Reading consideration and structure as distinct practices

Locate the comparison in the review

Judge, Piccolo, and Ilies revisit consideration and initiating structure through a meta-analytic review. The distinction is useful because leadership can involve both interpersonal support and the organization of tasks. Reading the source requires attention to the outcomes and measurement methods involved. It does not imply that a leader should receive a single universal score for being effective in every situation.

A fictional handover problem

A fictional clinic administration team describes its supervisor, Dana, as approachable. Staff feel comfortable raising concerns, but shift handovers repeatedly omit unresolved requests. Dana responds by being even more available for informal conversations. That may support the team while leaving the coordination problem unchanged. A different supervisor might introduce a meticulous checklist but dismiss questions about unusual cases. The two examples show why warmth and structure should be examined separately. The relevant question is which practice helps with the specific problem and how the practices work together when a standard process meets an exception.

Define observable practices

For this exercise, write one behavior that would demonstrate consideration during a handover and another that would demonstrate useful structure. Listening without blame might help staff disclose a missed step. A short shared record might ensure the step is passed to the next shift. Then identify a possible overuse of each approach. Conversation can become unfocused, and a checklist can become rigid. Decide what observation would reveal that the balance needs adjustment, such as unresolved items, repeated clarification requests, or reluctance to raise exceptions. These indicators make development more precise than advising Dana to become a stronger leader in general.

Questions for reading the synthesis

Ask how the review defines each leadership dimension and whether the same observer rates both leadership and its outcomes. Which outcomes concern satisfaction, perceived effectiveness, or work performance? Are relationships similar across different settings? Consider whether a task with clear procedures calls for the same form of structure as an unfamiliar problem. For the fictional team, what change should be tested first, and what unintended consequence should be monitored? Write the answer as a limited hypothesis rather than a guaranteed improvement. A useful reading translates broad evidence into a question that local observations can answer.

A specific role for reflection

Machiavelli Leadership Practices contains original questions about everyday leadership habits. It is not the instrument evaluated in the review and does not establish a leader's overall effectiveness. Dana could use its prompts to select a handover experiment and collect concrete feedback. The questionnaire's own research remains to be completed, and its results should support voluntary development rather than promotion or dismissal decisions.

Continue the reading

Leadership practices are actions in a relationship →

Providing direction without prescribing every step →

Supporting another person’s development without taking ownership of it →