Quite often, we come across the notion that leaders should ensure the development of their team's leadership skills, etc. I completely agree with this. However, looking from another perspective, don't you feel that for the development of subordinates, leaders should not be solely held accountable? The responsibility lies equally with the subordinates to collaborate and take an interest in their own development.
Your thoughts are welcome to deliberate on this aspect.
From India , Madras
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Your thoughts are welcome to deliberate on this aspect.
From India , Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear RM@CHENNAI,
You could have provided a little background on the nature of your query. Are you a senior or junior? Why have you raised this query? Anyway, let me give a reply. Yes, 100% I agree that the subordinate is also responsible for personal development. In fact, the leader can only guide or show the path, but finally one has to walk on one's own. However, there are a few additional reasons why a subordinate fails to respond despite prodding by the Manager.
The first one is recruitment. Whether the candidate has the ambition to grow or not has to be checked right at the time of recruitment itself. To light a lamp, there has to be oil. Can a lamp be lit without the oil? It may get lit, but after a while, the flame will extinguish. What oil is to a lamp is the ambition for career growth.
The second thing is one's learning attitude. No amount of training or coaching by the Manager will be effective if the learning attitude is missing in the subordinate. The Manager's efforts will be like water off a duck's back!
The third thing is the organization's culture. Is there a learning environment in the company? Are there examples of people joining at a lower level but rising in the hierarchy because of sheer efforts? Live examples motivate everybody, especially juniors.
The fourth thing is the general motivation level of the company. In many companies, low-IQ people are employed. They are hired even with low IQ because the salary offered is so low that it becomes impossible to attract people with average+ IQ. People with low IQ also know that they are incapable, but they continue to work because they know they may not get a job elsewhere!
The fifth and last thing is a mismatch in the subordinate's competence and the given job. Please remember, "for every job, there is a person, and for every person, there is a job." The asses cannot be expected to do the work of the horses. Any type of leadership is bound to fail with this mismatch.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
8034You could have provided a little background on the nature of your query. Are you a senior or junior? Why have you raised this query? Anyway, let me give a reply. Yes, 100% I agree that the subordinate is also responsible for personal development. In fact, the leader can only guide or show the path, but finally one has to walk on one's own. However, there are a few additional reasons why a subordinate fails to respond despite prodding by the Manager.
The first one is recruitment. Whether the candidate has the ambition to grow or not has to be checked right at the time of recruitment itself. To light a lamp, there has to be oil. Can a lamp be lit without the oil? It may get lit, but after a while, the flame will extinguish. What oil is to a lamp is the ambition for career growth.
The second thing is one's learning attitude. No amount of training or coaching by the Manager will be effective if the learning attitude is missing in the subordinate. The Manager's efforts will be like water off a duck's back!
The third thing is the organization's culture. Is there a learning environment in the company? Are there examples of people joining at a lower level but rising in the hierarchy because of sheer efforts? Live examples motivate everybody, especially juniors.
The fourth thing is the general motivation level of the company. In many companies, low-IQ people are employed. They are hired even with low IQ because the salary offered is so low that it becomes impossible to attract people with average+ IQ. People with low IQ also know that they are incapable, but they continue to work because they know they may not get a job elsewhere!
The fifth and last thing is a mismatch in the subordinate's competence and the given job. Please remember, "for every job, there is a person, and for every person, there is a job." The asses cannot be expected to do the work of the horses. Any type of leadership is bound to fail with this mismatch.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Employee Development - PPT 9.ppt