In a previous article, I made the point that HR have not been well served by representatives of the leadership and management development sector – my sector.
In particular, we have not given HR executives a straight story about how leadership and management development really works, and what is needed to create a culture to support any organisation, especially high growth businesses.
This series of blogs is intended to create a simple way of talking about leadership and management, and how to create a strong, responsive culture.
Let’s start with leadership. The simple truth here is this: leadership description is not leadership development.
In the last 25 years, the whole field of leadership development has become more and more popular. We have seen the rise of business leadership as an academic subject, and it seems that the number of leadership development experts has grown exponentially.
All this has led to an increase in the description of leadership.
Look in any discussion group for leadership development experts, open any book, and you will see reams and reams of paper (or screen) devoted to arguments about words like “trust”, “empathy”, “humility” etc, or exhortations to display these abstract characteristics. Follow this link for an example.
The assumption is that if we can truly pin down what characteristics leaders have, we can replicate them. In fact, it is not difficult to isolate these characteristics. Take any group, ask them “what are the characteristics of a good leader?” and with just a little guidance you will have a decent list on the flip chart in 20 minutes.
The description of leadership is not the important bit. The useful bit is the development of those traits in the person in front of you.
You can check this by comparing it with another abstract word: friendship. Imagine you have to teach people how to be good friends. What are the characteristics that make a good friend? You could list these in 20 minutes. Somebody who is a terrible friend could also list the characteristics of a good friend in 20 minutes. The tough part is getting that person to behave with these characteristics.
How did the leadership description industry come about? First, it’s easier to describe leadership than to create leadership skill in someone else. Second, as business leadership became an academic subject, it acquired an academic aura. Academics think about things deeply, make connections, and then in some way or other describe them.
Business’s issue is this: once you have described leadership, you still face the challenge of helping someone to do what you described. Just like if you had a Professor of Swimming, who can describe all the kinds of swimming strokes in the world. Interesting, but not what you need for beginners at the pool.
The result of all this is that most leadership development is really leadership description, with a few exercises tacked on the end that are meant to help people do what has been described. If you want real, visible leadership from the MD to the front line, leadership description will not help you.
Next time you are looking for leadership development, ask this question: how much of this is description, how much of this is development?
High growth businesses do not have the time or the budget for leadership description.
At a minimum, senior managers will need to learn about leadership, go away and apply it in their workplace to create results, and then come back and report those results to their group, then go away and apply more of what they learned 5 or 6 times. Otherwise they are just talking about leadership, not doing it. Here is an example of leadership development.
What do you think? How does this resonate with your experiences of leadership development?
