12 mistakes organisations make when developing leaders

Karen Schmidt CSP Engaging Leadership Expert

www.letsgrow.com.au

12 mistakes organisations make when developing leaders The issue of how to develop more effective leaders has been debated over a long period of time by many in business, government and academia. The topic continues to be discussed because getting it right is so important to the future of any organisation. If you are passionate about increasing the quality of the leaders in your organisation then this ebook will provide you with food for thought. No one person can claim to have the answer to the complex issue of how to improve the quality of leaders but if everyone who has experience in the area presents their ideas then a fruitful discussion can occur. This ebook presents my thoughts on the topic based on over 15 years of working with organisations as they attempt to improve their practices. As you read it I invite you to assess your current strategies against the criteria to see how you rate and identify where you might need to adjust your plans to achieve a more productive result. I welcome your feedback in the hope that it adds to the ongoing discussion and helps us all create more engaging leaders. Regards,

Karen Schmidt BEd (Adult Ed) Engaging Leadership Expert

www.letsgrow.com.au

12 mistakes organisations make when developing leaders Regardless of what industry you work in, the task of developing leaders should be high on the list of discussion topics for your executive team. Your organisation may currently have a high performing crop of leaders but, just as in nature, they will eventually come to the end of their productive life and need to be replaced. That’s why you need to start looking at how to grow the next crop, ready to take their place with a minimal disruption to your organisation. Unfortunately there are too many organisations that rely on outdated strategies that are more suited to the task focused, industrial workforce of the past rather than the intellectual capital driven, knowledge based workers of today. There are 12 common mistakes that need to be rectified to create more effective, engaging leaders.

1. Natural talent mantra

2. Age equals ability approach

3. One size fits all mindset

4. Against their will strategy

5. Promotion required rationalism

6. Just in time philosophy

7. Deep end metaphor

8. Back in my day ideology

9. Fresh stock attitude

10. Status quo system 11. Qualifications are essential stance

12. Mistake myopia syndrome

www.letsgrow.com.au

1. Natural talent mantra This is the belief that those people who have leading in their DNA make the best leaders. It’s a case of you either have it or you don’t. This mantra results in organisations that believe they don’t need to focus on assisting people to become leaders. They simply need to employ people who already have talent and the rest will happen naturally. “Talent” is often defined as a narrow range of attributes we traditionally associate with leaders, such as extroversion or decisiveness, when today’s successful leaders represent a far more diverse range of characteristics. It implies that natural talent will be identified early on which is why organisations who follow this mantra often have programs designed for graduates, overlooking potential leaders from the ranks of their older employees. To quote one senior leader I have worked with “if you aren’t a leader by the time you are 40 then forget it”. There are many examples of people who had a talent that was not discovered until later in life. These late bloomers can go on to have highly successful careers. I believe that being a successful leader is about a combination of knowledge, skill and attitude. Natural talent only takes care of the skill component of this formula for success. Finding potential leaders is hard enough. Don’t make it more difficult by discounting anyone who doesn’t seem like a natural. 2. Age equals ability approach At the other end of the spectrum there are those organisations that believe that chronological age is an important indicator of future success as a leader. Their belief is that older people who have more work experience will automatically be better placed to lead others. They wrongly assume that all experience is equal when in fact there is a huge difference between having 10 years experience or 1 years experience repeated 10 times. Stereotyping like this can be damaging to new leaders who are sometimes perceived as winning the job on seniority not merit. This tendency to promote older people at the expense of younger ones can cause the organisation to lose potential leaders, as young people leave when they see how hard it is to get their first opportunity to lead. Age related barriers can also hide another issue I will describe later on that I call the “status quo system”. Some organisations even go as far as combining this approach with the earlier “natural talent” mantra meaning they will recognise potential leaders but won’t promote them until they reach what is considered a suitable age.

www.letsgrow.com.au

3. One size fits all mindset Once new leaders have been chosen a new barrier can be the way they are developed. If the organisation has a mindset that all leaders learn in the same way and at the same pace they will fail to provide tailored development plans. Anyone who requires more assistance or takes a little longer to get up to speed is deemed to be a problem that needs fixing. Rather than looking at the quality of the development programs they turn their attention to the perceived failings of the individual. This mindset assumes everyone is starting at the same point in their development rather than working from a basis that each person will begin with unique strengths and areas for development. I have seen this issue arise in organisations where they are used to developing leaders who all come from the same “technical” background and are then faced with a new leader from a different discipline who doesn’t respond positively to the same system. Often there is an underlying goal of saving time or money by streamlining the development process. This is false economy as a lack of customisation can result in wasted effort and potentially the loss of people who would have made excellent leaders if more flexible development options were provided. 4. Against their will strategy I am always saddened to hear stories of people who are forced into the role of leader. They talk of having pressured applied to them by senior leaders who often use fear tactics to get their compliance. Their arguments range from “we know you can do it” to “we are in a bind”. They use incentives like increased pay, greater status and the opportunity to get their ideas heard at a senior level. On the other side, they point out that these offers don’t come along very often and that not accepting will limit their opportunities with the organisation. Senior leaders who are selfish enough to make decisions based only on what is best for them, not caring what the individual wants, are sending the wrong message. It makes people start to think about what other decisions they may be required to make under pressure from above. Often what is really going on in this situation is that the potential leader has seen what has happened to others in the past and doesn’t want the role or is not ready for it. Being a leader is not something you can do with passion if you have to be talked into it. This goes to the “attitude” part of what it takes to be an engaging leader. If an individual isn’t committed to fulfilling the role this will become obvious to their team. Just because an individual has the skill to be a leader doesn’t mean they want to be a leader.

www.letsgrow.com.au

5. Promotion required rationalism The practice of forcing people into leading as a “reward” for outstanding performance is a flawed one. It is often done because the organisation doesn’t have a structure that provides a career path for people with outstanding technical skills. Once they are in the most senior technical role and have reached the top of that pay scale there is no other way to reward them. This issue is seen in the “up or out” mentality employed by some of the large international services firms who require all professional staff to be promoted through their system in a certain time frame or be asked to leave. This rationalism makes two assumptions. First, that everyone wants to be promoted and second, that technical skills are somehow linked to the skills required to be a leader. Both assumptions are false. A system like this overlooks people who would be make excellent leaders but are not technically outstanding so they never get considered for the role. It stems from a time when the only way to get to the top was to start at the bottom and work your way through every position. Today we know that leaders don’t need to know how to perform every operational task to successfully perform in a strategic role. As long as they are willing to acquire the knowledge necessary to understand the business, people who aren’t technical experts can be outstanding leaders of technical organisations. 6. Just in time philosophy The term “just in time” was first used in the manufacturing industry to describe the concept of producing parts just as they were required rather than keeping them in stock. Today some organisations try to apply the same philosophy to many other processes, including developing leaders. Their thinking is often that they don’t want to give people false hopes by promising them promotions so they keep any succession plans a secret. Then, they appoint people just as required without warning. This can come as a shock to some who need time to get used to the idea so they may say no when put under pressure. As a result, the organisation misses out on potentially greater leaders. This philosophy also means that new leaders have no opportunity to develop skills in advance of their appointment and so can take longer to settle in and become productive. In extreme cases it can create a culture where people feel they have to run down other leaders to get a chance to take their place. Being promoted becomes all about timing and if you can get the timing right by making yourself look good when someone else is looking bad then you could be next to get that much wanted promotion.

www.letsgrow.com.au

7. Deep end metaphor Sometimes known as the “sink or swim method”, this approach is taken in some industries to separate out the people who are tough enough for the role from those who don’t have what it takes. It is particularly popular in male dominated professions where asking for help is seen as a sign of weakness. The thinking is that if you help people too much in the beginning they are unable to function without out. By not “holding their hand” early on they are forced to adapt or fail. Of course any failures are attributed to the individual’s inability to perform rather than the organisation’s lack of support. In fact the truth is that success is often a matter of luck or timing. If you happen to take over as leader when everything is running smoothly then chances are you will do OK. However if you are taking over in less favourable conditions or after the last person failed to make the grade, then your chances of success are slim. Whilst the concept of practical, on the job learning is recognised as valuable, organisations that operate using this metaphor tend to take the idea too far especially when it is combined with the “natural talent” mantra and “one size fits all” mindset I described earlier. 8. Back in my day ideology Times change and so do the strategies we need to use in developing leaders. Not all industries find it easy to cope with this reality. The result can be that some are still using ideologies about leading that are out of date. They rally against any changes to the “tried and tested” development methods that worked 20 or 30 years ago, unwilling to take on board new ways of thinking. It could be little things, like the frosty reception new leaders receive from their peers in the early days on the job, complaints that are leveled at the amount of time or money spent on supporting new leaders when the old guard had no such luxuries in their day or the unwritten rules that aren’t explained leaving new leaders to fumble around in front of others. If “back in the day” the path to being a senior leader required a degree or was only available to people who had come from the “shop floor” then older style leaders will struggle with anyone who doesn’t fit that model. Whilst some of these behaviours can be disguised as “settling in” issues, others are more blatant forms of discrimination, harassment or bullying and need to be addressed or you risk losing good leaders and potential leaders.

www.letsgrow.com.au

9. Fresh stock attitude Some organisations have a clear policy of not filling certain roles from within. They prefer to bring in fresh people from outside the organisation, thinking it might save them having to do any development. However, even the most experienced leader from outside will still need help to settle in and get up to speed on the organisational culture. This attitude can create a “glass ceiling” whereby people can only move to a certain level in the organisation before they have to move elsewhere in the industry to take their next step. The result is higher turnover and less attached employees who are always keeping their options open for roles elsewhere. Whilst there are benefits to bringing in new people with new ideas, it is false economy to have a strict policy of filling certain roles externally when you have suitable candidates already working for you. The opposite attitude, of never hiring outsiders for leadership positions can be equally misguided if it results in unsuitable people being promoted because they are the only option available. The organisation loses a lot of valuable “corporate knowledge” that never makes it to the strategic level as no one in a position of power has worked their way up to the role. 10. Status quo system With the growing diversity in most organisations today, it is still the case that in some industries leaders are chosen and developed to fit in with a tightly controlled “norm” for their role. They must act, think and look like the current leaders so as not to upset the status quo. Sometimes this practice is overt, other times covert or even instinctual. What happens is that the decision makers are not willing to consider people who are outside the current demographic norm because they are threatened by their presence or just don’t want to do the hard work of adapting to their different style. The result is you can end up with a group of followers rather than leaders or a leadership team that is not representative of its employees or customers. Psychologists tell us that we are most comfortable around people who are “like us” in some way so it is only natural for the same thing to happen when selecting leaders. Your system needs to find a way to alleviate this so you get the best person for the role not just the person who “looks right”.

www.letsgrow.com.au

11. Qualifications are essential stance Effective leaders require a range of skills that can be learnt in a variety of ways. Some organisations take the stance that a formal, university qualification such as an MBA is essential for senior leaders. This can lead to them sending people on expensive, time consuming programs that aren’t customised to their needs. The practice can also deter some people who would have made great leaders but for a range of reasons can’t excel in the university system. This “qualifications are essential” stance can be used as a way of narrowing down short lists or as a method of discriminating against people who can’t or won’t do formal study. By widening the criteria to include people who have practical experience gained from real life projects, organisations can benefit and save themselves a lot of money. We all know people who have all the theory in the world but can’t put it into practice. If organisations continue to be blinded by pieces of paper and ignore other characteristics such as cultural fit they will continue to develop leaders who struggle to deal with the messy realities of the role they don’t talk about in most university courses. 12. Mistake myopia syndrome This syndrome is not a new one but any discussion on improving leader development would not be complete without mentioning the famous “Peter principle”. Originally coined in 1969 by Laurence Peter and Raymond Hull it states that:

“Members of an organisation where promotion is based on achievement, success and merit will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability."

The key to the principle is that people then tend to be left in a position that is one level beyond their ability because senior leaders don’t want to admit they made a mistake. This then requires those people one level below them, who are competent, to make up for their lack of ability. This practice puts off potential leaders from agreeing to take on roles unless they are 110% sure they can do the job and is often the result of using the “deep end metaphor” or the “against their will” strategy.

www.letsgrow.com.au

Let’s Grow! Growing engaging leaders

Let’s Grow! is in the business of assisting organisations to thrive by showing them how growing their managers into engaging leaders will harvest bottom line results.

Director Karen Schmidt is an award winning speaker, workshop leader, facilitator, coach and author. Karen’s philosophy is simple . . . she believes that being a great leader is like being a great gardener. She uses this philosophy to help people understand how to develop a more natural approach to leading that yields results.

Originally a Human Resources practitioner, she has been nurturing leaders for more than 20 years. Karen’s experience comes from working with organisations of all shapes and sizes representing industries as diverse as IT, financial services, direct selling, manufacturing, retail, the military and professional associations. Along the way she has led teams of permanent, temporary and volunteer workers. She also believes that educating is a form of leading that deserves more recognition. To add to her practical experience she holds a degree in Adult Education and formal qualifications in Human Resource Management and Facilitation. Karen is the author of “Lessons in leading from the garden” and “Keep ‘em keen: a guide for managers on engaging people of all ages and career stages”. Today she works with current and future leaders across Australia, New Zealand and South East Asia. Her clients include corporates, government, professional associations, educational institutions and not for profits. Her services include: • Individual coaching • Leader development strategic masterplan • Leadership team facilitation • “Budding Leaders” development program