Leadership requires initiative but good leaders also remain aware of boundaries and the ramifications of their initiatives.
Listen to this AudioBlog
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
In almost all situations in the workplace there is a value placed on the idea of taking initiative, defined as “one’s personal, responsible decision to act”. It is often seen as the ability to get something done, solve problems or make a decision on a course of action without needing to rely on others to tell you what to do. In a great leader it also means you are able to think through the results of your actions.
Leadership requires that an individual take initiative and is considered a quality of great leaders. In most settings, however, one must also be aware of boundaries and ramifications. You cannot, for example, ignore company policy, exceed guidelines of authority or make decisions that are far out of the scope of your job description or you may be seen as a loose cannon, out-of-control and in violation of rules or even laws. You must be able to see the end result before you take the initiative or at least have a rationale goal or objective. So, how do you take initiative without getting into trouble?
Ask yourself these questions first.
1. Is there anything about what I am doing that does not feel like it will be okay with my supervisor or other company leaders? If yes, then think through your actions carefully, what are you doing, why you are doing it and what specific reservations do you think others would have of your actions.
For example, giving a refund to an unhappy customer for a mistake or error made previously might be satisfying to the unhappy customer but does it set a precedent for giving refunds to all unhappy customers, or present a danger to the cash flow of the organization? Where is the money coming from? How is it documented and what are the guidelines for giving refunds? Too often, companies cut prices in an attempt to keep customers but what they are doing is reducing the ceiling price for their products over time until the discounted prices become the norm rather than the exception.
2. Is what I am doing a new or innovative solution, or am I taking shortcuts that could come back to create more problems in the future or set precedents that would be disadvantageous to the organization?
For example, eliminating much of the “boilerplate” in contract language might make your agreements easier to understand and more acceptable to customers but could also eliminate protections and stipulations that also avoided future problems arising from a variety of situations, weakening your position in the agreement and decreasing their value. Boilerplate, like rules and regulations were created for a reason and you should understand their value before dispatching with them.
3. Have I thought through the ramifications of what I am doing? Who would have an issue with this? Is this ethical and fair? Does this put my organization in a stronger position or a weaker one? What would my supervisor or co-workers say about this?
For example, putting heavy emphasis on a sales force to get more business by concentrating on selling lower cost products might get more initial sales, but result in a higher volume of cancelled orders, or secondary negotiations to keep customers and unhappy customers because they were not sold the appropriate value equal product to match their needs in the first place. It is an example of not doing it right the first time resulting in higher quality costs in the long run.
Asking yourself “What Would Jesus Do?” might be good for addressing moral issues and asking “What Would My Boss Do?” might be better applied to workplace decisions since it is the Boss who will be evaluating your actions.
