Thoughts on Leaders, Leadership, Vision, Inspiration and Performance
Nigel Girling - Director of The National Centre for Strategic Leadership at Silverstone. As the founder of this national initiative - and as a CMI Ambassador and member of the CMI Qualifications Board - I am on a mission! My passion is to encourage and support leaders to be visionary, inspirational and creative - so that they can transform the lives of their people and transform the performance of teams and organisations. In this blog, I'll be sharing some ideas about this and hoping it will spark some thinking and debate. Please join in!
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
YouTube
Comments
Hi Nigel,
Great to have you on board. I look forward to reading your blogs.
Adi
Look forward to reading your thoughts Nigel.
Thanks for the welcome colleagues...OK, here's a starter for 10! If Fayol is right about 'management' being primarily about 'Planning, Organising, Coordinating and Controlling'... where does Vision, Inspiration and Development fit in? To me, that succinctly demonstrates the difference between 'managing' and 'leading'. Leading taken literally means trying to take someone or something on a journey - anyone with a dog or a horse knows that. Managing comes from manus - the same latin root from which we derive 'manual' - relating to the hand. One might conclude then that management is about keeping something in hand and under control while leading is about steering a path towards a vision. If that's true then management is essentially about keeping something in place or the same... on the 'straight & narrow'.... while leadership seeks to move forwards and towards some desired destination or goal. It is the intent behind the action that matters.... is it moving you forwards? If so, its probably a 'leadership' act. If it is about control or completion of a functional task... then perhaps it's 'management'.
Another view might be Adair's 'Action-Centred' leadership model.... which suggests that any task should be completed in a way that meets the needs of the task, the needs of the team and the needs of the individual. So mayb e a manager gets the task done.... but a leader uses the delegation of a task as an opportunity to build the capability and performance of the team while challenging and satisfying the esteem needs of the individual. I try (when I remember!) to delegate something to someone who will learn from it and find it interesting, rather than someone who would find it easy - even though the risk is slightly higher - if it means an overall benefit for the team and the individual. Better still, invovling the one who can do the task well to support and coach the one to whom it is a challenge.... then the result is 'growth' for both of them. Hard work, this leadership, don't you think?!
...and why is my face looming so large in this? Isn't there a button for 'arrghh, get that thing away from me?'
There you go Nigel, I've made your pic a more manageable size :)
Thanks Adi, that's slightly less terrifying to small children and woodland creatures...
Some thoughts on the CMI Manifesto....
When published last Autumn, the Manifesto lit a fire in me that almost took me by surprise. I had for so long supressed my frustration at the standard of leadership that I routinely encounter at middle and senior level in organisations, that I'd almost lost sight of how much it matters and how crucial it is that we change it. When I look at the 'hierachy' in organisations I see a system predicated on so many outmoded concepts.
Payment by 'rank' on the pyramid. We still seem to struggle with how to reward people for their impact in sophisticated ways: with promotion and bonus still by far the main methods in common use. One rewards expertise and impact by removing and potentially diminishing it, the other assumes avarice as the main driver for leadership action.
Leadership Development as a means of enhancing CV and salary. Candidates for MBA are recruited by information about salary enhancement (the business school rankings actually use this as a key indicator) - commensurately far less emphasis is placed on becoming more effective or having a greater impact, let alone on the sociological implications of being a more ethical or people-oriented leader and thereby transforming lives.
Ceilings, glass and in other forms. A diagram from Grant Thornton elsewhere in this website shows the continuing predominance of male senior leaders (79% in the UK, 80% in USA). Were it to show ethnicity I suspect the situation would be even worse. In these times where we mostly appear to recognise and talk about the need for leaders to be supportive, developmental and people-oriented and to be a mentor, coach and empowering coordinator and facilitator - still only 21% female senior leaders.... why? I'm sick of hearing (and saying) ' it will happen, it takes time for women to rise to board level'.... well we've had more than enough time. And it's still not happened. Now what?
So, to the manifesto. We need leadership. Effective, powerful, human, visionary, ethical leadership. For the greater good, not (just) personal gain. And we need it now. We are part of a profession that is predominantly 'amateur' in the sense that only a small minority are professionally qualified in the field. It's well past time to change it.
I agree fully that pay should be on ability and output rather than on any position in a corporate hierachy.
In two minds about the women leaders thing though. I've read elsewhere that things like a lack of executive experience (ie non exec posts) are holding many women back. Plus I do wonder how many step off the treadmill for family reasons and are then behind the pack when/if they get back on. I agree that having more women execs would probably be a good thing but it has to be a fair meritocratic fight to the top rather than placing people there just because they are a woman.
I recently heard research that suggested there was a disproportionately high number of CEO's who are 6' 2" or taller.
It would therefore seem to draw the conclusion that, at some level in our complex psyche, we are more prepared to "follow" or bestow the leadership attributes on someone because of their height (at least in a disproportionate number of cases)?
There was also a blog on the CMI's old site about the impact someone's appearance has on our decision making processes.
Slightly off topic, but I think it's interesting given the topic is leadership and management and it would seem there are still some primitive forces at play when appointing people to positions of leadership especially.
In a historical sense, the advancement of women in the workplace has been a brutally long and slow process. With Britain entered into the Second World War in 1939, women were given an unparalleled step-up into the previously 'male-dominated' workforce. However, with the end of the war, this short period of emancipation came to an end as women returned to the home. A return to this kind of involvement of women in the workforce has only really happened again in the last 30 years, with the decline of the heavy industries and the growth of the services sector, while an almost 50/50 split between men and women in the workforce has finally only been reached in the last few years or so. As a result, while there may not be that many female top executives presently, the ratio of men:women will inevitably balance out, although maybe not for another 10 to 15 years or so. Speaking as a recent graduate, it is clear that the competition for the best positions and opportunities in the job market between men and women has grown substantially, and in many sectors, women are surpassing men in terms of academic and professional achievement, opening the gates to the future female top exec.That glass roof is slowly cracking and I believe that it will be the women of my generation that will finally break it. While this may be a good thing, I just hope that a glass roof won't start forming over my head in response.
Thanks for your comments people, all interesting additions to the debate. Mike's comment brings up the 'is positive discrimination a good thing?' debate too.... which I've gone back and forth on for years. I can't help but think that the inequalities of society will take way too long to fix if we allow it to occur 'naturally'.... after all, it hasn't moved us along much so far. On the other hand though, I am passionately committed to meritocracy. Pass the paracetamol, someone.....
Interesting too that 3 people have commented...all men... is that indicative of a male predominance in the CMI community (which would perhaps support the glass ceiling argument)? My wife would probably say it had more to do with women being too busy to look at websites and blog when they should be working.... but then, she would, wouldn't she?
Colin, I remember seeing something about the height thing too.... and I agree, some of this stuff seems strangely anthropological for the 21st century... plus I recently asked a room full of undergraduates if they would offer a job to a female candidate who appeared at interview to be pregnant - more than 70% of the group said no.... including all 30 of the group's female students.(And anyway I'm only 5'11... so perhaps I should step down).
Robert: I hope your'e right about the cracks. But I work with the boards of dozens of organisations across many sectors.... and still rarely encounter a female strategic leader. In this society where we all know that 'macho' leadership is unlikely to engage people and can create unhelpful competitive and self-interested drives (financial meltdown, anyone?) that there is a greater need than ever for a more developmental, supportive and motivating leadership style. Perhaps it will need a large proportion of CEOs (mostly white, middle-class and male) to decide that their organisation and its stakeholders would benefit from a balance (gender, ethnicity, character, whatever) at the top before significant change happens. Holding my breath. Turning blue. OK, maybe not then.
PS. A Radio 4 piece I heard in the car earlier today was commenting on the fact that, though female politicians represent a far larger proportion of the House than ever... we still haven't seen a serious female contender for one of the top jobs since the redoubtable Mrs T.....
Is it ultimately just about testosterone? Let's hope not.
I've just been listening to Gordon Brown's faux-pas in making a derogatory remark about a voter and not realising his radio-mic was still on... reminds me of the famous Frank Drebin toilet scene in Naked Gun.... and puts me in mind of something my grandfather used to say.....
"Never say anything unless you'd be prepared to write it down and sign it".... probably as good a leadership 'thought for the day' as I've ever heard.
Mind you, he also used to say to me "if you think you're doing well, you're comparing yourself to the wrong people" - which is slightly depressing.... but equally true....
...and that 'comparing yourself' thing reminds of something I've often heard people say, and which makes my blood boil (I'm getting so Victor Meldrew with every passing year) ' and it's that thing where someone says "who do you think you are, xyz?".... (Shania Twain, that means you in 'that don't impresss me much'). It ranks alongside "if that was such a good idea, somebody else would have done it" - which I've had directed at me before. Both statements are a very effective way of suppressing innovation and ensuring that nothing changes or moves forwards. One of a leader's key roles is to inspire and motivate.... or as Gardner put it - the true leader "articulates goals that lift people's sights from their petty pre-occupations to unite them in pursuit of something worthy of their best efforts"
Amen to that.
I've just been listening to Gordon Brown's faux-pas in making a derogatory remark about a voter and not realising his radio-mic was still on... reminds me of the famous Frank Drebin toilet scene in Naked Gun.... and puts me in mind of something my grandfather used to say.....
"Never say anything unless you'd be prepared to write it down and sign it".... probably as good a leadership 'thought for the day' as I've ever heard.
Mind you, he also used to say to me "if you think you're doing well, you're comparing yourself to the wrong people" - which is slightly depressing.... but equally true....
I'm not a Labour voter, but I actually quite like what Brown said. It's what we all would have said. The lady was rambling away about immigration, and in large chunks was simply wrong. Rather than being upset by what Brown said it saddens me a bit that he's had to come out with a grovelling apology.
One of the joys of living in a media-obsessed democracy I suppose, Mike. Everyone's allowed an opinion, no matter how bizarre or innaccurate.... and has the chance to voice it (like I am now!). Interesting to consider though, bringing it back to our 'field' of management & leadership, that I can remember being taught on my very first course in the 1970s, that you should only 'criticise the behaviour, never the person'... he'd have been far better able to shrug this off he'd commented about her views rather than about her....perhaps Gordon has never had any management & leadership training.... now where did I put that CMI manifesto...?
There was a thread somewhere on the forum asking whether the PM, whomever that will be, should have a management qualification. Seems a sensible suggestion to me.
Here it is Nicola.
http://www.managers.org.uk/forum/management-courses/should-prime-minister-have-management-qualification
It would certainly be nice to feel that we had a prime minister with real leadership capability... but then I suspect Adolf Hitler was a very effective leader and had lots of the skills.... so perhaps vision and ethics have to be in the mix too!
“The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.”Wise words (if you ignore the gender bias).... and apposite in a week when we are asked to vote for our new 'rulers' amid a barrage of soundbites, spin and acrimony.Oh, and written 223 years ago by James Madison, 4th American President and main author of the US constitution. This simple statement seems very relevant today . Substitute 'stakeholders' for 'society' and hang it in every boardroom....Perhaps the 'problem' lies in the tension between needing selfless leaders focused on the greater good and our tendency to make their position highly-paid, powerful and desirable - encouraging and requiring many of the opposite qualities in those seeking 'office'. GK Chesterton explored the idea that rulers might be appointed from a list of the population and chosen randomly in his 'Napoleon of Notting Hill'. After the banking crisis and this election, I'm starting to wonder if he was right...
I mentioned the CMI manifesto a while back. I am a passionate believer that leaders should study and reflect.... another one of my Grandfather's pithy comments to me as a kid was "It's ok to make mistakes. But not twice." For that reason alone, I would support the need for reflection and lifelong learning - once you add in the myriad of changes hitting leaders from every side and the tough, competitive world in which most organisations operate - and it becomes a fundamental requirement of the job. My view would be that any leader with significant responsibilities should be spending at least 3 hours per week on their continuing professional development. If not, they're being left behind. I can absolutely guarantee that managers in China and India are spending a lot more than that. And they plan to dominate the global business world very soon. How can we mobilise the 4.6 million managers in the UK to meet the challenge?
It's Friday afternoon..... and another week has disappeared like water down a voracious plughole... that's 120 hours I'll never get back.
A colleague reminded me earlier today of a great John Harvey-Jones (of blessed memory) quote that "leadership is often just about jollying things along". As so often with JHJ and other exceptional leaders - this is a deceptively profound summation of the role of a leader wraped up in an apparently simple homily.
I hope and trust that some of my time and effort this week has served to jolly things along and that I can sleep tonight knowing I've made a difference. Only time will tell. How has your week been?
I've attended two big events in the last few days - the Ambassador day at Royal Thames Yacht Club and then the national Chartered Manager Awards Ceremony in (a very warm) Birmingham on Monday. Great to see so many of us gathering and committing to drive forward the leadership agenda. I was struck by the diversity of the attendees at both events - we seem to be represented at every level and just about every sector.
That must be a cause for optimism. I believe that we've never needed effective, dynamic, visionary and engaging leadership more than we do right now..... and that need will, I predict, grow exponentially in the next 5 years. Simply being a good manager isn't enough. While the ability to plan, control, coordinate and organise will always be hugely valuable.... it is rarely enough to 'transform' performance and seldom likely to inspire and motivate people to deliver their optimum. Leaders, as Gardner eloquently put it 'lift people's sights from petty preoccupations to engage them in the pursuit of objectives worthy of their best efforts' ....
We need, as a community and as a profession, to raise the profile of this agenda and engage every leader and organisation in developing their leadership capability so that they can engage and inspire their people to transform performance.
Nice thought. How do you think we can make it happen, together?
The National Centre for Strategic Leadership at Silverstone
Anyone who was at the Ambassador Event or at the Chartered Manager Awards Ceremony will have heard about this new national initiative. It has 3 main purposes:
1) To unify and integrate the many strands of provision and support designed to develop leaders and leadership capability so that we can, as a profession, seek to define what leaders must be capable of doing to lead organisations through the massive global changes that we will see over the next 5-10 years. You might call it a 'new leadership for a new world'.
2) To support the CPD of qualified and Chartered Managers
3) To encourage and support the professional qualification and professional development of leaders - especially senior leaders
The NCSL has been established to bring together Universities, colleges, training providers, executive coaches, professional bodies, e-learning providers, research bodies et al - and the ever-increasing range of qualifications, courses, assessment tools, books, websites and so on - to try and define what will still work and what needs to be re-defined or newly developed. None of us has personal experience of leading a team or an organisation through the times we are now facing. But between us we have the vision, creativity and intelligence to define what skills, capabilities, characteristics, attitudes and leadership behaviours are most likely to be successful. It is this that I want us to define and promulgate.
ConsequentlIy, I want to bring the CMI community into these debates.
My previous blog of 26th May referred to this situation (as many of mine tend to...) and I will be inviting experienced leaders & managers who feel they have something to contribute to join think-tanks - some of them online, some at events held at our Silverstone or Middle Aston centres - as we try and think our way around these issues. Please comment or contact me via CMI to express your interest.
Nigel Girling - Director - The National Centre for Strategic Leadership at Silverstone
May You Live in Interesting Times...
So, allegedly, the ancient Chinese curse goes. Well, we are certainly living through some interesting times. Times that are likely to get even more fascinating over the next 5-10 years, as we slash & burn our way through the public sector and reduce people's discretionary income to a point where many things that a couple of generations of C1 and C2 households (Google the ACORN classification if you want to know more) have considered to be basic 'rights' - the Sky box/big TV, 2nd & even 3rd cars, second homes, bigger houses, cheaper mortgages, winter holidays etc - perhaps return to their former place as 'priveliges' for the more affluent B and A groups..... meanwhile the world is altering dramatically under our feet - significant population growth in some countries (China, Brazil, Mexico, India) while populations shrinks in others (most of the EU for example) - UK is growing, primarily through immigration, creating business opportunities for many sectors and many other positive impacts on our economy and chances of recovery (unless you're a Daily Mail reader, in which case it signals the end of the world).
If you're between 40 and 60 - and on this site a lot of you probably are - then you've grown up in a world where English was the business language (well, American actually, but lets not quibble) and the world ran on a Judeo-Christian model. We communicated by letter & phone but preferred face-to-face and we disliked being sold to ('Can I help you?' - 'No thanks, I'm just looking' - sound familiar?). We used the computer at work. We went online to buy some stuff but felt slightly uncomfortable giving our bank-card details to a computer screen. We worked hard, aimed for promotion and sought to provide the best life we could for our families. All sounds perfectly normal doesn't it. Most of these assumptions make no sense to today's 15 year olds. And in 10 year's or so, they will be our primary workforce (well, not mine, because I'll have retired and be living on an island somewhere). 5 years after that, they will be in charge of everything. How do you think orgnaisations will operate then?
Have you seen the 'shift happens' movie(s)? if not, try this one below.... There are several versions from different perspectives now available on YouTube.
Which brings me to my real point. What are we doing as leaders to take account and advantage of this new reality? How will we need to change our behaviour? Our processes? Our attitudes? I'd be interested in your views.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCQ219bxl8&feature=player_embedded
Call for Participation - to all CMI members -
Having now launched the National Centre for Strategic Leadership at Silverstone (last Friday 11th June, to an audience of CMI members at Silverstone; at the Chartered Manager National Awards Ceremony on May 24th in Birmingham and on May 20th to the CMI Ambassadors in London) we are starting to compile areas for practitioner research - and this is where we need your help and input.
We will be forming 'Think-Tank's to discuss and define recommendations around a number of areas of contemporary leadership, including:
Leadership in a fast-changing world - how is the role of a leader changing? What will a senior leaders role look like in 2025? What new/changed skills are likely to be needed?
Professional Leadership & Qualification/Recognition - What 'qualification' or other competence assessment should we expect of people in leadership positions? Should it be mandatory - as it is for virtually all other professions?
Leadership ethics - What is a senior leader's responsibility for the impact of their organisation... on society, on the economy, on the environment, on suppliers, on the workforce, on employee's families?
Leadership Talent Development - Can this be spotted at age 13-15? How should we do that? What does 'the right stuff' look like today - and tomorrow? What action should be taken to develop those who exhibit this 'right stuff'?
Please consider how best to give your views in these debates. Participation will be possible by questionnaire, by attending conference events, at NCSL meetings and online, through blogs such as this. Please comment to express your interest. Thank you.
Capello, Domanech and all that....
Interesting to note the responses of both the English and French football teams to the style of leadership exhibited by their national coaches. MacGregor had much to say about this in his Theory X & Y - while I'm absolutely convinced of(and keep banging on about) the need for strong and dynamic leadership to deal with the issues we face as organisations, nations and probably as a species, that definitely doesn't mean we should revert to the old days of Theory X - skilled, capable and independent staff don't tend to respond well to autocratic styles - and especially not to being bullied. Moreover, surely by now we know that coercive power has a short lifespan as a motivator. An interesting contrast with the style of Maradona.... (and his blasted hand of god) - who appears to have the absolute support and belief of his people, despite limited experience (or even apparent skill?) as a 'manager'. I wonder what this says about the role of the modern leader?
I posed a question the other day 'Capello - Change Manager?' in which I wondered if he would change in order for England to change and start winning. I'll be honest and say I don't really know the answer to that one yet - but I suspect a little is the answer. I believe him to be a role model for the future in terms of 'authenticity', in other words having values, beliefs and behaviours that can clearly be identified and demonstrated. It's a fine line then for these to be appropriate for the leader, the team and the situation. What we have now I think is a situation that is inappropriate hence the relaxation of alcohol intake etc - it might be fish & chip suppers next before Germany??
What I also believe is important is the development of 'micro' leaders throughout teams and organisations. Sven used this approach to his team structures but seems lacking in the current England team. In our current austere age I really believe that it will be this micro leadership, in teams throughout organisations, that will spark real sustainable innovation - but how will it be identified, developed and facilitated?
The aftermath...
Well, if a leader is to be judged by the performance of their team.... and I think we all must be.... then history may be less than kind to the reign of F Capello esq. I agree with David's comments about 'authenticity' - there has been no doubt about standards and values in the Capello era... but the behaviour, body language and performance of the team suggested at least a partial failure to engage their passion and spirit - and, with tactical confusion apparent, perhaps also a failure to communicate the strategy effectively too. Perhaps there was also (if I can bear to say it) a certain poetic closure to '66 with the disallowing of an English goal where the ball had very obviously crossed the line...
Having subequently watched a passionate, ebullient and rampant Argentian team tear apart a talented Mexican outfit - albeit with another dodgy decision - and give every appearance of having a great time doing it... I think we need to learn a leadership lesson. It's no coincidence that the first 'behaviour' in the national standard for providing leadership for your organisation is to 'articulate a vision that generates excitement, enthusiasm and commitment' - it was very apparent yesterday which leader had managed to do that.
Call for Participation - to all CMI members -
Having now launched the National Centre for Strategic Leadership at Silverstone (last Friday 11th June, to an audience of CMI members at Silverstone; at the Chartered Manager National Awards Ceremony on May 24th in Birmingham and on May 20th to the CMI Ambassadors in London) we are starting to compile areas for practitioner research - and this is where we need your help and input.
We will be forming 'Think-Tank's to discuss and define recommendations around a number of areas of contemporary leadership, including:
Leadership in a fast-changing world - how is the role of a leader changing? What will a senior leaders role look like in 2025? What new/changed skills are likely to be needed?
Professional Leadership & Qualification/Recognition - What 'qualification' or other competence assessment should we expect of people in leadership positions? Should it be mandatory - as it is for virtually all other professions?
Leadership ethics - What is a senior leader's responsibility for the impact of their organisation... on society, on the economy, on the environment, on suppliers, on the workforce, on employee's families?
Leadership Talent Development - Can this be spotted at age 13-15? How should we do that? What does 'the right stuff' look like today - and tomorrow? What action should be taken to develop those who exhibit this 'right stuff'?
Please consider how best to give your views in these debates. Participation will be possible by questionnaire, by attending conference events, at NCSL meetings and online, through blogs such as this. Please comment to express your interest. Thank you.
The aftermath...
Well, if a leader is to be judged by the performance of their team.... and I think we all must be.... then history may be less than kind to the reign of F Capello esq. I agree with David's comments about 'authenticity' - there has been no doubt about standards and values in the Capello era... but the behaviour, body language and performance of the team suggested at least a partial failure to engage their passion and spirit - and, with tactical confusion apparent, perhaps also a failure to communicate the strategy effectively too. Perhaps there was also (if I can bear to say it) a certain poetic closure to '66 with the disallowing of an English goal where the ball had very obviously crossed the line...
Having subequently watched a passionate, ebullient and rampant Argentian team tear apart a talented Mexican outfit - albeit with another dodgy decision - and give every appearance of having a great time doing it... I think we need to learn a leadership lesson. It's no coincidence that the first 'behaviour' in the national standard for providing leadership for your organisation is to 'articulate a vision that generates excitement, enthusiasm and commitment' - it was very apparent yesterday which leader had managed to do that.
Lots of interesting discussion at the Parliamentary Group last night. Steve Easterbrook, the CEO of McDonald's UK, made many telling points about the critical need to reduce bureacracy to enable growth. While he was mostly referring to the burden of regulation... another of his comments that business should 'cut as far away from the customer as possible' suggests to me that internal bureacracy might need attention from all our scissors too. Any gardener will tell you that pruning is part of shaping a healthy plant and can stimulat5e growth... as long as you prune the right bits at the right time for the right reasons...
Andrew White - CEO of Serco Defence, Science & Nuclear - made a strong case for utilising private sector best-practice to drive efficiency... again, just as much a lesson for the business community as for Government. We could all benefit from a greater shared understanding of best practice.
Keith Clarke, CEO of Atkins, made many interesting and provocative comments about the essential need to develop talent - suggesting that the development (and the talent) might though come from India, China and beyond. Global markets need global leadership. He also suggested that Government should focus on larger organisations rather than SME, as this was where the best practice was most likely. Stunned silence from many but i think he has a point. Smaller organisations don't (or won't) have the resources to develop their people...it's always taken Government funding to make it happen and there won't be much of that around the place. He argued strongly that developing talent - especially leadership talent - wasn't a soft budget, but a cost of doing business. For what it's worth, I agree 100%.
In the absence of Business and SME Minister Mark Prisk (called away urgently - shame, he'd have loved Keith's SME comments...) Janice Munday filled in. It wasn't clear (to me at least) what her role in BIS is, but she suggested that the Dept was keen to promote a focus on developing talent. I do hope so. A time of change brings great opportunity - to reflect, evaluate and re-design. It really could be a fresh start. But then I thought we had a good squad in S Africa, so what do I know?....
Nigel - Sounds like an interesting evening which being based in the wet and cooler north I was unable to make unfortunately.
A couple of points spring to mind from your comments.
First we might have had a good squad (debateable....) in South Africa but did we have any real leaders on or off the pitch? If ever there was an obvious example of what happens when you don't develop leaders at all levels then this must be it! I thought Capello was potentially there but his inability to change in the face of new and different circumstances has blown it for me I am afraid. What difference would a 'Bobby Moore' have made on the pitch?
Second - if leadership development is an absolute given then how do we make it effective in terms of outcomes, time and costs so SME's can afford to do it? I've been working on this now, with others, for several years and have developed some highly innovative solutions which we deliver through my CMI level 7 centre Partners in Management - but can we get the message out and get organisations to take on board the fact that they must develop their leaders and it can be affordable? Thats why you have my support and contribution towards the Silverstone Centre's purpose - we'll get there somehow! Let's not give up - effective leadership at all levels is absolutely mission critical....
Abso - lutely David - and I somehow resisted the temptation to insert an expletive joining those two syllables,after engaging in the debate about 'should leaders swear?' and being comprehensively outvoted!
I absolutely concur on the need to make it easier to do... and I'm definitely a fan of the work you've been doing on that score.....love the mind maps too! I suspect another way to make it work is to exploit the flexibility of the CMI qualifications and create bite-sized modular 'qualifications'... the NCSL team are exploring various interesting angles on this right now. Onward and upward. Nil carborundum illegitimi. and all that.
Yet again couldn't agree more Nigel to the extent that we have already done it!
I had a good look at the Level 6 Management & Leadership qualifications and realised, that with the exception of finance, there are some excellent modules in there.
We have all known for some time that given the desperate state of our economy for the next decade then leading and managing innovation is going to be critical.
So I designed and now offer an intensive one week course that is focused on personal change, managing innovation and leading change. We assess against actually practically leading and delivering innovation in the work place and subject to satisfactory completion participants then get the Certificate in Management & Leadership - we call this the Transformational Manager programme and charge £1500 currently.
We are just putting another one together for social enterprises based more around culture and direction though.
Look forward to seeing your interpretation of this approach soon at NCSL
Regarding Leadership Talent Development - a thought. For many years now the Scouting/Guiding/Girls & Boys Brigade and Army cadets etc. have been actively developing the leadership skills of young people, drawing out talents, providing challenges to help members build new skills and stretch their thinking, and allowing the development of leadership behaviours in a supportive, coaching-style environment. I should add the national Youth Club movement, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme, and Young Enterprise too. Having been a willing participant in more than one of these organisations/ventures in my teenage years, I can vouch for numerous lessons learned in terms of leadership, people management, self-reliance, problem solving etc. which have stood me in good stead in my management career and other aspects of life. Some may consider these organisations sightly passe these days, however, they are still very much 'at large' in the community, and I recommend they are invited to contribute to the wider talent management debate in the NCSL. How could they link up with employers for example - beyond things like community project initiatives?
A cracking idea, Margaret. I certainly had my first experiences of leadership as a 'sixer' in the cubs and later both an assistant patrol leader and (a big moment for a 13 year-old me) later 'promotion' to patrol leader. I remember carrying a huge rucksack containing all our provisions and cooking gear all the way from the base to the top of a mountain in Wales - and refusing to let anyone else take a turn because I felt I should shoulder the burden on behalf of my team. I also remember being absolutely cream-crackered at the summit. I was so grateful when I went on a course and learned about delegation....
Like it Nigel! I well remember a number of 'character building' activities, and how leadership opportunities were often mixed with physical challenges - like guiding a group up Helvellyn in the Lake District in the pouring rain and along a 4 inch slippery ridge with a sheer drop on one side. Lovely training in management risk taking and not being afraid to lead from the front, with a smile on your face. Parents at home in blissful ignorance fortunately!
Thoughts on the subject of Employee Engagement....Recent studies, such as that conducted by Nita Clarke and David MacLeod on behalf of government in late 2009, have shown beyond reasonable doubt that, in organisations where leaders have successfully engaged their people in pursuit of a vision with enthusiasm and commitment, performance is increased very significantly. Most reports suggest that the 'discretionary performance' that is contained within untapped potential or is deliberately witheld due to disaffection amounts to around 30%-50% of the total available.
It is therefore clear that this discretionary performance represents a far larger source of profitability than any 'cost-out' exercise is likely to generate. The MacLeod report also indicates additional benefits from engaging and aligning people with the organisation's vision and strategy - as indicators such as:
...all show similarly significant increases.
We're not talking about a bit of an increase here, either. Some examples from the MacLeod report:
Both these examples are taken from a study of 664,000 employees worldwide. Another example from a study of nearly 24,000 business units by Gallup...
Consider the impact of these measures alone on your organisation.
I commend the report to you. As leaders, we all have stretching and challenging targets to achieve 'more of better for less' - I believe John Gardner said it best while in Government in the USA in the 1990's -
True leaders articulate goals that lift people out of their petty preoccupations to unite them in pursuit of objectives worthy of their best efforts.
At the National Centre for Strategic Leadership @ Silverstone - (see the intro blog at http://www.nationalcentreforleadership.blogspot.com/), our purpose is to work with leaders to help them do exactly this and then to engage their people at all levels, through dynamic, passionate, effective and constant communication with the organisation, teams and individuals.