There are two kinds of views on leadership that are deeply ingrained in people's minds: 1) our organization is well organized but leadership is not good, 2) instead of focusing more on leadership development, why not hire better leaders?
We applied a 360-degree feedback tool and asked respondents to choose one of four options out of 16 that any leader should have. Some of the abilities received 10% of the total votes, but have the ability to" practice self-development " and receive less than 2% of the votes. This means that less than one in every 50 respondents classify "practicing self-development" as one of the four abilities that leaders should possess.
What is the assumption of this? Based on this, we can interpret six pieces of information: 1) leaders don't need to evolve - They just need to keep their true colors. 2) Since people are always indifferent to nature, why should they go to self-development at great cost? 3) development of the leader is naturally achieved in the process of work. 4) Leaders support the status quo, improve and do not help business results. 5) Intentional development of leadership skills does not affect a person's career. 6) Since you are in a managerial position, you must be qualified for the job - the pursuit of personal development is a manifestation of weakness and incompetence. Those six looks are just nonsense. Some people are complacent about their own leadership effectiveness, which is wrong from the above point of view.
What if other professionals think so? If a rookie athlete has the above ideas? His athletic career will be like a flash in the pan and the flavor will suddenly drop. The same goes for physicists, certified accountants, pilots and many other professionals.
About 10 years ago, I heard the leader of a high-tech company speak to his management team. He personally described his efforts to get the position. Each year, he chooses a leadership trait that he believes can help him improve his leadership. These traits are not shortcomings that others point out, but actions and behaviors that he determines after analyzing the needs of the organization. One year he focused on how to lead change projects, the other year he focused on developing subordinates.
He sees it as an endless continuous improvement of activity. Obviously, the process itself inspired him. He firmly believes that he can learn new skills and become a better leader.
I'm thinking about a proposal Jeff Immelt wrote for General Electric (GE) executives: every Executive has to work hard to do one thing. Unsurprisingly, GE Energy continues to develop outstanding leaders. When more managers can engage in self-development, we will have better leaders.
We need a leader who understands six truths: 1) not better, but better, 2) leaders can make great progress if they want to do their best, 3) just going for a certain job may not be ideal. You have to develop consciously; 4) the better the leader, the better the business results; 5) self-Development will significantly increase the chances of success; 6) the Practice of self - development is a manifestation of self-confidence and commitment, not weakness. When leaders are actively engaged in self-development, we will see organizations that are well managed and managed.
Even worse leaders can strengthen our belief that human behavior is always fixed, and invented various sayings such as" nature is hard to move","accumulation is hard to change". Whenever we talk about the obvious weaknesses of the leader, such as character, rudeness, etc., This point of view becomes a universal shield.
The more Mature the leader, the more it seems that he confirms the hypothesis that"nature is difficult to move." Age, strength, success, and negative behavior year after year can make others suspect that they can no longer change. To make matters worse, these leaders often turn a blind eye and refuse to accept feedbacka connection that will help them correct their abnormal behavior.
We strongly believe that leaders who have the above behaviors can and do change. We reviewed leadership development program data for 545 leaders in three organizations and identified leaders with fatal disabilities (ability to be in the 10th percentile). In this group, 96 leaders have more than one fatal flaw, which is 18% of the total.
We recommend that these leaders first correct their fatal flaws, because until these ailments can be cured, even if they put more effort into other leadership abilities, they will rarely change their minds. Leaders should not be universal. As long as there are five superior abilities, you can squat on the leader's team. However, managers should not have bad leadership behavior, because the negative impact of such defects is enough to reduce their effectiveness.
After this development process, we found that 71 of the 96 leaders showed significant improvement in leadership effectiveness, and 75% of leaders with severe disabilities apparently changed their behavior. In short, these stubborn old men have also learned new tricks, changed old habits, and changed more than a star and a half! They have made amazing progress.
Through a study of more than 50,000 leaders, we have found that the effectiveness of leaders is closely related to employee engagement and satisfaction. Incompetent leaders can cause team members to complain, feel depressed, and have low morale. A significant improvement in the effectiveness of management will have a direct impact on enhancing the participation of direct reports.
The main focus of leadership development projects is their ability to have fatal flaws. Each of the 16 leadership abilities we assessed had at least a dozen leaders with fatal disabilities. But in some abilities, there are three times as many leaders with fatal flaws. Among the top four, they are all associated with poor interpersonal relationships. In General, fatal flaws with the lowest incidence include poor leadership, altered outcomes, and personality problems. It is obvious that lack of interpersonal skills, lack of concern for the development of others and unwillingness to take self - development seriously are the dead points of ineffective leaders.
Three out of every four leaders who are committed to self-development have achieved improved performance. Have you changed your problems?