I often hear people say that true leaders aren’t defined by an organizational chart. Real leaders are people that others are willing to follow. We’ve all heard the cliché that people don’t leave companies, they leave bosses. So why is it that in most organizations leaders get to choose their “followers” rather than the other way around?  What would happen if employees were able to choose their bosses instead of bosses choosing the people on their teams? 

Given the state of leadership in many companies, a radical approach like this might be worth a try. Clearly it would require some major revamping of current HR processes. However, I suspect that once such a system was in place, it wouldn’t take long for organizations to sort out the good leaders form the bad.

For years organizations have been using employee engagement surveys and leadership surveys to help develop leaders. But often these tools provide too little, too late. Once a person is in a leadership position it can be difficult to move him or her out of  the ranks of “leadership”. The best case scenario is that poor leaders get bounced around to leadership positions that don’t involve managing large or critical teams. The worst case scenario is that the people remain in their current position poisoning the part of the organization for which they are in charge.

Surveys are helpful feedback tools but they are reactive. An individual has to be in place for a long enough time in order for them to be useful.  Letting employees select their leaders is proactive. Employees aren’t going to choose to work for people with known issues.

While some organizations do a good job of acting on poor leaders, many do not create a sense of urgency and accountability for effective leadership. I would imagine that people would be more conscious of their leadership behaviors knowing that their position was contingent on people signing up for their team.

Does this sound too radical and not scalable?  W. L. Gore & Associates, the company that produces Gore-Tex and many other well known products has been taking a similar approach for decades. And they are not a mom and pop shop. W.L. Gore and Associates had revenues of $3.2 billion in 2011. They also have been on Fortune’s list of the 100 best places to work for 16 years in a row. While their approach is not exactly what I am suggesting, it does rely on the power of allowing leaders to emerge rather than be assigned.

Most organizations won’t be moving to this type of approach any time soon. However if your company did how would you fare?  What is keeping you in your leadership position?  If the answer is placement on an organizational chart or being in the good graces of your boss, you might want to re-assess what you are doing as a leader.

If you are a leader in name only, chances are your team is not contributing to their full potential. They may not be able to vote with their feet (in the short term) but at some point the problem will come back to you.

Lead your people as if your position depended on it. In many ways it really does.