efforts at self-Improvement to learn and earn the right to be called "leaders" enables true leaders to make most things appear to be "natural" as they perform with confidence in themselves as persons and as leaders, manifesting the characteristics noted earlier. They do not fear to make decisions and to take appropriate actions when and where necessary to achieve goals, operating with a level of professionalism, integrity and consistency that commands the respect of their followers.