It’s the armchair quarterback syndrome: We sit comfortably from our position in the organization and critique the decisions of the leaders. It’s a common occurrence, but is it fair?

What I like about the idea is that people are wanting to make things better, so their comments are usually coming from a well-intended perspective. Unfortunately, those doing the critiquing often do not have the big picture information which is available to the leaders. Thus, their suggestions may not be as good for the organization as they might think.

Organizational structure by itself gives leadership access to more information. It’s more likely that they are aware of upcoming trends, moves by the competition, market conditions, etc. — information not readily available to the rank-and-file. Their decisions are (hopefully) made with these factors in mind.

But … but … but …

By the same token, the rank-and-file often has information that leadership overlooks, and this information would be greatly beneficial to leaders if they had it.

So yes, decisions by leadership can seem counter to what’s good for the organization — at least from the rank-and-file perspective. And most definitely, it would be wise for leaders to seek more input from all levels other organization.

But keep in mind this is a two-way street. The rank-and-file needs to speak up, and leaders need to ask. But for everything to work, leaders need to listen.

Share This

Filed in Work, Motivation, Management, Leadership, Teambuilding, Workplace, Corporate Culture