The Leaderful Fieldbook

I have been asked to comment on whether there is any justification for paying 'designated leaders' more than other members of a leaderful team. To this important query, I would point out that, indeed, there is little argument to justify paying various team members more than others when all are participating for the common good. However, we don’t have a leaderful world in most organizations, and, as a result, some individuals may have designations which require them to take more responsibility than others – and, according to most pay systems, we pay for incremental allocations of responsibility. I can safely say, however, that in most organizations experimenting with leaderful practice, the distribution of pay is at a significantly lower ratio than in the conventional hierarchical organization. So, back to the query, if the ‘designated leader’ has particular responsibilities to serve at the boundary of the organization, representing the group with other stakeholders, and if a democratic process of engagement prevails, it may well be the case that the group members may agree that this individual should be paid more for this level of responsibility. In a fully leaderful organization where learning, as well as democratic participation, are fundamental attributes, it would be desirable that others have a chance to perform the boundary role.