Facilitative Leadership Providing Leadership Without

Facilitative Leadership

Providing leadership without taking control is the essence of effective facilitative leadership, and this often requires leaders to change how they think as much as how they manage (Brome, 2006). A facilitative leader is one that is more centered on subordinates, less on traditional lines of authority and the need to exercise formal power in all situations, and is therefore more able to manage by consensus, less on directives (Bens, 2007). Facilitative leaders are also much more attuned to the unique needs and innate value of each specific employee's contributions as well (Amy, 2008). Due to this and other attributes of facilitative leaders, the parallels to transformational leaders who have a high degree of emotional intelligence (EI) are often made in analyses completed (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). Both facilitative leadership and transformational leadership generate trust and sustain it throughout an organization when the leadership strategies are successful (Amy, 2008) (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). Both of these approaches to leadership however take different paths to the same goal, with facilitative leadership more focused on an egalitarian approach where everyone has relatively equal say in the direction of a workgroup or team. Facilitative leadership has become more prevalent in those industries that rely heavily on the intensive knowledge of key contributors, whether they have subordinates reporting to them or not (Herman, 2000). As this analysis suggests, a facilitative leader is also essential for the creation and sustaining of a learning organization as well (Barnsley, Lemieux-Charles, McKinney, 1998).

Defining Facilitative Leadership

Theorists and practitioners in the field of facilitative leadership have agreed that the seven practices model is most applicable across the range of scenarios it is used in (Schwartz, 2003). The seven practices of the facilitative leadership mode including sharing an inspiring vision; focusing on results, process and relationship; seeking maximum appropriate involvement; designing pathways to action; facilitate agreement; coach performance; and celebrate accomplishment. These seven factors are often represented in the framework of a lifecycle to indicate the iterative nature of these strategies of leadership over time (Amy, 2005). There are also many parallels to transformational leaders in each of these seven steps. The extent a leader has the emotional intelligence (EI) to strengthen and use these skills to help subordinates both attain their potential given their unique skills while also making contributions to group performance is the extent to which a leader is effective in using transformational leadership to facilitate change (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). On other words, the best transformational leaders can quickly transition to a facilitative role based on their innate skill sets for managing uniqueness of individual contributors while attaining a high level of team-based orientation at the same time. When a leader is successful in managing these series of strategies iteratively and at difference paces for every one of their subordinates, learning organizations tend to form. A learning organization is predicated on the high levels of trust that exist between and among team members, and act as an accelerator for getting more complex work done that requires tighter levels of coordination. Trust becomes the catalyst of more effective shared accomplish of complex goals as the necessary interlinking processes and tasks are more easily accomplished (Dyer, Nobeoka, 2000).

With the end goal being the creation of trust, facilitative leaders must concentrate not so much on the mechanics of leadership, but the meaning. There is a big difference. For any manager, the mechanics of planning, organizing, leading and controlling can tend to overshadow the need for more fundamental and individual communication with each subordinate. This is one of the main reasons why highly transactional managers have difficulty transitioning into a facilitative role, as the perception of time, focus on process efficiency over personal uniqueness, and challenge to change is often quite difficult (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). Studies of the most successful facilitative leaders indicate they have a high degree of Emotional Intelligence (EI) (Amy, 2008). As a result, they are able to interpret situations and political conditions accurately and quickly, and then define strategies to respect those constraints while still attaining organizational objectives in the process (Schwartz, 2003). Studies conflict however on whether the level of EI is innate (Bens, 2007) or inherent (Brome, 2006) in facilitative leaders. Despite this variation, however it is clear that EI levels at a level comparable to transformational leadership have a greater propensity to concentrate on solutions to complex problems that coax trust and strong level of collaboration from subordinates (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). This is directly the opposite of transaction and even authoritarian managers who often order or demand compliance to an order and the completion of a directive, regardless of whether a subordinate is well suited for it or not. A transactional manager often will revert to short-term rewards or punishments to drive long-term collaboration and coordination in groups. This strategy, while effective in the short-term, does little to actually change behavior over the long-term. The reason is that a lack of trust will still pervade an organization despite transactional leaders' delivering threats or incentives that only change behavior, not attitude (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). Transformational leaders that concentrate on the most positive aspects of transactional leadership styles including the option for subordinates of earning immediate rewards for exceptional efforts, has shown potential in facilitating self-learning and change (Liu, Siu, Shi, 2010). Facilitative leaders that have the ability then to be situationally aware and able to tailor specific strategies to the individual needs of subordinates are more effective in (Amy, 2008). Underlying this ability to take the best strategies of transactional leadership with a transformational mindset is what separates exceptional leaders from managers over time (Herman, 2000).

What also emerges from this study of transformational leaders who are in the process of being trained to be facilitative is also the fact that their ways of thinking about problems change significantly. No longer focused purely on a tactical response, often-facilitative leaders look to their teams and ask highly specific, focused questions, looking to elicit insight and expertise (Amy, 2008). This highly collaborative and consensus-driven approach to decision making is one of the core strengths of facilitative leaders who seek to create trust and sustain it over time (Bens, 2007). Facilitative leaders believe the ultimate compliment you can pay a subordinate is to give them your undivided attention and concentrate on how best to manage them to the development of their abilities while also attaining organizational goals (Barnsley, Lemieux-Charles, McKinney, 1998). This is the fundamental difference between a transformational and facilitative leader; the latter has the ability and willingness to seek out the opinions of their subordinates, even if they do not agree with them, to create the best possible solution or strategy going forward.

It is in the coordinating of all the divergent and potentially conflicting opinions that subordinates have, and create a solution that encompasses the most valuable insights that makes a facilitative leader effective. This is a unique skill set and one that through EI can sense and respond to political conditions and sensitivities while at the same time concentrating on the central objective or goal that needs to be attained. Most fundamentally, however a facilitative leader sees value in the diversity of opinions and perspectives, and seeks to create through consensus and collaboration a strategy that both capitalize on the inherent strengths of the teams in an organization while also accomplishing the goals and strategies of the organization at the same time (Brome, 2006).

Facilitative Leadership and Trust

Across all of these factors and the seven-step model mentioned at the beginning of this paper, it is critical that a facilitative leader nurture and grow trust over time. A review of the current literature on facilitative leadership shows that the emphasis in much of the search is on how to re-orient the approaches leaders take to perceiving problems before ever acting on them (Amy, 2008) (Bens, 2007). By re-defining and re-orienting the mindset of a facilitative leader, the focus shifts away from decisions that could potentially derail or even harm the decision-making process more than help it (Schwartz, 2003). Overcoming self-defeating perceptions and behaviors is critical for a facilitative leader to attain the objectives that they are responsible for (Schwartz, 2003). Often however the mindset of concentrating on reaching a solution a quickly as possible, with a strong task orientation, is what pervades the mindset of many leaders, and the tendency of moving back to transactional and transformational approaches is prevalent. Shifting perspectives of how to manage, lead, and are truly facilitative takes effort and a willingness to step back from perceptions and embrace a different paradigm of working. Those that accomplish this from a leadership standpoint are the most trusted because they become the most authentic in terms of their leadership styles. Seeking out the feedback of subordinates, synthesizing their opinions and insights, gained through many years of experience, is a characteristic of a strong facilitative leader. Add to this the ability to respect divergent attitudes and beliefs by their subordinates while at the same time working towards a common goal, and facilitative leaders can attain a high degree of trust with subordinates as a result (Amy, 2008).