what is leadership development

8/6/2019 What is Leadership Development

1/60


2/60


3/60

What isLeadershipDevelopment?

Pur pose & Prac t i ce

Leadership South West

Research Report 2

Edited byRichard BoldenJune 2005

Supported by


4/60

Contents

Contents

CONTENTS ..................................... 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................... 2LEADERSHIP SOUTH WEST ................... 2

INTRODUCTION ............................. 3

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT:ANECESSITY ORA WASTE? ...................................... 3THE STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT........... 4

PART ONE: THE PURPOSE OF

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT .......... 5

CHANGING CONCEPTS OF LEADERSHIP ANDLEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT .................. 5THE CONTEMPORARY CONTEXT OF LEADERSHIP

DEVELOPMENT.................................. 7LEADERSHIP VERSUS MANAGEMENTDEVELOPMENT.................................11APPROACHES TO LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT.................................................13

PART TWO: THE PRACTICE OF

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ........ 16

LEADERSHIP COURSES .......................16FACILITATED WORKSHOPS ..................20COACHING,COUNSELLING AND MENTORING22REFLECTIVE WRITING,PERSONAL JOURNALSAND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT............24

ACTION LEARNING IN LEADERSHIPDEVELOPMENT.................................27ROLE PLAY AND SIMULATIONS ..............30LEADERSHIP EXCHANGE:SOME NOTES ONOBSERVATION.................................32THE USE AND ABUSE OF PSYCHOMETRICS INLEADER DEVELOPMENT.......................35360DEGREE APPRAISAL ....................37LEADERSHIP CONSULTANCY .................39E-LEARNING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT.................................................42

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .... 47

BEST PRACTICE IN LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT.................................................47MAKING LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT WORKFOR YOU .......................................48

REFERENCES ................................ 51

APP ENDIX 1: CONTRIBUTORS .... 56

APP ENDIX 2: THE CLS PATHWAY TOMASTERING LEADERSHIP ............ 57

Copyright 2005Leadership South WestAll rights reserved.

Acknowledgements

The current report was compiled by

Richard Bolden on behalf of LeadershipSouth West. Contributions are includedfrom Peter Case, Jonathan Gosling, AlanHooper, Keith Kinsella, Donna Ladkin,Robin Ladkin Neville Osrin and JohnPotter. Brief biographies are given inAppendix 1.

I would like to thank all my colleagues atthe Centre for Leadership Studies andLeadership South West for their valuableassistance and would also like to thankthe South West Regional Development

Agency for their continued support ofthis project.

Leadership South West

Based at the University of ExetersCentre for Leadership Studies andsupported by the South West RegionalDevelopment Agency, Leadership SouthWest is a major regional initiative toimprove the uptake and provision ofleadership development in the Southwest

of England.By working with key partners, agenciesand businesses in the Region we aim toenhance awareness of the value ofleadership development and to improvethe availability, relevance andeffectiveness of all forms of support,education and policy.

For further details please visit ourwebsite.

Leadership South WestXFI BuildingUniversity of ExeterRennes DriveExeter EX4 4STUnited Kingdom

Tel: 01392 262578Fax: 01392 262559Email: [email protected]

www.leadershipsouthwest.com

2 Wh at is Leadersh ip Deve lopm ent : Purpose & Pract ice


5/60

Leadership Development: A Necessity or a W aste?

Introduction

Welcome to the second in a series ofresearch reports from Leadership South

West, the regional Centre of Excellencein leadership, based at the Centre forLeadership Studies at the University ofExeter. Whereas the first reportexplored the question What isleadership? this second report will lookat What is leadership development:purpose and practice. The aim of thereport is to explore the current range ofapproaches to leadership developmentavailable to individuals and organisationsand the assumptions and principles thatunderlie them. The intention is both toprovide practical advice on best practicebut, above all, to challenge organisationsto consider the ways in which they goabout developing management andleadership capability and what they hopeto achieve by doing this.

This report will not, however, explore thecontent of leadership developmentprogrammes in any great depth, nor willit pay much consideration to thedifferent organisational contexts in which

it can be applied. Both of these are,without doubt, considerable factors inthe effectiveness or otherwise ofleadership development initiatives andmerit far greater consideration thangiven here. For this reason, they willform the focus of subsequent reports.

Leadership Development: ANecessity or a Waste?

Like so much within the field ofleadership studies the issue of leadership

development and its impact remainshighly contentious. Whilst many reportspropose that enhancing leadershipcapability is central to improvedinvestment, productivity, delivery andquality across both the public and privatesectors (CEML, 2002) others questionthe value of leadership training(Personnel Today, 2004).

Central to the argument about theeffectiveness of leadership development

is the question of whether or not you cantrain or develop leaders. Early theoriesof leadership proposed that great leadersemerged because of an innate

combination of ability and personalcharacteristics (i.e. a belief that leaderswere born not made). Subsequentmodels have questioned this assertion,arguing that leadership behaviours and

competencies can be learnt and/oracquired over time. The current popularview probably lies somewhere inbetween, to the extent that whilst manyleadership qualities (such ascommunication skills, strategic thinkingand self-awareness) can be developed,core personal characteristics (such asdominance and sociability) are lessamenable to change and will influencethe type of leadership style adopted. Inturn, the relative effectiveness of any of

these styles will be determined by awhole host of situational and contextualfactors.

The theories and models upon whichthese views are based, however, stilltend to be couched in a veryindividualistic notion of leadershipwhereby it is conceived of as a propertyof the leader. Whilst this might makelife easy for those recruiting anddeveloping leaders (you simply need toidentify the appropriate individuals and

which skills/competencies to develop) itdissociates the practice of leadershipfrom the organisational and situationalcontext in which it occurs. Perhaps amore useful perspective is to considerleadership as a process contextuallysituated within the relationships betweenpeople (be they leaders or followers).From this perspective what is moreimportant than the leadership qualities ofa number of individuals are theunderlying processes that give rise to

improved organisational effectiveness.If considered in this way, it is perhapspossible to understand why manyleadership development activities fail toachieve the sorts of outcomes desired bythose investing in them. Whilstleadership can undoubtedly beinstrumental in organisationalperformance, the development of a smallnumber of individuals in isolation, isunlikely to result in markedimprovements to these or other outcome

measures.

Raelin (2004, p.131) proposes that:

Wh at is Leadersh ip Deve lopm ent : Purpose & Pract ice 3


6/60

The Structure of This Report

Most leadership training that isbeing conducted in corporate off-sites is ill-advised [] because theintent of most of this training is toput leadership into people such that

they can transform themselves andtheir organisations upon theirreturn.

He, and other authors (e.g. Gosling andMintzberg, 2004; Mintzberg, 2004),propose that this simply does not workand, instead, that leadership (andmanagement) development should bealigned with the organisational culture,context and objectives, amongst a widearray of other factors. To this extent, itcould well be argued that much current

leadership development is going towaste and that effort would be bestspent on increasing the quality andprecision, rather than the quantity, ofprovision (Burgoyne et al., 2004).

The Structure of This Report

This report seeks to explore ways inwhich leadership development can beharnessed to enhance individual andorganisational performance on a range of

dimensions (economic, social, ethical,etc.). It is structured into two parts.The first examines the purpose ofleadership development what it seeksto achieve and for what reasons, whilstthe second presents the practice ofleadership development the principlemethods and their relative strengths andweaknesses. The report concludes witha summary of the main lessons andsources of further information.

Contributions to part two of the report

have been provided by CLS Fellows andFaculty with extensive practicalexperience of leadership development fora wide range of organisations in a widerange of industries/sectors. For a profileof each contributor please refer toAppendix 1.



7/60

Changing Concepts of Leadership and Leadership Development

Part One:The Purpose ofLeadership

Development

In this part of the report we will explorethe underlying purpose of leadershipdevelopment what it seeks to achieveand why.

Changing Concepts ofLeadership and LeadershipDevelopment

As discussed in the previous LSW

Research Report (Bolden, 2004) and theintroduction to this one, the past yearshave seen a considerable shift in themanner in which leadership is conceivedand, as a consequence, so too haveapproaches to leadership development.

In the early 20th Century it was assumedthat people became leaders by virtue oftheir personal characteristics. This so-called trait approach saw numerousstudies attempting to isolate thequalities displayed by good leaders.Factors including intelligence,dominance, self-confidence, level ofenergy and activity, and masculinitywere all cited as key traits, yet none ofthese were sufficient in themselves todistinguish leaders from non-leaders (or

followers). Furthermore, with each newstudy, additional traits were identifiedleading to little consensus (Bird, 1940).Because of the emphasis on largelyinnate or relatively unchangeablepersonality characteristics, the trait

approach has limited application tomanagement and leadershipdevelopment, placing the emphasis moreon recruitment and selection processes.

As the usefulness of a trait approach wascalled into question, new models ofleadership began to emerge in the mid20th Century. The first of these werebehavioural or style theories ofleadership. In this case, it wasconsidered not so much the innate

characteristics of the leader, but howhe/she behaved, that is important.Behavioural models presented varyingstyles of leadership from directive to

participative, person-centred to task-centred, proposing that where the leaderhas both high concern for people andproduction they will be most effective(e.g. Blake and Mouton, 1964). From a

behavioural perspective, the purpose ofleadership and managementdevelopment is to ensure thedevelopment of the most appropriatestyle of leadership and achieving auniversal level of best practice.

A subsequent variation on behaviouralmodels postulated that the mosteffective leadership style will, in fact,vary in relation to the situation. Thesemodels are either termed situational,where it is assumed that the leader can

modify his/her style to match thesituation (e.g. Hersey and Blanchard,1969, 1977, 1988), or contingency,where it is not assumed that the leaderis able to adapt and instead should beselected to fit the situation (or thesituation changed to fit him/her) (e.g.Fiedler, 1964, 1967). In the case ofsituational and contingency theories, theleaders first task is to recognise thesalient features of the situation (e.g.nature of task, ability of followers, etc.)

and then to adapt accordingly (or in thecase of contingency theories to changeroles as required). This would argue forthe development of diagnostic abilitiesfirst, followed by adaptability inleadership style.

From the late 1970s interest arose inthe abilities of leaders to bring abouttransformational change withinorganisations. Burns (1978) first spokeof transforming leadership an abilityto inspire followers to work towardsmoral goals, an idea that wassubsequently developed into

transformational leadership (Bass,1985; Bass and Avolio, 1994) where theleader transforms ordinary people toachieve extraordinary results. Such anapproach places an emphasis on theleaders ability to develop andcommunicate an inspiring vision andmotivate followers through a sense ofshared purpose that transcendsindividual concerns such as pay and

position. Transformational leadershipreinforces the notion of the leader aschange agent and would call primarily for



8/60

Changing Concepts of Leadership and Leadership Development

the development of communication andinter-personal skills.

Whilst we may notice a shift in thinkingover time many of the assumptions andimplications of transformationalleadership are not dissimilar to theearlier trait and behavioural models(Gronn, 1995). They reinforce thenotion of the individual leader,influencing and motivating followers,and their ability to transcendorganisational and situationalconstraints. Indeed, transformational or

charismatic leaders might even beaccused of being narcissists whoengender a culture of dependencyamongst followers (Conger, 1990;

Maccoby, 2000), but is this really thebest thing for the organisations theyserve and, if not, what are theimplications for leadership development?

A range of more inclusive models ofleadership are now emerging (inaspiration if not always in practice)which argue for quieter, less dramaticleadership at all levels within theorganisation.

Quiet management is about

thoughtfulness rooted in experience.Words like wisdom, trust,dedication, and judgment apply.Leadership works because it islegitimate, meaning that it is anintegral part of the organization andso has the respect of everyonethere. Tomorrow is appreciatedbecause yesterday is honoured. Thatmakes today a pleasure.

Indeed, the best managing of allmay well be silent. That way people

can say, We did it ourselves.Because we did. (Mintzberg, 1999)

Such concepts are not new, however,and indeed there is an uncanny similaritybetween the definition given byMintzberg and a quote from the oneearliest authors on leadership, Lao Tzuthe founder of Taoism, who proposed:

To lead people, walk besidethem... As for the best leaders,the people do not notice their

existence. The next best, thepeople honor and praise. Thenext, the people fear; and the

next, the people hate... When thebest leader's work is done, thepeople say, We did it ourselves!(Lao Tzu, 6th Century BC).

Perhaps then we are simply seeing areawakening to the importance ofinclusive and collective leadership.Authors now talk of Servant, Moral and

Team leadership where the leader takesup his/her role out of a desire to achievecommunal goals founded upon sharedvalues and beliefs, rather than becauseof the need to assuage an unusual powerdrive or to acquire material possessions(Greenleaf, 1970). From thisperspective the individual leader shouldknow when to step back and relinquish

control dependent on the situation andnature of the task indeed, the leadershould also be a good follower.

[Followers] have the vision to seeboth the forest and the trees, thesocial capacity to work well withothers, the strength of character toflourish without heroic status, themoral and psychological balance topursue personal and corporate goalsat no cost to either, and, above all,

the desire to participate in a teameffort for the accomplishment ofsome greater purpose. (Hughes etal.,1993, p224).

This definition of followers could equallybe applied to leaders and indicates howthe boundaries between leadership andfollowership are becoming blurred: thedefinition of a good leader need notdiffer greatly from the definition of anygood employee or responsible individual.

The concept of distributed leadership,

founded on a shared sense of purposeand direction at all levels in theorganisation, turns our attention to theprocesses of leadership rather than theproperties of individual leaders and isbecoming increasingly popular in sectorssuch as education and healthcare.

From a distributed perspective,leadership practice takes shape inthe interactions of people andtheir situation, rather than from

the actions of an individualleader. (Spillane, 2004)



9/60

The Contemporary Context of Leadership Development

This approach demands a dramaticreconsideration of the way in whichleadership is conceived and promotedwithin organisations. It isnt aboutmaking everyone a leader this would

simply lead to too many chiefs anddiffused accountability instead it callsfor recognition of the collective tasks ofleadership (Drath, 2003). Distributedleadership suggests that leadership is anemergent property of a group or networkof interacting individuals, there is anopenness of the boundaries of leadershipand varieties of expertise are distributedacross the many, not the few (Bennet etal., 2003). Practical implications wouldinclude the involvement of a wider range

of stakeholders in the leadership process(e.g. parents and students as well asteachers and governors in schoolleadership); transfer of the role of

leader in relation to the situation, taskand experience; and less exclusivity overparticipation in leadership andmanagement development.

Each of these points offers a significantchallenge to providers of leadership andmanagement development. Programmessuch as MBAs, for example, traditionally

seek to develop a range of cognitiveskills and capabilities but place relativelylittle emphasis on how these can betransferred to the workplace.

"The MBA trains the wrong people inthe wrong ways with the wrongconsequences [] Using theclassroom to help develop peoplealready practicing management is afine idea, but pretending to createmanagers out of people who havenever managed is a sham."(Mintzberg, 2004)

If the practice of leadership is consideredas more than just applying a set ofprinciples, then its developmentdemands a more experiential dimension.Likewise, if we consider leadership as acollective process rather than anindividual property then we need tochallenge the traditional approach ofsending only senior managers onleadership development programmes,

and encouraging others in theorganisation to follow the leader.

Figure 1 offers a conceptual frameworkfor leadership development thatcontrasts approaches depending on theattention given to the individual or thegroup and prescribed or emergent

learning processes.

Figure 1 Leadersh ip deve lopmen t f r a m e w o r k (LSDA, 2003)

Rodgers et al. (2003) propose that thevast majority of current leadershipinitiatives still lie within Cell 1 of the grid(prescribed and individual), with most ofthe remainder in Cell 2 (emergent and

individual). Very few initiatives at alladdress the right-hand side of the grid(i.e. collective leadership development)despite this being precisely where weshould be focussing our attention if weare seeking to develop an inclusiveculture of shared leadership within ourorganisations.

The Contemporary Context ofLeadership Development

Management and executive education isbig business, with approximately $50billion spent per year on leadershipdevelopment alone (Raelin, 2004). In a2003 survey the Financial Times foundleading European companies to bespending on average 3,336 perparticipant per year on executiveeducation; 42% of respondents had acorporate university, with a further 12%looking to establish one over the nextcouple of years; and of the topics offeredleadership, followed by general

management, were the most typical(Financial Times, 2003). In a morecomprehensive study of management

Prescribed

Emergent

Individual Collective

1. Prescribedand individual

2. Emergentand individual

4. Prescribedand collective

3. Emergentand collective



10/60


development in Europe there was apronounced increase in managementdevelopment activities across allcountries since the 1990s, rising from anaverage of 5.4 days per manager per

year to 9.3 days and, despite a lowerthan average investment in managementeducation, UK companies spent onaverage 1,056 per manager per year(Mabey and Ramirez, 2004).

Within the Higher Education sector, thenumber of UK business schools hasincreased from two in the mid-1960s tomore than 100 in the mid-1990s(Crainer, 1998). At the undergraduatelevel the number of students studyingbusiness studies (and related subjects)

has risen from 1,000 to 156,000 (Baty,1997) and the annual number of MBAshas increased from 776 in 1975 to10,889 in 2000 (Business SchoolsAdvisory Group, 2002).

What has driven such a shift? Certainly,as many academics have argued, therehas been an attempt to emulate thesuccess of American business schoolsbut there have also been a range ofother factors at work (Tiratsoo, 2004).

Since the 1980s British governmentpolicy has consistently promoted theimportance of management capability,provoking employers to takemanagement development seriously;declining public-funding has encourageduniversities to seek alternative incomestreams; and various supply-sidepressure groups have promoted publicawareness that business education is a

good thing. From the demand-side,there is evidence that organisations areincreasingly valuing (and recruiting)students with business and managementqualifications and students are seeingthis as a desirable career route.

From an employer perspective theimperative to enhance management andleadership capability arises from thechanging nature of work, especially theneed to cope with increased competitionand more or less continuous upheavalsin their organisations (Hirsh and Carter,2002), demanding increased intellectual

flexibility and alertness as well asrelevant skills, abilities, knowledge andself-awareness. Mabey and Ramirez(2004) cite the primary triggers for

investing in management developmentas changes in the external environment,closely followed by business needs andHR strategy.

Despite the plethora of management andleadership development now availableand the increasing level of demand,however, there remains a significantquestion as to the extent to whichcurrent provision meets the needs oforganisations. Taylor et al. (2002, p366)conclude that the global challenges nowoccurring demand approaches toleadership education that are profoundlydifferent from those that have servedwell in the past and Tiratsoo (2004,p118) suggests that the evolution of the

British system had little to do withrational debate about the merits of theU.S. practice and instead often reflectedthe politics of prejudice and self-interest.

Changing conceptions of the nature ofmanagement and leadership, along withchallenges to traditional approaches totheir development, are driving a numberof trends in management and leadershipeducation. Williams (2000) identifies a

particular increase in demand for post-graduate and short course or executiveeducation within university provision.Hirsh and Carter (2002) identify anincreasing modularisation and flexibilitywithin all types of formal trainingprogrammes, an increasing demand andprovision of informal and personaldevelopment (including mentoring,coaching, 360 degree feedback, projectworking, learning sets and teamfacilitation) and a shift from managedcareer structures to more open internal

job markets. Central to many of thesetrends is a shift towards more flexible,experiential and informal approaches,tailored to the requirements ofindividuals and organisations. Such ashift requires the reversal of manytraditional educational priorities: fromtheory to practice, parts to systems,states and roles to processes, knowledgeto learning, individual knowledge topartnerships, and detached analysis to

reflexive1

understanding (Taylor et al.,

1 Reflexivity is defined as "a directing back onitself" (Dictionary.com, 2005). Reflexive



11/60


2002). A representation of how thisimpacts programme structure andcontent is displayed in Table 1.

Key Trends From ToTheProgramme

Prescribed

course Standard Theoretical

Study

programmeand real issues Customised Theory in

context

The Time-frame

One-off

event

A journey

with ongoingsupport

The Mode Lecturing/

listening Conceptual

Participatory,

interactive andapplied

Experientialand conceptual

The Focus Individuals Individuals

within a groupand for a

purpose

TheConsultant

Supplier Partner, co-

designer,facilitator, andcoach

Table 1 Chang ing t r ends in l eade rsh ip d e v e l o p m e n t (West and Jackson, 2002;based on Vicere and Fulmer, 1998)

Underlying these changes are a numberof transforming concepts about thepurpose of management and leadershipdevelopment. There are, of course, thepractical concerns of creating moreeffective managers and leaders,enhancing the competitiveness oforganisations and providing programmesthat people will pay for, but associatedwith these are changing philosophicalperspectives on the role of managementand leadership within organisations and

how best to develop them.

Mole (2000) makes a distinction betweenthe notions of training, education anddevelopment. The focus of training, heargues, is the employees present job;the focus ofeducation is the employeesfuture job; and the focus ofdevelopmentis the organisation. Whilst some of themore traditional modes of provision,especially formal managementprogrammes aimed at disseminating

understanding thus refers to the ability forcritical self-reflection in relation to previousknowledge and experience.

skills and knowledge, tend to adopt atraining approach it is clear that thecurrent trend is more towards educationand development: developmentprogrammes prepare individuals to move

in the new directions that organisationalchange may require (ibid, p22).

A similar distinction is made by Bush andGlover (2004, p19) in their review ofleadership development, where threecontrasting models of leadershipdevelopment are identified. Theseinclude the scientific (managerial/technicist) that depends on training tomeet clearly defined targets; the

humanist (empowerment/ persuasive)which is more people focussed and

emphasises strategically plannedtransformational interaction; and the

pragmatic (rational/ reactive), which isproject-focussed with an emphasis onthe immediate needs of individuals andgroups.

It is possible to identify relative meritsand weaknesses of each of theseapproaches and an associated series ofdevelopment activities, yet each alsorepresents a significant philosophical

perspective on the nature ofmanagement and leadership. Holman(2000) cites four recurring themes indebates about the purpose, nature andvalue of Higher Education (as identifiedby Barnett (1990; 1994)) and adds afifth relevant to the understanding ofmanagement education in particular:

1. Epistemological: reflectingassumptions on the nature ofknowledge pursued;

2. Pedagogical: referring to the nature

of the learning process, the intendedoutcomes and the teaching methods;

3. Organisational: regarding themanagement and organisation ofeducation;

4. Social: reflecting the perceived roleof education in society; and

5. Management: referring toconceptions on the nature ofmanagement practice.

Given the diversity of views on each ofthese themes it is unsurprising that a

range of qualitatively differentapproaches to management andleadership development have arisen in



12/60


practice. On the basis of his reviewHolman identifies four contemporarymodels of management education (seeTable 2) but concludes that academicliberalism and experiential vocationalism

are somewhat wanting as approaches tothe development of practicing managers(the former due to its over-reliance ontheory and the latter for its over-relianceon action). He proposes, instead, thatexperiential liberalism andexperiential/critical approaches are mostlikely to create managers capable ofmeeting the future needs oforganisations and society. Theirexperiential pedagogies go a long way topromoting learning and development

because of the way in which they buildupon the way managers naturally learnat work and their ability to address thecomplexity and non-mechanistic natureof actual management practice.

Gosling (2000) proposes another, oftneglected, purpose of managementeducation: that of catharsis.Management (and leadership) educationoffers a vehicle for exploring issues of

goodness and greatness and enablingindividuals to gain a sense of belonging

to an essentially moral or just cause.The ethical and emotional dimensions ofhuman endeavour are becoming centralto the effective practice of leadership inan increasingly diverse yet inter-connected world, but are still oftenoverlooked in the majority of traditionalmanagement and leadership education.

In the context of this debate on thenature and purpose of management andleadership education it is perhapsunsurprising that we are seeing a trendfrom traditional formal programmestowards more flexible, experientialinitiatives but there are also a number ofother trends, such as those summarisedin Table 3. It is noted, however, thatstill remarkably few programmes areunderpinned with explicit theories ofmanagement and leadership practiceand/or the educational processesassociated with their development(Weindling, 2003).

Contemporary Models ofManagement Education

Academic l ibera l ismAssumes that management education should

be primarily concerned with the pursuit ofobjective knowledge about management. Itthus seeks to disseminate generic principlesand theories that can be applied in arelatively scientific and rational manner.From this perspective the aim of managementdevelopment should be to create themanagement scientist, capable of analysisand the application of theoretical principles.Primary teaching methods would includelectures, seminars, case studies and

experimentation.

Exper ient ia l l ibera l ismShares many of the same assumptions asacademic liberalism but argues for a morepractical approach, grounded in managerialexperience rather than theory. The principleaim of this approach is to create thereflective practitioner equipped withappropriate practical skills and knowledge andthe ability to adapt to and learn from thesituation. Primary teaching methods wouldinclude group work, action learning and selfdevelopment.

Exper ien t i a l voca t iona l i smArises from economic and organisationalconcerns to argue that the main role ofmanagement education is to providemanagers with the relevant skills andknowledge required by organisations. Theprinciple of this approach is to create thecompetent manager equipped with thenecessary interpersonal and technicalcompetencies required by organisations.

Primary teaching methods would includecompetence based approaches such as theNational Occupational Standards.

Ex p e r i e n t i al / c r i t i ca l Seeks to emancipate managers and otheremployees in the organisation fromoppression and alienation (Holman, 2000,p208). To this extent, it shares much incommon with experiential liberalism althoughit demands a more critical level of reflectionthat enables people to become reflexive abouttheir own knowledge and actions and toformulate practical, non-instrumental andemancipative forms of action. The principle

of this approach is, therefore, to create thecritical practitioner able to challenge anddevelop new modes of action. Primaryteaching methods would include approachesincorporating critical action learning and

critical reflection.

Table 2 Contempora ry Mode ls o f Managemen t Educa t ion (Holman 2000)



13/60

Leadership versus Management Development

Key trends in UK and US leadership

development programmes

Needs analysis widely regarded as an

important element but rarely included inpractice.

Development of staged models forleadership development linked to aplanned series of programmes foreffective transition into differentleadership roles.

Use of leadership standards andcompetency frameworks.

Wider range of providers and fundingbodies.

Increasing emphasis on the importance oflearning and leadership.

Increasing use and popularity ofmentoring and coaching.

More emphasis on development fromwithin, work-based learning andcommunities of practice.

Widespread use of active learningapproaches including experiential learningand reflection.

Increased use of case studies, actionlearning and problem-based learning toenhance links between research, theoryand practice.

Growth in collaborative leadershiplearning.

Use of online communities to facilitate e-learning and communication.

Growing clarity and emphasis uponleadership values, beliefs and purposes.

Table 3 Key t rends in UK & US l e a d e r s h i p d e v e l o p m e n t p r o g r a m m e s (Weindling, 2003)

Hirsh and Carter (2002) identify threesignificant tensions currently facing

providers of management education.Firstly, alongside the modularisation offormal programmes into bite sizechunks there is increasing pressure toprovide holistic programmes applicableto leaders and managers at all levels inthe organisation. Secondly, the increasein personalised learning such as coachingand 360 degree appraisal poses seriousresourcing challenges due to theincreased time required for tailoring andsupporting provision. And thirdly, with

the shift away from traditional careerstructures and lifetime employmentmanagers are receiving little support forlong-term career planning.

We can thus see that there are a widerange of factors influencing the currentrange and types of management andleadership development provision in thiscountry. Some of these are practical

concerns arising from the historicaldevelopment of management educationin the UK and the challenges facingorganisations, whilst others are moretheoretical what are our assumptionson the purpose of education, the natureof management and leadership, and therelative importance placed on theindividual versus the collective? None ofthese issues is easily resolved butwithout an awareness of thefundamental concerns and underlying

assumptions it will be difficult to selectan effective approach to leadershipdevelopment.

Leadership versusManagement Development

In the discussion so far I have used theterms management and leadershipdevelopment largely interchangeably asthere is a significant degree of overlapbut what exactly is leadership (asopposed to management) developmentand how can individuals andorganisations get the most out of it?

Day (2001) proposes that leadershipdevelopment is distinct frommanagement development to the extentto which it involves preparing people forroles and situations beyond their currentexperience. Management development,he argues, equips managers with theknowledge, skills and abilities to enhanceperformance on known tasks through the

application of proven solutions whilstleadership development is defined as orientated towards building capacity inanticipation of unforeseen challenges(p582). He continues by making adistinction between leader andleadership development, whereby leaderdevelopment is about developingindividuals in leadership roles, whilstleadership development takes a morerelational view of leadership as a processinvolving everyone within theorganisation. To this extent, Day viewsleadership development as beingfundamentally concerned with the



14/60

Leadership versus Management Development

development of collective organisationalcapacity.

In this way, each person isconsidered a leader, and leadershipis conceptualised as an effect ratherthan a cause. Leadership istherefore an emergent property ofeffective systems design.Leadership development from thisperspective consists of using social(i.e. relational) systems to help buildcommitments among members of acommunity of practice. (ibid,p583)

This distinction is useful in encouragingus to consider what it is that we wish to

achieve through executive development,even if Days concept of leadershipdevelopment may be somewhat idealisticin practice. Leader development is aninvestment in human capital to enhanceintrapersonal competence for selectedindividuals, whereas leadershipdevelopment is an investment in socialcapital to develop interpersonal networksand cooperation within organisations andother social systems. According to Day,both are equally important although

traditionally development programmeshave tended to focus exclusively on theformer. Within the current report wealso take the view that both types ofdevelopment are required and should bean integral part of any developmentinitiative. Therefore, in the remainder ofthis report when referring to leadershipdevelopment we refer both to thedevelopment of human and socialcapital.

Even when considering leadership

development in this broader context,however, it remains difficult to specifywhat exactly constitutes leadership, asopposed to any other form of,development. Campbell et al. (2003)argue that the current diversity ofperspectives on leadership developmentis misleading as it leads practitioners andresearchers to suggest that, firstly,leadership development constitutes anyunderstanding that developsindividual(s) and secondly that all

development activities are equallyuseful/effective.

Like Day, in their review, Campbell andhis colleagues identify that the field ofleadership development is currentlydominated by individualistic approachesto development. Such approaches focus

on developing five principle categories:

1. intrapersonal attributes (e.g. selfawareness);

2. interpersonal qualities;3. cognitive abilities;4. communication skills; and5. task-specific skills.

At the intrapersonal level it could beargued that there is no differencebetween becoming an effective leaderand becoming a fully integrated human

being (Bennis, 1999, p23) and thusCampbell et al. (2003, p31) concludethat there is little reason to label thisleadership development, except in thebroad sense that the developingindividuals hold leadership positions.The inter-personal level fits more closelywith Days conception of leadershipdevelopment, viewing leadership as asocial influence process and the goal ofdevelopment to enhance inter-personalcompetence in order to obtain the trust,

respect and commitment of others(Campbell et al., 2003). The additionalthree categories (cognitive,communication and task-specific skills)are a range of personal capabilities thathelp enhance an individuals inter-personal influence. In each case achallenge remains as to how todifferentiate the types of skills requiredby leaders as opposed to managersand/or followers and the responseremains largely dependent on yourtheoretical and philosophical views onthe nature of leadership (e.g. if you takea distributive perspective then such adifferentiation is inappropriate as who isconsidered the leader varies over time).

Campbell and colleagues take Katz andKahns (1978) notion of leadership as

incremental influence as the foundationfor their conception of leadershipdevelopment. Thus, the aim ofleadership development is to enhance

inter-personal influence over and above

the influence that stems from a personspositional authority or legitimate power(Campbell et al., 2003, p39). From thisperspective the most effective leadership



15/60

Approaches to Leadership Development

development methods are likely to bethose that develop core influencing skillsincluding values that can serve as a

moral compass, problem-defining andproblem-solving skills, task facilitation

skills, and communication andmotivational skills.

In our own experience of developingpeople in leadership positions we tend totake the view that it is important todevelop all of these skills within acontextual appreciation of the culturaland organisational environment. Whenconsidering leadership, rather thanmanagement, development the primaryemphasis is on enabling people to thinkbeyond the apparent restrictions of their

current role and to develop the criticalcapabilities to move between operationaland strategic modes as required - tobalance an attention for detail with anunderstanding of the bigger picture.

All in all, leadership developmentwithin management educationshould develop the 'character',integrity, skills and discursiveintelligence necessary for theresponsible exercise of power.

(Gosling, 2004)To this extent, leadership developmentmay well incorporate elements of moretypical management and self-development programmes (includingtime management, project-management,delegation, self-awareness, etc.) butwith the objective of creating a reflexivespace in which the leader/manager cancritically reflect upon current practiceand experience. There is no reason toconsider, therefore, that leadership

development should only be offered tosenior managers and, indeed, therewould be good reason to encourage thiskind of development throughout theorganisation to enhance collective as wellas individual capacity. The nature of therequired intervention, however, is likelyto vary depending on the job role andcurrent level of experience of theparticipants.

Leadership development is broaderthan programmes of activity or

intervention. It is concerned withthe way in which attitudes arefostered, action empowered, and the

learning organisation stimulated(Bush and Glover, 2004, p19, citingthe work of Frost and Durrant,2002).

Approaches to LeadershipDevelopment

With the multitude of ways in whichleadership and leadership developmentcan be conceived and the many purposesthey serve it is not surprising that a widearray of development approaches andtechniques have evolved.

In a major European study Mabey andRamirez (2004, p20) ranked HR and Linemanager preferences for management

development methods in Europeancompanies as follows:

1. internal skills programmes2. external courses, seminars and

conferences3. mentoring/coaching4. formal qualifications5. in-company job-rotation6. external assignments, placements

and/or secondments7. E-learning.

In all countries in the study there was arelatively low preference for on-the-jobdevelopment (such as job rotation andassignments) and a strikingly low uptakeof E-learning given the current interestin this form of delivery. Within the UKthere is a higher than average use ofqualifications-based development,despite the relatively low rating of thiswith regards to what makes an effectivemanager.

Storey (2004, p26) proposes that most

training and development interventionsoffered in-house and by external trainingproviders can be classified into fourtypes:

1. Learning about leadership andorganisations: primarily involvestraditional classroom and workshopmethods to present leadership theoryand research.

2. Self/team analysis and exploration ofleadership styles: a series of methods(including psychometrics, 360 degreefeedback, coaching and sensitivitytraining) to raise awareness of self



16/60


and others and how this impactsupon leadership styles.

3. Experiential learning and simulation:approaches that emphasise theimportance of learning by doing,

such as outward bound courses,action learning and role play.

4. Top level strategy courses: executivedevelopment courses designed forsenior managers. Often associatedwith prestigious business schools andqualifications.

In addition to these types ofcourse/programme there is also a wholearray of less formal leadershipdevelopment activities conducted withinorganisations, including projects and

secondments, seminars, career planningand mentoring.

Storey also highlights a tension withinmost leadership development initiatives:

There is a fundamental dilemmathat haunts many leadershipdevelopment events. Becauseleadership is perceived asfundamentally about doing ratherthan knowing, there is an inherentbias towards activity-focussed and

indeed briskly paced encounters []In consequence, there is little timefor reflection or strategic thinking.These characteristics of leadershipdevelopment events are self-evidently in tension with the kind ofclear thinking supposedly requiredof top leaders. (ibid, p27)

If we now consider the relativepopularity and use of differentdevelopment approaches it remains clearthat, despite the shift towards more

flexible and tailored provision discussedearlier, large companies still use moreformal than informal training (Mabey andThompson, 2000). Furthermore, muchof this remains in a traditional face-to-face mode rather than via e-learning,which tends to be used to support ratherthan replace traditional methods(Burgoyne, 2001; CIPD, 2002).

With regards to personalised and tailoredprovision, coaching is particularly

popular with organisations and managersbut its extension to large numbers ofindividuals is limited by cost and theavailability of high quality coaches

(Carter, 2001). 360 degree feedback,like many approaches, is found to bemost powerful when integrated within acomprehensive development programme(Kettley, 1997) and is significantly

affected by the following three factors: awork context supportive of skillsdevelopment, the belief of theparticipant that people can improve theirskills, and a belief that they themselvesare capable of improving and developing(Maurer et al., 2002).

Mabey (2002) found that successfulcompanies use a variety of formal,informal and external approaches todevelopment and Burgoyne et al. (2004,p49) conclude that:

The evidence on how managementand leadership works is that it worksin different ways in differentsituations. The practical implicationof this is that to get the benefit ofmanagement and leadershipdevelopment requires the design ofappropriate approaches for specificsituations rather than the adoptionof a universal model of bestpractice.

Furthermore, Burgoyne and colleaguespropose that the relative effectiveness ofany development approach will bestrongly influenced by the participantspast experience, personal character andpreferred learning style. Other keyfactors include the organisationalcontext, need for buy-in fromparticipants, and the ethos of learningwithin the organisation.

All indications are that multiplemethods will produce the most

effective management learning. Noone method has the sole answer.(Burgoyne, et al., 2004, p50)

Thus, the choice of developmentapproach is not a simple one. Formaximum effect, we need to carefullyconsider what it is that we seek todevelop and how best this can beachieved. If, for example, we wish todevelop a culture of shared, considerateand reflective leadership within our

organisation is it wise just to sendindividual leaders on action-packed orhighly prescriptive leadership trainingcourses? Chia (1996) recounts a



17/60


Japanese management developmentprogramme for high-potential leadersthat takes a different approach theywere taken to a retreat in the mountainsand encouraged to learn the art of tea

pouring and observing the movement ofcarp. Such a program sought to developa sensitivity, creativity and imaginationthat could not be achieved through moretraditional approaches.

It is also worth noting that the veryprocess of leadership developmentserves many purposes beyond simplydeveloping talent. Executive educationcan be an effective retention strategythat helps drive the motivation,enthusiasm and commitment of

participants; it can serve as a reward;and can also help in teambuilding andengendering a sense of shared purpose.On the flipside, singling out certainindividuals over others for involvementin leadership development can lead tounintended consequences such asdisappointment, alienation andresistance. Little can be moredemotivating than having a colleague orsuperior go off on all-expenses-paid triponly to come back and try to change

everything and tell you how to do yourjob better!

In the next part of this report we willlook at a range of popular leadershipdevelopment approaches to identifyelements that tend to improve theireffectiveness for enhancing individualand organisational performance.



18/60

Leadership Courses

Part Two:The Practice ofLeadership

Development

In this part of the report we will reviewsome of the most prevalent forms ofleadership development. The entries arecontributed by a selection of CLS facultyand fellows who draw both on theirextensive practical experience ofdelivering leadership development aswell as research evidence.

Clearly the relative impact and

appropriateness of each of theseapproaches will be largely influenced byprogramme content, context (includingorganisational, sectoral, regional andnational culture) and the nature ofparticipants (seniority, personal learningpreferences, etc.) however,unfortunately, these debates are beyondthe scope of the current report and willbe touched upon in subsequent editions.

The practices described are listed in noparticular order of importance and

include:

Leadership courses Facilitated workshops Coaching, counselling and mentoring Reflective writing and journals Action learning Role play and simulations Leadership exchange Psychometric testing 360 degree appraisal Leadership consultancy E-Learning

Leadership Courses

(By Jonathan Gosling)

For many people, leadershipdevelopment means going on a course.Most business schools offer programmesof various kinds, many organizations runin-house versions of the same thing, andseveral consultancy companies specialisein their own distinctive versions. Whilemany such programmes incorporate

learning-oriented activities such ascoaching, 360o feedback, action-learningand so forth, at the core of these

programmes is some kind of classroomexperience. What do these achieve?

Firstly, they can help build a cadre ofpeople who understand themselves to bepart of the leadership population(networking out of class is the mostimportant opportunity). They can alsopromulgate shared models that provide acommon conceptual language fortalking about leadership. They can act asa reward for people of whom much isasked (in this case the status of thecourse provider is often as important asthe relevance of the content). They canprepare individuals for newappointments by giving them a bit ofdistance from the organisation so they

can return with a fresh view (sometimesalso to facilitate someones exit from theorganisation!). They can give hard-pressed managers a little reflection timeand offer a different perspective (liftingpeople out of the day-to-day to a long-term view, show the business logic ofproposed changes, and so forth). Theyenable participants to concentrate onsome aspects of leadership developmentwhich can only be achieved throughface-to-face conversation (especially

building mutual familiarity and trust).And they can help launch or sustain achange initiative in the organisation,often with opportunities for executives toexplain their plans and inspire thetroops.

Long-term improvements in leadershipability, however, cannot be achievedthrough a 2-day workshop; in this casesomething like the Exeter integratedleadership development framework (seeAppendix 2) which provides bothconceptual challenge and personalcoaching, is much more suitable. But, onthe other hand, a short but intenseopportunity for facilitated discussion canalso do a lot to empower and enthuse acadre of leaders.

In a recent article on managementeducation (Gosling and Mintzberg,2004), Henry Mintzberg and I set outseven principles which apply as much toleadership development:

(1) Leadership development onlymakes sense for people who havecurrent leadership responsibilities,



19/60

Leadership Courses

because they need to be rooted in therealities of accountability and choicesbetween less-than-perfect options. Whilethere are many good reasons to educateyoung people in the principles of

leadership, the politics of power andinequality and their historicalantecedents, this kind of analytical andabstract knowledge is quite different tothe moral and aesthetic awareness calledfor in real leadership roles.

(2) While the staff of developmentprogrammes should be clear about whatthey want to teach, participantsshould be able to weave their ownexperience into the process. On ourAdvanced Leadership Programme

(www.alp-impm.com) each module hasparticipants working in a distinct

mindset (Gosling and Mintzberg, 2003).This guides us in terms of relevantcontent (change theories for the catalyticmindset, self awareness in the reflectivemindset); it also helps us to handle thetension between the need to bring newideas and at the same time stay relevantto challenges faced by participants. Our

job is to help them to approach thesechallenges in new mindsets, and thus to

widen their repertoire of appropriatestyles.

(3) Leadership development shouldleverage work and life experience asfully as possible. This seems obvious but how often is class time filled up withcase-studies and PowerPointpresentations, with time only for a fewquestions on the agenda set by thepresenter? To quote from our paper,

theories are like maps of the world,case-studies like travellers tales. Bothare best appreciated as are theirlimitations by people who alreadyknow the territory (Gosling andMintzberg, 2004, p20). This hasimportant implications for the wayprogrammes are run: a presenter maywant to explain a companys code ofethics, but participants find the crucialquestion to be about non-executivedirectors intent only on meetingregulatory controls. Leveragingexperience means sharing control of the

agenda, and following the questions thatarise from the meeting of theory andexperience.

(4) The key to learning is thoughtfulreflection. This means allowing time forit. Look at the programmes that seemintent on replicating the high-pressureenvironment of work with late-night

sessions, over-night preparation ofmassive case-studies and ceaseless teamcompetitiveness. Or those modelled on abizarre banquet, an endless processionof disconnected lectures and exerciseswith no time to taste and savour thedistinctive flavours of each, let aloneabsorb and digest the benefits.Programmes need to provide for twoaspects of reflection reflexivity aboutones own internal thoughts and feelings;and remembering (literally re-

membering, bringing together scatteredparts of experience). Some of this is bestdone privately, and people need bothtime and encouragement to do this specific moments for writing reflexivenotes are very helpful. But reflection isalso a collective activity, and peopleoften recognise their own thoughts andfeelings in well-focused discussion. Westart each day with structured reflectionsessions, and practices such as coachingand 360 degree feedback are further

examples.(5) Development of leaders andimproving leadersh ip should have animpact on the organisation.Leadership is not something pre-formedand then applied to a context; it

unfolds, emerging through constantadaptation and invention [] withrecurring patterns as in a series ofmusical refrains (Gosling and Mintzberg,2006). Leaders who are constantlydiscovering new things about their work

can have an immediate impact bybringing these discoveries into theworkplace. But there are more radicalalternatives. On our ALP we reverse theprocess: leadership teams from severalcompanies come together in theprogramme, presenting and discussingtheir key strategic issues. The classroomacts as a reflective vessel, each groupacting as friendly consultants to theothers. Because the participants are allworking on issues for which they are

responsible, they can take decisions andmove forward on the basis of their newunderstanding: this is really bringing theworkplace into the classroom!



20/60

Leadership Courses

(6) Leadership developmentbecomes a process of interactive

learning. Teachers present their ideasexpecting them to be tested and refined;participants present their issues and

experiences with the same expectations.The collective work is to deconstruct theinherent logic, the underlyingassumptions, and to discover thereinboth an understanding of the limits ofknowledge and an appreciation of theinsights, moral sensitivity and qualitiesof judgement that leaders draw upon indoing their jobs.

(7) Every aspect should befacilitative. The value of skilfulfacilitation is immense; but we need to

go further. Business-schoolamphitheatres put all the focus on theteachers performance, and interventionsfrom the audience put the spotlight onthe questioners performance too. Thereis always an element of theatricalityabout any public event, and leadershipitself is an act; but we should not bepromoting the entertainment factor if itgets in the way of thoughtful enquiry,careful reflection, facilitative questioning.So the architecture of the buildings

deserves attention, so too the design ofprogramme evaluation we know thepower of measurement to drivebehaviour! But we can take this furtherstill. If we are trying to develop areflective mindset, it helps to get awayfrom the bustle of every-day life.Similarly, if we are exploring a change ithelps to be in an environment whichspeaks naturally of transformation. As ithappens, nature itself does just this,especially at the height of spring or

autumn; on one programme designedalong similar lines to the ALP (but thistime for a single company) we go toBosnia where an enthusiasm for changewent too far, and the real challenge is tore-establish the basis for carrying ontogether for continuity. Here theenvironment and the experiential andsymbolic aspects of development arecarefully selected to facilitate thelearning not the teaching of lessons.

In describing these seven tenets I have

drawn particular attention to theimplications for formal leadershipcourses; they apply equally to more

diffuse methods such as coaching andaction-learning. But there are somethings that can only be achieved bybringing people together with colleaguesfrom their own and other organisations

(preferably in groups from a number oforganisations working together). I wantnow to draw to attention to some of thedysfunctional effects of not bringingpeople together in this way.

Note first that one of the powerfulfeatures of coaching is that it provides asafe and confidential setting to exploreaims, purposes and doubts. Thisdepends on the regularity and reliabilityof the coaching process, just as much ason the skills of the coach and the

willingness of the coached. (By the way,this is frequently a downfall of using line-managers and internal HR specialists they too often get sidetracked by

operational priorities). In the sameway, participants on a leadershipprogramme will quickly sense if it ischiefly about propaganda and wishfulthinking (in which case they will feignearnestness in class and save their ironyand sarcasm for the bar). So much morecan be achieved if they feel secure

enough to face the uncertainties andambiguities, including the moraldilemmas which are such a central partof any leadership role. The next fewparagraphs describe what must be inplace for this quality of containment.

The term containment is drawn forpsychoanalysis, where it is used todescribe the quality of a relationship inwhich one party is able to manage her orhis own emotional response to another(Bion, 1962). Classically, this refers tothe way a mother is able to be fullyattentive to her child while not beingcarried away by the infants ownemotions if the child feels hungry anddesperate, the mother must be aware ofthis but need not feel overtaken by thedesperation herself. This attentive butmeasured response helps the childgradually learn that his/her own feelingspass, and that in spite of presentanxieties, he/she will be OK. In the sameway leaders often provide containment

for the people in their organisations;teaching staff do the same for theirstudents. When this works well the



21/60

Leadership Courses

students are able to feel confused anduncertain about the topic, perhaps evenat a loss to make sense of it. This is anormal and very proper position to be inas a learner and is equally true for

mature participants on leadershipdevelopment programmes. But how canthis work in the kind of participativelearning environment I described above?If everyone shares in the learning

journey, who provides containment?Herein lies one of the strengths of formalleadership programmes. The structure,timetables, specified developmentpathways and scheduled events, alongwith dedicated administrative staff,faculty, programme branding all these

serve to create a sense of identity andstability to the learning process.Conversely, the current trend for open-ended menu-driven optional andpluralistic development opportunitiesmay offer flexibility, but inadequatecontainment. Does this matter? Theanswer depends on what is wanted fromthe development programme. A simpledistinction can be drawn as follows:

(a) Techniques - Skills and methods fordealing with relatively well-defined

problems. At more senior levels theserange from quite high-level analyses ofmarkets, organisational structures etc,through to coaching and presentationskills, but it would be unusual for aleadership course to concentrate mainlyon technique (as distinct from amanagement skills training programmes,or standard MBA, for example). Thesepose little challenge to the way peoplesee the world or their place in it, sotechnique based programmes tend to be

less anxiety-provoking although thevalue should not be underestimated:especially at more junior levels peoplecan discover significant new things aboutthemselves.

(b) Themes - The major issues facingan organisation often deserveconcentrated attention informed byexperts, models and discussion acrossthe relevant community. Managing amajor change, re-focusing on customers,driving a quality programme or global

integration these are the kinds ofthemes around which a programmecould be built, with modules, field visits,

formal input (and some techniques).These are especially relevant forexperienced, well-qualified middle-management with more seniorinvolvement who have to make the

organisation effective within its changingcompetitive and social context. Forexample, many so-called Executive MBAsare designed around thematic modules,and the same is probably true of themajority of in-company leadershipprogrammes.

(c) Realities - In any organisation,large or small, some people findthemselves wondering what the mainthemes really are, and what they oughtto be. They are trying to figure out the

emerging patterns in the context, theenergy in the company, the appetite ofinvestors and the behaviour ofcompetitors and consumers. One of themost important contributions of aleadership programme for these mostsenior people is to provide theopportunity and stimulation for highquality conversations amongst thispopulation. And it is at this level that thequestion of containment is mostpressing, and most delicate.

There are a number of approaches towork at this level. Most involve a level of

discovery, open-ended exploration intosituations which might offer usefulanalogies, because one of the keychallenges at this level is recogniseissues which dont yet have a clearlypackaged identity they are not yet

themes. It is often easier to noticesomething happening in anotherindustry, or even a different sector orculture altogether, and then to recognisesimilar dynamics in ones own situation.

This is precisely the level at which wepitch the Advanced LeadershipProgramme, currently running in variousversions in the UK, North America andIndia. In one company-specific example,leaders meet on five modules, each in adifferent country in programme designedto get them seeing, thinking and talkinga distinct mindset (receptive in the UK,reflective in India, competitive in the

USA, collaborative in China, catalytic inBosnia), More usually we work acrossthree mindsets, (reflective, connectedand catalytic), and with three to six



22/60

Facilitated Workshops

company groups sometimes on theirown organisational issues, andsometimes interacting across the groups.All this provides a fine balance betweena number of features: individuals can

follow up non-conformist ideas withparticipants from other companies ifthese ideas (counteracting group-think intheir own company culture); yet they areclearly on the programme as members ofa delegation from the company, and forwhom they must apply any new insights.A clear focus on the issues facing eachcompany is countered by therequirement to work on these issues insight of peers from other organisations,who often notice relational and cultural

blind-spots, leading to subtle sometimes radical re-framing of theissues.

However it would be a mistake to claimthat we can engage in leadershipdevelopment especially at the level of

realities in a smooth and painlessway. When we deal with leadership, wedeal with power, accountability andchoice. None of these is easy to dealwith, and all involve a degree of inter-personal and intra-personal conflict. The

realities of leadership include makingchoices between less-than ideal options,competing with colleagues for influenceand rewards, the frequent need to moveon, the ability to live with unpleasantconsequences of ones decisions andactions. A good quality leadershipprogramme must face these realities not apologise for them, nor try toabsolve leaders of responsibility; theywould be the last to buy into suchsoothing rhetoric. But proper

consideration means addressing the bigquestions of guilt, ambition and pride;the fact that people capable of greatnessare also liable to cause or collude ingreat evil. Leadership programmes aresupposed to help successful, influentialpeople become more powerful, to havegreater impact. With this comes greaterrisk that they may do more harm,either by their own actions or by beingpart of some collective mistake. In tragictheatre this is called hamartia, when

the tragic hero literally misses the markand makes a practical error (Aristotle,350BC). Any leader worthy of the nameis aware of this danger; a great appeal of

coaching is the opportunity to voiceprivate doubts about these matters; agood leadership should find ways to dealwith them at a collective level we canall think of bad things done by groups of

well-meaning individuals. But there arealso plenty of examples of good thingsnot done because people were unable todiscuss their ideals and hopes for abetter way. As we face the effects ofclimate change, global poverty and theuncertainties of genetic engineering, weneed leaders who are not put off byanxiety, but are able to responsiblyexercise what power they have on thebasis of collectively made value-

judgements. To encourage this is the

special contribution of formal leadershipdevelopment programmes.

Fur t her Read ing Gosling, J. (1996) Plato on the education of

managers. in French, R. and Grey, C.

Rethinking management educationLondon: Sage.

Gosling, J. and Mintzberg, H. (2004) Theeducation of practicing managers.Sloan Management Review, 45(4),19-22.

Mintzberg, H. and Gosling, J. (2002)Educating managers beyond borders.

Academy of Management Learningand Education, 1(1), 64-76.

Nussbaum, M.C. (1986) The fragility ofgoodness. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. On hamartia, seeespecially Interlude 2: luck and thetragic emotions pp378 - 394

Williams, C., Wilke, G. and Binney, G.(2005) Living leadership: a practicalguide for ordinary heroes. London:FT/Prentice Hall.


(By Alan Hooper)

When you talk to people who haveundergone a good leadershipprogramme, invariably they will focus onthe individual(s) who facilitated thesessions. Indeed, this is usually the firstthing they talk about. Only once theyhave told you about the facilitator, oftenwith considerable enthusiasm, will theytalk about the process and only thenabout the detail of what they actually

learnt. The relationship between teacher and student has been the keyto learning throughout the ages. One ofthe earliest recorded examples can be



23/60


traced back to classical times when theGreek General Xenophon exploredleadership with the worlds first andgreatest teacher of the subject,Socrates (Adair, 2003, p.20).

The relationship between teacher, pupiland subject matter is explored in detailin Platos Symposium (Plato, 360 BC)and in the modern psychologicalparlances of Transactional Analysis (TA)such relationships are oftencharacterised by parent/child dynamics(Wagner, 1996). To be really effective,however, the relationship should developinto one of adult/adult over time as thepupil grows in confidence and theteacher steps further back. This

movement is the key to good facilitationand it is the experience that individualson development programmes value themost.

So what are the characteristics of goodfacilitators? Based on my ownexperience I believe there are five keycharacteristics.

First, they empathise well with theirgroup. They have honed the skill ofdeveloping a good relationship with a

group, quickly. Most have a warmth thathelps the establishment of this rapport,but this does not apply to all of them.They tend to be self-aware and confidentin their ability to reach out to a group.Interestingly, there does not appear tobe a common methodology and manydifferent types of personalities can beequally effective. Indeed, some goodfacilitators are not really aware of what itis they do that makes them so effective;but they are sufficiently self-assured to

know that it works.Second, skilled facilitators are good atemotional intelligence (Goleman, 2000).This is not surprising since EI is foundedon a high level of self-awareness and athorough understanding of how anindividual relates with others. Just assignificant, they combine EI with theirown experience to enable them to relateto a variety of scenarios which may beraised by the group. This enables themto understand, and deal quickly with,

difficult and delicate situations whenthey occur within the group (the test ofa good facilitator).

Third, and linked with the second,effective facilitators are extremely goodat observation, they choose their wordscarefully (to ensure precise meaning).They think constantly about the best way

to develop the learning of the group;they have a finely-tuned awareness tothe general mood of a group and noticesubtleties that indicate a change of moodor unease; and they are very consciousof those individuals who becomedisengaged or isolated. Neuro LinguisticProgramming, described as the study ofwhat works in thinking, language andbehaviour (Knight, 2003, p.1), has hada significant impact in this field.However, although NLP has grown in

popularity since the early 90s only aminority of good facilitators are formallyqualified as NLP practitioners (despitemany of them using similar techniques).

The fourth characteristic is associatedwith the size of the group. Indiscussions with facilitators about the

ideal group size, invariably the answeris: between 10 and 12. The rangeseems to vary between 8 and 16: it isdifficult to maintain meaningful dialoguefor an extended period below 8; and the

dynamics appear to change significantlyabove 162. The ideal group size isbased less on objective analysis butmore on the intuitive feel of facilitatorsabout what works. Indeed, faced with agroup size of more than 16, they willoften adopt very different strategies,such as Open Space Technology (Owen,1977). In contemporary leadershipdevelopment linked to majororganisational change it is increasinglyimportant to work with very large

groups. Some of our colleagues and CLSFellows often work with over 600managers together, moving in an out ofvarious sub-groupings. This format isparticularly important for internationalorganisations that need to achieve acommon understanding and collectivecommitment during relatively short (andexpensive) face-to-face events for aworldwide population.

The final characteristic is the onereferred to at the beginning of this

2 This experience matches Dr MeredithBelbins assertion that an ideal team size isten (Belbin, 1981).



24/60

Coaching, Counselling and Mentoring

section: the ability of the facilitator tomove from a parent/child to an

adult/adult relationship. The timing ofthis movement requires particular care.Move too early and the group will not

have sufficient knowledge andconfidence; move too late and the groupmay never progress beyond the childstage. With the right timing this canbecome the most rewarding part of thewhole relationship with facilitator andcourse participants moving towards anequal partnership.

These five characteristics are at theheart of good facilitation. They are whatworks. It is perhaps relevant that, justas we remember the teachers who had

most influence at school, so weremember those facilitators who wereparticularly good at helping us developour leadership skills.

Fur t her Read ing Brooks-Harris, J. and Stock-Ward, S. (1999)

Workshops: Designing and facilitating

experiential learning. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Hunter, D., Bailey, A. and Taylor, B. (1995)The Art of Facilitation: How to creategroup synergy. Fisher Books.

Wagner, A. (1996) The TransactionalManager. London: The IndustrialSociety.

Coaching, Counselling andMentoring

(By John Potter and Richard Bolden)

Coaching, counselling and mentoring arewords that have crept into commonusage in organizational behaviour andorganisational development literature

and practice. They represent threefacets of a possible developmentalrelationship between two or moreindividuals but are often usedinterchangeably, which can lead toconfusion.

Of the three concepts coaching isperhaps the most widely talked aboutand it is estimated that up to 70% oforganisations use it at a senior level(Lambert, 2004). Coaching is aboutusing day-to-day work experiences as a

learning opportunity via the facilitation ofan experienced coach. It involvesencouraging self-reflection to unlock apersons potential to maximize his or her

own performance by helping them tolearn from experience. Coachingtypically has a practical focus aimed ataddressing real workplace challengesand can either be treated as a short-

term intervention or a longer-termdevelopmental process.

Counselling shares many similarities withcoaching but is closer to the therapeuticrelationship between therapist andpatient. Although often instigated inresponse to work-related issues there isa significant psychological dimension:addressing the person as a whole ratherthan just in a professional capacity. Theprocesses involved are more aboutunderstanding, challenging and enabling

than providing feedback. Counselling isnot about giving advice but is aboutgetting people to see things from adifferent viewpoint and encouragingthem to take action to solve theirproblems themselves.

Finally, mentoring is usually described as the relationship between a senior andmore junior member of an organizationdirected towards the advancement andsupport of the junior member (Fowler

and Gorman, 2004). It is a long-termrelationship (either formal or informal)associated with the provision of supportand guidance and passing on ofwisdom. Although typically used for thesupport of inexperienced managers newto a job or organisation it is nowincreasingly common for CEOs anddirectors to have their own mentors. Atrusted external mentor or coach can bean invaluable support in problem solvingand acting as a friendly ear with whomto share sensitive issues that would bedifficult to share with colleagues or more

junior members of staff.

Figure 2 shows how these three conceptsare inter-related and overlap. From thisdiagram it can be seen, for example,that it is possible for a combinedcoaching/mentoring relationship but itshould be noted that this would bedifferent from a purely coaching ormentoring relationship.



25/60

Coaching, Counselling and Mentoring

Figure 2 Coach ing, Counse l l ing andMen to r ing Over laps (Lambert, 2001)

The Centre for Excellence in Leadershipmakes a further distinction, indicatingthat counselling is primarily based on theresolution of personal problems based on

past experience, coaching focuses onrecent, current and future performance,whilst mentoring takes a longer-termview of career development and buildinga lifes work (CEL, 2005).

So how do these three related, butdifferent processes relate to leadershipand leadership development?

Firstly, the nature of the relationship isimportant to consider and agree inadvance, as are intended outcomes and

the manner in which these activitiesintegrate with other individual andorganisational development processes.

In a recent empirical study of mentoringFowler and Gorman (2005) identifiedeight primary functions of therelationship as perceived by mentors andmentees. These were personal andemotional guidance, coaching, advocacy,career development facilitation, rolemodelling, strategies and systemsadvice, learning facilitation and

friendship. Additional research hasdemonstrated a long-term impact ofmentoring on organisational commitmentand company loyalty (Payne andHuffman, 2005).

With regards to coaching, the CareersResearch Forum (Lambert, 2004)proposes six key attributes of effectivecoaching and the same could be said ofmentoring and counselling.

1. A clearly defined purpose linked to

individual and organisational needs.

2. A visible and open relationship withorganisational support and a clearlyagreed budget and contract.

3. The choice of a high calibre coachwith a good fit to the individual

receiving coaching.4. A proven and planned learning

process with regular activities,feedback and reviews.

5. Good supportive relationshipsbetween the coach, manager, HR andindividual.

6. Regular evaluation against individualand organisational objectives.

Coaching, counselling and mentoringoften draw on feedback techniques suchas 360 degree appraisal and

psychometric assessment and cancomplement and support more wide-reaching educational programmes,particularly as a means for aiding thetransfer of learning from the classroomto the workplace.

Secondly coaching, mentoring and (to alesser degree) counselling can bepowerful leadership tools in their ownright. Hirsh et al. (2004) talk of theimportance of managers developing

others and coaching and mentoring skillsare essential elements of this ability.Characteristics of positive developmentsupport include engagement via personalrelationship, informal access, care withtrust and encouragement, sharp focus,coaching (but also help findingexperiences), working within a widercareer context, and an evolvingrelationship.

Thirdly coaching, counselling andmentoring, like a number of other

leadership development practices, can bepowerful techniques for enhancing socialcohesion. At an individual level thesepractices, by increasing self-awarenessand awareness of others, are likely toresult in enhanced inter-personalrelations via improved understandingand acceptance. A number of authors,though, now argue that the mosteffective outcomes can be achievedthrough group coaching. Kets de Vries(2005), for example, provides a case

study of where joint coaching was usedwithin an organisation to bring aboutdurable changes in behaviour andconcludes that leadership group

Coaching

Mentoring

Counselling

The personalstuff

Enter with care!

Mentoring=

Coaching



26/60

Reflective Writing, Personal Journals and Leadership Development

coaching establishes a foundation oftrust, makes for constructive conflictresolution, leads to greater commitment,and contributes to accountability, allfactors that translate into better results

for the organisation (p.61). In a similarway as group slimming, stop-smokingand drink/drug rehabilitationprogrammes rely on the power of thegroup to both support participants and toexert pressure to change, making acommitment to adapt and developleadership behaviours is more powerfulwhen expressed in public.

In a similar vein, coaching andmentoring can be important processes inorganisational acculturation. It could be

argued that setting the tone fororganizational culture and how itdevelops is a key responsibility ofleaders (Schein, 1992). In this case, thesupportive relationship between coachand coachee or mentor and mentee cangreatly guide and shape these processes.

The triad of coaching, counselling andmentoring is therefore an important partof the toolkit for the leader of the futureboth for ones own leadership practice as

well as development.Fur t her Read ing Pegg, M. (1999) The Art of Mentoring: How

You Can be a Superb Mentor.Guildford, UK: Biddles.

Reddy, M. (1987) The Managers Guide ToCounselling At Work. London:Methuen.

Whitmore, J. (2001) Coaching for

Performance. London: NicholasBrealey.

Reflective Writing, Personal

Journals and LeadershipDevelopment

(By Peter Case)

Many writers working in the field ofleadership education and developmentargue that successful leadership stylenow and in the future will require astrong focus on self awareness,behavioural sensitivity and interpersonalskill (Hodgkinson, 1983; Maccoby, 1981;Mumford, 1995; Pedler et al., 2001;

Reason and Rowan, 1991; Senge, 1990).The implication of this view is that skilfulleaders will value openness, will share

goals with followers/subordinates, beconcerned about others, be supportive,good listeners, receptive to others ideasand insights and be able to communicateeffectively. Although there may be

certain obvious exceptions, organisationsare increasingly managed by persuasionand consent rather than overt commandand control and it is arguably important,therefore, for persons occupyingpositions of responsibility to acquire therequisite soft skills to performeffectively in these negotiatal contexts.

In order to develop leadership skills ofthe sort outlined above, we need toadopt innovative methods that willenable participants on leadership

development programmes to integratetheory and practice and make theirlearning relevant to their ownorganisational lives. The encouragementof reflective writing through the use ofsome form of personal journal orpersonal development portfolio can beextremely helpful in turning everydaywork experience into data thatparticipants can learn from. Experientiallearning journals bring many educationaladvantages. For example, they provide

participants with:

an opportunity to identify and reflecton critical workplace incidents andexperiences;

a means by which tutors can offerfeedback and support to the learnerand gauge their future developmentneeds;

an opportunity to practise critical andevaluative thinking with respect toactions and experiences;

a means of integrating theoreticallearning with workplace leadershippractice.

Using Learn ing Journa ls Learning journals are typically personalto the participant and shared only withtheir tutor or coach. On occasion a tutormight give specific directions toparticipants to make entries in their

journal, but the main intention of alearning journal is that it becomes arepository for participants to make

entries on any and every appropriateoccasion throughout a programme ofleadership development (and, indeed,possibly beyond should they find it



27/60

Reflective Writing, Personal Journals and Leadership Development

sufficiently beneficial). The kinds ofreflections that participants might makein a journal are as follows:

critical incidents at work that need tobe thought out loud;

thoughts that follow a particularpiece of formal study on aprogramme;

exploration of work-related issueswith reference to the theoretical orconceptual elements of aprogramme;

a return to a previous entry in the journal for the purposes of furtherreflection.

Reflections,

what is leadership development

Documents