Dear boss… I know, I know that you have taken various leadership courses, but I still see you as a boss and not as a leader. The truth is that we do not succeed in establishing a hierarchical relationship that satisfies both in favor, and in pursuit, of effectiveness and quality of life in our environment, of synergy, of teamwork… Yes, me too, even being Engineer, I read books and I know the importance of combining effectiveness and professional satisfaction.
I have even read things about leadership in the company, although I do not know what they tell you in the courses for managers. Of course, and I would not want to frustrate you much, I do not see you as a leader (I hope you do not mind that I tell you a lot).
I wanted to talk to you basically about professionalism and knowledge, and I preferred to do it beforehand in writing to save time in the talk that, already live and direct, I hope we have. We are more or less the same age and, from my experience of these years in the organization, I believe that I cannot match your management capacity or your ability to deal with colleagues and clients; But frankly, I don't see you as a leader (no matter how many courses you take, I think) nor do I see myself as a follower. The truth is that I do not see myself as a collaborator or even as a human resource; I believe that I am a professional expert in my field, in which I carry out with success and responsibility, in accordance with what the company supposedly wants and says the President, and because apparently we belong to the "knowledge economy".
I have innovative initiatives, but I also have the perception that they are not well received; Sometimes I wonder if the organization really pursues continuous improvement and innovation, but I know that there may also be problems, difficulties, interests that escape me, so I resign myself. Nevertheless, I think, and let me confess, that you lack sufficient technical knowledge to evaluate my suggestions; I admit that you have the power and I, like my colleagues, know (it is difficult for me to keep myself updated in knowledge, although I try beyond the courses that are orchestrated), but there should be greater harmony between both: power and knowing.
Here is one of my reflections. Perhaps we could be more effective if I had a little more power and you something more to know; but it could also be resolved so that each one had the power that corresponded to him for his knowledge. Simplifying things, I would not meddle much in what to do or achieve, and you would not meddle in how it should be done. I am not only referring to procedures and rules that seem to me surpassed by common sense, but also to all that of corporate values, habits, etc., which are interpreted with so much lack of rigor.
In other words, tell me what quantitative and qualitative results are expected of me and of the community, and let me achieve them without commissioning parallel, indeed routine and bureaucratic, works of which I do not understand the need, and also without liturgical interruptions. In fact, I do not think it is necessary for you to evaluate me as frequently and with such a wealth of parameters, nor to be my coach. I have also read about coaching and mayeutics, and I believe that neither you are Socrates nor I your disciple. Believe me, I take care of my own development as a human being and as a professional, and again let me say what I think: you can teach me little about it.
But what bothers me most is that I am sometimes forced to work without professionalism, without care, for the sake of I don't know what reasons. Surely there are reasons, in our organization and perhaps in that of the client, for the deadlines to be more important than the quality, but I do not like to do things wrong knowingly: it is like a kind of prevarication. A professional is a professional; if what the company wanted were employees, then that would be another relationship (in which I don't seem to see the need for leaders either). The president speaks (at least in public) of the professionalism of everyone, managers and workers; I have not heard him speak of subordinates or employees, nor does he use the term "human resources", except to refer to the resources of human beings.
I think it is too obvious a contradiction that lifelong learning, professionalism, creativity, continuous improvement, quality, empowerment is preached…, and then I am asked to inhibit my know-how, or that my initiatives and ideas are past, if not suffocated. I have also read (maybe I shouldn't read that much), that "a good leader is one who knows how to get the best out of his collaborators"… Look, if I do things well, believe me it is not for you, but rather despite of you. It is also suggested by experts that leadership and coaching are almost synonymous… Look, delusions are reaching unimaginable heights, but I believe that the boss has to be a good boss, with a new and important role in the 21st century, and without having to be a leader or a coach,unless you have to make things up to fill your meeting and activity schedule.
I don't need a leader, but to know how to lead myself; But I think that juniors (as the plural suggests the Academy) do not need a leader, but, if anything, a senior to protect them until they come of age. In other words, the technical function should have greater independence from the managing power, as the judicial power does from the political power. This will sound revolutionary, but I am talking about autonomy in how to do things to satisfy the client, and less cultural-doctrinal delusions that seem to turn managers into officiators of a manipulative liturgy. This is how I see the supposed leaders: as officiators of a strange liturgy that comes to divert attention from what would be the right economy.
As an observer, I dislike the idea that companies become impoverished (stocks plummet) while executives get richer, and, even more in my environment, I dislike that professionalism is replaced by the follow-up of supposed leaders. But I do not have a revolutionary vocation but a professional one: I like to know, and I like to apply what I know. If I have to obey my criteria, then I take responsibility and inhibit faculties and strengths.
This is a worthwhile reflection. There seems to be an effort to uphold the superiority of business management professionals (managers, leaders…) at the expense of experts in technical areas. I can only confess that, without sufficient freedom of action, I do not consider myself an expert professional but an employee paid to obey. I think Pío Baroja said it: "In Spain you don't pay for work but for submission." In these times, knowledge is increasingly important and it takes a lot of effort to follow the progress in the different fields; management is also important, but perhaps the status quo would have to be reconsidered. Are we in a relationship between bosses and employees, or are we in a relationship between management professionals and technical professionals?
The company has the right to function as it wishes and, because it pays me, that I submit to its purposes and interests; But if they ask me for professionalism, that's another thing. A doctor cannot be compelled to prescribe a drug against his discretion, nor can a teacher be compelled to teach trigonometry before geometry. If I were to blindly subject my technical professionalism to your criteria of a different professionalism (that of business management), then my determination to do things could well be an obstacle: in fact, sometimes I think it has been.
I already know that we are not going to resolve the necessary changes in the company, but I would be satisfied with improving the effectiveness and professional satisfaction of our environment. That one, come in, believe me, why you get off the pedestal and see us as professionals who know a lot, and who want to do things better every day. More than followers, collaborators, subordinates, employees or human resources, we are workers who, by vocation or professional itch, want to do things in harmony with what we know and in accordance with the results required of us.
Dear boss, because you have a bigger office you don't know more, nor are you infallible: you simply have a bigger office. By taking many leadership courses, you are not a leader: you simply have more courses on your record. By continually evaluating myself you are not superior, you are simply a follower of internal rules. Oh, and what you do is not coaching: coaching is something else.
We can talk about all this if, like me, you seek greater collective effectiveness and a desirable professional satisfaction for all; if, on the contrary, what you were looking for was to defend a privileged position at all costs, then… Then in reality we would not need to speak. This worker is at your disposal, but also waiting to be summoned with the intention of finding a new and more suitable hierarchical relationship.
