Leading Without Power Max De

Leading Without Power

Max De Pree, author of Leading Without Power: Finding Hope in Serving Community, was the CEO of Herman Miller, the office furniture company, and had written two books before this one. This one explores an interesting anomaly in American culture: The fact that the nation with the most vibrant business sector on the planet also has a thriving non-profit sector, and it is that sector that provides most of the satisfaction individuals derive from their lifetime pursuits. "The more I consider human potential, and its intricacies, the more I believe that not-for-profit organizations are increasingly where people turn to fulfill themselves. In fact, a friend of mine calls it an American irony that here in the United States, the home of the most effective economic system we know, so many people turn to the non-profit world to fulfill themselves" (De Pree, 2003, p. vii).

De Pree investigated this dichotomy, not in order to write a sociological tract about it, but rather to determine what it is leaders in non-profit organizations do that might translate to all organizations. Within the book itself, De Pree manages to blend other dichotomies. For example, while he extols measurement as a way to move toward visions for change, he also engages in the 'warm fuzzies' of explaining how trust can be but within organization. In short, this book seems to be a blueprint for blending the old, industrial world with the New Age world that is not about leading by fiat, but by inspiring followers more by what one is than by what one does. He also believes that considering a business to be a movement rather than an organization moves leaders a long way toward being able to inspire rather than dominate.

Movements are easier to recognize from the inside. There is a harmony of relationships and a constructive conflict of ideas. There is a palpable unity as the people there implement their vision" (De Pree, 2003, p. 23).

This is in great contrast to ordinary working organizations, in which De Pree points out that the only unity often arises because of widespread hatred for a bad boss, or because of the paycheck that makes it all, if not worthwhile, at least sensible to continue to work there.

De Pree uses personal example to explain how he went from being a standard-issue CEO to being a guru of the holistic viewpoint of organizational conduct. He tells of his wife's family, a family who considered a kiss to be the ordinary form of greeting, rather than a behavior reserved for intimacy or long-standing familiar relationship. He uses the story to open his readers' minds to the possibility of different, more relaxed, ways of behaving with other humans. And he also uses it, as he often does with his stories throughout the book, to make a point that is germane to his main idea, leading without over-powering. He notes that "Movement thrive on their stories" (De Pree, 2003, p. 24), and that, "We are defined by our stories, which continually form us and make us vital and give us hope. Stories teach and preserve traditions and practices and policies and values. I don't know many people who prefer a manual to a myth" (De Pree, 2003, p. 24).

For all De Pree's attention to the softer side of human organizational behavior, he does note that competence is necessary, and that a no amount of character will make up for a lack of competence. Indeed, if there were a caveat regarding transferring non-profit conduct to for-profit life, it would be in avoiding the pitfall of excusing incompetence in favor of character.

Although it seems to hearken back to the early industrial gurus of the past century -- Frederick Taylor and those who came after him in attempting to dissect industrial efficiency -- De Pree believes measuring one's effectiveness is key to achieving goals. He believes, however, that even for-profits often measure the wrong things, the pedestrian things, instead of the truly meaningful processes and events. However, he has no illusions that it is possible to measure everything. He notes, too, that "There are mysteries in organizations just as there are mysteries in life"(De Pree, 2003, p. 48).

On thing that is not a mystery, at least in terms of measuring, is that one needs to measure the right things. De Pree tells a probably often-told tale about the Soviet Union and the habit of factory managers there measuring 'inputs,' how many pounds of glue were used in shoes, for example, so that they could determine whether a factory was successful. That the resulting product might have been all left shoes and no right shoes would have seemed inconsequential, just as long as lots of glue had been used up. De Pree suggested that the old Soviets needed to take a broader view of input measurement.

In his own version of 'management by walking around,' De Pree seems to believe 'water cooler' discussions are a good way to measure some inputs, such as the inputs that concern employee interest.

De Pree considers 'inputs' in a very different light from the old Soviets, or even from the new Americans; rather than measuring board feet of lumber, he suggests that measuring what the organization expects from the employees is a better measure, and may include not only board feet of lumber sawed, but belief in a shared vision and so on.

Inputs are, to De Pree, the annual meeting at which visions are produced and shared. In addition, they are also questions and contrary opinions, the very things he believes are among the important ones setting non-profit organizations apart from for-profit ones. Perhaps the most useful point he makes regarding this, in a society obsessed with 'accountability,' is that there is a place for anonymity. While he notes that many executives will simply disregard any information about the organization that they receive anonymously, others will retain the information, possibly for later confirmation and action. Still others will use their powers of discernment and take anonymous information very seriously under advisement. De Pree makes the point that "we express our opinions anonymously every time we vote" (De Pree, 2003, p. 54), and those are certainly taken seriously.

Despite De Pree's insistence that leadership be by example rather than force, or perhaps because of it, he ends his discussion with an extensive treatise on morality and ethics, not a bad subject in the post-Enron era. He wrote this book before the Clinton-Lewinsky debacle, however, so it was apparent that at least in some organizations, notably the premier organization in the United States, its government, leaders were not yet completely cognizant concerning one of De Pree's most important points: "Nothing is more dispiriting than the discovery of the leader in a vital organization who has betrayed the moral purpose of the group to obtain a few paltry signs of personal power and wealth' (De Pree, 2003, p. 185).