There is a cultural shift throughout the business and academic realms in what to term to use for a person in an authoritative position. Previously, they were called supervisors or managers because they literally supervised and managed people, processes, and activities. The shift is now to call these individuals by the much more appropriate term of leader. The term leader espouses that they will lead their employees and colleagues through situations--"through thick and thin." Their abilities are measured against the successes of the people they lead. A good leader, for example, would be someone who is able to provide guidance and optimism in the face of a challenge and work with their professional teammates (i.e., colleagues, direct-reports) to solve the problem.
Aside from leading the people that they work with, these new managers are also being called to coach. Throughout the text Coaching for Performance, John Whitmore focuses on some of the struggles that managers (or leaders) run into as they actively work toward success of this necessary job duty. Directly related to items discussed in the BigFive ProFile by Howard & Howard, the successful manager/coach must have traits and competencies congruent to empathy, integrity and detachment (Whitmore, 2002). The 'coach in training' must also be willing to change their ways of thinking and doing from how they were brought up.
One key example Whitmore points out is related to recall. The traditional management style was to tell someone how to do something, and sometimes they would tell and show them how to accomplish a task; the latter being only two percent more effective than the former. However, the new coach needs to adopt the approach of tell, show, and experience for their coachees to have maximum recall--a staggering 85 percent recall after three weeks. Along with these results, research also shows that subordinates do to learn effectively when left on their own (Whitmore, 2002). It may seem common sense, but the idea of coaching versus managing (the same with leading versus managing) really does focus on the development and ultimate success of the coachee.
As seen in nearly all leadership texts, awareness and self-awareness are key areas for success, especially in relation to coaching. Whitmore breaks down these two terms in that "[a]wareness is knowing what is happening around you" whereas "[s]elf-awareness is knowing what you are experiencing" (Whitmore, 2002, p. 35). Without these two key insights, both the coach and the coachee will not be able to or willing to develop new methods for doing. A major pitfall for managers turned coaches is for these 'experts' in a given field to teach their coachees their way (or the 'right way') in doing a task instead of allowing the coachee to learn his or her individual way of doing (Whitmore, 2002).
As managers become leaders and simultaneously coaches, they will see the benefits of their approaches not only in the success of their coachees but in their own leadership development. Personality traits, competencies and strengths that are crucial for coaches to possess are also found in successful leaders. Changing the culture of one's organization through successful coaching can improve the morale and inevitably the quality of work that is coming out of a given department. As leaders grow and learn from the many avenues in which they will go up and down during their tenures, the importance of coaching should always be in the forefront of their minds.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
360 Evaluations and Leader Development
The new phenomenon in the business world related to employee development is the 360-degree evaluation. This process of getting feedback from not only supervisors (as was traditionally done) but from colleagues and subordinates is becoming critical to the success of the company and individuals at all levels in the organization. Particularly for the purposes of this discussion, it is extremely relevant to leader (and leadership) development.
Before I delve into this topic, it is important however to know that though these two terms are sometimes synonymous, Velsor and McCauley point out in “Our View of Leadership Development,” that they in fact are quite different. Leader development is related to the growth of an individual’s capability to be more effective when placed in a leadership role (2). Whereas leadership development is the growth of an organization’s capability to establish the basic leadership tasks needed for successful, cohesive work—thus outside the realm of both the individual and the traditional managerial hierarchy (18). I wanted to clarify this distinction because the use of a 360 evaluation model is not just for developing individuals for the sake of personal growth, but also for the benefit of the whole—the cornerstone of organization leadership approaches.
There are six ‘best practices’ related to the 360 evaluation which organizations should be aware of in order to make this an effective exercise. One of the key elements for successful use of the 360 model pointed out by Rogers, Rogers & Metlay in their article, “Improving the Payoff from 360-Degree Feedback,” is for companies to focus the 360 evaluation questions specifically in relation to the competencies needed for each unique job—thus no two positions will have the same competency-based questionnaire (48-9). This is substantiated from data collected by the authors related to the ultimate benefit of a 360 evaluation by looking at companies who did versus those who did not use this and other ‘best practice’ techniques. Some of the other elements that the authors focus on are to: carefully select the participants; closely direct the feedback process; establish training programs for employees; and conduct an evaluation at the end of the process so to conclude the business advantage of the exercise (45). With focus on these areas, the use of the 360-degree evaluation has great potential to not only be advantageous for the individuals but is sure to increase productivity and long-term success of the organization.
As leaders move through the many passages, as discussed in my previous post, the use of a 360 evaluation can be critical to their success. Many people are not aware of their lax in certain competencies that are necessary for their leadership growth. This feedback from all areas of one’s professional interactions—supervisors, colleagues and subordinates—is sure to benefit them because this fresh look at their strengths and short-comings will help them to readily focus their own personal leader development.
Before I delve into this topic, it is important however to know that though these two terms are sometimes synonymous, Velsor and McCauley point out in “Our View of Leadership Development,” that they in fact are quite different. Leader development is related to the growth of an individual’s capability to be more effective when placed in a leadership role (2). Whereas leadership development is the growth of an organization’s capability to establish the basic leadership tasks needed for successful, cohesive work—thus outside the realm of both the individual and the traditional managerial hierarchy (18). I wanted to clarify this distinction because the use of a 360 evaluation model is not just for developing individuals for the sake of personal growth, but also for the benefit of the whole—the cornerstone of organization leadership approaches.
There are six ‘best practices’ related to the 360 evaluation which organizations should be aware of in order to make this an effective exercise. One of the key elements for successful use of the 360 model pointed out by Rogers, Rogers & Metlay in their article, “Improving the Payoff from 360-Degree Feedback,” is for companies to focus the 360 evaluation questions specifically in relation to the competencies needed for each unique job—thus no two positions will have the same competency-based questionnaire (48-9). This is substantiated from data collected by the authors related to the ultimate benefit of a 360 evaluation by looking at companies who did versus those who did not use this and other ‘best practice’ techniques. Some of the other elements that the authors focus on are to: carefully select the participants; closely direct the feedback process; establish training programs for employees; and conduct an evaluation at the end of the process so to conclude the business advantage of the exercise (45). With focus on these areas, the use of the 360-degree evaluation has great potential to not only be advantageous for the individuals but is sure to increase productivity and long-term success of the organization.
As leaders move through the many passages, as discussed in my previous post, the use of a 360 evaluation can be critical to their success. Many people are not aware of their lax in certain competencies that are necessary for their leadership growth. This feedback from all areas of one’s professional interactions—supervisors, colleagues and subordinates—is sure to benefit them because this fresh look at their strengths and short-comings will help them to readily focus their own personal leader development.
Friday, April 16, 2010
The Six Leadership Passages
Prior to this course—and this entire graduate program for that matter—I had no formal education on the dimensions, facets, and other subsequent research in “leadership.” I had always thought of leaders as a certain breed—born to lead! Though I still feel that some people possess stronger attributes (those seen in the BigFive ProFile, for example) than others which help in their leadership success, I have recently learned that those attributes may in fact not help and may even hinder one’s climb up the professional, leadership ladder if the steps are not taken sequentially.
The article, "Six Leadership Passages" by Charan, Drotter & Noel, establishes the appropriate mode in which we should climb this imaginary ladder. First, we must prove ourselves after a year or so in a job that we are ‘promotable’ due to the sharpening and broadening of our individual skill set. These attributes however will only lead to our leadership success if we are able and willing to make a value-based transition. This consists of valuing managerial work and not just enduring it, as well as truly valuing the leading of others to their own productivity. This shift is critical in order for a manager to move onto the second passage—managing managers. Skipping the first passage and not fully accepting the values of it can lead to, as the authors call it, ‘clogging the leadership pipeline’ (16-8).
Like the first, the second passage has values that are critical to success, including the valuation of managing areas outside of their individual expertise. As the authors point out, communication is critical for the third passage managers as they must develop the “skill of skip-level communication” so to not diminish the authority of managers in the lesser two passages. The fourth passage has values placed in importance of the support staff. Without this, staff will not perform to their full capacity, ultimately leaving the business manager with a clog in the pipes. Group managers, seen in the fifth passage, must have values related directly to the success of other people’s business (i.e., holistic, strategic thinking). The final passage is solely focused on values versus skills. The managerial challenge at this passage is to assemble together a high-achieving, ambitious team but this can only be done successfully after years and years of diverse experiences allowing, for example, a CEO to truly value the needs of the sixth passage (20-6).
In my professional life, I am in the beginning stages of the first passage…with a bit of a twist. After two years in my educational coordinator position I was able to display knowledge of the job, self-initiation, and the ability to take on multiple roles in different areas of my department with success. Upon the retirement of our previous business manager, I was asked to step in and fill that position as interim while they searched for a replacement. Obviously, I skipped quite a few passages and was thrown into the fourth without any preparation. Being thrust into this role forced me to adopt the somewhat trite mantra of ‘sink or swim.’ I chose to swim—not only for my own sake (and sanity!), but for the sake of the department. Lucky for me, some of my stronger dimensions had a chance to shine, such as my low C+ (high consolidation) and my low N= (moderate need for stability). Prior to the BigFive, I did not have formal names for these dimensions of my personality but I knew these were the areas that helped me not just wade in the water until a new manager started, but instead allowed me to swim toward my own leadership shore. I have recently been promoted as the educational administrator/day-to-day operations manager in the my department. As the authors suggest, I must learn to value deligation as well as the success of others as I move through the first passage. I believe that my intense focus towards goals and my moderate threshold for handling stress at work are bound to help me as I climb my own personal leadership ladder.
The article, "Six Leadership Passages" by Charan, Drotter & Noel, establishes the appropriate mode in which we should climb this imaginary ladder. First, we must prove ourselves after a year or so in a job that we are ‘promotable’ due to the sharpening and broadening of our individual skill set. These attributes however will only lead to our leadership success if we are able and willing to make a value-based transition. This consists of valuing managerial work and not just enduring it, as well as truly valuing the leading of others to their own productivity. This shift is critical in order for a manager to move onto the second passage—managing managers. Skipping the first passage and not fully accepting the values of it can lead to, as the authors call it, ‘clogging the leadership pipeline’ (16-8).
Like the first, the second passage has values that are critical to success, including the valuation of managing areas outside of their individual expertise. As the authors point out, communication is critical for the third passage managers as they must develop the “skill of skip-level communication” so to not diminish the authority of managers in the lesser two passages. The fourth passage has values placed in importance of the support staff. Without this, staff will not perform to their full capacity, ultimately leaving the business manager with a clog in the pipes. Group managers, seen in the fifth passage, must have values related directly to the success of other people’s business (i.e., holistic, strategic thinking). The final passage is solely focused on values versus skills. The managerial challenge at this passage is to assemble together a high-achieving, ambitious team but this can only be done successfully after years and years of diverse experiences allowing, for example, a CEO to truly value the needs of the sixth passage (20-6).
In my professional life, I am in the beginning stages of the first passage…with a bit of a twist. After two years in my educational coordinator position I was able to display knowledge of the job, self-initiation, and the ability to take on multiple roles in different areas of my department with success. Upon the retirement of our previous business manager, I was asked to step in and fill that position as interim while they searched for a replacement. Obviously, I skipped quite a few passages and was thrown into the fourth without any preparation. Being thrust into this role forced me to adopt the somewhat trite mantra of ‘sink or swim.’ I chose to swim—not only for my own sake (and sanity!), but for the sake of the department. Lucky for me, some of my stronger dimensions had a chance to shine, such as my low C+ (high consolidation) and my low N= (moderate need for stability). Prior to the BigFive, I did not have formal names for these dimensions of my personality but I knew these were the areas that helped me not just wade in the water until a new manager started, but instead allowed me to swim toward my own leadership shore. I have recently been promoted as the educational administrator/day-to-day operations manager in the my department. As the authors suggest, I must learn to value deligation as well as the success of others as I move through the first passage. I believe that my intense focus towards goals and my moderate threshold for handling stress at work are bound to help me as I climb my own personal leadership ladder.
Friday, April 2, 2010
The WorkPlace BigFive ProFile
Since I started the Master's in Leadership Development program last fall, I have learned a lot about myself. Some of it I was aware of, while others of it I was not. We started our journey by taking a Jungian Typology assessment, liken to Meyers Brigg, and the results were me to a 'T'--I am officially an ESTJ. Throughout the lessons associated with that exercise, I have become more self-aware of my personality strengths and weaknesses and how to relate those into my professional life.
However, this quarter we were required to take the WorkPlace BigFive ProFile assessment. Personally, I think this was undoubtedly more accurate and 'right on' than the Jungian assessment. Had this assessment been given to others to complete about me, I am sure the results would be parallel to my own results. As the authors of The Owner’s Manual for Personality at Work point out, the bottom line for studying personality at work is specifically related to the performance of not only the individual but the company as well (28). It is crucial that I am self-aware of my own personality and how it affects and is affected by the variety of tasks and persons I work amongst daily.
A quick breakdown of the BigFive ProFile looks at five components: N need for stability; E extraversion; O originality; A accommodation; and C consolidation. If you can imagine, think of each on a spectrum—the far right (++) being the exact definition of each component, with the far left (--) being its precise opposite. Just as seen on a political, ideological spectrum, the center is moderate (=), a combination of both extremes. Another critical element to understand is that moderate BigFive scores are averages, not modes. The author of this text, Pierce J. Howard, Ph.D., also points out that blends of the different components/facets actually make for the ideal form of leadership (108).
With this very brief overview, my BigFive results are:
N=, E=, O=, A=, C+
This concise BigFive result is broken down within the assessment analysis by the different traits related to each of the five core components. Through careful review of the details (of which I will not bore you with at this time), I am confident in proclaiming that the concise, brief result seen above is exactly me!
I am excited to begin this journey over the next nine weeks as we decipher and better understand our individual and global results and how those implicate our professional, leadership careers. Some of the components I am keen to focus on are:
A= I am borderline between A= and A-. The explanation of this component focuses on the potential for my personality to come across as hostile, rude, hard-headed, and not a team player. As a leader, this is most definitely an area I need to focus special attention on as I am self-aware of this personality shortcoming.
C+ Though I do not think this is necessarily bad (since no one trait is better or worse), I do need to focus on this so that I am not negatively precived as overbearing, a workaholic, or inflexible. Again, this is an area that is critical to effective leadership and my self-awareness is my first step in adjusting my personality as needed. Of course, it is also crucial to be focused as a leader so adjustment is key to this component.
I highly suggest for anyone in a leadership role to look into the BigFive profile as it is already an important instrument in my own personal leadership toolbox.
-Colleen
However, this quarter we were required to take the WorkPlace BigFive ProFile assessment. Personally, I think this was undoubtedly more accurate and 'right on' than the Jungian assessment. Had this assessment been given to others to complete about me, I am sure the results would be parallel to my own results. As the authors of The Owner’s Manual for Personality at Work point out, the bottom line for studying personality at work is specifically related to the performance of not only the individual but the company as well (28). It is crucial that I am self-aware of my own personality and how it affects and is affected by the variety of tasks and persons I work amongst daily.
A quick breakdown of the BigFive ProFile looks at five components: N need for stability; E extraversion; O originality; A accommodation; and C consolidation. If you can imagine, think of each on a spectrum—the far right (++) being the exact definition of each component, with the far left (--) being its precise opposite. Just as seen on a political, ideological spectrum, the center is moderate (=), a combination of both extremes. Another critical element to understand is that moderate BigFive scores are averages, not modes. The author of this text, Pierce J. Howard, Ph.D., also points out that blends of the different components/facets actually make for the ideal form of leadership (108).
With this very brief overview, my BigFive results are:
N=, E=, O=, A=, C+
This concise BigFive result is broken down within the assessment analysis by the different traits related to each of the five core components. Through careful review of the details (of which I will not bore you with at this time), I am confident in proclaiming that the concise, brief result seen above is exactly me!
I am excited to begin this journey over the next nine weeks as we decipher and better understand our individual and global results and how those implicate our professional, leadership careers. Some of the components I am keen to focus on are:
A= I am borderline between A= and A-. The explanation of this component focuses on the potential for my personality to come across as hostile, rude, hard-headed, and not a team player. As a leader, this is most definitely an area I need to focus special attention on as I am self-aware of this personality shortcoming.
C+ Though I do not think this is necessarily bad (since no one trait is better or worse), I do need to focus on this so that I am not negatively precived as overbearing, a workaholic, or inflexible. Again, this is an area that is critical to effective leadership and my self-awareness is my first step in adjusting my personality as needed. Of course, it is also crucial to be focused as a leader so adjustment is key to this component.
I highly suggest for anyone in a leadership role to look into the BigFive profile as it is already an important instrument in my own personal leadership toolbox.
-Colleen
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Welcome to my blog!
This is a blog I am starting for my LDR 703 graduate course entitled 'Building Leadership Capacity.' Over the next 10 weeks I will be blogging my thoughts, feelings, and observations relevant to the course material.
Here's to Week 1 of spring quarter!!
Here's to Week 1 of spring quarter!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
