Posted by 
Following the Second World War, western societies built what was called “social capitalism” (Richard Sennett): an economic system which was dominated by long-term employment, strong unions, stable organizations and long innovation cycles.
This changed from the 1970s. So-called “flexible capitalism” was on the rise and with it came significant changes in economic conditions inside and outside its organizations. These conditions are well-known: massive digitalization, faster innovation cycles, growing dependencies concerning supply chains across borders, increasing political instabilities, weakening unions and the rise of flexible job conditions, often to the disadvantage of the employee.
The central promise between employer and employee is broken
What makes these conditions remarkable, especially for leadership, is the psychological consequence they bear. The organizations of the “social capitalism” era (and therefore leadership as one of their core mechanisms) could guarantee their employees some kind of security and stability.
In our current era of flexible capitalism the environment shows great uncertainties, which the organizations in turn transform into uncertainties for their employees: temporary work, agency work, clickwork, fixed-term contracts and so on.
Therefore the central promise of the social capitalism – work for security (in terms of money and stability) – is increasingly broken. The consequence is a fundamental alienation between employee and employer, a massive loss of trust and goodwill on both sides, with leadership as the key arena.
The alienation of people is becoming the central problem of leadership
This creates an increasing alienation of people from their organization – a major problem for leadership. Hence modern leadership advocates a new relationship between leader and led, beyond purely the transactional. A manager should provide orientation, be a role model, develop employees in a targeted manner, etc. People should be (re)integrated emotionally and socially into the organization and further alienation should be prevented. All these aspects are a given in modern leadership theory.
How can this be achieved under uncertainty?
How can a manager achieve this if an organization passes on the uncertainty induced by its environment internally to it’s people? The answer must lie in a model of action and leadership that addresses central human needs on the one hand and is flexible enough to survive in an environment of uncertainty on the other.
Radical Leadership is about addressing psychological needs
If we view organizations as a social ecosystem, we need leadership that addresses the psychological needs for pragmatism, evolvement, assertiveness, resonance and learning, while at the same time being resilient enough to cope with the organizational uncertainties.
Radical leadership offers such an action-oriented, yet flexible action set, which is based on the principle of “first lead yourself, then lead others” and clearly and comprehensibly addresses the basic actions of modern leadership.
The core of radical leadership consists of flexible principles of action, the so-called PEARLs (which are again based on the three core human needs as defined by David McLelland: achievement, affiliation and power).
1. Pragmatism: Do what works and leave out everything else.
2. Evolvement: Bring out the best in yourself and others.
3. Assertiveness: Protect your private life from your work.
4. Resonance: Treat others with helpfulness and appreciation.
5. Learning: Expand your knowledge and skills every day.
How to bring radical leadership to life
1. Pragmatism: Do less, not more
When it comes to effectiveness, we tend to ask: What else can we do? But in our crowded work environment this could be the wrong question. One must ask: What can I leave out in terms of tasks, meetings, mails and so on. Radical leaders tend to do less, not more, shifting from managing as much as possible to a focus on meaningful work. Even if this means not to do anything at all but to sit and think. After all, thinking and thoughtful judgment is a leader’s main purpose.
2. Evolvement: If you don’t like people, go
Leading people means having a readiness for working with different personalities and for going deep, dealing with conflicts, emotional tensions and tedious discussions. If you feel that you aren’t this type of person, then don’t be a leader. Leadership isn’t easily learned. Being honest about that is one of the most crucial parts of radical leadership.
3. Assertiveness: Pay your price, but not more
There’s a difference between engagement as a leader and exhausting oneself. Personal engagement always has a price in terms of time and nerve. But far too many leaders are crossing the line from meaningful engagement to self-damaging behaviour. They forget the most important fact of work-related health: After all, it’s just a job. Be engaged, be focused, but don’t let your job consume your whole life. Perhaps a life-work, rather than a work-life balance.
4. Resonance: Build trust
As strange as it may sound, some organizations prefer not to know the person working but only his role. But in a world of complexity and insecurity, trust is the instrument of choice when it comes to working together. Therefore radical leadership is also about showing yourself as a human being with your fears and doubts, hopes and emotions. When the organization cannot provide stability and security, the leaders have to knit the social net of trust within their reachable area.
5. Learning: Introduce slack time
Most companies run on a tight time regime. As much time as possible should be charged to the customer, with as little slack time as possible. This is an innovation-drowning mistake, as the example of 3M’s “15% culture” shows. Radical leaders honor the time their team can use for learning, for experiments and for reflecting on their own matters. Introducing slack time is not so much an operational as a mental issue of leadership and mindset as Jayshree Seth put it in her article on this blog. Therefore radical leadership means freeing time and space for individual and collective learning experiences.
The alienation between employees and organizations caused by the insecure conditions of the flexible capitalism era can’t be undone completely. But radical leadership can reduce this alienation, by building trust, by focusing on the important issues or by stepping aside if oneself is not suitable for leading. After all, radical leadership is a matter of attitude and consequence, not of methods. Feeling and believing this attitude, people will align with their leaders because radical leadership teaches us that in terms of uncertain times we are all on the same side.
About the author:
Markus Väth is a freelance occupational psychologist and author of several books about management and the future of work, including “Radical Work. Instructions for a liberated working life“ (German).