The greatest difficulty for those who have the responsibility of being in front of a group, be it as a leader, manager or director, is to maintain behaviors that are consistent and aligned with the expectations of those who observe and rate them in their daily performance.
On many occasions we have heard the phrase " lead by example ", but perhaps we have not done the exercise of deepening the scope and meaning it has for the organizational culture and for the management processes in the organization.
Becoming a reference is a risk that increases when a self-proclamation is made, I mean that it is not easy to maintain a line of conduct that can or should be followed by others, among other things because each person is different and What for some may be desirable for others is not necessarily so.
On many occasions we hear bosses preach about the importance of this or that behavior and they take longer to finish their desideratum than they themselves to be caught in undesirable and sometimes questionable behaviors, in such a way that they are in charge of invalidating said purposes. This is the case perhaps because leadership is weak and is subject to the authority granted by the position and not necessarily the one offered by the results of its management.
Setting an example also means that there is a fact or behavior that must be followed or avoided and therefore those responsible for BEING an example must meet a series of characteristics. I want to emphasize the importance of making the difference between GIVING the example and BEING the example since it has a deep conceptual implication but with serious practical consequences since GIVING is a demonstration of the ideal that should be done with respect to something, while BEing means to embody in your actions what should be imitated, replicated or followed by other people in the organization.
The example, in terms of behavior, is a conscious and intentional action that aims to be shown to others as worthy of being imitated, in this sense we could question the validity of a leadership where the example is not born of a personal and deep conviction that affirms the action but, on the contrary, it becomes a mask that hides an agenda of incoherence and that therefore does not express the reality of what is wanted with the proposed action.
In order not to complicate this reflection, what I intend to do is to invite a debate on whether BEING an example for someone is valid in terms of training or is simply a process that ends in manifest incoherence when circumstances force a change in the direction initially proposed as desirable. to be followed and imitated.
We know of cases in the history of people who were consistent with their principles and values, who gave their lives for a cause and who are worthy of being imitated, there are in the religious, social, cultural, sports, business fields, etc., Now the question is whether their life was a dedication to the rostrum, where they are judged by their results, or is it about people who discovered and / or have identified that BEING an example is a natural consequence of everyday life and not a passing experience.
The great criticism of many of our business, social, religious, etc. icons, is their ability to remain leaders worthy of being imitated and followed. In many moments we discover stories and facts that would make the person unworthy and that therefore lead them to lose the credibility that they enjoyed and turn from one moment to another into anathema that nobody even wants to name.
Finally, it seems to me that it is worth thinking that transformative leadership must go beyond example, it must include the possibility of mistakes and errors, leadership is not to BE or to SET an example, it is more about TRANSFORMING with the example, in the possibility of turning management into a new experience for the members of the work team. Leadership is a necessary component in the transformation processes and the example is an option that is available to be taken, improved or changed, in such a way that the results meet the expectations and purposes of the organization.
