If you have been following these posts you know that La Piana Associates has turned itself into a bit of an organizational laboratory. We’re looking at new ways of structuring everything from firm management to consulting project assignments. We now view the entire process as “transformation.” At some point tinkering becomes change and change becomes transformation: development of an entirely new framework for the organization.

We have replaced our traditional organizational chart with a Venn Diagram with three overlapping circles: business management, practice management, and integration. Our team members play different roles in one or more of those circles.

All our consultants now participate in monthly learning circles, and we have created two practice area groups for ongoing professional development: one in strategic restructuring (partnerships: mergers, joint ventures, etc.) and the other in business planning. We have expanded our pool of supervisors so that each consultant shares her/his supervisor with no more than two others.

An article in the August/September Scientific American Mind says something we have long suspected about leaders: their success is determined in large part by the fit of their agenda and style with the needs of the group being led. The research–by Stephen D. Reicher, S. Alexander Haslam, and Michael J. Platow–suggests that leaders must both understand the values of those to be led and also try to mold those values.

The image of the bold, charismatic leader is ingrained on our national psyche, but it may well be that those who lead through the force of their personality can only do so when the people needing leadership seek such a powerful leader.

The authors claim that there is not a fixed leadership personality, but rather a fit with the time, place and needs of the group. They use the example of the German people, who sought a strong leader prior to Hitler and weak government ever after.

I find this argument interesting. However, what I find fascinating is the statement that “Leaders who adopt this strategy must try not only to fit in with their group but also to shape the group’s identity in a way that makes their own agenda and policies appear to be an expression of that identity.”

And I thought Machiavelli was dead!

The article cites examples as diverse as Yasser Arafat and George Bush, demonstrating that leaders sometimes dress and talk like the prototypical member of the group to be led, in order to convey a sense that “I’m just one of the gang,” while subtly imputing to the group their own values. Note President Bush’s manipulation of public opinion after 9/11 to support domestic spying, torture of prisoners in secret prisons, the abandonment of habeas corpus, censorship of libraries, phone-tapping, and even the invasion of Iraq, a country that was never implicated in the 9/11 attacks.

The message for nonprofit leaders is clear: Fit your leadership style to the needs and values of your group and you will get a better response than by simply relying on your no doubt formidable charisma.

And, while you’re at it, please don’t mobilize your people to invade any small countries.