Peer leadership is much harder than organizational leadership? Agree or Disagree and why?

2016-08-03T01:17:03-04:00

Response by COL Lee Flemming made Aug 3 at 2016 1:20 AM

2016-08-03T01:20:42-04:00

Peers will challenge and question decisions, and often want imperical evidence to support a proposed direction. Although peer leadership does get easier once you have earned their trust and respect; in this regard it is much like organizational leadership.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2016 1:23 AM

2016-08-03T01:23:11-04:00

Up to the point where your peers look to you as the de facto group leader COL Lee Flemming.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2016 1:28 AM

2016-08-03T01:28:13-04:00

Peer leadership is more difficult because most your peers can see themselves in the position of leadership and imagine how they would do things differently/better. AS COL Lee Flemming said, you have to earn your peer's trust and respect to truly be successful and then you have to keep it.

Unlike peer leadership, organization leadership has a expected level of authority assigned to the position due to the pre-established hierarchy. When somebody enters the position, that person is instantly recognized as the person with the prescribed authority to lead the organization. There is not the requirement to earn trust and respect from those within the organization.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2016 2:31 AM

2016-08-03T02:31:35-04:00

I commented on the levels of leadership on another thread. Let me find that tomorrow.

In a nutshell, positional leadership is the bottom most level of leadership. It is due solely to holding a position.

Response by SSG Jeremy Sharp made Aug 3 at 2016 4:40 AM

2016-08-03T04:40:39-04:00

Peer leadership is much more difficult since it is based on one's technical and tactical proficiency.
If you are not a strong leader, whose opinions others value, then your input will be of little significance to your peers. The military rank structure usually lends itself to establishing leadership within an organization based on the position one is occupying.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Aug 3 at 2016 11:20 AM

2016-08-03T11:20:39-04:00

Each has advantages and disadvantages.

Organizational Leadership suffers from "systemic pressures" in that the Leader must conform to specific expectations of role. There are things they must do. Not only based on billet, but based on perception. However, on the flip side, the leader has positional authority which can alleviate other challenges.

Peer leadership reduces some pressures, but presents different ones. Candor is greatly increased in that the question "why?" can be asked freely. Information, including context and insight can be accrued more easily.

If we think of information traveling through a funnel when going through a hierarchy, it goes through a hose when among peers. There are less system-based blockages, which allow natural leadership to grow. This in turn allows people's inherent skill to shine.

So... As a Leader looking down at a group of subordinates working on a group project, it's fairly easy to spot who the natural leaders will be. Who's ready for the next step. However, when placed within an organizational (billet based) role, the transition becomes difficult, because the tools are different. Authority vs Collaboration/Cooperation.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2016 9:23 PM

2016-08-03T21:23:50-04:00

Agree due to that fact that you are being judged by your peers and how you compare to them. On a grand scale. It makes one open their eyes to see how "qualified" they are at their job in a reality than by how they think they are. It's like going to an NCOES and realizing how your "peers" answer certain questions about their job or how much lack of knowledge one has.