Leading from the front is one of the most misunderstood and miscommunicated leadership principles. When most people think about leading from the front they conjure images in their mind of some great military commander out front, sword in hand, engaging with the enemy. Unfortunately, this cinematic representation of leadership is romanticised and is seriously skewed. The sword-wielding warrior will certainly be demonstrating some enthusiastic leadership prowess, right up to the point when he is killed in the first skirmish.
One of the hardest lessons to learn in the military is that good leaders need to remove themselves from the “doing” and focus on the leading. This is because you can’t observe and adjust the plan if you’re neck deep digging a fighting pit. You need to step back and observe your part of the battlefield and direct your troops to where they are needed. You can also command the reserve troops and coordinate fire support, logistics, resupply, and so on. You can’t do these things if your head is in a hole or if you are fighting or you are dead. Don’t get me wrong, there will be times when you must get your hands dirty, and all hands are on deck. But this is the exception to the rule, not the rule.
Stepping back and commanding your troops or staff can be an uncomfortable feeling, especially if you have been promoted from within the ranks and used to be at the same level. But you are no good to anyone if you are unable to lead because you are too involved in the work or you’re metaphorically dead.
The etymology of the word leader comes from the Old English word ‘lædan’ meaning ‘to go before as a guide’. It was first used in English in the 14th century to describe a person in charge, and then various other uses came about later. Leaders were known to be those people who would step into the darkness holding a lantern and charting the way. They often put themselves at greater risk resulting in personal sacrifice or sanction.
So, how do you lead from the front whilst maintaining oversight of the battlefield? The answer is distributed leadership.
Distributed leadership is not delegating. Delegation is the specific assignment of responsibility for an activity or task without authority. That means the individual who has been delegated the activity or task is responsible and accountable but has no authority over how it is to be completed. The authority remains vested in the leader who assigned the delegation.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu, leaders should not allocate subordinate leaders responsibility for a task without also giving them the authority to complete it.
Delegation has its place, but only so far as to allocate specific work or functions to subordinates. If leaders constantly delegate, work just gets pushed down the chain of command, causing people who have got less time and earn less money to complete the work. This can result in a workforce resenting leaders within the organisation as their perception of those in power is that they are lazy and just off-load their work onto others.
The purpose of distributed leadership is to increase the leadership capacity within an organisation. It is the transfer of part of the leader’s power to subordinate leaders, allowing them the freedom to lead their part of the organisation autonomously, whilst remaining aligned to the vision, mission, and values of the organisation.
Employing a distributed leadership model requires subordinate leaders to be given the autonomy to make key decisions in their areas of responsibility. This autonomy is central to achieving the objective of empowering leaders and giving them ownership of their part of the organisation.
They should not be micromanaged, and for new senior leaders, this can be a hard thing to do. Affording members of your senior or middle leadership team this level of autonomy requires a huge amount of trust and this is often outside the comfort zone for many senior leaders.
However, this trust needs to be earned as it is dangerous to give ineffective leaders full autonomy – therefore the term “earned autonomy” is common.
Distributed leadership empowers subordinate leaders to lead from the front and frees up senior leaders to maintain one eye on the battlefield and the other on the vision.
Most militaries employ distributed leadership. Military commanders know that leadership decisions must be allowed to be made by the individual who is closest to the action; hence, they push leadership responsibility down to the lowest level practicable.
“Great leaders do not create followers, they create more leaders.” Tom Peters
The concept of distributed leadership has significant benefits for the military but can equally benefit business, especially when employed with mission command. The six key benefits of employing a distributed leadership model are:
- Effectiveness – Accurate decisions and solutions that best address the situation.
- Decisive Action – Action that is deliberate and targets the specific issue or circumstance.
- Efficiency – Timeliness of decision making and responsiveness of the solution.
- Ownership – Full ownership, buy-in, and belief in the decisions at the level where they will have the most impact.
- Empowerment – Empowerment of subordinate leaders, leading to their growth, loyalty, and retention.
- Ethics– Leaders who are close to the issues and those they affect are more likely to be empathetic and make more ethical decisions.
