A new administrator takes over a department or division and immediately begins issuing edicts, disbanding committees, replacing people, and squelching the inevitable dissent--through fear and intimidation, if necessary.
In another area, a new person comes in and right away starts working to build consensus, listening to those who have been there longer and seeking to understand the issues before making any drastic decisions.
How can two people in such similar situations take such radically divergent approaches?
One of the most misunderstood aspects of higher-education administration, I believe, is the difference between leadership and control. Sadly, too many administrators are focused primarily on controlling the people and circumstances around them rather than on providing actual leadership to their areas.
Ironically enough, these are often the same individuals who, as underlings, squawked the loudest when they felt that their superiors were too authoritarian. Obviously, they’ve never been taught, either by example or any other means, the qualities that make a good leader.
True leadership requires humility, a willingness to listen, to admit that others might know more about a given area or situation, to acknowledge that one might actually be wrong on occasion. Control, on the other hand, is prideful and arrogant, seeking to have its own way and make others conform to its vision. An effective leader listens more than speaks, whispers more than shouts, apologizes more than blames.
True leadership seeks to serve rather than be served. History and religious tradition provide many examples of such leaders, from Ghandi to Martin Luther King, Jr., from Socrates to Jesus Christ, who famously taught that the last shall be first and the first shall be last. Leaders understand that one of their most important functions -- perhaps the most important -- is to help the people they lead reach their full potential, and not to exploit those people for their own gain, to make themselves look good, or to advance their own careers.
Ultimately, leadership is all about trust. The best leaders demonstrate trust in those around them, which is the opposite of control because it involves a great deal of letting go and no small amount of self-effacement . . . which brings us back to humility. Great leaders are also trustworthy, meaning that they tell the truth, do what they say they’re going to do, and can be counted on to go to the mat in defense of what they believe is right. Control tends to be cynical, calculating, and inconsistent.
The great paradox of leadership is that, by letting go, administrators ultimately achieve some measure of control over their circumstances, together with their colleagues; whereas, by attempting to clamp down, they merely invite passive aggressive resistance, if not outright mutiny, which in the end leads to chaos. This is a true and time-honored principle that all great leaders understand intuitively, and one that control freaks can never seem to grasp.
