Is the transition from “command and control” to “motivate and mentor” the right idea?
Just moving from one idea of what leadership is to another?
Maybe a change is to see that our idea of what leadership is, is an act of imagination.
What if "leadership" was something that the organisation build together? So the way that leadership is described in a competency framework or whatever is the *outcome* of a conversation rather than the input into something (a development program or recruitment process). The conversation might end of with command and control or motivate and mentor or something in between, or something entirely different.
Descriptions of what leadership is or our competency frameworks then become like saved states in a computer game or a financial statement for a particular date - valid on one date only and instantly our of date (but still useful).
Who gets the conversation happening, who saves the game? Is that the new role of the "leader"? Maybe, but maybe not.
I think what I am offering is not a process but the hint of a way of seeing how we think of leadership that may kick our thinking out in a useful direction.