How long will you continue that leadership? The importance of switching 'faces' between crisis and peacetime
For a long time now, modern society has been called the 'VUCA era,' a time of constant, unpredictable change. From market fluctuations and technological innovation to unexpected pandemics and natural disasters, organizations are constantly exposed to crises of varying scales. In such a highly uncertain environment, the significance of leaders who steer the organization has become more important than ever. In particular, it can be said that a leader's true worth is tested precisely in 'crisis' situations, where the organization is in the midst of chaos and the future is unclear.
In crisis situations, there are certainly times when top-down leadership that powerfully leads the organization is required. Through rapid decision-making and clear instructions, chaos is brought under control, and the organization is saved from the brink of collapse. That figure is like a reliable captain of a ship sailing through a raging sea. However, is that powerful leadership truly a panacea? After the storm has passed and the sea has returned to calm, is it really the best navigation technique to continue leading the ship in the same way?
This time, we will not view leadership as a single fixed style, but rather rethink it as a dynamic skill that should be flexibly changed according to the situation. We will position the leadership required in the special situation of a crisis as a 'potent drug' and deeply examine its effects and side effects. Then, we will explore the diverse forms of leadership needed in peacetime, when the crisis has passed, or in situations where new value creation is required. What is the 'situational adaptability' of a leader that is indispensable for organizations to survive in the coming era? I would like to get to the essence of that.
In the eye of the quiet storm—what a crisis demands of a leader
When a crisis that shakes an organization occurs, the workplace is instantly engulfed in chaos and anxiety. Information becomes confused, the fear of not knowing what will happen next eats away at the members' hearts, and business processes that should normally function fall into a state of paralysis. In such extreme situations, the most important role required of a leader is to continue to steer the ship of the organization quietly but firmly in the center of the storm so that it does not sink.
First, what is essential is rapid and accurate decision-making. In a crisis situation, there is no time to wait for all the information to be gathered. You must point the way forward, relying on fragmented information, your own experience, and intuition. If there is hesitation or delay here, the situation may worsen further, potentially leading to irreparable damage. As the saying goes, 'A 70-point decision made quickly is more valuable than waiting for a 100-point one,' speed is the lifeline of crisis response. Even if this decision does not look like the best one in hindsight, it becomes a powerful step forward for the organization.
Next, what is required is clear and concrete instructions. Members driven by anxiety seek clear guidelines rather than acting autonomously. 'What, who, by when, and how should it be done?' The leader needs to organize complex situations concisely and provide specific instructions so that members can act without hesitation. Vague expressions or appeals to spirit only promote further confusion. Those instructions serve as a blueprint for the entire organization to move in unison toward a single goal. Each word from the leader becomes a signpost for members moving through the darkness.
And above all, what is most important is the leader's own mental stability. If a leader shows fear or hesitation, those emotions will immediately spread throughout the organization and could cause panic. No matter what internal conflicts you may have, you are required to appear calm and composed on the outside and maintain an attitude full of confidence. This is by no means synonymous with suppressing emotions. It is an expression of high-level self-management ability, where you recognize and control your own anxiety and consciously choose the image you should show to the organization. A leader's unwavering stance becomes a source of peace of mind for members, who think, 'It will be okay if I follow this person,' and serves as the final bastion for maintaining the organization's centripetal force.
The pros and cons of a potent drug—the light and shadow of directive leadership
Top-down leadership based on rapid decision-making and clear instructions, which a leader demonstrates in a crisis situation, is called 'directive leadership.' This is extremely effective in restoring the functions of a chaotic organization and overcoming an immediate crisis. Its efficacy can be compared to a 'potent drug' administered to a dying patient. While it can save a life if used correctly, it carries the risk of causing serious side effects if the method and dosage are wrong.
The 'light' of directive leadership, or its merits, lies in its immediacy and efficiency. Because it skips consensus-building and discussions that take time in normal processes and decides policies all at once based on the leader's judgment, it can respond quickly to situations where every moment counts. Also, by unifying the chain of command, it becomes possible for the entire organization to act as one, without waste and in a disciplined manner. This allows for minimizing damage and leading to an early resolution of the situation. This powerful leadership gives members a strong, albeit temporary, sense of security and purpose, acting as a breakwater to prevent the collapse of the organization.
However, this 'potent drug' has a 'shadow' that cannot be overlooked, namely, side effects. If this directive style is used habitually even after the crisis has passed, the organization will gradually lose its vitality. The biggest side effect is a significant decline in members' autonomy and creativity. When waiting for instructions from the leader becomes the norm, members lose the motivation to think, judge, and act on their own. This is the increase in so-called 'instruction-waiting people.' Carrying out instructions from above becomes the job, the proactive attitude of seeking better methods or attempting new challenges is lost, and the organization becomes rigid.
Furthermore, top-down communication carries the risk of stifling diverse opinions and ideas from the front lines. In an environment where the leader's decisions are always viewed as absolute, it becomes difficult to voice dissent, even if one feels it is wrong. As a result, the organization loses valuable insights and opportunities for innovation, reducing its adaptability to environmental changes. Also, one-sided instructions amplify members' 'sense of being forced,' significantly damaging their sense of ownership and engagement in their work. Thus, even if the crisis is overcome in the short term, it leads to the ironic result of stopping the organization's growth engine in the long term. Directive leadership is merely an emergency prescription, and its use should be limited to the specific period of a crisis.
After the storm has passed—how to cultivate leadership in peacetime
When the storm called crisis has passed and the organization has regained its daily routine, the leader must quickly switch roles. It is required to take off the commander's mask and demonstrate a new form of leadership to maximize the abilities and potential of each member. This is not leadership for short-term problem solving, but leadership for fostering long-term, sustainable organizational growth. Here, we will delve into two styles that are particularly important in peacetime: 'participatory leadership' and 'developmental leadership.'
Participatory (collaborative) leadership is a style that actively involves members in the decision-making process and moves things forward while consolidating the opinions and wisdom of the entire team. Instead of making conclusions arbitrarily, the leader acts as a facilitator to activate discussions, draw out diverse perspectives, and support final consensus building. The greatest advantage of this approach is that it increases members' sense of ownership and motivation. People hold a stronger sense of responsibility and motivation to execute things they have been involved in deciding. Also, because diverse opinions are exchanged, the possibility of discovering risks that might be overlooked from a single leader's perspective or generating more creative solutions increases. However, since this style also has the aspect of taking time for decision-making, it is not suitable for situations where speed is required. It will demonstrate its true value in peacetime, such as in more important and long-term policy decisions.
On the other hand, developmental (coaching) leadership is a style that focuses on the growth of individual members. Instead of giving answers (teaching), the leader helps members think for themselves and draw out inner answers through questioning (coaching). As for the main way of interacting, there is 'listening,' which means listening deeply to the other person's story, and this builds a relationship of trust. Then, by asking powerful 'questions' such as 'What do you think?' or 'What other options are there?', the leader deepens the members' thinking and broadens their perspective. It is also important to make them aware of their strengths and notice areas for improvement through accurate 'feedback' on their daily actions. This leadership does not produce immediately visible results. However, by continuing persistently, members acquire the ability to solve problems autonomously and deepen their confidence. As a result, it leads to
raising the level of the entire organization's capabilities, and you can build a strong team that can run on its own even without a leader.
Compass to the future—catalytic leadership that accelerates innovation
In today's business environment, just protecting and improving existing businesses will eventually lead to being swallowed by the waves of major changes that will come. For an organization to grow sustainably and carve out the future, innovation that overturns conventional wisdom is essential. In such situations where value that no one has ever seen before is created, a completely new role is required of a leader, one that is neither a commander, a coordinator, nor a coach. That is 'catalytic leadership.'
A catalyst in a chemical reaction is a substance that promotes the reaction without changing itself. Similarly, a catalytic leader does not become the protagonist who comes up with ideas, but focuses on creating a 'place' or 'environment' where innovation naturally occurs from within members or the team. The first step toward that is ensuring psychological safety. Outlandish ideas or challenges that do not fear failure will never be born in an environment where members feel, 'I might be made fun of if I say something like this,' or 'I will be blamed if I fail.' The leader needs to actively foster a culture that respects any opinion and allows failure as an opportunity for learning. Leaders themselves taking the initiative to show their own weaknesses or talking about past failures also leads to creating an atmosphere where members can feel safe to self-disclose.
Next, it is important to connect diverse talents and knowledge. Much of innovation is born from new combinations of existing knowledge. Catalyst-type leaders intentionally create opportunities for chemical reactions by bringing together members from different departments within the organization or inviting experts who usually have no connection to the team. When people who do not normally interact in their daily work engage in dialogue and clash their perspectives, sparks of unexpected ideas fly.
Leaders act as mediators to ensure these chemical reactions proceed smoothly, guiding conflicts toward constructive discussion and finding common goals.
Furthermore, catalyst-type leaders do not engage in excessive management or micromanagement of their members. Rather, they show a clear vision and broad direction, while leaving the specific processes to the team's discretion. This is a manifestation of an attitude that respects the members' ownership and creativity to the fullest extent.
The leader's role is not to monitor progress, but to remove obstacles when the team hits a wall and to secure necessary resources (time, budget, information, etc.). Just as a gardener tills the soil and provides water and fertilizer so that plants can grow on their own, leaders devote themselves to creating the optimal environment for innovation to sprout and grow.
Like a chameleon, like a compass—the situational adaptability that true leaders must possess
As we have seen so far, there are diverse styles of leadership: the "Commanding" style to overcome crises, the "Participatory" style to gather the team's collective strength, the "Developmental" style to foster individual growth, and the "Catalyst" style to create the future. And it is not the case that any one of these is absolutely correct.
A truly excellent leader is not someone who sticks to a specific style, but someone who can flexibly change their behavior by making complex judgments based on various factors, such as the situation the organization is in, the nature of the challenges faced, and the maturity of the members. This ability is the core of this discussion: "situational adaptability."
Leaders with situational adaptability change their colors vividly according to the surrounding environment, much like a chameleon. In an emergency, they become a decisive commander; in a brainstorming session, they become a humble listener; and in a 1-on-1 with a young member, they become a patient coach.
However, at the root of this, there exists one axis that is different from a chameleon and never wavers. That is the role as a "compass" that shows the direction the organization should aim for. In other words, while changing the leadership style (How) in a protean manner, they consistently point to the organization's vision and philosophy (Why/What). Because this unwavering axis exists, members can follow the leader with peace of mind without being confused by changes in the leader's style.
So, how can one acquire this high level of situational adaptability? The first step is self-awareness. First, it is important to objectively grasp your "habits"—what kind of leadership style you prefer and naturally use. It is also effective to seek feedback from trusted colleagues, superiors, or members, or to utilize leadership diagnostic tools. By recognizing your own strengths and the styles you unconsciously avoid, you can finally begin to consciously use different styles.
The next step is learning and practice to increase your repertoire. It is essential not only to input knowledge by reading books or attending training on leadership styles you are not good at, but also to consciously try those styles in your daily work. It might not go well at first. However, by repeating small successes and failures, you can gradually make that style your own.
It is similar to the process of learning a new language. Situational adaptability is not a natural talent, but an acquired skill honed through conscious learning and practice. In the era of VUCA, leaders who guide the ship of an organization are required more than ever to have this advanced navigation skill that is both protean and has a firm axis.
Summary
In this article, we have discussed the importance of leadership by viewing it not as a fixed character, but as a dynamic skill set that should be used differently depending on the situation.
First, when an organization is in crisis, a "Commanding" style is required, where the leader brings order to chaos with quick decisions and clear instructions. However, we pointed out that this is a "potent medicine" to be used only in emergencies, and that if used regularly, it has side effects that rob members of autonomy and creativity, eroding the organization.
Then, we stated the necessity of switching the leadership style to a "Participatory" style, which respects members' opinions and increases their sense of ownership, or a "Developmental" style, which encourages the growth of each individual and raises the overall capability of the organization, during peacetime when the crisis has passed. Furthermore, we explored that in order to create innovation that paves the way for the future, the role of a "Catalyst," where the leader does not take the lead but promotes chemical reactions among members, becomes important.
In conclusion, the quality most required of future leaders is "situational adaptability," the ability to freely use these diverse styles according to the situation. This ability is honed by recognizing your own strengths and consciously learning and practicing other styles. While having an axis as a compass that continues to point to the North Star that the organization should aim for under any circumstances, you change your role in a protean way along the path. Isn't such a flexible and resilient leader the one who can overcome an uncertain era and lead the organization into the future? There is no finished form in the journey of leadership. It is only beyond constant self-reflection and learning that the true form of leadership exists.
