In this blog post, I’ll explore the role and responsibilities of a leader, focusing on what leadership is and how to view and guide members within an organization who lack competence and motivation.
Last year, at the recommendation of people around me, I took a course called “Global Engineering Leadership,” one of the engineering literacy courses offered by the College of Engineering at Seoul National University. Many people recommended this course because it was known for being easy to get good grades in and having a light workload, but looking back after completing the semester, “Global Engineering Leadership” turned out to be a course that meant much more to me than that. True to its name, this course was designed to cultivate leadership skills among engineering students who will lead South Korea in the future, with the goal of helping them acquire the competencies—such as interpersonal skills and communication—required of global leaders. For me, as a scholar and someone who dreamed of becoming a leader in South Korea’s science and technology sector, it is no exaggeration to say that this course became a turning point in my life. As I gained many insights and realizations through the course, I also developed my own perspective on leadership. This course was also a great help in finding an answer to a question about leadership that was recently posed to me. I felt it would be good to explore this question together with others, and in this article, I would like to discuss a dilemma based on my insights into leadership.
“Imagine an organization. Within this organization, there are members who are highly capable and motivated, while others lack both ability and motivation. If you were the leader of this organization, would you work alongside the latter group, or would you lead the organization by excluding them?” This is the dilemma I intend to address in this article. I call it a dilemma because no matter which side you choose, you cannot satisfy everyone. If you proceed with only the capable and motivated individuals, some people within the same organization will feel marginalized; conversely, if you try to lead all members together, work efficiency may decline. Realistically, organizations where every member possesses outstanding competence and high motivation are rare. So, if you were the leader of such an organization, what choice would you make in the face of this dilemma?
Before stating my position, I’d like to first examine three terms: “organization,” “responsibility,” and “sacrifice.” First, the dictionary definition of “organization” is “a system in which people cooperate to perform a specific function.” I believe the word “cooperation” deserves particular attention here. If we view an organization as a social group composed of people, it can be defined as a system in which members cooperate to achieve a common goal. Next, “responsibility” refers to “a task or duty one must undertake” or “the obligation or burden one bears for the outcome of a certain matter.” Both definitions share the common element of “obligation.” Finally, “sacrifice” means “giving up or forsaking one’s life, property, honor, or interests for the sake of others or a certain purpose.” The key point to note here is that, unlike responsibility, sacrifice does not necessarily imply an obligation that must be fulfilled.
Astute readers may have already guessed why I am discussing these three words together while reading the previous explanation. Now, let’s combine these three words into a single sentence. I would like to construct the following sentence: “Members of an organization must faithfully fulfill the responsibilities assigned to them and be willing to make sacrifices when necessary.” Of course, there are many ways to phrase a sentence using these three words, but the meaning will not differ significantly. For an organization to successfully achieve its goals, all members must perform their roles with a sense of responsibility and, in unavoidable situations, be willing to make personal sacrifices. However, sacrifice is ultimately a personal choice and must not be forced. Next, I will connect the competencies and motivation of organizational members to this sentence to find the answer to the question.
In the sentence presented above, an employee’s competence refers to the ability to fulfill the responsibilities assigned to them, while motivation refers to the mindset that drives them to faithfully carry out those responsibilities and, if necessary, make sacrifices. Therefore, the most essential elements for an organization to successfully achieve its goals are competence and motivation. Generally, employees can be categorized into four types based on these two criteria.
When evaluated based on competence and motivation, members who possess high competence but lack motivation are highly likely to change for the better through one-on-one meetings or appropriate motivation. Conversely, members who are highly motivated but lack competence can grow through education and training. However, members who lack both competence and motivation are more difficult to change than those in other categories. So, should an organizational leader exclude such members in order to efficiently achieve goals within a limited timeframe? I don’t think so. If I were an organizational leader, even if such members were present within the organization, I would want to lead the team so that we could work together and share the sense of accomplishment when all members achieve our goals. Let’s imagine a
chair. Suppose the chair has four wheels: one is normal, two have screws that are overtightened, and the other has gum stuck to it. Here, the chair represents the organization, and the four wheels represent the four types of team members described earlier. So, who does the wheel with gum stuck to it symbolize? It’s the member who lacks both competence and motivation. Because of the gum-covered wheel, the chair will certainly not move smoothly. So, what should we do to make the chair move properly? Hardly anyone would remove the wheel with the gum stuck to it entirely. We would peel off the gum from the wheel and, if necessary, loosen the screw that’s been tightened too much just a little. But we wouldn’t get rid of the wheel itself.
This analogy best illustrates my point. Of course, some might counter, “Can’t a chair still move even if it’s missing one wheel?” That’s not entirely wrong. If the center of gravity is well-balanced, the chair can move to some extent even without one wheel. But what happens if an unexpected external force is applied? A chair that was barely maintaining its balance could easily lose its center of gravity and tip over. The same applies to organizations. If an organization operates by excluding members who lack competence or motivation, it may seem fine under normal circumstances. However, in the event of an unexpected crisis, the likelihood that the entire organization will lose its ability to respond increases significantly.
Now we can also address the counterargument: “Won’t the organization’s efficiency decline if we don’t exclude such members?” Of course, if we don’t exclude them, efficiency may drop somewhat in the short term. However, the extreme measure of exclusion could put the entire organization at even greater risk. Therefore, before resorting to exclusion, efforts must first be made to resolve the problem and help members grow. So, what is the leader’s role in this process?
As discussed earlier regarding the meaning of responsibility and sacrifice, leaders, as members of the organization, must fulfill their roles and accept the responsibilities and sacrifices that come with leadership. A leader’s responsibility is to coordinate so that cooperation among members flows smoothly and, through this, guide the organization toward achieving its goals. Furthermore, when the organization faces a crisis, overcoming it and maintaining the organization’s stability is also a crucial responsibility of the leader. I believe a leader’s sacrifice is an action they choose to take voluntarily in order to fulfill these responsibilities.
For example, suppose there is a team member who does not get along well with others. The leader can set aside time to listen to that person, offer encouragement, and provide advice. Sharing a meal or having a relaxed conversation can also be helpful. Since this involves investing personal time beyond official duties, it can certainly be considered a sacrifice for the leader. Although I mentioned earlier that sacrifice is not an obligation, for a leader, it can be a necessary sacrifice for the sake of the organization. Therefore, an organizational leader must strive to ensure that all members cooperate to achieve the organization’s goals together, even if it requires personal sacrifice.
Removing gum stuck to a wheel is never easy. However, that doesn’t mean you should simply discard the wheel with the gum on it. Similarly, I believe that the true role of a leader is to comfort, teach, and guide members who lack competence or motivation—even if it takes some time—so that they can grow together. This is my answer to the question I sought to address in this essay, and it represents my insights on leadership gained through a semester of learning and reflection.
