Important studies with the "duh" factor.
By George Hathway
I just got my copy of McKinsey Quarterly. There was a really interesting article called “Managing your organization by the evidence” by Keith Leslie, Mark Loch, and Willam Schaninger. It is a must read with a big “duh” factor (hint…I liked it).
The authors conducted a survey of more than 250 organizations (mostly businesses) to identify those factors that indicate sustainable organizational excellence. They verified what many in the academic and practitioners world have been saying for years: that certain key leadership practices account for sustained organizational performance. “The McKinsey research unambiguously identified the best practices for achieving [high levels of organizational performance]. Senior executives must provide for clear roles within a structure matched to the needs of the business (accountability), articulate a compelling vision of the future (direction), and develop an environment that encourages openness, trust, and challenge (culture).” They emphasize that the magic is doing these things in combination. They also prove that other practices that frequently appear in leadership competency models and in leadership literature are important in supporting these three things. Yukl, Kouzes and Posner, Blanchard, and others are now validated. Well, duh.
I am being a bit harsh. The study is important since it provides independent verification of what we have been saying for a long time. The twist is that if organizations don’t use these three practices, but do employ the others mentioned in the article, then sustainable performance is much less likely to be attained.
There is another study about to be released that relates to this. Gary Yukl and Rick Lepsinger conducted a survey that validated what Larry Bossidy has been saying for a few years. Clear vision is not enough: organizations need to create a culture where execution is possible. There also need to be processes that are consistent with the direction and executives need to understand how to manage these. It is a combination of factors that leads to success.
What does this mean to the development of leaders?
1. Perfecting a set of leadership competencies is not enough. Managers must know how to use those competencies in the right combinations in order to achieve organizational success. It is like teaching someone to drive: just knowing how to steer, brake, clutch, shift, and use the throttle are not enough. You have to coordinate everything in order to get where you want to go. Our training must focus on using these together, not separately.
2. This is not all skill building. The right attitude is important. In order to manage the culture leaders need to be concerned about the behaviors and attitudes of their entire organization. That means that just putting levers through performance management and rewards/recognition is not sufficient (the McKinsey article said this explicitly). A bit of knowledge on what is culture and how to change it is also critical.
3. These are not things that are learned overnight. They must be integrated into a comprehensive, long term development process that reinforces the values and style of senior leadership. This means that the development process can’t succeed without the active involvement of the senior management team.
4. Not everyone can employ these in combination. Certainly they are imperatives for senior management. The McKinsey study verifies that. However, leaders in front line or operational levels have little opportunity to shape their organization’s culture. They should understand the nature of culture and how to utilize it effectively to enhance their own opportunity for success. More intense training can be given to the operational and process skills that are promoted by Yukl and Lepsinger. Careful attention to training for transitions is essential here. Competency models should have different areas of emphasis and different behavioral hurdles as one transitions from one level to another.
5. Using Corporate University Xchange’s 24-step Leadership Development process (which will be described in detail for members and in coming newsletter issues) is an excellent way to ensure that all the things relevant to developing at all levels occur. All too frequently we focus on only one or two development processes…at only one or two levels of management. A systems approach is really necessary in order to have a continuous flow of competent leaders that is consistent with the vision of senior management. The 24 step process enables one to cover all the bases but also to concentrate on those factors that are most critical to success.
6. The focus on culture means that there is no quick fix. Experience and experiences do count. As developers of leaders, we must understand the culture well enough to enable our “trainees” to use it. |
So…thanks to McKinsey Quarterly for the “duh” –and for the validation. The article should be a useful reference for anyone who is in the process of installing or improving real leadership development with their organization.
References:
Leslie, Keith, Loch, Mark A, and Schaninger, William (2006), Managing your organization by the evidence, McKinsey Quarterly, 2006 Number 3.
Personal communication with Rick Lepsinger. He can be contacted at rlepsinger@onpointconsultingllc.com.
George Hathaway is a consultant specializing in leadership of organizations and the development of leaders. He has over 20 years of experience in the field and recently retired as Director of Leadership Development for American International Group (AIG). He can be reached at ghathaway@corpu.com |
