A leader who achieves results is someone who can create a 'correct framework' for learning together with their members.
To achieve results in an organization, you must raise and maintain the motivation of your members.
However, this is not easy, and isn't it the most stressful thing for a leader?
Even if you are not good at dealing with people, once you become a leader, the organization will demand that you bring members together to achieve results.
Today, I will talk about how to raise member motivation and achieve results when you find yourself in this situation.
1. What is management for raising member motivation?
I will get straight to the point, but there was an interesting case study in Amy C. Edmondson's book, 'Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy', so I would like to introduce it.
She cites the approaches of two hospitals as case studies regarding the introduction of a new heart surgery technique (MICS).
The contrasting frameworks shown by the leaders (doctors) of the two hospitals teach us how important it is to share purposes and goals with members.
[In the case of Hospital A]
The surgeon repeatedly stated that their confidence in the new technique was growing, and the members shared the belief that this method would greatly benefit the patients. One nurse said with shining eyes, 'Every time we perform MICS, I feel my knowledge becoming more solid. I can see the patients recovering quickly. It is a truly rewarding experience. I am truly grateful to have been chosen as a member.'
[
In the case of Hospital B]
The leader of the heart surgery team decided to perform MICS because, in his own words, 'As part of our marketing, I want the public to know that we can perform this surgery.' Some members thought that the leader was performing MICS simply to improve the image. Some nurses even stated, 'We just wanted to be on par with other hospitals.'
Amy C. Edmondson. Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy - Eiji Press Inc.
What is the difference here?
The purpose of Hospital A is to contribute to patients.
To that end, all members tackled the following issues using the framework of 'learning' the new MICS technology.
・Why are we working on MICS?
・What do we need to learn to do that?
・What are we lacking, and how can we fill that gap?
The purpose of Hospital B is hospital branding.. It is a top-down management approach to satisfy the self-actualization needs of the hospital and the doctors, using the
framework of 'branding' for the new MICS technology.
In other words, the doctor was the leader, and the nurses and staff were subordinates, practicing top-down management.
Looking at this, we can see that the way members engage changes significantly depending on the framework the leader creates.
The same thing happens in companies as well.
Even though the philosophy claims 'contribution to customers', I often see companies that only chase their own presence and profits, leaving employees exhausted with no choice but to comply; this is the same situation as Hospital B.
2. A correct framework creates correct conflict.
In any organization, as projects progress, conflicts and disputes arise between superiors and subordinates, or among members.
Since everyone has different ways of thinking and different abilities and skills, this is unavoidable.
In the case of Hospital A and Hospital B mentioned earlier, there were conflicts between supervisors and members, as well as among members themselves, but even with the same conflicts, the perspective that emerged was quite different.
The framework at Hospital Apositions the environment as a place for learningto fulfill contributions to patients, so the conflicts and disputes that arise are focused on problems to be solved.
In contrast, the framework at Hospital B is branding. In a sense, they were working on mastering MICS top-down to satisfy the self-approval needs of the hospital and the doctors.
The conflicts that arise here are not focused on problem-solving, but rather become conflicts and disputes born from the personal feelings of doctors and nurses, or among nurses themselves.
A correct conflict should be one that focuses on problems leading to results and is born from the learning of all members.
In such conflicts, the focus is on the problem rather than the person, so once the problem is solved, any lingering resentment can be easily cleared away.
To achieve this, the framework a leader creates must not be a work framework, but rather a learning framework that allows everyone, including the leader, to grow and achieve results while learning together.
What do you all think?