Are You a Benevolent Dictator? You Should Be!

Micromanaging, consensus management and democratic rule all can be highly ineffective leadership styles.

by Neal Whitten, PMP, Contributing Editor

IN RUNNING A COUNTRY, democracy is the best thing going to date. However, in running a business or project, my experience has shown that the benevolent dictator style is the most effective. A benevolent dictator leads by actively soliciting information and opinions from team members and others—listens, then demonstrates the leadership, courage, and boldness to personally make the right decision, and stands accountable for that decision. A benevolent dictator also holds his or her subordinates accountable for their decisions and they, in turn, hold their subordinates accountable for their decisions, and so on. In other words, everyone is encouraged and expected to make the decisions that affect their own domain of responsibility.
Now, I’m not talking about micromanaging. Micromanaging occurs when a leader chooses to make decisions for anyone and everyone within his or her influence. The micromanaging "leadership" style is highly offensive; it neither teaches the importance nor capitalizes on the promise of accountability. It should only be used in rare instances, for very short periods of time.
Many organizations and projects attempt to operate on either consensus or democratic rule. Consensus, which has been over-hyped for years, is mostly an ineffective tool in managing teams and projects. Consensus is obtaining the buy-in from a team or group by adjusting the final decision to a position with which everyone can live. For other than the most-trained teams, consensus causes the most important decisions to be compromised, to be watered down. In an attempt to satisfy all team members in buying into the team’s decision, the solution is almost always non-optimal and, frankly, is often without vision and personal commitment.
What’s that? You say there is personal commitment because everyone had a say in the decision? Yes, everyone had an opportunity to speak their mind, but my experience shows that many don’t speak up or they are quick to compromise or live with someone else’s proposal—even if they feel it is weak. Many members of a group consensus don’t feel personally committed. They hide behind the facade of the team or group.
What do I mean by personal commitment? Personal commitment is when you, personally, are charged with making a decision and then you are held accountable for the outcome of that decision. Teams cannot feel this level of accountability, only individuals can.
What about using the democratic voting process? Organizations or projects that consistently reach decisions by democratic rule frequently can be more ineffective than reaching decisions through consensus. Why? Because the majority vote is usually enough to lock in a decision. Unfortunately, everyone with a vote to cast is looking out after his or her own personal interests or the personal interests of the team he or she represents. Consequently, the right business decision can easily be overlooked or dismissed.
You might be asking about now, "If the benevolent dictator concept is so effective, then why don’t more leaders adopt this style of leading?" Two big reasons: The first reason is that in the free world many of us shy away from any association with the word "dictator." Even with the adjective "benevolent" added we still feel uneasy. The other big reason—and it’s the biggest one—is that to be a benevolent dictator means we have to make decisions that will, at times, be unpopular. Many of us have a hard time making decisions that are criticized by others. In fact, the primary reason why project managers fail is because they are too soft and have difficulty making the tougher decisions (see PM Network, December 1997, "The #1 Reason Why Project Managers Fail: Too Soft!").
I often hear project managers and resource managers say they cannot effectively adopt the benevolent dictator concept because they have a serious shortage of project members and employees with the good business sense—the leadership skills—to make the tough decisions expected of a benevolent dictator. I strongly disagree! For most of us, I believe we do have the people we need, they just haven’t been trained properly. After all, they watch how we manage and copy our styles.

ALL OF US NEED to be trained, coached and mentored in the skills and behaviors that make for the most effective leaders. Nearly everyone will rise to the expectations that we set for them—providing we constructively nurture them along the way. If you want your project to be run like a business where decisions are made based on what’s best for the business, and you want the project members to consistently take accountability for their own actions, then teach and encourage the powerful benevolent dictator concept at all levels of a project and organization. It’s good business!

Neal Whitten, PMP, president of The Neal Whitten Group (www.nealwhittengroup.com), is a speaker, trainer, consultant, mentor, and author in project management and employee development. His books include The EnterPrize Organization: Organizing Software Projects for Accountability and Success and Managing Software Development Projects: Formula for Success.

This material is reprinted from PM Network magazine (December 1998) with permission of the Project Management Institute Headquarters, Four Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-2399 USA. Phone: (610) 356-4600. Fax: (610) 356-4647. Project Management Institute (PMI) is the world’s leading project management association with over 50,000 members worldwide. For further information, contact PMI Headquarters at (610) 356-4600 or visit the web site at www.pmi.org. "PMI" and "PM Network" are trademarks of the Project Management Institute, Inc. © 2000 Project Management Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

ARTICLES | HOME | TOP