Frank Wiekhorst

Man as an end and not as a tool

Good leadership empowers people within the limits of their individual potential. It would be a misguided mindset to instrumentalize people.

People are not the instrument of leadership. They are the purpose of leadership. Leadership should involve people, protect them from constant over-exertion, employ them according to their self-image, and, if they so desire, encourage their development. Good leadership empowers people within the scope of their individual potential.

Every leader lives in the tension between responsibility for the team’s performance on the one hand and the function of a service provider for the team on the other.

The idea that people should be viewed as an end goes back to Immanuel Kant. Kant argued that people possess intrinsic value and dignity because of their reason and their capacity for moral autonomy. This means that people should not be abused or exploited, but rather treated as independent individuals with rights and moral respect.

Companies are a part of, and also a beneficiary of, society. In this respect, the damage caused by poor leadership and the resulting harm to people always also weakens society.

Taking responsibility requires free thinking

Only those who can think freely and independently are able to take responsibility.

The ability to form an independent opinion based on one’s own considerations, as well as to make one’s own decisions, is the foundation of sound leadership. However, this does not mean that those in positions of responsibility cannot also choose to follow or trust the expertise of a third party. The categorical rejection of others’ ideas is not a sign of intellectual freedom.

Leaders must be able to decouple themselves emotionally and intellectually from thought leaders and have the ability to draw their own conclusions. Only then are they able to act independently. In particular, they should recognize when they are in an opinion bubble. These bubbles are characterized by favoring or rejecting certain lines of thought and facts, thus separating them from the outside world.

The ability to think freely requires a high degree of trust in one’s own mental powers. This mental power allows them to recognize their own limitations and warns them against intellectual dependence, which we all have to some extent.

Structure in planning and communication

Anyone who only starts thinking about leadership when it is needed cannot lead.

Anyone who wants to lead needs a readily available structure for assessing issues, planning, and communication. It’s both burdensome and inefficient to think about necessary structures only when the situation arises. Effective, well-thought-out structures must already be in place when needed.

The steps of recording the intention, comparing it with the current situation, and calculating forces.

• in the here and now (Stage 1),
• during the required action (Stage 2), and
• after the goal has been achieved (Stage 3),

weighing the corresponding risks, developing and weighing alternative courses of action, making and formulating a decision, and comprehensively communicating expectations to the team are the essential building blocks of solid leadership.

This structure must be present and available to every responsible person in every situation without delay. It is the basic framework for questions, further discussions, and a structured understanding of the scope for action.

Decision-making power

Decision-making power means being able to make a decision within a given time frame, even with incomplete information, and formulating it appropriately.

Decision-making power refers not only to the abilities of an individual, but also to groups and systems. Decision-making in larger systems is usually more complex and time-consuming. Therefore, every individual leader is encouraged to fully utilize their own decision-making scope. The willingness of individuals to make decisions relieves the burden on the system as a whole.

A leader must first determine for themselves whether a pending decision is still within their authority. The question of personal decision-making authority is more likely to be answered with “yes” in reactive systems and “no” in sluggish systems.

A system with high decision-making power must therefore not only be able to delegate decisions but also sanction unnecessary delegation to the next higher level. A leader cannot absolve themselves by referring decisions back to their own boss.

The majority of decisions will have to be made with incomplete information. The thesis is: “An early wrong decision causes less damage than a late right decision.”

Impact awareness

Impact awareness is the confidence in one's own ability to act. And it is the responsibility for one's own impact.

A solid leader possesses the positive attitude of being able to influence a situation through their actions. In this context, impact awareness forms the antagonistic counterpart to powerlessness. People who consider themselves powerless and helpless in the face of the status quo are – in every respect – unsuitable for leadership roles.

In general, the term impact awareness refers to a person’s ability to be aware of the impact of their actions and behavior on people, groups, organizations, and the environment. Impact awareness therefore requires empathy and self-reflection. This impact awareness must then lead to responsibility for impact. If this responsibility for impact is lacking, their suitability as a leader must also be reconsidered.

Will to act

The will to act and the ability to act are the basic prerequisites of leadership. It is the execution that determines the success of leadership.

If the will to act is lacking, then every plan, every risk assessment, every communication is a waste of resources. Decision-making power and awareness of impact are also completely worthless without the will to act.

Without implementation, leadership is merely a theoretical exercise. Every solid leader examines their own will, as well as the will of their team. If a consultant identifies a lack of will to act in the client, the advice is in vain.

Nurturing and maintaining the will to act is therefore one of the fundamental core areas of leadership. If, for example, subordinate managers lack the will to act, the higher-level leadership must respond.

However, an uncontrolled will to act often turns into pure actionism. Therefore, leadership must establish itself where there is a will to act.