“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
~ Leo Tolstoy
Organizations are faced today with unprecedented scale of change and complexities as they strive to remain relevant, competitive, and profitable. While change has been always a constant, the rate of change has grown exponentially, particularly since the pandemic came with its calling card in early 2020, quickly followed by events which continue to create far-reaching and sustained headwinds for businesses across the globe. As organisations struggle to cope and navigate, even the “very best” of global employers, known for their decades long commitment to people practices and processes, are seen taking actions which adversely impact significant numbers of their workforce.
What is very sad, is the way many of these people decisions are being executed and communicated, and the way its impacting employee experience. The stories of employees’ shocking experiences of email accounts or access cards getting suddenly locked out, or others waking up to a mail message that they have been terminated with immediate effect, or laptop screens freezing even while employees are engaged in meetings with external customers or potential new hires, have become quite common. I am tempted to play on Tolstoy’s timeless quote above and say – all unhappy families (read organisations) are getting to look and behave alike.
So, one may ask a very valid question. What is the relevance of the subject and theme of leadership development in organizations amidst this context of unprecedented uncertainty and complexities? Should organizations not suspend investing in leadership development till the external environment gets more stabilised? The findings of researchers studying organizational excellence and success have been consistent around a few drivers of organizational success including culture of customerorientation, continuous innovation, talent quality and commitment. Tom Peters defines leadership as “the art of getting others to want to do, (what) should be done”. And that the mark of effective leadership is the “impact on the attitude and performance of others”. The drivers of organizational successmentioned above are directly related to the “attitude and performance of people”. As organizations strive and struggle to retain and build on their effectiveness, the potential value great leadership could bring to the table is priceless. I rest my case on the importance and urgency of investing in leadership development for organizations – not tomorrow, not when the environment stabilises, but in the here and now.
The caveat to this conclusion is, in an environment, where every dollar to be invested is facing increased scrutiny, considerations and deliberations, practitioners of leadership development interventions need to get it first time right. There is hardly any margin of error. Organizations neither have the deep resources, or patience, to invest in interventions those do not show timely and/or sharp enough tangible business outcomes. Our recommendation is while designing or reviewing the leadership development processes and interventions the “5Cs of Leadership Development” could be used as guiding principles to sharpen the interventions, prioritize resources, and thereby augment effectiveness and impact.
C1: Context~Each organization has its own unique context. Leadership development process and interventions need to be tailored and aligned to that context. What business the organization is in?What is the purpose and objective?Who is or are the owners (promoter led vs publicly traded), how critical decisions are made in the organization (centralised vs decentralized), what is the organizational maturity level (start up vs mature), what is the history of past interventions – what has worked vs what hasn’t: these are only a few of the questions that must guide the organizational contextual analysis while designing new or even reviewing ongoing interventions.
C2: Commitment~Sustained commitment from each layer of leadership, starting from the top, is a critical driver for leadership development. How much invested is the top leader in the leadership development agenda? How much time is spent by the senior most leaders in the organization in reviewing the progress and results of interventions? The answers to the above questions will determine largely the adoption and sustenance of programs and learnt behaviours. Leadership development agenda needs to get not only the sponsorship of leadership, but the commitment by leaders in investing time, energy and effort to review the progress on actions and results linked to leadership interventions, the same way they would review hard business metrics. And the trick is to get it right at the top and the virtuous cascade downline will be largely seamless requiring very less drive.
C3: Culture~How conducive is the culture of the organization in building and deepening the leadership pipeline, will determine the traction and stickiness of leadership development initiatives. How often and in what way do leaders get involved in teaching their next line of leadership? How deep is the culture of coaching and mentoring by senior leaders in the organization? What roles do managers have in the design and deployment of learning initiatives? These are only a few of the considerations while evaluating how well aligned (or not) the prevalent culture of the organization is to the leadership development agenda. So, what happens if the culture is not aligned? Do we embark on the trying to change it? Well, if the “culture (can) eat strategy for breakfast” it definitely can do the same with puny culture shaping/shifting interventions. And when the present time demands for practitioners to be flexible and nimble footed it’s prudent to not attempt to move the elephant out of the way, but to find a way around and despite the elephant. The design principles and elements of the intervention must recognise these potential cultural headwinds.
C4: Capability~Leadership is an organizational capability. The competence, commitment, and capacity of leadership can be a source of distinctive competitive advantage. The investment in leadership capability need be on all 3 dimensions of capability building. What programs and processes are available for structured and sustained development of targeted skills and behaviours leading to leadership competence? What are the systemic drivers (linked to performance management, rewards and recognition, talent management etc.) in place to drive commitment to adopt and practice desired skills and behaviours? How well spread are the practices of demonstration of desired skills and behaviours across different parts of the organization will determine the capacity of the organization in terms of leadership capability.
C5: Craft~Leadership Development is a craft which demands method and mastery. The leadership development practitioner needs to integrate the insights from the above while crafting the approach and design of leadership development process and interventions in the organisation. A less is more approach would be recommended given the context of constraints on resources. Focus on a few areas and get the design principles (linked to the 4Cs above) right. For example, astrategic choice would be – which layer of the leadership hierarchy needs to get prioritized and disproportionately resourced in order to derive disproportionate returns on every development dollar invested.Building sharp metrics which demonstrate tangible business outcomes,involving leadership at all stages of defining and prioritization, design, deployment, and review of the intervention and linked programs are critical “Craft” skills and techniques. Finally, the 5Cs need to be approached and adopted in an integrated way, and not used in isolation, in order to drive effectiveness of the leadership development process and interventions in organizations. All happy families (read successful organizations) can indeed look alike in being effective and strong led by the depth and width of great leadership.
