Who Did It Better? — evaluating the leadership styles and impact of Ortega, Jobs and Gates.
Leadership Styles and Their Impact
It is a common saying, that the end justifies the means. And that is true in many ways, especially in leadership. Does a leadership style produce results? Then it most certainly has something good going on for it that is worth emulating. I believe that as true. The world is replete with stories of simple men who turned businesses around; built global empires, and sometimes started a whole new strain of commerce that had never existed before them.
In this paper, I will attempt to compare the leadership styles of two great leaders of the common industry, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, and pattern out what shared traits and differences existed between their styles. Next, I will juxtapose the traits identified against a third person of equally convincing success; Ortega Amancio of the Zara Group in Spain.
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates Leadership Styles: Similarities and Differences
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were surprisingly born in the same year in neighboring states of the United States. Though they grew up under very different conditions, they both showed an early interest in technology, business and the untethered pursuit of their dreams and interests.
This is an underlying trait of what a great leader epitomizes and the first similarity between the leadership styles of both men; the undeterred pursuit of one’s interests. Leaders who usually carry on in this fashion may initially appear as insensitive and apathetic which may lead to their employees/followers taking a dislike to them. Steve Jobs suffered this reaction to his leadership the most. Steve was a genius who cared more about the quality of the product than what it would cost, or who needed to bend over backward to make it work. He understood that focusing on the product was the goal, though this came at a price. Remarkable still, is the fact that both he and Bill dropped out of college in pursuit of what interested them the most, even though at the time those decisions may have appeared disastrous.
Another similar trait between these two was their ability to leverage on the existing status quo to create their dreams. I will term this as visionary leadership. Steve saw the potential of the small computer that Wozniak was putting together and partnered with him to push the limits of its potentials. Similarly, Bill Gates moved to buy a product of a small developer and turned around to sell it to IBM, a seemingly simple move, but one that led to securing his hold on the PC world for all time. These moves were both visionary and revolutionary. Their visionary leadership styles elevated them to see far and beyond the normal.
Thirdly, these two both showed that they were willing to work hard and believed in the effort of teamwork. Amidst the chaos that led to his initial ousting from the Apple company, was the fact that Steve pit internal teams against each other to launch products. Though this may have ultimately backfired due to the commercial failure of the Macintosh, he reintroduced the concept again upon his return to the company and produced some of the greatest tech ever made.
Similarly, Bill also utilized hard work and team spirit; he was known to work long hours each day especially leading up to the Microsoft IPO and offered a participative style of dialogue within his team towards solutions and problem-solving.
Yet, in there lies the first major difference between the leadership styles of the two; Steve was very authoritarian. He believed in his genius and was not shy to make it felt. Bill, on the other hand, was more accommodating of team inputs. That notwithstanding, he was no less a genius by all standards, and the ultimate decision-maker, yet he was not one to rubbish the opinions of his team as was commonly spoken of Steve.
Another striking difference between these two was the risk-taking nerve within Steve. Many critics will argue that it was almost reckless in some cases, as compared to Bill’s more calculated business temperature. For a long time, Microsoft had become almost comfortable in their dominant position as Windows Operating System software provider and nearly suffered for it -they missed out on the phone-tablet mobile revolution, and digital multimedia entertainment spaces, preferring rather to perfect what they knew best to do: build software.
Steve had the exact opposite approach. He built beautiful software on the already beautiful pcs he built, he created the iPod, the iPad, the iPhone, and even iTunes -all of which have become disruptive products in the space they dominate.
Finally, with regards to differences in leadership styles; Steve projected a more charismatic, motivational figure who mastered the art of communication, and this helped cement his cult-like image in the hearts of customers and critics. Bill, on the other hand, is plain-spoken, without the exaggerated energy, and almost forgettable.
Amancio Ortega’s Leadership Style to Steve and Bill
Now, relating all the above similarities and differences to the leadership style of Amancio Ortega, founder of Zara, and the Inditex Group; Like Steve and Bill, Mr. Ortega has been known for being decisive and very focused in pursuit of his desires. He is known to have taken bold steps in his business journey which include deciding to keep production local as compared to the trend to outsource production to low-cost regions of the world and sticking to brick and mortar business outlets as the main business showcases.
He is also remarkably visionary -Mr. Ortega is hailed as being one of the fashion pioneers of large stores in many regions of the world- with the Zara brand’s global success. He almost always set a new frontier every decade for what was possible with global fashion when he took the brand internationally in a time when most brands where consolidating and closing. This is even more relevant now when most major fashion stores are closing.
Like Bill, Ortega is known to discuss decisions with small meeting groups of management and preferred to delegate work to team members rather than steer the load alone. Though he has resigned to a more relaxed role, this style of leadership was part of the core success principles within Zara.
Finally, worth noting too is the risk-taking leadership trait of Ortega: Like Jobs, Ortega has moved his business from just one brand into a global conglomerate of eight thriving brands, including Zara Home, with over 7000 shops globally. Ortega and the Inditex Group made daring moves to acquire more brands to bolster the groups growing customer diversity, and these bets have proved ultimately successful.
Do Leaders Need to Change Leadership Style According to Different Cultures?
Certainly yes. Global business leaders have a tedious task of balancing growth and the economic environment, with the global sphere and its cultural nuances. Yet despite this difficulty, global leaders must adjust their approach to leadership to suit the different markets and cultures. What thrives in the USA boardroom meeting, because of the cultural temperature and understanding, maybe considered insulting in the Indian boardroom -and you don’t want that. This is because studies show that people no matter how rational are more likely to make decisions based on emotional connections first, and then economic factors. A laissez-faire leadership style may be acceptable in parts of Africa, but certainly, be frowned upon in a German work environment where punctuality and exactness are paramount. People are inherently drawn towards what feels safe and familiar as opposed to what is new and seemingly better. Culture seats deeply in the personal perceptions people have about brands and their affiliations, so businesses venturing into new markets have the task of unraveling what the preferences of the intended markets are and adjusting leadership models and expectations accordingly.
How Leadership Can Overcome Issues Facing Global Business Entering New Markets
Leadership can make the right decisions from the top that will trickle down to all parts of the organization. First, leaders can take the necessary steps towards educating their teams on cultural maturity. Being culturally mature means that you understand that people are different in their perspectives and appreciations, and you recognize that by making an effort to know and respect these nuances, you can better relate with them to reach your desired goals. This is what good leadership can do. Nuances such as hand gestures, punctuality, tone of voice, language, religious influences, etc can be managed when teams are educated, are open-minded to learn and honest to a fault about their new environment and the complexities that adaptation presents. Smart organizations will use existing company cultures to compare with the ideals of the foreign markets and identify areas of adjusting and or adaptability.
References
Agarwal, AJ. (n.d.). Jobs or Gates: Differences in Leadership [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/aj-agrawal/jobs-or-gates-differences-in-leadership.html
Clawson, J.G. (2019, January 4). 11 key characteristics of a global business leader [Article]. Retrieved from https://ideas.darden.virginia.edu/11-key-characteristics-of-a-global-business-leader
Entrepreneur (n.d.). Steve Jobs: An Extraordinary Career [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197538
Entrepreneur (n.d.). Bill Gates [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197526
Hosie, R. (2016, December 23). Six working practices we can adopt from the world’s second-richest man, Amancio Ortega [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/working-practices-amancio-ortega-world-s-second-richest-man-job-success-zara-inditex-a7491926.html
Leaders League. (2018, November 7) Amancio Ortega — The Conquistador [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.leadersleague.com/en/news/amancio-ortega-the-conquistador
Thurwanger, M. (2010, November). Leadership in a Global Environment. Enhancing Effectiveness in Multicultural Organisations [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.peoriamagazines.com/ibi/2010/nov/leadership-global-environment
