Are We Serious About Growing Leaders?

In industry, do we take the challenge of growing future leaders seriously?  I don’t think we do and here’s why…

Let me first explain why the question has arisen.

Reactions to The Three Levels of Leadership

My book, The Three Levels of Leadership, came out in 2011.  Since then, many readers have asked me to create a training programme based on it.  Or instead, to offer train-the-trainer certification for those wanting to offer a “three levels of leadership”-based course for leaders.

My firm answer until the start of 2014 was always “no.”  Why?  Because I was suspicious of the leadership development programmes I’ve come across down the decades.  I always felt they made little difference to those attending them – I couldn’t see any change or growth in their attitude and behaviour.  Being an executive coach, I favoured coaching over formal training for growing leaders, but then I would, wouldn’t I?

What’s Wrong With Leadership Programmes?

But as the number of requests to offer a “Three Levels”-based programme increased, I began to wonder if I was guilty of prejudice against training courses.

Why couldn’t we, I wondered, create a 21^st century programme for leaders combining experience-based learning, formal classroom teaching, executive coaching, self-reflection, feedback and on-the-job challenges?  That led me to explore what others felt about the success of leadership development programmes.  Guess what?  I found I wasn’t alone in my views.  Distilling it all down and blending it with my own experience, the criticisms boil down to three themes:

• Poor selection of candidates for training.  For example, by mistaking hubris-based confidence for genuine potential.
• Programme design.  Comments I’ve heard, read or made myself include:
  • “It’s too classroom-based.” 
  • “It’s not experiential enough.” 
  • “It’s too often a one-time sheep dip; it needs to be phased over a longer period with between-module practical assignments.”
  • “There’s not enough time for reflection.” 
  • “Leaders aren’t given help in working on their mindsets and presuppositions so they remain locked into their old habits.” 
  • “There’s too much teaching and too little on-the-job mentoring and coaching.” 
  • “It’s not tied in enough to the specific challenges we’re facing in our business.”
  • “The subject of group dynamics is too often ignored.”
• Unhelpful company cultures that make it harder for budding leaders to grow.  For example, by being too quick to punish mistakes and risk-taking.  Or having too few senior executives who believe it’s a priority to grow future leaders.

Creating a 21^st Century Programme for Leaders

So I set to work designing a learning experience that addresses these three concerns – or at least the first two. A programme that focuses not just on knowhow and skills, but on developing a leader’s “presence” through self-mastery (that is, mastery of one’s mind, behavioural reactions under pressure and attitude towards others).

Eventually I arrived at a first draft.  I envisaged a 14-module programme, spaced out over a year or perhaps 18 months, needing 34 days of face-to-face learning plus homework back on the job.

Reaction

When I mentioned this first draft to friends in the corporate sector they asked, “How long will the programme last?”  “34 days,” I replied.  “What,” they shouted, “you’ve got to be joking!”

But I wasn’t.

And that brings me back to the question at the start of this blog article.  Are we serious about growing our leaders?  My friends’ reactions suggest we’re not.  But why should the idea of a 34-day programme for leaders blow people’s minds?

Comparisons

Think about it, how long does it take to train a fully qualified accountant?  Or a marketing professional?  Or a lawyer?  Or a doctor?  A lot more than 34 days, but we regard their training as normal.  But is acquiring the skill to consistently connect with and influence people (and stay resilient in tough times) any less difficult? Just as important, leaders have an enormous effect on the world for good or ill, so why do we have a different attitude to their development?

Consider the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst where the British Army trains its new officers.  Their programme lasts 44 weeks.  44 weeks!  That’s 5 weeks of physical conditioning and 39 weeks of practical leader training before officer cadets take up their first assignment as a 2^nd Lieutenant.  And then they have further leadership training at Staff College as they rise further in the ranks.

Who do you know in the corporate sector that’s spent 44 days learning how to lead, never mind 44 weeks, on top of all their technical education and on-the-job experience?  I’ll bet your answer is, “No one.”  In fact, in my experience, few senior executives have had more than 4-6 days training or development as a leader.  No wonder surveys tell us how little faith we have in our business leaders. And no wonder so few people feel engaged in their work.  [* See footnote]

To be fair to those friends I spoke to, when I pointed out these comparisons they looked thoughtful and said, “You’ve got a point there.”

Persisting

I wasn’t suggesting anything as long as the Sandhurst programme.  But I was proposing something that takes the growth of business leaders seriously.  I’m going to continue working on this idea of a 21^st-century programme for leaders to help them work on their psychology and grow their self-mastery and leadership presence, not just their knowhow and skills.  But meanwhile I believe it’s time we asked ourselves:

• Are we serious about growing leaders in industry ?  
• How much time and money are we prepared to spend in growing leaders of the future? 

Why wouldn’t we invest as much effort in growing leaders as we would in, say, equipping accountants with enough technical skill and knowhow?  After all, our future could depend on it.

* The 2013 Edelmann Trust Barometer’s survey of 26,000 people across 26 countries found that only 20% believe business leaders can correct the big issues facing their industries.  In other words, 80% think their leaders aren’t up to the job.  And Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace 2012 survey reported that only 13% of employees across 142 countries feel engaged in their work and connected to their company.  It also found that 24% (nearly twice as many) feel negative and act out their hostility, undermining the work of the engaged minority.  The 63% majority?  They don’t much care.