Google also emphasizes its use of small teams which facilitates the speed at which the company works -- the teams are nonhierarchical, and the best ideas, rather than the most powerful leaders determine which idea ultimately 'wins out.' "At Google, we know that every employee has something important to say and that every employee is integral to our success" (Life at Google, 2011, Google). The CEO sits side-by-side ordinary workers at the (free) cafeteria. As a knowledge-based, information-sharing company, Google takes a non-discriminatory attitude towards the input of others. Information will increasingly become the currency of modern commerce, and soliciting new ideas is essential from a wide range of organizational participants. This stands against some of the more individualistic concepts of leadership as articulated by Warren Bennis, who stresses the need for a leader to have a singular, clear objective, although Bennis does believe in the value of understanding the organizational context and creating a sense of 'buy-in' for the idea. The 'trait' approach to leadership likewise suggests that only a select few have the needed traits or 'right stuff' to lead (Northouse 2007). Participatory leadership instead advances the concept that the whole organization must have the necessary motivation and commitment, and no single individual is great enough to achieve success. Leading is just about following, and knowing when to change course and step back because team members have a new idea they wish to advance.

Leadership is not the process of 'me' leading 'you,' rather it is the process of mutual engagement and learning. Although some individuals may have more formal responsibilities than others within an organization, no leader is ever 'in control' all of the time. Part of being responsive to the dynamic environment includes learning from members who may have more experience and knowledge of the types of changes that have occurred recently in the wider world. A CEO may be able to learn from a technologically astute member of his IT team; a manager who is dealing with an international client might learn from a member of the organization with family ties to that region.

Participatory management is ultimately an investment -- an investment...

Objectors to the idea might state that it is not suitable under all circumstances. Beginning a new organization with a coherent philosophy or orientating new workers might require a more directive form of leadership. But it is still possible to infuse even these situations with a spirit of mentorship, so there is a sense of an exchange, rather than a top-down direction of ideas.
Participatory management ensures that members of the organization are always learning from one another. Although there is certainly a place for outside consultants, they are not the only source of knowledge. When managers do not merely 'direct' but also strive to use employees as a resource, the organization is more responsive and dynamic to the external environment. And finally, perhaps most importantly of all, it fosters a place where it is more pleasant to work, and will draw higher-quality employees and retain them. Mentorship and growth is only possible when workers feel as if they have an active role in making a better organization and a better tomorrow, by realizing the mission of the organization.