poor performers and demands more fr

poor performers and demands more from
them. If they don’t rise to the occasion, he replaces
them with people who can. You would
think such an approach would improve results,
but it doesn’t.
In fact, the pacesetting style destroys climate.
Many employees feel overwhelmed by
the pacesetter’s demands for excellence, and
their morale drops. Guidelines for working
may be clear in the leader’s head, but she
does not state them clearly; she expects people
to know what to do and even thinks, “If I
have to tell you, you’re the wrong person for
the job.” Work becomes not a matter of doing
one’s best along a clear course so much as secondguessing
what the leader wants. At the same
time, people often feel that the pacesetter
doesn’t trust them to work in their own way
or to take initiative. Flexibility and responsibility
evaporate; work becomes so task focused
and routinized it’s boring.
As for rewards, the pacesetter either gives no
feedback on how people are doing or jumps in
to take over when he thinks they’re lagging.
And if the leader should leave, people feel
directionless—they’re so used to “the expert”
setting the rules. Finally, commitment dwindles
under the regime of a pacesetting leader
because people have no sense of how their personal
efforts fit into the big picture.
For an example of the pacesetting style,
take the case of Sam, a biochemist in R&D at
a large pharmaceutical company. Sam’s superb
technical expertise made him an early
star: he was the one everyone turned to when
they needed help. Soon he was promoted to
head of a team developing a new product.
The other scientists on the team were as competent
and self-motivated as Sam; his métier
as team leader became offering himself as a
model of how to do first-class scientific work
under tremendous deadline pressure, pitching
in when needed. His team completed its
task in record time.
But then came a new assignment: Sam was
put in charge of R&D for his entire division. As
his tasks expanded and he had to articulate a
vision, coordinate projects, delegate responsibility,
and help develop others, Sam began to
slip. Not trusting that his subordinates were as
Leadership That Gets Results
harvard business review • march–april 2000 page 10
capable as he was, he became a micromanager,
obsessed with details and taking over for others
when their performance slackened. Instead
of trusting them to improve with guidance and
development, Sam found himself working
nights and weekends after stepping in to take
over for the head of a floundering research
team. Finally, his own boss suggested, to his relief,
that he return to his old job as head of a
product development team.
Although Sam faltered, the pacesetting
style isn’t always a disaster. The approach works
well when all employees are self-motivated,
highly competent, and need little direction or
coordination—for example, it can work for
leaders of highly skilled and self-motivated
professionals, like R&D groups or legal teams.
And, given a talented team to lead, pacesetting
does exactly that: gets work done on
time or even ahead of schedule. Yet like any
leadership style, pacesetting should never be
used by itself.
The Coaching Style. A product unit at a global
computer company had seen sales plummet
from twice as much as its competitors to
only half as much. So Lawrence, the president
of the manufacturing division, decided to
close the unit and reassign its people and
products. Upon hearing the news, James, the
head of the doomed unit, decided to go over
his boss’s head and plead his case to the CEO.
What did Lawrence do? Instead of blowing
up at James, he sat down with his rebellious direct
report and talked over not just the decision
to close the division but also James’s future.
He explained to James how moving to
another division would help him develop new
skills. It would make him a better leader and
teach him more about the company’s business.
Lawrence acted more like a counselor than a
traditional boss. He listened to James’s concerns
and hopes, and he shared his own. He
said he believed James had grown stale in his
current job; it was, after all, the only place he’d
worked in the company. He predicted that
James would blossom in a new role.
The conversation then took a practical turn.
James had not yet had his meeting with the
CEO—the one he had impetuously demanded
when he heard of his division’s closing. Knowing
this—and also knowing that the CEO unwaveringly
supported the closing—Lawrence
took the time to coach James on how to
present his case in that meeting. “You don’t get
an audience with the CEO very often,” he
noted, “let’s make sure you impress him with
your thoughtfulness.” He advised James not to
plead his personal case but to focus on the
business unit: “If he thinks you’re in there for
your own glory, he’ll throw you out faster than
you walked through the door.” And he urged
him to put his ideas in writing; the CEO always
appreciated that.
Lawrence’s reason for coaching instead of
scolding? “James is a good guy, very talented
and promising,” the executive explained to us,
“and I don’t want this to derail his career. I
want him to stay with the company, I want
him to work out, I want him to learn, I want
him to benefit and grow. Just because he
screwed up doesn’t mean he’s terrible.”
Lawrence’s actions illustrate the coaching
style par excellence. Coaching leaders help employees
identify their unique strengths and
weaknesses and tie them to their personal and
career aspirations. They encourage employees
to establish long-term development goals and
help them conceptualize a plan for attaining
them. They make agreements with their employees
about their role and responsibilities in
enacting development plans, and they give
plentiful instruction and feedback. Coaching
leaders excel at delegating; they give employees
challenging assignments, even if that
means the tasks won’t be accomplished
quickly. In other words, these leaders are willing
to put up with short-term failure if it furthers
long-term learning.
Of the six styles, our research found that
the coaching style is used least often. Many
leaders told us they don’t have the time in
this high-pressure economy for the slow and
tedious work of teaching people and helping
them grow. But after a first session, it takes
little or no extra time. Leaders who ignore
this style are passing up a powerful tool: its
impact on climate and performance are
markedly positive.
Admittedly, there is a paradox in coaching’s
positive effect on business performance because
coaching focuses primarily on personal
development, not on immediate work-related
tasks. Even so, coaching improves results. The
reason: it requires constant dialogue, and that
dialogue has a way of pushing up every driver
of climate. Take flexibility. When an employee
knows his boss watches him and cares about
what he does, he feels free to experiment.
Leadership That Gets Results
harvard business review • march–april 2000 page 11
After all, he’s sure to get quick and constructive
feedback. Similarly, the ongoing dialogue
of coaching guarantees that people know what
is expected of them and how their work fits
into a larger vision or strategy. That affects responsibility
and clarity. As for commitment,
coaching helps there, too, because the style’s
implicit message is, “I believe in you, I’m investing
in you, and I expect your best efforts.”
Employees very often rise to that challenge
with their heart, mind, and soul.
The coaching style works well in many business
situations, but it is perhaps most effective
when people on the receiving end are “up for
it.” For instance, the coaching style works particularly
well when employees are already
aware of their weaknesses and would like to
improve their performance. Similarly, the style
works well when employees realize how cultivating
new abilities can help them advance. In
short, it works best with employees who want
to be coached.
By contrast, the coaching style makes little
sense when employees, for whatever reason,
are resistant to learning or changing their
ways. And it flops if the leader lacks the expertise
to help the employee along. The fact is,
many managers are unfamiliar with or simply
inept at coaching, particularly when it comes
to giving ongoing performance feedback that
motivates rather than creates fear or apathy.
Some companies have realized the positive impact
of the style and are trying to make it a
core competence. At some companies, a significant
portion of annual bonuses are tied to an
executive’s development of his or her direct reports.
But many organizations have yet to take
full advantage of this leadership style. Although
the coaching style may not scream
“bottom-line results,” it delivers them.
Leaders Need Many Styles
Many studies, including this one, have shown
that the more styles a leader exhibits, the better.
Leaders who have mastered four or
more—especially the authoritative, democratic,
affiliative, and coaching styles—have
the very best climate and business performance.
And the most effective leaders switch
flexibly among the leadership styles as
needed. Although that may sound daunting,
we witnessed it more often than you might
guess, at both large corporations and tiny
start-ups, by seasoned veterans who could explain
exactly how and why they lead and by
entrepreneurs who claim to lead by gut alone.
Such leaders don’t mechanically match their
style to fit a checklist of situations—they are
far more fluid. They are exquisitely sensitive to
the impact they are having on others and
seamlessly adjust their style to get the best results.
These are leaders, for example, who can
read in the first minutes of conversation that a
talented but underperforming employee has
been demoralized by an unsympathetic, do-itthe-
way-I-tell-you manager and needs to be inspired
through a reminder of why her work
matters. Or that leader might choose to reenergize
the em

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

pemain miskin dan tuntutan lebih darimereka. Jika mereka tidak naik ke kesempatan, ia menggantikanmereka dengan orang-orang yang dapat. Anda akanberpikir pendekatan tersebut akan meningkatkan hasil,Tapi itu tidak.Pada kenyataannya, gaya pacesetting menghancurkan iklim.Banyak karyawan merasa kewalahan olehpacesetter tuntutan untuk keunggulan, dantetes moral mereka. Pedoman untuk bekerjamungkin jelas dalam kepala pemimpin, tapi iatidak menyatakan mereka jelas; Dia mengharapkan oranguntuk mengetahui apa yang harus dilakukan dan bahkan berpikir, "jika sayaharus memberitahu Anda, Anda orang yang salah untukpekerjaan." Pekerjaan tidak menjadi soal melakukansalah satu terbaik sepanjang yang jelas tentu saja begitu banyak sebagai secondguessingapa yang pemimpin ingin. Pada saat yang samawaktu, orang sering merasa bahwa pacesettertidak mempercayai mereka untuk bekerja dengan cara mereka sendiriatau untuk mengambil inisiatif. Fleksibilitas dan tanggung jawabmenguap; pekerjaan menjadi begitu tugas yang terfokusdan routinized membosankan.Sebagai imbalan, pacesetter baik memberikan noumpan balik tentang bagaimana orang-orang yang melakukan atau melompat diuntuk mengambil alih ketika ia berpikir mereka sedang tertinggal.Dan jika pemimpin harus meninggalkan, orang merasatanpa arah — mereka begitu terbiasa "ahli"menetapkan aturan. Akhirnya, komitmen dwindlesdi bawah rezim seorang pemimpin pacesettingkarena orang tidak memiliki rasa bagaimana pribadi merekausaha masuk ke dalam gambaran besar.Misalnya, gaya pacesetting,Ambil kasus Sam, biokimiawan di R & D diperusahaan farmasi yang besar. Sam's luar biasakeahlian teknis membuatnya awalbintang: dia adalah orang yang semua orang berubah ketikamereka membutuhkan bantuan. Segera ia dipromosikan keKetua Tim pengembangan produk baru.Para ilmuwan di tim yang yang kompetendan motivasi diri sebagai Sam; métier nyasebagai tim pemimpin menjadi menawarkan dirinya sebagaimodel bagaimana melakukan karya ilmiah kelas satudi bawah tekanan luar biasa tenggat waktu, pitchingketika diperlukan. Tim selesai nyatugas dalam waktu singkat.Tapi kemudian datang penugasan baru: Sam sangatmengepalai R & D divisi seluruh nya. Sebagaitugasnya diperluas dan dia harus mengartikulasikanVisi, proyek koordinat, mendelegasikan tanggung jawab,dan membantu mengembangkan orang lain, Sam mulaislip. Tidak mempercayai bahwa bawahannya yang sebagaiKepemimpinan yang mendapat hasilHarvard business review • Maret-april 2000 halaman 10mampu seperti dia, ia menjadi micromanager,terobsesi dengan rincian dan mengambil alih untuk orang lainKetika kinerja mereka slackened. Sebaliknyadari mempercayai mereka untuk meningkatkan dengan bimbingan danpengembangan, Sam menemukan dirinya bekerjamalam dan akhir pekan setelah melangkah di untuk mengambilatas kepala penelitian flounderingtim. Akhirnya, sendiri bos yang disarankan, untuk bantuan nya,bahwa ia kembali ke jabatannya sebagai kepalatim pengembangan produk.Meskipun Sam goyah, pacesettinggaya tidak selalu bencana. Karya-karya pendekatanbaik ketika semua karyawan motivasi dirisangat kompeten, dan memerlukan sedikit arah ataukoordinasi — misalnya, dapat bekerja untukpemimpin sangat terampil dan motivasi diriprofesional, seperti kelompok R & D atau tim hukum.Dan, mengingat tim berbakat untuk memimpin, pacesettingtidak tepat itu: mendapatkan kerja yang dilakukan padawaktu atau bahkan lebih cepat dari jadwal. Namun sepertigaya kepemimpinan, pacesetting tidak bolehdigunakan sendiri.Gaya pelatihan. Unit produk di globalperusahaan komputer telah melihat penjualan plummetdari dua kali sebanyak pesaingnya untukhanya setengah sebanyak. Begitu Lawrence, PresidenDivisi manufaktur, memutuskan untukdekat unit dan menetapkan kembali orang-orang danproduk. Setelah mendengar berita, James,kepala unit ditakdirkan, memutuskan untuk pergi kebosnya di kepala dan membela kasusnya ke CEO.Apa yang lakukan dengan Lawrence? Daripada peniupansampai di James, dia duduk dengan hatinya langsung memberontakLaporan dan berbicara bukan hanya keputusanuntuk menutup Divisi tetapi juga James di masa depan.Dia menjelaskan kepada James bagaimana bergerak untukDivisi lain akan membantunya mengembangkan baruketerampilan. Itu akan membuatnya lebih baik pemimpin danDia mengajar lebih banyak tentang bisnis perusahaan.Lawrence bertindak lebih seperti seorang konselor daripadabos tradisional. Ia mendengarkan kekhawatiran James'sdan harapan, dan ia berbagi sendiri. Diamengatakan ia percaya James telah tumbuh basi dalamPekerjaan sekarang; itu adalah, setelah semua, satu-satunya tempat dia akanbekerja di perusahaan. Dia memperkirakan bahwaJames akan berkembang dalam peran baru.Percakapan kemudian mengambil giliran praktis.James tidak belum punya pertemuannya denganCEO — yang ia tidak sabar menuntutketika ia mendengar penutupan Divisi nya. Mengetahuiini- dan juga mengetahui bahwa CEO unwaveringlydidukung penutupan — Lawrencemengambil waktu untuk pelatih James pada bagaimanaperkaranya pertemuan. "Anda tidak mendapatkansebuah penonton dengan CEO sangat sering,"iamencatat, "Mari kita pastikan Anda terkesan denganperhatian Anda." Ia menyarankan James tidakmemohon tapi kasus nya pribadi untuk fokus padaunit bisnis: "jika dia berpikir bahwa Anda berada di sana untukkemuliaan Anda sendiri, ia akan membuang Anda lebih cepat daripadaAnda berjalan melalui pintu." Dan dia mendesakDia meletakkan ide-ide dalam tulisan; CEO selalumenghargai itu.Lawrence's alasan untuk pembinaan bukancacian? "James adalah orang baik, sangat berbakatdan menjanjikan,"Eksekutif menjelaskan kepada kami,"dan saya tidak ingin ini untuk menggelincirkan karirnya. Sayaingin dia tetap dengan perusahaan, aku inginDia bekerja keluar, aku ingin dia belajar, saya ingindia untuk mendapatkan keuntungan dan tumbuh. Hanya karena diakacau up tidak berarti dia mengerikan. "Lawrence tindakan menggambarkan pembinaangaya par excellence. Coaching pemimpin membantu karyawanmengidentifikasi kekuatan mereka unik dankelemahan dan mengikat mereka untuk pribadi mereka danaspirasi karir. Mereka mendorong karyawanuntuk menetapkan jangka panjang tujuan pembangunan danmembantu mereka konsep rencana untuk mencapaimereka. Mereka membuat perjanjian dengan karyawantentang peran dan tanggung jawabmemberlakukan rencana pengembangan, dan mereka memberibanyak instruksi dan umpan balik. Pembinaanpemimpin unggul mendelegasikan; mereka memberikan karyawantugas-tugas yang menantang, bahkan jika ituberarti tugas tidak diselesaikancepat. Dengan kata lain, para pemimpin ini bersediauntuk memasang dengan jangka pendek kegagalan jika itu furtherspembelajaran jangka panjang.Enam gaya, penelitian kami menemukan bahwagaya ini paling sering digunakan. Banyakpemimpin mengatakan mereka tidak punya waktuperekonomian ini tinggi-tekanan untuk lambat danpekerjaan membosankan untuk mengajar orang-orang dan menolongmereka tumbuh. Tapi setelah sesi pertama, dibutuhkansedikit atau tidak ada tambahan waktu. Pemimpin yang mengabaikangaya ini lewat atas alat yang ampuh: itsdampak pada iklim dan kinerja yangsangat positif.Diakui, ada sebuah paradoks dalam pembinaan 'sefek positif pada kinerja bisnis karenapelatihan berfokus terutama pada pribadipengembangan, bukan pada langsung terkait dengan pekerjaantugas-tugas. Meskipun demikian, pembinaan meningkatkan hasil. Thealasan: hal ini membutuhkan dialog berkelanjutan, dan bahwadialog memiliki cara untuk mendorong setiap driveriklim. Mengambil fleksibilitas. Ketika seorang karyawantahu bosnya watches dia dan peduliapa yang dia lakukan, dia merasa bebas untuk percobaan.Kepemimpinan yang mendapat hasilHarvard business review • Maret-april 2000 halaman 11Setelah semua, dia yakin untuk mendapatkan cepat dan konstruktifumpan balik. Demikian pula, dialogpembinaan jaminan bahwa orang tahu apayang diharapkan dari mereka dan bagaimana mereka bekerja sesuaike dalam visi besar atau strategi. Yang mempengaruhi tanggung jawabdan kejelasan. Sebagai komitmen,pembinaan membantu di sana, juga, karena dengan gayapesan implisit adalah, "saya percaya pada Anda, saya sedang berinvestasidalam diri Anda, dan aku berharap upaya terbaik Anda. "Karyawan sangat sering bangkit untuk tantangandengan hati, pikiran, dan jiwa.Gaya bekerja dengan baik di banyak bisnissituasi, tetapi mungkin adalah paling efektifKetika orang-orang di akhir menerima "untukIt." Misalnya, gaya bekerja sangatbaik ketika karyawan sudahmenyadari kelemahan mereka dan inginmeningkatkan kinerja mereka. Demikian pula, gayabekerja dengan baik ketika karyawan menyadari bagaimana budidayakemampuan baru yang dapat membantu mereka maju. Dalampendek, it works terbaik dengan karyawan yang inginuntuk melatih.Sebaliknya, gaya pelatihan membuat sedikitmerasakan ketika karyawan, untuk alasan apa pun,tahan terhadap belajar atau mengubah merekacara. Dan itu jepit jika pemimpin tidak memiliki keahlianuntuk membantu karyawan sepanjang. Faktanya adalah,banyak Manajer tidak terbiasa dengan atau hanyakompeten di pelatihan, khususnya ketika datanguntuk memberikan umpan balik berlangsung kinerja yangmemotivasi daripada menciptakan rasa takut atau apatis.Beberapa perusahaan telah menyadari dampak positifgaya dan mencoba untuk membuatnyakompetensi inti. Di beberapa perusahaan, signifikanporsi tahunan bonus terikatEksekutif di pengembangan nya laporan langsung.Tetapi banyak organisasi belum mengambilkeuntungan penuh gaya kepemimpinan ini. Meskipungaya pelatihan mungkin tidak menjerit"hasil bottom-line," ini memberikan mereka.Pemimpin perlu banyak gayaBanyak penelitian, termasuk satu, telah menunjukkanbahwa lebih gaya pemimpin pameran, semakin baik.Para pemimpin yang telah menguasai empat ataulain — terutama otoritatif, Partai Demokrat,gaya affiliative, dan pelatihan — memilikiiklim dan bisnis terbaik kinerja.Dan para pemimpin yang paling efektif beralihfleksibel antara gaya kepemimpinan sebagaidiperlukan. Walaupun itu mungkin terdengar menakutkan,kita menyaksikan lebih sering daripada yang Anda mungkinkira, di kedua perusahaan besar dan kecilStart-up, oleh veteran berpengalaman yang bisa menjelaskanpersis bagaimana dan mengapa mereka memimpin danpengusaha yang mengaku dipimpin oleh usus sendirian.Para pemimpin seperti mekanis tidak cocok merekagaya untuk menyesuaikan daftar situasi — merekajauh lebih banyak cairan. Mereka indah sensitif terhadapdampak mereka mengalami pada orang lain danmulus menyesuaikan gaya mereka untuk mendapatkan hasil terbaik.Ini adalah pemimpin, misalnya, yang dapatBaca di menit pertama dari percakapan yangtelah berbakat tapi karyawan berkinerja buruktelah kehilangan semangat oleh melakukan tidak simpatik,-itthe -cara-saya-memberitahu-Anda manajer dan kebutuhan untuk Jadilah Terinspirasimelalui pengingat mengapa pekerjaannyahal-hal. Atau pemimpin yang mungkin memilih untuk meremajakanem