The GILS Model >>Second Layer: Leader Perspective  

Second Layer: Leader Perspective

The GILS-Model: the second layer

Within each domain The GILS-model opens posibilities to choose for more specific goals and for more detailed situationally contingent influencing behavior. This is the second layer of the model. 
As we suppose that Leader and Co-Worker will interact with each other for say 80% of their interacting time in the Collegial Generating-domain we will in the next paragraphs explain the general working of this domain.

The Leader-perspective
Take a Leader having to influence a Co-Worker towards fulfilling a task, solving a problem. This co-worker will be functioning at a certain level of competence in fullfilling this task. For easy systemizing we discern 4 levels of competence for the worker:

  1. student
  2. junior
  3. senior
  4. master

Contrary to all other leadershipmodels the Leader is n the GILS-model an integral part of his managementsituation. So the Leader also brings into each situation hÝs levels of competence. We discern the same four levels of competence as with the co-worker.

It is managementreality that a manager does not always has the knowledge and experience to perform (or instruct) all tasks at expertlevel. In many cases a manager has workers who are more specialised in certain fields. And furthermore: often in a changing organisational environment new tasks or problems will have to be dealt with, and no one - nor leader nor worker - has major experience in fullfilling such new tasks. 

The blue rectangular presents the behavioral style options of the leader in his interaction with co-worker. For the sake op presentation we presume he or she is himself an master-expert in the field at stake. 

  1. worker is student then leadershipstyle: instructing
  2. worker is junior then leadershipstyle: getting to understand
  3. worker is senior then leadershipstyle: completing
  4. worker is master then leadershipstyle: autonomising

These leadershipstyles are contingent with the (functional) needs of worker at the level of competence he has reached: each worker wants to be adressed by leader/manager in a way that confirms his capabilities at that moment in a positive manner and helps them acquire a higher level of competence, in order to fullfil taks as autonomously as possible.

When leader is himself not functioning at masterlevel, but at lower levels of competence (student-junior-senior) the Leader will not be able to fully oversee the task and is not able to add the content necessary for 100% taskfulfillment by co-worker. Consequently he then will only be able to partly add relevant information using the with co-workers competencelevel contingent influencing style. The amount of style-effectiveness he or she then brings into the situation is indicated by the small colored rectangulars. Examples: being a junior in a task a leader can only instruct some small parts of a task (small black rectangular). Being a medior he can only bring someone to understand the small parts or elements he understands himself. And in doing so he will not be able to demonstrate how these relate to the entire taskpicture, because he has no knowlegde there of (smaller red rectangular). As a senior the leader will only be able to add some informations necessary but not all informations.

This above described reality makes very clear that there are many situations in management that can not be completely solved by unilateral influencing behavior of Leader only.