I kick off this topic by posing the following questions for readers, especially those who are team leaders, to ponder a moment……

I anticipate the opinions of readers will be somewhat balanced – some choose the “commander” and some pick the “encourager”.

Before I state my personal views regarding the above questions, allow me to share the characteristics of both leadership styles.

Now, coming to my own take which style is efficacious. In my opinion, both styles have merits and demerits, depending on type of task field, mission or situation. Although write-ups on corporate leadership in today’s encompassing global commerce and business world are prominently promulgated compared to other leadership arenas - and I am going to render more emphasis on corporate leadership – let us view a few examples for comparison purpose.

EXAMPLE 1:

Visualise the commander of an army brigade commissioned to seize a garrison of the enemy. The forceful commander calls all the shots – no “if” and no “but” from his soldiers except to totally obey subserviently as ordered. Because of the crucial mission, any slightest slip-shot or break in concerted action by any soldier may result in disaster. Diverse opinions cannot be tolerated. Only the commander’s order stands. Of course, his decision cum planning calibre counts a lot to derive success or failure of the mission. 

Needless to say, military commanders must be tip-top in battle strategies, confidence of success and execution in order to avert defeat. In any battle, a dynamic commanding leader commands success – the mission or situation warrants soldiers to obey unwavering to the command of their leader.

Occasionally, albeit not frequent, good military commanders assume the softer character to encourage his soldiers during lull (calm) times when not in military combat. However, a military leader by appointment serves primarily as commander than "encourager".

EXAMPLE 2:

In professional football/soccer like the English Premier League series, the most important figure is the manager (in some countries, the equivalent title is head coach). All players, including the captain, take the cue from the manager regarding team formation, overall mode and tempo (defensive, attacking, short or long passes, fast and aggressive, or slow and calm etc.). The cue given before each match will be based on the manager’s latest assessment of the opponents’ strengths and weaknesses, also his reckoning of the likely strategy deployed by his counterpart of the other team. 

A team manager executes close to totalitarian command, He is mandated to make unilateral decisions, including the selection of the first-eleven players and substitutes for each match. Yet, it is important to solicit inputs from players during pep talks, especially their current feelings, general morale and perceptions of the opponents. During the half-time dressing room pep talk over the short 15-minute break of each match, the manager may give instructions to change the strategy of play or decide on substitutions by incorporating the players’ inputs. He may admonish players who had been sluggish in the first half play while also encouraging those who had performed well to try even harder in the second half. 

A manager’s incumbent leadership style is weighed heavy on the command disposition, yet spiked with some elements of encouragement like confidence boosts. The pure 100 per cent autocratic approach does not work well for long in professional football leadership. An astute manager exhibits commanding style to his team as his meat, yet sprinkle his human touch as condiments where needed. 

EXAMPLE 3:

Now, we talk about a sales team of a commercial corporation aiming to capture major market share in the industry. Essentially the chief executive officer’s and the chief sales officer’s leadership styles influence the mood of their sales force. It is a fact that motivation is the golden key to unlock hidden qualities in sales individuals. Motivation derives from encouragement. Sales people will excel if they are encouraged, and thus motivated, to capitalise on their natural styles for scoring. Directing the top salesman on how he should conduct his tasks may be counteractive as confusion sets in. Just like a person who is a right-hander, he cannot write well by being ordered to use his left hand. His natural dexterity is in his right hand. Likewise, a salesman will fare better by being encouraged to harness his natural strengths, not weaknesses.

Most sales gurus profess that the best mode for learning is via sharing of actual experiences. Sharing involves dialogues, listening, giving inputs, joint revisions etc. – the interactive activities lending weight to encouragement. Sharing is contrary to leading by giving strict instructions or demands. To me, issuing ultimatum is the worst kind of sales leadership. 

One school of thought – which is not popular - propounds that sales people would fare much better under pressure pushed down from the top. Those who postulate this believe hard pressure will impound on individuals to draw out every ounce of their energy elixir for maximum performance. Leaders in this category resort to the extreme approach called “fear motivation”. Some of them opine that motivation derived from encouragement is too inconsequential to drive real impact. 

I have had known of actual cases whereby the corporate leaders audaciously declare to their sales subordinates somewhat like this: “My survival depends on meeting the company’s sales expectations. So, it is a must that each of you meet your target. If you don’t fulfill, and because of you I fail to fulfill my overall target, I will push you into the ocean to drown first before I get drowned.” Outright unbecoming threat to subordinates.

What do I think of fear motivation in sales? My comments, based on my actual observations where this method was enforced, are as follows:

# In sales, instilling fear into subordinates should aptly be termed fear desperation, not fear motivation. Due to fear, the affected individuals fire fight for desperate moves, hoping to meet targets. They might slog hard out of desperation or apprehension. With luck, they probably could hit some positive scores, but only transient (temporary).

# Fear-driven desperate efforts eventually cause mental and physical fatigue. At the beginning, positive results might come to light; in the longer run, the burnout effect will cause performance plunging downhill. The end culminates in repercussions when team members either give up or leave.

# Subordinates will refrain from relaying real facts to superiors because they fear the likelihood of being reprimanded. Hence, they paint false positives in their report in order to cover true negatives …….. at least to tide over for the time being. 

# Always desperately scrambling for solutions will ultimately bring about shoddy performance, at the expense of efficiency and effectiveness in the way sales tasks are carried out. 

# On the other side of the coin, sales endeavours should not be totally amiable encouragement cum motivation focused. There should be a tinge of command from top leaders for sales people to observe certain non-compromised ground rules on ethics, commitment, discipline, mutual respect and protocol. Without adherence to such sound principles, sales results will not be wholesome in respect of both quantity and quality. And without a cemented unity of purpose, team cohesion and integrity will slacken. 

# In a commercial enterprise, the basic essence for business growth is encouragement-based motivation, supplemented by the command to abide certain fundamental principles pertaining to best practices. Encouragement is the main ingredient for the business cuisine, command is the spices. Without the main ingredient, the spices serve no purposes.  Only if the main ingredient (encouragement) matches with the spices (enforcement of best practices}, can a commercial cuisine be palatable.

# No doubt some subordinates do not respond to the encouragement calls of their corporate leaders. However, such personnel are the minority, probably 10 per cent of the force. There will be few being recalcitrant, incorrigible, passive etc. who do not change no matter how much of encouragement is rendered to them. Well, to this category, the respective leader should firmly issue the firm order of “either you shape up or shift out!” That is situation when the leader needs to act like a “no if, no but” commander!..............for the well-being of the whole team. 

SUMMARY

Although I have cited the examples of military and professional football leadership, my preference delves more in the commercial corporate side. Simple logic: A nation cannot be progressive sans (without) a sound economic profile. Even revered political leaders will not make headway to elevate their respective nation’s standing in the global scenario without economic might. China’s leaders in the past few decades realised this, and China is now both a global political and economic super power as the result of this realisation.

Commerce (or businesses) gains eminence in the modern global era. Hence, corporate leaders have become important protagonists at respective national scenes - many at international scenes too. There are more business corporate leaders than in other fields.

Commerce relates to sales and sales support activities. Corporations heavily depend on these activities to thrive. Now you see why I rendered more detailed emphasis to Example 3, citing the sales arena for elaboration? 

Ending reminder to corporate leaders: Engage more encouragement interactions with subordinates, especially the sales personnel. Be commanding only when and where needed so, like pertaining to firm reminders on matters of best practices. Commercial corporate leaders who resort to sheer command as their sole way of managing subordinates will not make good as leaders.