GREAT LEADERSHIP -- MAY I HAVE SOME PLEASE?

Do We See Enough Good Leadership?

Everyone is talking about leadership and how important it is. Organisations suffer from "poor leadership" when their performance dips. Everyone expects people (you and me) to offer excellent leadership to them so they can improve. We are often asked ourselves in our personal and work lives to "show more leadership" to get things moving. Leadership is a buzz word right  now -- not to be confused with management -- management is getting people in your organisation for whom you are responsible to ensure they fulfil their objectives. Leadership is something more but what exactly is it? How do we try and get some of it? I am convinced we do not see enough good leadership around,however it is sorely needed.

 

Do we need to be charismatic to be good leaders? Well it does help - but we need to remember that some of the worst leaders in the 20th century ( Hitler, Mao and Stalin for example) were charismatic with a magnetic and forceful personality - they lead their people in a certain (bad way) -  but were they good leaders? They were good in leading people but in the wrong direction and to disaster -- so  their skills were used in a wholly malevolent manner. So perhaps one of the key elements of good leadership -- apart from charisma and the ability to talk and make good speeches and communicate well - is integrity - to do the correct thing. Unfortunately integrity isn't like charisma or eloquence, it isn't very sexy but it is crucial to good leadership no matter what other people say.

Peter Drucker, the great management thinker opined on integrity as it relates to leadership in the following way.  "Subordinates know in a very short time if a person aspiring to leadership has integrity. They can forgive someone a mistake or even incompetence but not a lack of integrity."

 

A fish rots from its head and any leader must have integrity, His\Her character will be taken as a model  by subordinates in the organisation -- it must be a good model. Would you like your son\daughter to work for this person and learn from them? That is regarded as the ultimate test by Drucker.

 

Leadership means having the ability to lift the performance of your employees beyond what they themselves would expect to achieve. You need to have a vision to move your organisation forwards and a strategy to achieve that. However you must also have the ability to take your people with you and they must believe in your vision and also believe in you. They do not have to like you but they do have to respect you. Getting ordinary people to do extraordinary things is a true sign of excellent leadership. It is very difficult to define but easier to see in practice.

 

Winston Churchill in WW2 gave excellent leadership to the free world. He was thrown up by a crisis,interestingly before WW2 he was seen as a maverick and someone whose time had gone - yet in a crisis situation he did express fantastic leadership coupled with great communication skills. Lech Walesa - an electrician became leader of Solidarity and helped democratise a communist state and indeed the whole former Eastern block. Both these are examples of leadership which made huge differences to people's lives.

So what characteristics do we need to possess to aspire to excellent leadership? Well amongst the main ones not, in any particular order are the following:

Managers - manage processes whilst leaders lead people - So leadership is people focused.

Leaders have a positive outlook and a future vision they aspire to.

Leaders make a commitment to communicate with their employees and keep them in the picture.

Leaders inspire employees to share their vision and deliver outstanding performance.

Leaders give a commitment to support and facilitate their employees.

Leaders are optimistic and confident in their own abilities and the abilities of their people and organisation.

Leaders are decisive and make decisions as soon as they can.

Leaders promote and deliver imaginative solutions to organisational problems. They do not shy away from those challenges

 

Last but not least -- Leaders must have integrity and be honest and fair in their dealings with everyone.

 

What about the future? As organisations grow in complexity we may need to move to a model of collaborative leadership where leadership is vested in different people\groups at different times within an organisation and in different circumstances. The organisation will need different levels of leadership and will no longer be able to afford vesting leadership in just a few hands. New models like the mutual approach will help in this process.

 

Have managers got all or even some of the above characteristics? - Well we may have some but certainly not all and certainly we need to work on all of the above, to transform ourselves from managers to leaders. It is a constant journey but we all need to work on it and the journey to effective leadership never stops.

 

The world unfortunately does not benefit from an abundance of great leadeship. We need to keep striving to improve that for everyone's sake.

CONVERSATIONS YOU MIGHT DREAD HAVING?

How can we resolve challenging conversations?

There are often those conversations that you know you must have both in business and in life that you know are going to be difficult, that you know you need to have but keep putting off. There is always a good reason to delay, at least it seems to you that there is a good reason but in reality, just like going to the dentist it needs to be  tackled. So what might you be able to do to enthuse yourself,calm your nerves and move forward with the conversation you know you need to have.

 

There is some really excellent advice on this from the new Andy Bounds book on communications entitled "The Snowball Effect". The first thing to try and address is to look at the future in these conversations and not go back to a past version of the blame game. This is not a very easy way forward but nevertheless is critical. We also need to find out what makes the other person tick and what their priorities are - -usually try to identify more than one priority the other person might have. We then need to mention and acknowledge past blockers but to move on from them straight away. We do not need to get distracted by them -- resist the temptation to do so and move forward. We need to rapidly move into the Next steps phase where we need to identify the benefits to the other person of progressing the situation and then offering them two or three tangible options to resolve the issue. Giving them options will probably reduce their ability to say no to a single solution and increases their likelihood of agreeing to one of the options.

 

In essence you will need to envision the outcome of any difficult conversation before you start it. Try and identify a range of options that will get you what you want to achieve.

 

It is then a must, to try and script the "challenging conversation" you are going to have in the following stages:

 

1. Your focus on the future introduction -The future will be better let's take things forward.

2. The questions you will use to find out their key priorities - I want to focus on your priorities and how things can improve.
3. Acknowledge the past blockers but move on - (Perhaps we can avoid or minimise this bit?)
4. Next steps - -- explain the benefits of an agreed way forward for both parties and then offer two or three options for your colleague to hopefully agree on one of those options.Offering more than one option will make it more difficult for your colleague to reject any solutions as this would be seen as a bit of a negative approach on their part.

In the most challenging of conversations it is always helpful to confirm by e-mail what has been agreed and by whom.

Then that is it? -- Well not always as life is never as easy as that - but at least the next time you have to tackle a challenging conversation,hopefully you will be better prepared for success?

Let's hope so -- I'm already preparing my script.

ENCOURAGING MUTUALITY AND PLURALISM IN ORGANISATIONS - OUR BEST HOPE FOR THE FUTURE?

 

Mutuality- Our best hope for the future?

 

A healthy civic society and a degree of healthy responsible pluralism within organisations needs to be the way forward for society. This is the only way that new ideas emerge to drive us forward into the future. The alternative to this pluralism is a very centralised stalinistic approach where the centre holds on to old ideas and does not let go or even listen to what change is needed. One absolute and unchallenged set of ideas and processes can never be an effective substitute for a society or organisation that generates new ideas in a pluralistic way,which will need to move us forward in this new millennium. Yet some organisations are very guilty of succumbing to this very centralist ideology and it does not become them or indeed any of us as well.

There is now increasing discussion around moving economic and social policy forward more hand in hand with the wider interests of society. According to the latest Respublica publication on mutuals in society- " Diverse and devolved ownership, power and capital, alongside user, consumer and employee participation in governance and decision-making, are principles that we can all agree with. Unlike any other policy agenda, mutual, employee-owned and co-operative models, and their underpinning ideals, have attracted cross-party support and have been promoted as foundational players to our public institutions, private services and businesses, not just in this Government’s lifetime, but the ones that have preceded."

The position that many organisations find themselves in, especially in the not for profit sector - is that they are facing a position of cuts in public spending and lower economic activity. The workforce in those organisations is in danger of being dis-incentivised as it does not have much of a stake in the organisations that it works in. Traditional salary and reward mechanisms mean that the workforce can expect minimal rewards for the the future, unless the workforce is given a greater stake in the organisations in which it works. Those businesses i.e. like John Lewis which do have more of a mutual approach have held their own in this economic climate.

 

Is greater mutuality the answer, please read the latest Respublica publication on this at:

 

http://www.respublica.org.uk/item/Making-it-Mutual

 

This will give you all some new insights into the way that our organisations can develop and grow in th elight of the huge economic challeges we face.

 

 

WHEN THINGS FAIL IN AN ORGANISATION - HOW DO WE PUT THEM RIGHT?

How can we spot it early and fix it early?

Many organisations have problems and challenges that need to be resolved but they are often faced with inertia and a lack of will power to tackle things and do what is right to get the organisation back on track never mind about moving and growing it in the right direction. Just getting things back on an even keel would be a start.

 

Things can go wrong in a dramatic sense with a dip in demand due to recessionary pressures which cause profit and cash flow issues, redundancies and closures. Organisations can face huge cost hikes in raw materials and energy resources which do not help the situation. The direction and management of the organisation can be faulty and not tuned into what needs to be done to change direction. These are the dramatic issues which we can all recognise fairly easily -- which need to be addressed in a very focused and direct way within a very short time-frame or else things go under pretty quickly.

 

There are are however other problems within organisations which manifest themselves gradually  over a long period of time. These are not so easy for people within the organisation to recognise because perhaps the pace of change within that organisation is glacially slow. Levels of profit; revenue, employee morale and innovation have remained fairly constantly low over a long time and although the organisation is still commercially successful, it has been overtaken by a large number of its peers. Most people in the organisation do not perceive there are any real issues at all because the organisation has done what it has always done and done it to the standards it has set itself in the past. Any persons within the organisation who try to identify any potential issues with the direction of the organisation are shouted down or more probably ignored -- seen as weirdos or mavericks who are just causing trouble and why isn't everyone happy. It is this gradual manifestation of certain problems and issues over time which I believe is the most dangerous for an organisation. Why? Because it is so difficult to recognise by those within that organisation - they do not see it coming and the accumulation of these unresolved issues leads to a worsening of organisational performance and perhaps ultimate failure. Visible crises are also challenging but at least most people can recognise them as such and there is at least some unity of purpose in trying to resolve them.

 

Theodore Roosevelt was reported to have said, " Do what you can,with what you have,where you are."  Problems arise when people do less than what they are capable of doing or are not capable of doing what they were initially thought capable of doing or they misjudge the timing of doing the correct thing or they take inappropriate action at the wrong time. People who have been promoted to a higher level within the organisation have achieved this usually on the basis of their potential not always on their past achievement,indeed their past achievement may not indicate that they are capable of doing the new job they are thrust into. From the military sphere, there are certain characteristics which are listed by the author Norman Dixon which should be recognised within organisations facing serious problems and challenges:

 

Serious waste of human resources

Fundamental conservatism in clinging to out of date ideas and past glories

Tendency to reject information which they find unpalatable or conflicts with their pre-conceptions of reality

Indecisiveness in making decisions

A tendency to underestimate the enemy and any challenges faced.

Undue readiness to find scapegoats

Failure to exploit a favourable situation

Full frontal assaults at the enemy's strongest point

Lack of reconnaissance

Suppression or distortion of news from the front - to maintain morale and security

 

Do you recognise any of these factors that might compound problems and challenges?

 

What can we do about the above? We need to learn from our mistakes and minimise incompetence by having rigorous training and selection processes. We also need to minimise carelessness and over confidence as well. A large degree of realism is necessary in that the reality of slow decline and lack of problem resolution must also be recognised as well as the headline grabbing crises. In the end an organisation can die a slow death without the key challenges being addressed.

 

The Tom Peters analogy of the frog being put into a bucket of boiling water is particularly pertinent here. The frog being a cold blooded animal doesn't realise it is being boiled to death until its too late. Let's ensure our own organisations do not meet a similar gruesome fate!!!

INNOVATION - CAN WE DELIVER IT?

 

How can we become more innovative?

 

 

Top directors in organisations always look for innovations and innovators. They want something that will make a huge difference to the organisation's performance.How can the game of the organisation be successfully changed to move it forward apace? How might they help us to do this? Some ideas are indeed innovative in terms of the organisation itself -- but to be commercially successful they must appeal to the wider market in the sense that people wish to purchase or at the very least partake in that innovation. Therefore the innovation should not just seem like a good idea to us but a good idea to the market place as well. Too often we look at innovations just through our own eyes and not the eyes of others who they will ultimately affect and who may ultimately purchase them.

To bring a new innovatory idea to the fore, takes a lot of guts and perseverance - One has to be ready for ridicule and criticism -- but one has also to be thick skinned and determined -- The flow of innovatory ideas can never stop because the life blood of an organisation will be cut off if this happens. Innovation starts with an idea which needs to be nurtured,cared for and developed We need to always look at how and if the idea might work; not criticise the idea and\or the person who comes up with that idea. The latter is sadly frequently the case in organisations and the organisation cannot afford to de-rail people from their innovation track as this could prove to be catastrophic.Intelligent directors will know that the majority of ideas will not come to fruition but a few of them could be winners and that is all we need, just a few winners!

 

Companies like Google and Microsoft encourage their workers to think the unthinkable and that is partially why they have been so successful. In the modern organisation there is often not enough reflection and thinking time. A lot of effort is focused on getting the present reporting as correct as possible. Indeed people spend so much time focusing on the current reporting approaches that they devote little time to thinking about the future and the innovations that will need to inhabit that future. Not an easy task but it needs to be done.

 

Successful innovation in an organisation requires a person to possess,a mixture of creativity, common sense and the ability to get things done. Without the latter, nothing will ever happen no matter how wonderful and brilliant your ideas might be. Individually you have to have a clear sight on what you wish to achieve,get support,deflect\nullify criticism and keep the momentum going. That is how an individual might do it but what about the organisation itself. Is it geared up to innovate regardless of what your Director says?

 

Does your organisation have any or all of the following characteristics?

 

1. A well organised and freely flowing information stream between all parts of your organisation.

 

2. Close and frequent joint working between different parts of your organisation usually of a lateral and not vertical nature.

 

3. Top Directors who approve of and do not fear innovation.

 

4. Managers with the creativity and time to develop and drive innovation.

 

5. A culture of positively encouraging innovation.

 

6. A tradition of working in teams and sharing the credit for successful ideas.

 

Sharing credit is important as there is nothing that would stifle future innovation as much as an individual or group claiming exclusive ownership of an innovation if that claim did not reflect the truth. The real innovators would hide their future ideas for fear of them being stolen by internal colleagues and might even hawk them to more sympathetic competitors. Please give praise for innovations where it is due - that is the best recipe for success.

 

Does being innovative put your organisation at greater risk of failure? Well innovation does involve some measured and calculated risk taking -- but it does not equate to risk taking per se and this is very important to underline. Innovators are excellent at spotting opportunities that no-one else has exploited and this culture of horizon scanning and opportunity identification is key here. Such a process should be hard wired into your organisation's business planning approaches. It is much more difficult to do this if the aforementioned characteristics do not exist within your organisation.

 

This process can be risky however failure to innovate is even more risky - especially in these turbulent times.

 

We must all become more opportunity focused and it must be in our organisation's interests to help us in our endeavours to do this.

 

Wil our organisation help us?