( A practical methodology of developing leaders in an organisation)
Context
With increasing globalisation of business, demanding customers and constant reduction of costs, organisations need to develop more leaders for running their businesses. Leadership development is no more a slogan. With increasing stakes, organisations are actively engaged in developing leaders.
On the other hand, challenges of leadership development exist at both the levels: at the blue print as well as at the execution level. The note here explains those challenges and suggests a possible action plan.
Challenges of leadership development in corporate world
Because leaders need to perform real-time in live situations, they cannot be developed by classroom training. Nor is it a content-download exercise which can be rated at the end as A+. Because leadership skill has to be embedded in an individual’s armoury, the process of developing leader is like growing a plant: partly in our control, partly outside our control. As James March, a researcher who conducted a course on Leadership for Stanford University for 14 years, writes ‘Issues of leadership are indistinguishable from the issues of life”.
Therefore, much like a development of a plant, leadership development cannot be hastened beyond a certain point; the time depending both on the complexity of the requirement, baggage that an individual brings on the table, as well as the kind of people the leader is leading.
Given this difficulty in developing leaders, companies earlier focussed on developing managers. That was enough when industry changes were relatively slow-paced, where majority of organisations followed me-too strategies, or where the systems were relatively ‘closed’ by regulation and other means. Smart ‘managers’ performed the role adequately.
However, when ground rules change quickly by aggressive competitors, managers are always running hard to remain at the same place. Even the risk-mitigating measures of incremental improvement tools like TQM, Six Sigma or Lean do not help. For instance, Fujitsu’s new delivery model in BPO has completely changed the ground rules of BPO industry. On the one hand it promises to solve the customer problems in one shot as well as the inbuilt problems of attrition. But that also has forced BPOs to develop leaders at a relatively young age.
A practical methodology for developing leaders ( and managers as a side benefit! )
Organisations, who have to develop leaders because of their business models, are compelled to take a complete end to end view of leadership development. For them the objective of leadership development is to replenish the pipeline of leaders so that senior ‘positions’ are manned appropriately. They have to walk through all the three stages of developing leaders: Sourcing of pipeline, inoculating and developing the leadership skills, and nurturing the second tier network to enable leaders.
Stage I: Sourcing of leadership pipeline
Three decisions are have to be taken at this stage.
1. One can source the pipeline from the basket of junior pool of employees or hire from the basket of ‘ready-made pool of senior individuals”. Needless to say, both strategies demand compatible recruitment, retention and performance management policies. Business demands and size of organisation also matters because sourcing from junior pool requires large investment. GE and HLL are examples of the first option. So too are business groups like Tata and Birla.
2. The second step of ‘sourcing the leadership material from the pool’ can be executed by two ways. Two methods are used: old method of selecting potential leaders through evaluating employee performance over a period of time, and the modern method of evaluating potential leaders through ‘leadership potential assessment’ centre.
Psychologists are split 50/50 on this. One group believes that individual’s behaviour can be explained by ‘absolute traits’ (and therefore can be evaluated through assessment centres) while the second group believes that it can be explained by the ‘situations’ in which the individual has been placed (and therefore can be evaluated only through real performance in an organisational system). As an example of later, responses of officers in Government are a good example of ‘situational behaviour’. Irrespective of the type of individuals placed in Government, they behave in a similar fashion. The same is true of professionals working as doctors, lawyers, and police force. A lot has been written on this split. For a condensed summary, see my book, The Five great myths of career building, Page 123-132.
3. Because leadership development is a long process, one of the ways to reduce the developmental timetable is to categorise employees and channelize their development in that region. Using an analogy of cricket, we do not need all-rounders that can perform in different conditions and situations; we need batsman or bowlers who will perform in a specific situation.
Stage II: Inoculating and developing leadership
Inoculation of leadership vaccine means establishing the distinction of ‘managership’ versus leadership clear in the mind of corporate participants. In my opinion, this confusion has been the primary source of difficulty in developing corporate leadership skills. A leader ‘negotiates an open system’, while a manager, negotiates ‘close system’. A closed system ( like building a complex bridge) can be very difficult to manage because of the number of variables involved, but the complexity is still ‘static’. For more elaborate definition of leader, see my earlier blog of Leadership.
We engage in open systems and closed systems all the time: in our relationships, in resolving a problem, in achieving our objectives. However, we do not understand the ‘principles’ we adopt in negotiating these open/closed systems, because they are invisible and applied unconsciously. Articulating these principles clearly is therefore the first step in developing the leadership. Another advantage of using ‘systems view’ for leadership development is that the individual can use non-corporate platforms and situations to develop his or her leadership skills. This saves time and also ‘embeds’ the learning in the ‘whole’ of a person.
Developing the leadership skills requires both the elements of action: understanding of ‘what to do’ and the behavioural skill of ‘how to do’. This presents three major challenges
Enabling leaders to work in multiple ‘people’ systems ( transactional and collaborative) concurrently so that they find time to prevent fires instead of spending time only on dousing fires
Transactional system enables executives get their work done in short time with minimal effort (with the fullest use of their power and status). This constitutes majority of their tasks. However, they also have to engage in collaborative systems to ‘resolve problems’, develop new ways to solve old problems, and generate insights ahead of a problem. This however requires more time with people and less use of positional power. If a senior executive does not get the right balance between the two systems, he/she spends all his/her time in dousing fires, instead of preventing fires. Once an executive is caught in this vicious cycle, he/she keeps on working for 60 hours a week but still producing lower-than-average results.
Sharing the difficulties in synthesising work system with people system to achieve organisational objectives like knowledge management and innovation.
Innovation or knowledge management require harmonious synthesis of people and work systems. When executives rely too much on work system to manage their ‘knowledge’ the objective is not achieved. Big IT systems are created with no addition of knowledge. Innovation also happens out of the ‘chaos’ created in the work+ people system. If we move too early to ‘rein’ the chaos, we miss the innovation.
Inculcating the understanding plus behavioural component in the armory of an individual through use of one-to-one coaching, shadow coaching or group coaching.
Non engaging situations in classroom, WBT simulations can develop the understanding, but developing the requisite behavioural skills requires online responses to real-life situations. This requires embedding the skill into the ‘whole’ of a person. This therefore requires coaching. Without real-time coaching, behaviour skills cannot be imparted. Learning remains conceptual. In certain difficult instances, even shadow coaching (shadowing executives in meetings and interactions) is required to provide ‘accurate’ inputs to the employee so that root cause identification happens immediately without any bias.
Embedding also needs understanding the individual’s background habits, family life and personal hobbies so that learning is incorporated in a personal kit of an individual. Certain insights and appreciation can be acquired only after reframing an event in personal life. Coaching is an art, because it demands intervention without ‘intruding’ in a person’s life.
Although many tools and ideas exist in developing leadership skills, the real challenge is ‘embedding’ them in the system ( ethos and habits ) of an organisational work. As Henry Mintzberg, highly acclaimed management researcher, puts it aptly “ the crux lies in adapting the ideas , and not adopting them”.
Stage III: Nurturing the second tier to enable the leaders
It is well accepted that even leaders deliver results when they have good teams to lead. Top talent is more effective when it operates in vibrant internal networks with a range of employees. Without the social network of capable performers, leaders cannot perform for a sustained period.
Fortunately, leadership development program can itself help us develop a second tier of capable steady performers. As the leadership process is linked closely with the personal self development process, no one can guarantee that all potential aspirants will become leaders. These so-called ‘unsuccessful’ individuals can help create a band of capable performers who can excel in their function, be it sales or delivery. In other words, developing Managers can be a ‘secondary output’ of this program. Although this cannot truly substitute the manager development program, it can partly cover the gap.
Action plan for an organisation
Given the current HR processes in any organisation, leadership development cuts across all the three functions of Talent acquisition/allocation, Talent management and Talent deployment. At the minimum it requires tying up of four independent processes:
Utilising current program to identify and track potential leaders
Altering the Conventional design of LDP training program to include relevant elements such as ‘systemic’ intelligence, managership versus leadership etc.
Utilising Talent acquisition/allocation team to allocate potential leaders to identified roles/positions so that coaching is used effectively, and
Utilising Succession Planning to plan for key leadership positions.
Context
With increasing globalisation of business, demanding customers and constant reduction of costs, organisations need to develop more leaders for running their businesses. Leadership development is no more a slogan. With increasing stakes, organisations are actively engaged in developing leaders.
On the other hand, challenges of leadership development exist at both the levels: at the blue print as well as at the execution level. The note here explains those challenges and suggests a possible action plan.
Challenges of leadership development in corporate world
Because leaders need to perform real-time in live situations, they cannot be developed by classroom training. Nor is it a content-download exercise which can be rated at the end as A+. Because leadership skill has to be embedded in an individual’s armoury, the process of developing leader is like growing a plant: partly in our control, partly outside our control. As James March, a researcher who conducted a course on Leadership for Stanford University for 14 years, writes ‘Issues of leadership are indistinguishable from the issues of life”.
Therefore, much like a development of a plant, leadership development cannot be hastened beyond a certain point; the time depending both on the complexity of the requirement, baggage that an individual brings on the table, as well as the kind of people the leader is leading.
Given this difficulty in developing leaders, companies earlier focussed on developing managers. That was enough when industry changes were relatively slow-paced, where majority of organisations followed me-too strategies, or where the systems were relatively ‘closed’ by regulation and other means. Smart ‘managers’ performed the role adequately.
However, when ground rules change quickly by aggressive competitors, managers are always running hard to remain at the same place. Even the risk-mitigating measures of incremental improvement tools like TQM, Six Sigma or Lean do not help. For instance, Fujitsu’s new delivery model in BPO has completely changed the ground rules of BPO industry. On the one hand it promises to solve the customer problems in one shot as well as the inbuilt problems of attrition. But that also has forced BPOs to develop leaders at a relatively young age.
A practical methodology for developing leaders ( and managers as a side benefit! )
Organisations, who have to develop leaders because of their business models, are compelled to take a complete end to end view of leadership development. For them the objective of leadership development is to replenish the pipeline of leaders so that senior ‘positions’ are manned appropriately. They have to walk through all the three stages of developing leaders: Sourcing of pipeline, inoculating and developing the leadership skills, and nurturing the second tier network to enable leaders.
Stage I: Sourcing of leadership pipeline
Three decisions are have to be taken at this stage.
1. One can source the pipeline from the basket of junior pool of employees or hire from the basket of ‘ready-made pool of senior individuals”. Needless to say, both strategies demand compatible recruitment, retention and performance management policies. Business demands and size of organisation also matters because sourcing from junior pool requires large investment. GE and HLL are examples of the first option. So too are business groups like Tata and Birla.
2. The second step of ‘sourcing the leadership material from the pool’ can be executed by two ways. Two methods are used: old method of selecting potential leaders through evaluating employee performance over a period of time, and the modern method of evaluating potential leaders through ‘leadership potential assessment’ centre.
Psychologists are split 50/50 on this. One group believes that individual’s behaviour can be explained by ‘absolute traits’ (and therefore can be evaluated through assessment centres) while the second group believes that it can be explained by the ‘situations’ in which the individual has been placed (and therefore can be evaluated only through real performance in an organisational system). As an example of later, responses of officers in Government are a good example of ‘situational behaviour’. Irrespective of the type of individuals placed in Government, they behave in a similar fashion. The same is true of professionals working as doctors, lawyers, and police force. A lot has been written on this split. For a condensed summary, see my book, The Five great myths of career building, Page 123-132.
3. Because leadership development is a long process, one of the ways to reduce the developmental timetable is to categorise employees and channelize their development in that region. Using an analogy of cricket, we do not need all-rounders that can perform in different conditions and situations; we need batsman or bowlers who will perform in a specific situation.
Stage II: Inoculating and developing leadership
Inoculation of leadership vaccine means establishing the distinction of ‘managership’ versus leadership clear in the mind of corporate participants. In my opinion, this confusion has been the primary source of difficulty in developing corporate leadership skills. A leader ‘negotiates an open system’, while a manager, negotiates ‘close system’. A closed system ( like building a complex bridge) can be very difficult to manage because of the number of variables involved, but the complexity is still ‘static’. For more elaborate definition of leader, see my earlier blog of Leadership.
We engage in open systems and closed systems all the time: in our relationships, in resolving a problem, in achieving our objectives. However, we do not understand the ‘principles’ we adopt in negotiating these open/closed systems, because they are invisible and applied unconsciously. Articulating these principles clearly is therefore the first step in developing the leadership. Another advantage of using ‘systems view’ for leadership development is that the individual can use non-corporate platforms and situations to develop his or her leadership skills. This saves time and also ‘embeds’ the learning in the ‘whole’ of a person.
Developing the leadership skills requires both the elements of action: understanding of ‘what to do’ and the behavioural skill of ‘how to do’. This presents three major challenges
Enabling leaders to work in multiple ‘people’ systems ( transactional and collaborative) concurrently so that they find time to prevent fires instead of spending time only on dousing fires
Transactional system enables executives get their work done in short time with minimal effort (with the fullest use of their power and status). This constitutes majority of their tasks. However, they also have to engage in collaborative systems to ‘resolve problems’, develop new ways to solve old problems, and generate insights ahead of a problem. This however requires more time with people and less use of positional power. If a senior executive does not get the right balance between the two systems, he/she spends all his/her time in dousing fires, instead of preventing fires. Once an executive is caught in this vicious cycle, he/she keeps on working for 60 hours a week but still producing lower-than-average results.
Sharing the difficulties in synthesising work system with people system to achieve organisational objectives like knowledge management and innovation.
Innovation or knowledge management require harmonious synthesis of people and work systems. When executives rely too much on work system to manage their ‘knowledge’ the objective is not achieved. Big IT systems are created with no addition of knowledge. Innovation also happens out of the ‘chaos’ created in the work+ people system. If we move too early to ‘rein’ the chaos, we miss the innovation.
Inculcating the understanding plus behavioural component in the armory of an individual through use of one-to-one coaching, shadow coaching or group coaching.
Non engaging situations in classroom, WBT simulations can develop the understanding, but developing the requisite behavioural skills requires online responses to real-life situations. This requires embedding the skill into the ‘whole’ of a person. This therefore requires coaching. Without real-time coaching, behaviour skills cannot be imparted. Learning remains conceptual. In certain difficult instances, even shadow coaching (shadowing executives in meetings and interactions) is required to provide ‘accurate’ inputs to the employee so that root cause identification happens immediately without any bias.
Embedding also needs understanding the individual’s background habits, family life and personal hobbies so that learning is incorporated in a personal kit of an individual. Certain insights and appreciation can be acquired only after reframing an event in personal life. Coaching is an art, because it demands intervention without ‘intruding’ in a person’s life.
Although many tools and ideas exist in developing leadership skills, the real challenge is ‘embedding’ them in the system ( ethos and habits ) of an organisational work. As Henry Mintzberg, highly acclaimed management researcher, puts it aptly “ the crux lies in adapting the ideas , and not adopting them”.
Stage III: Nurturing the second tier to enable the leaders
It is well accepted that even leaders deliver results when they have good teams to lead. Top talent is more effective when it operates in vibrant internal networks with a range of employees. Without the social network of capable performers, leaders cannot perform for a sustained period.
Fortunately, leadership development program can itself help us develop a second tier of capable steady performers. As the leadership process is linked closely with the personal self development process, no one can guarantee that all potential aspirants will become leaders. These so-called ‘unsuccessful’ individuals can help create a band of capable performers who can excel in their function, be it sales or delivery. In other words, developing Managers can be a ‘secondary output’ of this program. Although this cannot truly substitute the manager development program, it can partly cover the gap.
Action plan for an organisation
Given the current HR processes in any organisation, leadership development cuts across all the three functions of Talent acquisition/allocation, Talent management and Talent deployment. At the minimum it requires tying up of four independent processes:
Utilising current program to identify and track potential leaders
Altering the Conventional design of LDP training program to include relevant elements such as ‘systemic’ intelligence, managership versus leadership etc.
Utilising Talent acquisition/allocation team to allocate potential leaders to identified roles/positions so that coaching is used effectively, and
Utilising Succession Planning to plan for key leadership positions.
