Cowardly Leaders who are in positions of power have the ability and authority to get rid of their subordinates. That isn’t disputed. However, how they choose to get rid of their subordinates helps define a true cowardly leader.
How Cowardly Leaders Eliminate Employees
Cowardly Leaders are in unique positions. They have the power and authority to make decisions that dramatically-even drastically-affect the careers and lives of the people who work for them. Being in a professional position by no means insures that they will be professional. There are at least four different ways they use:
- The Old Fashioned Way- Cowardly leaders can always fire someone if the charter or city/county ordinances allow it. It’s rare, except in a politicized city government, that there isn’t some protection for an employee. However, in those power-centric organizations where a cowardly leader is in power, firing someone who doesn’t toe the company line is always an easy option.
- “We are going in another direction.” When cowardly leaders have no grounds to fire someone (i.e. the employee hasn’t committed a violation that warrants termination), they often turn to the cowardly way out: “We are going in another direction.” This means, “I don’t have to give you a reason, and I don’t have to tell you why. I have someone I like better. I have someone who will be a better yes-man than you are.” It’s rare for anyone but a cowardly leader to use this as an excuse. They don’t have the courage to give a reason, so they don’t.
- Making life miserable- Again, this method is used to avoid conflict and to avoid doing their job as a supervisor- i.e., supervising. To get rid of someone that is protected by a city or county charter, the cowardly leader resorts to innuendo and “fact”-finding, where the facts are hand-selected. They use reassignment, a radical shift in work hours, work schedule, work location, or a combination of all the above. Multiple reports and assignments are ordered with quick suspense dates. Once the reports are submitted, the cowardly leader adjusts them. His ulterior motive is to blame the findings on the report’s author. Moreover, the ultimate goal is to make work so miserable that the employee leaves on his own accord. This relieves the cowardly leader the burden of having to actually do his job and lead an organization.
- Demote and Defame. Cowardly leaders can reassign and demote those direct reports who do not toe the line. Demoting results in lower morale, and not just for the employees who are demoted. All employees who see what could happen to them if they do not become yes-men are affected. Once demoted, these employees’ reputations are then defamed by carefully worded statements that add to the negative reputation the cowardly leader is attempting to foster.
Commonalities among Cowardly Leaders
There are some constants that anyone who pays attention can easily see regarding how cowardly leaders eliminate employees. First, they avoid conflict. They don’t have to, and therefore usually do not, counsel, discipline, evaluate or guide their employees. Their management style often consists of “do it this way or else.” Suggestions, alternatives and reasons why something might be a better idea are often not just ignored, but criticized. They also spend much more time defending their actions and insuring that anything they do is protected than they do in actually performing supervision on the employees they manage.
So how can you tell the difference between a true, courageous Leader and a cowardly leader? It’s simple. True leaders work with employees, counsel them, usually multiple times, have evaluations- even more often than is required by charter. They document any weak areas, give work plans to the employee, and lay out timetables to improve. In other words, the intent is to make the employee better. Cowardly leaders do none of the above. Their overriding goal is to protect themselves, increase their power, and surround themselves with like-minded individuals who do not question.
II-47
