THE DEFINITION of an emperor is a male monarch , usually the sovereign ruler of an empire or another type of realm. Some of the most well-known emperors in history were Emperor Hirohito of Japan, Alexander The Great of Greece (Macedon) and Napoleon Bonaparte of France. While there were numerous others that lived to list them would take away from the main focus of this article.
Conversely the definition of somebody who empowers is a person who gives, authorizes, delegates, or makes somebody stronger and more confident, especially in controlling their life and claiming their rights. In forward thinking organizations empowering their employees to have greater control or freedom in their assigned duties is common not mention a practice that is more conducive to greater productivity with a noticeable rise in profits.
A strong confident boss would rather empower his or her employees as opposed to act as their emperor leading to low employee morale with the end result being significant numbers or resignations or an increase in health care costs due the stress an emperor type can cause on an employee. The natural consequence of this type of managerial style is sharp decreases in profits.
Micromanagement should not be and is not the same as being the sovereign ruler of an organization due to the fact that a so-called micromanager closely observes or controls the work of subordinates or employees. Micromanagement is more of a style (albeit an infective one) that is found in organization where the need for conformity is of the upmost importance.
Not being a psychologist I am unqualified to provide any insights as to what goes into the making of an emperor or what drives them to think or act as they do. The same holds true for the boss or supervisor who uses empowerment to achieve their desired results. I would love to hear the opinion of a professional psychologist or psychiatrist as to the upbringing or other social environmental factors that go into the development of each type of persona.
It can be argued that in any organization there are those who need the strict regimen that a dominating/ruler personality commands as without that fear of discipline (being fired, pay cut, demotion) they simply will have little regard for their assigned tasks or the extra pressure it puts on those who have to put in extra time in addition to extra work to make up for the lack of responsibility of that other person.
An interesting question to ponder would be can a person in charge combine both methods using either on the type of individual who it is deemed best suited to be handled that way or depending on the circumstances at any given moment in any day can that same supervisor or manager go from one method to the other on the spur of the moment? This question as to whether or not a person can possess both personality traits is once again is best answered by professionals.
Given the obvious advantages and disadvantages of both methodologies which you do think in the final analysis works best? Having worked under both conditions I personally functioned better and had more zest for what I was doing when I was empowered to do what I do best under the conditions that I caused me flourish. While I was never one to challenge or question those who were above me I often felt defeated under what felt like the rule of the all -powerful emperor.
As I sum this article up I will ask those who are in a position of authority aka supervisor &/or manager – do you empower or are you an emperor and why you feel your method is the one that works best not only for you but for the organization as a whole?
I would vote that in a position of authority the Empower methedology works better than an Emperor one.
Studies have shown that employees want to feel confident, motivated, and take ownership of their position and the role they play. I can imagine if I was under an Emperor like superior who was ready to let lightning bolts fly if I were to mess up, to avoid injury I’d probably be a zombie like employee and not bother with being innovative, or going beyond the call of duty for that matter… Chances are the Emperor’s workload would be larger than it needed to be. This is because when people take initiative, even if they cannot handle a task completely on their own – there’s always an attempt to build on – and if they’re motivated chances are they would like to complete the task and just require direction, not spoon-feeding or the threat of that bolt.
This would definitely oppose growth and development of the business because if you look at the bigger picture – workflow bottlenecks, undecisve responses, and general time of completion from a customer perspective would be the cost of a centralised, and intimidating environment.
Jared, Thank you for your very well laid comments which make a lot of sense not to mention the fact that I agree with your statements wholeheartedly. Could you envision a scenario under which a supervisor or other managerial type would be able to employ both methods depending on the employee as some clearly need a tougher more regimented environment in order to function while others do not. Do you suppose it is possible for somebody to have the type of personality where they can be two radically different people at the same time?
I most certainly do. The scenario where a superior were to employ both methods – well as you mentioned ‘depending’ on the situation and those involved I agree that it may be more advisable to lean toward a more assertive stance. I believe being responsible for your actions should include a response, whether a reward or consequence – bearing in mind the aim is not to cause harm but to encourage progression.
Ultimately the responsibility of setting the overall environment should not be the responsibility of a managerial function, it is a governance related task by setting the tone at top. Corporate Governance ensures the right things get done, while management ensures things get done right. I stand under correction, but I don’t think an individual at any level does not want to be right.
Regarding personality, I don’t think being two radically different people is healthy overall. Being double standard implies a degree of uncertainty, and portrays an image of being fake without real substance. I would say the key is to be adaptable, focused, and relative to the environment by educating and advocating:
Before considering a response, try and outline an approach at board level. Two good questions to start with are:
1. What governance model is the business currently using and how do you know?
2. What model would be most effective to use and why?
If those two things are different, there’s a Vantage Point. I would look at at the following areas to start with when looking at employing a culture that promotes development across the business spectrum:
– Practice content strategy;
– Demonstrate what a positive result looks like;
– Provide tools & resources necessary to achieve expectations;
– Provide collaborative channels for cross functionality which are interdependent;
How? a Vantage Point! Or as I put it
– Relative advantage: To what extent is an idea perceived as better than an existing standard?
– Comparability: How much is the idea an apparently logical extinction of the status quo?
– Complexity (or simplicity) How easily and to what certainty does each individual understand their role and what the expectations are?
– Traceability: How effortless os it for individuals to interact with decision makers, and superiors. (Without fear of a lightning bolt)
– Observability: How noticeable is progress tracking and development measurement?
A famous quote I came across that stuck with me from my schooling days gives the a broader picture…
“We cannot teach anyone anything, we can only help them discover it for themselves, while we both from each other a long the way.”
Jared,
As usual you put together a very well thought out comprehensive response. It has been my experience that management is responsible for setting the tone of the organization with advance directive. The “floor general” spends the greatest amount of time with the the employees and thusly is the person who manipulates the employees. I was not implying that a person need have a split personality but rather is it possible for somebody to employ both methods once again depending on the person it is being applied to along with other factors. There are those who need a constant “kick in the rear” hence the emperor approach while others who have the drive, and professionalism to do what they need to do while striving for improvement hence the empowerment approach. Thank you again Jared.