Leadership - We Know It When We See It

Amid the public outcry over MP’s expenses and their discontent at the conduct of the Speaker, those seeking lessons on leadership might be forgiven for looking anywhere other than the Houses of Westminster at the moment.

And yet the Speaker can furnish us with some useful insights into what is required of leaders. His recent behaviour in firstly being unwilling to see the importance of the brewing scandal over MPs’ expenses, and then in savaging members of his own party when they questioned his judgement on the issue has dissipated his authority. The result of this has been a loss of confidence in the Speaker among MPs and calls for his resignation.

We might justifiably ask ourselves how this has happened – after all, it seems that he has done no more than misjudge the public mood and respond cantankerously to some hostile questioning. But in fact, he has not offered the leadership his position demands.

In business a position of authority is bestowed on a manager by those above him or her in the hierarchy. This authority is accompanied by a set of responsibilities and a level of trust. Should the manager then break this trust, it will not be long before he or she loses the job.

In order to successfully wield the power which accompanies a position of authority, a manager also needs the respect of the people below him or her in the hierarchy. If this respect is lost, the manager’s ability to exercise the power of their position is greatly reduced.

While the Speaker’s office is more complicated than that of a hypothetical business manager, the lesson for business people is that it is not enough simply to occupy the position of authority and wield the accompanying power.

Kevin Yates, Managing Director of Mitchell Phoenix, explains, “leadership is not simply an idea, nor is it expedient - something we can believe in one day and not the next. People will see straight through that. It has to be visible, applied, and strong enough to gain the respect of the people you lead.”

In fact, argues Yates, after it has been bestowed one then has to prove one is worthy, and to do this, one has to display the fundamental qualities of leadership: a sense of purpose about what it is one wishes to achieve, decisiveness in fulfilling that purpose, the ability to mobilise others in adversity, and a character which commands respect.

Mitchell Phoenix and the Kirkpatrick model of training evaluation

Donald Kirkpatrick developed a very popular evaluation model that has been used since the late 1950s by the training community. The focus is on four kinds of outcomes that result from training programs and identifies four levels of evaluation:

Level 1 Evaluation - 1st Reaction
Level 2 Evaluation - Learning transfer
Level 3 Evaluation – Behavioral change
Level 4 Evaluation – Positive, attributable results


Level 1— 1st Reaction

Here the goal is to measure participants’ reactions to the training program. You should measure their reactions immediately after the program. Level one evaluation should not just include reactions toward the overall program “Did you enjoy the program?” it can, and should, include measurement of participants’ reactions or attitudes toward specific components of the program, such as the relevance of topics, the style and structure, the schedule and participation.

Level one evaluation is the measurement of initial delegate satisfaction with the training experience.

Learning (Level two outcomes) and transfer of learning (Level three outcomes) are unlikely to occur unless participants have positive attitudes toward the training program. The measurement of specific aspects of the training program can provide important information about what aspects of the training program can be improved in the future.

The following point applies to all four levels of Kirkpatrick’s outcome evaluation. Evaluators should establish performance standards on outcomes, so that common evaluative judgments can be made on all four steps.

Finally level one evaluation is useful for immediate reaction to the events but does not signal improvement.


Level 2—Learning transfer

Level two evaluation is done soon after the training event to determine if participants gained the knowledge, skills, or attitudes. A couple of issues present themselves in leadership development:

1. How does a business measure knowledge, skills, and attitudes?

2. What instrument(s) can be used to determine improvement in level two outcomes?

It is here in the area of Leadership development that the Kirkpatrick model has less currency. Firstly: Should we try to measure things that are almost entirely subjective – improvement in attitude from one week to the next? Or secondly: Create such tenuous measurements and connections that the process takes more energy than making the improvements.

Ready & Conger (London Business School) in their review of training in the workplace, call these “make-believe metrics’ and suggest that trying to measure here is less cost effective that in later stages.

Level 3—Behavioral changes

Here your goal is to find out if training program participants change their on-the-job-behavior as a result of their having attended and participated in the training program. The level three question is,

“To what extent has the training had a positive effect on job performance?”

Level three evaluation specifically involves measuring the transfer of knowledge, skills, and attitudes from the training context to the workplace.

Learning is likely to transfer more effectively if the conditions in the work setting are favorable for transfer.

Here Ready & Conger identified 3 Key Success Factors

1. Managers at all levels accept joint responsibility for leadership and management development - Ownership is distributed, demand for change is established as a cultural requirement. The organizational culture and climate must change in order to support individual change.

2. Leadership Development should be based on the company’s own strategic drivers and requirements. These must be understood at the levels involved and communicated at the start of training.


3. Make believe Metrics – Already mentioned. Don’t spend resource measuring what continues to elude measurement. Attend to business outcomes and the development of common culture and practice. The training or learning is directly linked to workplace activity and outcomes; Project themes set and live business issues addressed using learning from the training. Provide real world examples and focus on actual experience performing and practicing the behaviors.

Level 4 – Positive and attributable results

Here your goal is to find out if the training program led to final business results that contribute to the “bottom line” (i.e., business profits). Level four outcomes are not limited to return on training investment, they can include other major results that contribute to the effective functioning of an organization. These include outcomes that most people would agree is “good for the business.” and can be changes in financial outcomes (such as positive ROI or increased profits) or changes in variables that should have a relatively direct effect on financial outcomes at some point in the future, for example:

• Improved quality of work. Higher productivity.
• Reduction in staff turnover, Improved quality of work life
• Improving human relationships
• Improved vertical and horizontal communication
• Fewer grievances. Lower absenteeism. Higher worker morale
• Fewer accidents. Greater job satisfaction
• Increased sales

And, as a result, increased profits.



Mitchell Phoenix Limited was established as providers of Leadership and Management development in 1988. Since then, more than 4000 managers worldwide have benefited from the unique blend of training, coaching and consultancy.

www.mitchellphoenix.com

Sustainability in Business – What does it mean?

Sustainability is an increasingly common term in today’s world. It is most widely used to communicate goals around ‘saving the planet’, renewable energy and feeding the Earth’s population. The concept of sustainability refers to the ability to maintain balance of a certain process or state in any system and is central to studies of ecological and biological systems.

If we see business as an organism and start to explore sustainability as an overarching goal we will find that this idea has been around for hundreds of years. At Mitchell Phoenix we often ask people to consider ‘What is the purpose of Management?” the ultimate conclusion being “To secure the future”. If we accept that our purpose is to secure the future, then what is the implicit responsibility? It is to Govern Change.

Governing change is the act of generating sustainability in business through being pro-active. Adapting to change is evidence that learning has taken place Reacting to change based on how we have always done it simply stores up the need to handle the same thing again in the future. The ability to change and adapt is the key to sustainability.

President Obama, since his election, has made several speeches and has often used the question “Will our children thank us?” around difficult issues that need addressing now. Business needs to start thinking more about what it is creating rather than what it is taking, not what it is losing but what it is gaining. Change is often seen as a cost rather than an investment. “I haven’t got time” is a basic example.

We can wait for change to force our hand, new legislation, for instance, and conform. We can see the writing on the wall and reluctantly implement measures in readiness, ruing what once was. We can embrace change and make it our strategy, forging ahead with clarity and purpose. Already, corporate governance is upon us. We need to educate our people over Diversity and demonstrate our policies. Social Responsibility will become more and more of a requirement and managing our carbon emissions will be a burden or a boon.

If we want an adaptable, sustainable organization, Governing Change has to be core thinking for every business. In his book, “The Future of Work”, Tom Malone from the Harvard Business School explores in one of the chapters, putting human values at the center of business. By nurturing, growing, planning a legacy, preparing the future, he states that it is highly likely that we would automatically embrace and adopt principles and policies that are currently being legislated.

The World Commission on Environment and Development has articulated what has now become a widely accepted definition of sustainability: "[to meet] the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Sounds like a plan to me.