Leadership: Horses and Humans
7 July 2015
Read by 2852 persons
When observing the relationship of horses with nature and their peers, one notices that the horse, as a gregarious animal, has always needed the presence of a leader. In a herd of wild horses, the leader provides the impetus, guides the group, and organizes the various functions beneficial to their survival (monitoring, preventing danger, etc.). Thanks to him, horses can drink, eat, and move around safely. Their survival depends on this: intelligent cooperation. Imposing, forcing: the use of force in the human-horse relationship.
When humans began the domestication of the wild horse, seeing in it help for work and other advantages, they did so through force and submission in the most pejorative sense of the term. The horse saw in this "unknown animal" only a potential predator who, if it submitted, ensured its survival by offering it the security of shelter, food, and water. It accepted giving up its freedom to stay alive, instinct being the strongest. Endowed with superior physical strength and running speed, it could easily avoid the embrace that was imposed on it and that it thought was deadly... Man managed to capture it - by cunning and not by force - and wanted to domesticate it - by force and not by cunning -.
Faced with its inability to make it understand its very human desires, man used violence and constraint... The horse therefore had no real choice; "cooperating" was the assurance of its survival. Listen, understand, act as a leader or impose by brutality? However, over time, the belief that obedience to a will expressed by a leader - a "boss" - should be proportional to the (bad) treatment received has evolved very favorably. New methods have appeared, and above all, the conviction that authority without leadership leads nowhere. Monty Roberts, a pioneer in "gentle methods" of horse training, said: "A good trainer can get a horse to do what he wants; an excellent trainer - a leader - will make sure the horse wants to do it." Thus, the methods of "educating" horses have, fortunately, positively and drastically evolved. Today, we obtain through suggestion and desire what the "submission" obtained by force and constraint had never allowed us to obtain...
Humans learned to speak "horse" because horses only understand one language: their own. They quickly understood their interest in cooperating: eating, sleeping, feeling safe... A very clear analogy to Maslow's pyramid... This win-win behavior convinced the horses to stop fleeing.
2- Modifying one's leadership style: a key to human performance
This evolution in the human-horse relationship, if we are convinced that it is capable of considerably modifying our way of "managing", naturally finds its place in work relationships. Leadership is first and foremost listening to and understanding others.
The leader encourages, suggests, but does not impose by unreasonable force. Employees can freely express their creativity, feel valued, and therefore go further! The one who, as with horses, is able to carry - and share without imposing - a vision and the means to ensure the survival and comfort of the group naturally establishes himself as a leader. He does not constrain or subdue; he encourages through his charisma, his ability to convince, his objectivity, his credibility. He knows where to go; the members of the group trust him and follow him not because they "must" but because they "are convinced that he can lead them towards the common goal to which they have all adhered."
A "good" leader will be the one who "will make his employees want to get up in the morning and surpass themselves by his side." Their comfort of life depends on it. As its name suggests, the leader must guide - give direction -, create a vision, have his teams adhere to it, and rely confidently on their abilities. He must not strive to "be directive" but rather to "invite to do", to instill mutual trust, a desire to surpass oneself, to achieve a common goal for the company and its employees.
If the leader has not convinced them, the members of the group will "flee" as horses instinctively do in front of a predator. This flight will inevitably result in a lack of cooperation, reduced performance, and resignation... Everyone loses: the company AND the employee. A leadership style using constraint and force only leads to frustration and underperformance, both individual and collective, while leadership by consent produces the exact opposite effect, in horses as in humans. Author: Marie Coulbois "Creator of MCBS, HR consulting firm"
