You’re very capable. You’re highly skilled in your field. You’re even a recognized authority in what you do. For this you’re tapped on the shoulder and welcomed into the ranks of your organization’s leaders. You’re in charge of an area … or a division … or the entire facility. And certainly someone with all of your capabilities simply must know how to do everything associated with the job in a very effective and meaningful way. Right? Not so fast. In my work with organizational leaders from the highest ranking to a lower level of leadership I definitely conclude that the resounding answer is ‘Wrong!’ Regardless of how skilled leaders are in a technical sense as it pertains to their responsibilities the vague aspect of a job often centers on how to be effective in leading the charge … motivating, encouraging and developing the talents of others to achieve the results you strive for.
Encountering leaders who express either frustration around or simply a desire to lead their company to greater success, I have often asked who they turn to for leadership guidance? Who is it okay to approach and discuss leader related problems and challenges? What I hear too often is that a leader perceives that when they are selected for the position, they are presumed to know the technical skills associated with the position and the skill to lead others to accomplish the job. And where this exists, it tends to deprive the leader of building and improving a skill that is the foundation for an organization’s ability to bridge the gap that too often exists between the vision of what the desired achievement is and the reality of what is actually accomplished. It is dangerous and often costly. Simply put … even leaders want and need to be led. They too want guidance as to how to oversee their areas of responsibility and be extremely effective in doing so. Achieving real and lasting success is much easier when we don’t have to fake it. Everyone wins … including the organization.
Leadership is most easily taught to those not naturally blessed with the skills when they are young and resilliant and flexible and in lower level positions where there is less risk for the organization and the individual.
If one has used only technical abilities to rise to a senior position, embracing the interpersonal and human relations skills to lead an organization, it may be too late. In that circumstance the organization doesn’t was the technicians genius but pairs him with someone who can multiply his effectiveness but being his leadership surrogate.
To lead effectively, one must absolutely know where the organization that is being lead needs to go. (By the way, he is interchangeable with she.) He then must be sure that his organization has the physical resources necessary to permit his people to get to where they are going, and that might be best attained by asking his organization what they need to get to the ultimate destination.
This is where the human skill comes in, very big time. The good leader must have the vision of the ultimate destination. But he must insure that he achieves organizational buy in and part of the way to achieve that is to have the subordinates that will take the organization there participate in the decisions about the how to achieve that. At thyis point one doesn’t spend the organization into bankruptcy, but rather all of the subordinate planning is subjected to IRR testing.
Very few leaders get to a job or career position fully qualified for the job. They must be able to rely on their “experts” to help him formulate the solutions. It is that give and take with staff, the ability to listen and accept and reject ideas with grace, and if it is a matter of rejection, it must be done in such a way as to not turn off or demotivate the subordinate.
If people want to enhance their skills as a leader, the best way to lay a foundation is to study those past leaders that have enjoyed great success in leading organizations. Biographies of leaders are great classrooms. Look for the people qualities. Look at both their success and failures. Look at both your own successes and failures. Failures are the best classroom. It isn’t a matter of self flagellation, but rather an examination of the process, and where that process failed. KNOW YOURSELF. If you have habitual weaknesses, learn to keep those traits out of the leadership process. It won’t always be perfect. but without creating a lot of disasters, you need to do the right thing 51% or more of the time, with more than 51% of the resources.
If you one is not a natively good leader that is not disqualifying, but one needs to learn around it.
Thank you for inviting me to use a bit of your time on my take of macro leadership 100A. 100B is done out in the field and it is tough, but rewarding.
Robert,
You have added a lot of depth to my post … obviously because of your extensive experience through the Polaris Group. Thanks for adding the richness!
This is cool!