Bullying - Part of Your Organization's Culture?

No doubt we are all aware of a multitude of tragic scenarios that have played out with increasing regularity in our local communities and across our respective nations - children and youth subjected to intense and sustained harassment that only gains attention or action after they have taken their own lives in a desperate attempt at escape.  Invariably as a community, as parents, as human beings we individually and collectively express shock and dismay that such a tragedy could take place.  Invariably we ask how and why could this happen, what should have been done to identify and stop the bullying, and what we should do now.  We seem particularly shocked that children could perpetrate such abuse. 

I'm not sure why we are so surprised.  Judging by my own experience and that of others an undercurrent of bullying exists within our broader society and in our workplaces.  Our youth are unfortunately just modeling our own "adult" and "professional" behaviors.

I want to first point out that by starting this entry in the way I have that I in no way intend to diminish the very real tragedies that have taken place.  I do, however, believe it is useful as a starting point in highlighting the fact that we unfortunately do not leave that reality behind once we move on from elementary school.  Inadvertently or not, our leadership styles and our work cultures also tolerate, sustain, and even foster bullying.  Just as there are not, and should not be, bystanders in dealing with bullying of our youth a similar sentiment must hold true in our organizations.

There may be more than a few questions rattling around your head at this point, not least of which may be "Does bullying really exist in my organization?"  and "What does bullying even look like?"  Or perhaps like me, and others who have reached out to me, you know all too well the face of bullying from your past or current work.  My personal experiences have run the gamut - leaders abusing their secretaries and subordinates, physicians intimidating their colleagues/nursing staff/ managers, union presidents running roughshod over their members, peers targeting peers, and on and on.  The list is endless.  Perhaps we have become a little bit less tolerant of such behavior and a bit more sophisticated in our response than when I first started my career but such behavior is still far too frequent for my liking.

What does this have to do with leadership?  Everything.  First, as leaders we have to be conscious of our own potential (or reality) for being the bully.  In our roles we yield great power and with great power comes great responsibility and accountability.  By the very nature of our roles we can intimidate and by using our positional authority - throwing our weight around - we can cow others into doing what we want them to do.  As leaders we can feel fully justified in doing so - we have been given the authority, we have earned the leadership role, we have been given a mandate, my staff don't/can't see the reality like I do, I have a professional designation (e.g., MBA, MD) that gives me even more credibility, and so on and so forth.  But is this roughshod approach real leadership?  It's not many subordinates who have the courage or temerity to hold fast in a point of view that is counter to what their boss is proposing.  Even less so if the track record for being contrary includes personal criticism, opinions being denigrated, being undermined on other projects or opportunities at a later date (i.e., payback), being overlooked for promotions or raises, or even being threatened with - or experiencing - job loss.  Even less so if the bullying behavior has proceeded with impunity before. 

If we are not the bullying leader we have a role in supporting and creating a culture that doesn't tolerate such behavior.  Leaving aside the moral obligation we have as leaders to prevent and eliminate bullying in the workplace, there are some very practical and self-serving reasons to deal with bullies.  The implications to individual and organizational performance are not to be underestimated.  Many authors and researchers approach this subject matter as a workplace health and safety issue.  As it should be.  And as with a variety of workplace health and safety issues the ripple effect of a bully's actions - especially if in a leadership role - equates to any or all of lower staff productivity and effectiveness, poor customer service, increased absenteeism, lower morale, poor team work, higher employee turnover, and very real (and costly) health issues. 

Morally and ethically we are also called to act as leaders and deal with bullying behavior.  Vested with our own positional and moral authority we are called to stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves and uphold the stated values of our organizations or professions.  I'm fairly confident that no organization on record nor any professional association has as one of its tenets a commitment to fostering a culture of bullying. 

All this being said we could still likely describe recent and ongoing examples of bullying in our organizations.  So what needs to happen to really make a change? As already noted, I'm not aware of any organization or professional association that promotes bullying or abuse or harassment in any form.  Quite the contrary.  So I don't believe that we need more written codes of conduct, regulations, policies, procedures or similar written statements on the matter.  What we need is more courage and action, not more paper.  We need to be leaders and carry through with the obligations we have signed on to.  We need to not dismiss bullying behavior as an aberration or one-time event.  We need to not condone such behavior because our boss, or peer, or subordinate or member of our staff "gets results".  And our response has to be far more than providing counseling to those experiencing workplace bullying, or shifting them to other duties, or giving them paid leave to recover.  Most of these types of actions really do nothing more than blame the victim - whether that is intended or not. 

Harken back to your days in elementary school.  Think about the kids being harassed and bullied today.  The options for response can seem limited.  Often a bully will threaten further - and harsher - retribution if the victim rats them out.  Amazingly enough the victim can experience more isolation from coming forward - they will appear weak and a whiner in the eyes of the rest of their peers.  If somehow the victim does find the courage to bring the issue to an authority figure there is no guarantee that the cycle of abuse will stop. 

From what I've seen in organizations, the behaviors we adopted in school to get through are the same ones that many use to get through similar situations at work - silence, tolerance, gritting of our teeth, turn the other cheek, just trying to make it through another day of work, hoping that we won't have to encounter that leader, that peer, that professional who seems to go out of their way to bully and intimidate.  If they do get the courage to stand up to the bully, the processes we use seem to further draw out the pain and the opportunity for further abuse and retribution.  The bully gets to continue their work, they may have more "behind closed doors" opportunities to threaten, they have polished responses that amount to "he said/she said", and they may even pull out their own claims to now being themselves abused/harassed by these allegations.  The victims often despair of having raised their voice.  Their experience seems to send them a message - don't speak up, lay low, the cost is too high.  And that message is brought home not only to them but to all staff.

As leaders we must be the ones to stand up to the bullies just as we may have once done in school - head on.  There must be zero tolerance for such unprofessional behaviors.  There must be the courage to take action on the code of conducts that we have all either helped create or signed on to.  Are such efforts easy or pleasant?  Decidedly not!  But that is what our role as leaders entails.  And I speak from experience - I have been threatened by and stood up to so-called leaders, to members of my own Board of Directors, and to abusive physicians.  In too many of those cases I often stood alone.  In many of those cases I too became a subject of abuse and harassment - late night calls at home, threats of legal action, public vilification, and in-your-face "discussions".  My role as leader called me to protect those who couldn't protect themselves, who often just wanted to come to work do a good job and to have the opportunity to enjoy that work. 

Leadership is hard work and it takes courage.  As a leader you set the tone by your every action (or inaction) each day.  Do you have the courage to stand up and call out the bully that is in your work unit, that is your professional colleague, that is your peer - that is your boss?  Or are you content to let someone else pay the price for your inaction?

______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Poise over Panic!

In my time as a manager/leader starting some twenty-five years ago, I've had the opportunity to work with and observe many leaders, managers and staff.  They have all helped me grow and develop my own leadership philosophy and style.  Sometimes I've learned great tools and techniques from them as they have navigated normal and not so normal situations.  But there have been just as many opportunities - and maybe more - where the lesson learned has been "I'll never do that!"

One of the areas of greatest learning has been in the experience of seeing how managers and leaders react to "adverse" events.  Those events have covered a spectrum of circumstances - poor (to deadly) service to clients, the out-of-the-blue call from a prominent political leader looking for action, a staff crisis, a building or equipment malfunction impacting service delivery, or media showing up without warning at your doorstep.  The set of circumstances is largely irrelevant for my blog other than in trying to convey that something bad has happened that needs to be addressed.  More importantly for me, is the range of leadership reactions these situations have engendered - which has been nothing short of extraordinary, educational and (in a perverse sort of way) highly entertaining.

For the intent of this blog and to highlight my point, I am going to focus on what I consider to be the negative side of these reactions.  In many cases, I write from direct experience or have otherwise observed the leadership response as it has unfolded.  Namely, a leadership reaction that actually becomes part of the crisis, or THE crisis, rather than a means of managing in and through it. 

All too often, and for too many in leadership positions, there is a tendency to lose one's head during a real or perceived crisis.  I emphasize perceived because I believe that in many situations leaders may overplay a set of circumstances and never step back for long enough to evaluate whether in fact there is a real crisis in need of management.  Up-front evaluation is an important first step.  Otherwise you are going to be expending a lot of unnecessary time and energy that probably could be put to better use. 

Beyond this initial evaluation, it appears that for some leaders running around, crying out that the proverbial sky is falling is somehow an effective way of ensuring that immediate, decisive and effective action is taken.  That's where I believe some leaders miss the point about what effective leadership is and should be about.  Too many react to a negative scenario by confusing immediate action or any action with effective action.  They seem to believe that only by providing an immediate response in a situation will they be perceived as being in control, responsible and competent.  The reality is often far different.  More often the sense they convey to staff and others around them is that they are in panic mode.  Rather than being a leader that manages the situation their reaction more often generates fear, stress and anxiety to everyone unfortunate to be caught up in the vortex of activity.

Aside from the mental distress that the leader is subjecting themselves and their team to, a "decisive" yet hasty reaction is just as likely (or more likely) to lead to the wrong decision as to the right one.  In most situations we rarely have 100% perfect information.  In crisis situations this is even more the case.  Therefore, crisis demands disciplined leadership, an ability to remain calm, and the strength to keep yourself and your team focused in order to solve the problem at hand.  In my experience, panic and performance excellence rarely go together.  A panicked reaction can often lead to more problems to solve.

A leader in crisis (versus a leader who manages through crisis) also creates a number of other negative impacts that may not be understood at the time or even later. First, in your haste to make a decision, you many not even be solving the right problem but merely papering over symptoms.  Second, by making a hasty decision you may inadvertently compromise your ability to achieve other more important objectives.  Third, rather than creating an effective and productive team you are more likely creating fear, reduced productivity, risk aversion and indecisiveness amongst your staff.  Ultimately, you are also doing damage to the perception of your leadership capacity - you are not creating an image of a confident and competent leader amongst your team, peers, superiors, or other stakeholders that can be looked to for strength in times of challenge.

So Keep Calm and Carry On!  I'm convinced that we don't see or experience as many crisis situations as we think we do.  Take the appropriate time to assess the situation.  And even when you do experience a true crisis, taking a deep breath before taking action is still a good tactic and a sign of confident, disciplined leader.  Your reaction will calm others, help them focus on doing the right things, and ensure understanding of all impacts of your actions.  I'm convinced that by taking a more measured and less panicked approach that you will make better decisions and the confidence in your leadership will be enhanced.

Leadership excellence means more poise and less panic. 







______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Make your best people quit!

A very simple post to write today - because I didn't write it! I have shared this article on my LinkedIn page recently but realize that many of you are not connected to me in that way and so much of what is said here reflects my thoughts and experience - and the intent in creating my blog - that I thought it was something worth sharing again. 

Enjoy...and reflect on how you or your organization falls into these traps...and maybe do something about it!

----------

Hiring Wisdom: Top 10 Ways to Guarantee Your Best People Will Quit

by Mel Kleiman on Apr 8, 2013    

Here are 10 ways to guarantee that your best people will quit:

10. Treat everyone equally. This may sound good, but your employees are not equal. Some are worth more because they produce more results. The key is not to treat them equally, it is to treat them all fairly.

9. Tolerate mediocrity. A-players don’t have to or want to play with a bunch of C-players.

8. Have dumb rules. I did not say have no rules, I said don’t have dumb rules. Great employees want to have guidelines and direction, but they don’t want to have rules that get in the way of doing their jobs or that conflict with the values the company says are important.

7. Don’t recognize outstanding performance and contributions. Remember Psychology 101 — Behavior you want repeated needs to be rewarded immediately.

6. Don’t have any fun at work. Where’s the written rule that says work has to be serious? If you find it, rip it to shreds and stomp on it because the notion that work cannot be fun is actually counterproductive. The workplace should be fun. Find ways to make work and/or the work environment more relaxed and fun and you will have happy employees who look forward to coming to work each day.

5. Don’t keep your people informed. You’ve got to communicate not only the good, but also the bad and the ugly. If you don’t tell them, the rumor mill will.

4. Micromanage. Tell them what you want done and how you want it done. Don’t tell them why it needs to be done and why their job is important. Don’t ask for their input on how it could be done better.

3. Don’t develop an employee retention strategy. Employee retention deserves your attention every day. Make a list of the people you don’t want to lose and, next to each name, write down what you are doing or will do to ensure that person stays engaged and on board.

2. Don’t do employee retention interviews. Wait until a great employee is walking out the door instead and conduct an exit interview to see what you could have done differently so they would not have gone out looking for another job.

1. Make your onboarding program an exercise in tedium. Employees are most impressionable during the first 60 days on the job. Every bit of information gathered during this time will either reinforce your new hire’s “buying decision” (to take the job) or lead to “Hire’s Remorse.”

The biggest cause of “Hire’s Remorse” is the dreaded Employee Orientation/Training Program. Most are poorly organized, inefficient, and boring. How can you expect excellence from your new hires if your orientation program is a sloppy amalgamation of tedious paperwork, boring policies and procedures, and hours of regulations and red tape?

To reinforce their buying decision, get key management involved on the first day and make sure your orientation delivers and reinforces these three messages repeatedly:

A. You were carefully chosen and we’re glad you’re here;

B. You’re now part of a great organization;

C. This is why your job is so important.

This was originally published in the April 2013 Humetrics Hiring Hints newsletter.

Mel Kleiman, CSP, is an internationally-known authority on recruiting, selecting, and hiring hourly employees. He has been the president of Humetrics since 1976 and has over 30 years of practical experience, research, consulting and professional speaking work to his credit. Contact him at mkleiman@humetrics.com.
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Organization structure...any design will do!

A pretty harsh title for something that typically has such major implications for organizations, its staff and ultimately the clients it serves.  The title reflects my jaded perspective on the restructuring that I have experienced, the quality of implementation, and the real outcomes achieved by restructuring - particularly those that have promised dramatically improved organizational performance as a result.

I'll qualify my cynicism.  I'm not suggesting that any organization structure is perfect or should be held sacred and unchangeable.  Organizations should critically evaluate how they are structured and how they need to be structured to best respond to their reality and anticipated changes in their environment.  There are a number of circumstances in which restructuring may be a reasonable and rational response including diminishing revenues and profitability, loss or change in markets that a firm traditionally serviced, lack of clear chain of command or accountability for results, lack of integration or coordination between business functions or units, or changes in technology or other means by which the business accomplishes its goals.  The need for restructuring can also be reactive or proactive - driven by an externally imposed reality or undertaken in anticipation of or in support of new desired directions. 

The challenge for leaders in contemplating and implementing a change in organization design and reporting structures is that there are too many scenarios in which it is undertaken for the wrong reasons, in anticipation that it will solve all the organization's current and anticipated problems, and in too many circumstances is not aligned with other organizational systems or requirements.  Too often it is viewed as an "easy" solution, as a symbolic commitment to change (i.e., "We'll show them we mean business!"), and as ready substitute for the real and hard work of moving an organization forward.

So what's my prescription for organization redesign?  First off, be very clear about why restructuring is being undertaken.  When there are multiple or frequent changes in structure - too often coincident with changes in senior leadership - the organization rapidly loses (or continues to lose) credibility around the need for change.  In addition, it loses momentum on achieving key elements of its mandate and certainly starts to lose the commitment and engagement of its staff and management.  If an organization undertakes frequent or constant restructuring the image conveyed and the feeling created is that leadership is lacking commitment to any long-range plan, goals or objectives - "let's just wait this one out; they'll be back with another version in a few weeks/months..."  Worse yet, many begin to wonder whether senior leadership even has the requisite skill to lead if they are constantly changing structure! 

Second, organizations need to do a far better job of connecting redesign efforts to an overall plan for the business.  Organization restructuring efforts - no matter how well designed - are disruptive.  Internal communications and partnerships are changed, systems that people worked with are impacted, and corporate memory (in form of displaced staff) is often lost.  This disruption should be clearly justifiable on the basis of how it helps moves the organization forward and helps it achieve its stated strategic objectives.  If a senior leader or senior leadership team has only a vague notion of what can measurably be achieved from restructuring they are doing a grave disservice to the organization, its people, and ultimately its customers.  There should be an ability to target and communicate specific expectations in terms of improvement - profitability, effectiveness, safety - to be achieved in the transition to a new structure.  If you don't have that, go back to the drawing board and get clarity.  You will need that clarity to get others in the organization on board in a meaningful way.

I've also seen and experienced too many examples of restructuring that are about trying to deal with individuals - when leaders lack the courage or acumen to manage performance or stick to their overarching strategy.  This can manifest itself in a couple of different ways.  One scenario revolves around two or more challenging personalities, people who can't work effectively together, with negative impacts all around.  Rather than deal with this as a personnel issue requiring leadership intervention, clarity of expectations, and other performance management intervention, restructuring can present itself as a simple solution.  Restructure so that those in conflict have less to do with each other.  Problem solved!  A seemingly expeditious way out, but one that can have significant repercussions for everyone around the conflict solution.  Restructuring efforts can also driven by a desire to hold on to an up and comer in an organization - if there is not more responsibility, more recognition, more opportunity, bigger title, more money provided to an individual we may lose them to another opportunity.  So in an effort to keep that individual, an organization rejigs responsibilities that may or may not align with achievement of long-term strategic directions.  Ultimately, once the key individual moves on to the next role, the role they vacate is actually not doable by, nor maybe desirable to, anyone else.  Neither circumstance cited justifies organization restructuring.  Redesign just papers over real and unsolved issues.

Ultimately, if you are going to move forward with a new structure it needs to be planned out as if it were a major strategic initiative - because it is!  It is an effort that requires significant and engaged commitment of leadership, a commitment of communication and change management resources, and otherwise needs effective project management resources to ensure successful implementation.  Failure to make this kind of effort through the redesign - from conception, through initial implementation, through to evaluation of impact - will ensure that all of the positive gains touted will not be achieved, and that more than a few negative results may be obtained in lieu!
Recognize the human impact of the change you are undertaking as well.  The analogy of "Band-Aid off - fast or slow", comes to mind.  Many have their personal preference for pain tolerance but in the case of restructuring my advice is to move with more speed than less.  The restructuring effort is going to create uncertainty for everyone - even those seemingly unaffected by proposed changes.  And in any organization, despite the best efforts at communication, the grapevine will be moving faster than official channels and there will be as many rumours as there is fact about restructuring.  During this time of change an organization runs the risk of losing some of its best people.  They have options to move to other organizations, other careers, and other opportunities.  Don't inadvertently give them the incentive to make the change.

Finally, if it wasn't already made clear above, no organization design represents the perfect solution for any organization.  Your current structure has its problems.  A new structure you are contemplating may solve those problems but it will introduce others.  Ultimately my belief is that structure is one of several levers that is required and must be in sync to ensure an organization's success.  In this case, form must follow function and must be attuned to a well articulated mission, vision and values.  It's up to Leadership to coordinate, integrate and manage all of these components.  It's complex and demanding work.  There is no simple solution on the road to success. 

But if you looking for simple solutions and just trying to "shake things up" then any organization design will do...
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Lead through Innovation and Creativity!

Alberta's public sector is again being challenged to tighten its collective belt for fiscal year 2013/14 - and into the foreseeable future.  Funding increases for some departments are being reduced from former commitments while others are experiencing outright funding reductions.  Salary negotiations in the public sector are taking the expected turn as well - wage freezes and tough negotiations.

I'm leaving aside any comment or perspective on whether Alberta has an expenditure problem or a revenue problem.  Regardless of where I weigh in on that debate it won't have any bearing on the situation facing Alberta's public sector.  The reality is that there will be funding challenges to deal with while at the same time achieving what's expected given a continuous boisterous economy and population growth.  And growing expectations of performance!  Some of the responses that have been considered under similar circumstances in the past have included service reductions, program elimination, fee increases (e.g., tuition fees, parking rates) and other generalized cost-cutting measures (e.g., eliminate or reduce travel and professional development).  These same approaches will likely surface this time around too. 

There is more debate this time around about core directions for some institutions - What type of programs really should be offered on a go-forward basis?  Are all programs offered really part of our core direction/purpose?  Do we need a new facility in this location?  Will this facility serve another few years longer versus being replaced?  Can we fulfill our mandate without a particular program or a particular facility? We are even seeing discussions within the education sector that would be akin to merger/acquisition talks within the private sector.  The promise of the latter approach is to reduce duplication of services and associated expenses.  We definitely need to have these discussions and make our system reflect what service requirements are today and into the future.  We should also be prepared to evaluate whether some of our service delivery options are meeting pure health and education requirements or might be too focused on other economic and political goals.

What I haven't heard much about yet is whether truly innovative and creative solutions are being looked at to meet this funding/service challenge into the future.  It's not like we haven't seen this movie before.  And I can't see pure cost-cutting as a sustainable long-term strategy.  So how do we make our services more sustainable - and better! - into the future?  What can we learn - and adapt - from other businesses to promote innovation in service delivery and creativity in meeting the challenge?  How can we lead and succeed with innovation and creativity?

Fundamentally, I believe we need a change in our public sector culture.  And by this I do not mean that we must demand more from our public sector employees in terms of hours worked or benefits foregone.  We have to overcome the myth of public sector employees as unmotivated and entitled individuals who could not cut it in the "real world".  That approach will not get the commitment we need to make necessary changes to service provision.  More likely, that approach will get us more of the continuing conflict and dysfunction we already observe in our labour negotiations.  As challenging as it will be, we will have to do more work on developing true respectful partnerships within our public sector.

Success will also mean doing a 180 degree turn on some of our traditional leadership and management practices.  I'm sure most of us have heard from public sector staff and managers the frustration of having to jump through innumerable hoops and navigate countless barriers to fulfill duties of their jobs - much less have time or energy left over to be innovative.  As pressure to manage budgets and perform to expectations has increased over time, the reaction of "the system" has been to put more and more processes in place to somehow enforce performance and manage risk.  This emphasis on process is further compounded by some who confuse micromanagement with accountability and responsibility - and leadership.  Neither additional process or oversight will allow our public sector to implement required changes in a timely and effective fashion.  Instead what is required is more inspiring leadership, leadership vision that is focused more on "what" then "how", and a system that starts to re-establish trust in the ability of its people to perform.

To foster the innovation and creativity we require, there is the need to provide the space and time to be innovative and creative.  Staff and managers have been running full out - responding to the latest directives, the need for more reports, the need to justify positions and expenditures, the need to respond to a host of expectations and so on.  There are not enough hours in the day and they generally feel that success is surviving the shift, the day, or the week.  Their collective heads are down, nose to the grindstone, trying to meet expectations.  Do they feel they have made progress?  Do they feel they have made a difference?  Do they feel fulfilled?  The answers are generally no.  Simply telling people to "work smarter" without actually giving them permission to disengage from their regular tasks, duties and expectations merely generates more frustration.  It may seem counter intuitive given the pressures the public sector is under right now, but there is a necessity to create some real breathing space to fully engage our skilled and dedicated professionals in meeting long-standing challenges.  As Einstein said (and I may paraphrase) - "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

A challenge to leadership in the current circumstances is continuing to be courageous enough to take on the status quo.  This relates to previous points on developing a compelling vision for the future, focusing on outcomes (the "what"), empowering people to achieve (the "how"), and just as importantly - especially in this time frame - sacrifice more than a few sacred cows.  There is a need more than ever to reframe our conversations and redefine how our work is getting done (and even what our work should be!).  There is no doubt that powerful forces within our institutions or amongst various stakeholders will resist such change - after all, they have done well under the current setup.  There has to be more courage and willingness on the part of all leaders at all levels of our organizations to truly commit to an inspiring vision and stay the course. 

Leaders will also have to foster and support change agents throughout our public sector.  They will have to ask themselves, "Who really is equipped and ready to lead the change we need to make to be successful in achieving our vision?"  They will not only have to take steps to identify those current and future leaders, but they will also have to make very real efforts to ensure these change agents are not just the first over the hill to get the spear.  There are those prepared to step up at all levels of the organizations to make real change but they face many up-hill battles right now.  Leaders must display the courage to really support a strong vision for the future and support their change agents to overcome inertia and the forces supporting the status quo. 

Finally, there must be the patience to develop a culture of creativity and innovation - and trust.  Culture doesn't change or evolve overnight.  People won't simply become creative or innovative or calculated risk takers overnight.  Too many of these potential change agents have been burned before when they have stepped out into the spotlight.  Developing creative and innovative solutions - and a culture that supports culture and innovation - takes concerted effort and many small steps.  If there is belief that real change is necessary all organizational efforts and systems must be aligned to creating a belief and a culture that will support and sustain that change.  The "Big Bang Theory" of change that we have seen play out too often may seem appealing and demonstrative of a commitment to action but it has limited and questionable affect in my opinion.


Let's fuel passion.  Let's celebrate (not punish) new ideas.  Let's foster autonomy.  Let's be courageous.  Let's experiment.  Let's take (many) small steps. 

Let's lead with creativity and innovation!

______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Good Leadership requires Good Governance

I'm not sure how many of us appreciate the role that Boards of Directors play in setting direction for large organizations and helping it achieve those objectives.  In most circumstances public and media focus falls on a leader - a President, a CEO or other top executive.  Ultimately, however, a well functioning Board is fundamental to the success of an organization through their decisions - not the least of which is their selection of the senior operational leader.  The quality of their decision making and their commitment to their governance task can have wide-ranging impact.

I have worked with a variety of boards in my 25 year career.  I have worked with good boards and not so good boards.  I have seen them lose their way in a variety of circumstances including being burdened with an ineffective Chair, a disruptive board member, uncommitted board members, boards that get too involved in operations, and boards that simply perform a rubber stamp role for what senior leadership wants to get done.  Ineffective governance can severely compromise and inhibit the ability of an organization to succeed and fulfill its mandate.

Sometimes it's the case that boards don't even understand what their key responsibilities are.  This lack of understanding or confusion can often arise from the process by which a person is recruited to the board or the quality of the orientation they receive upon becoming a member.  Too often board members can be selected on criteria that may have nothing to do with kinds of skills that a board requires to fulfill its functions - they are part of the same personal network as existing board members, they are prominent community members, they are politically connected, they are major donors, and so on and so forth.  None of these factors necessarily make for a good board member.  A poor selection process can then be compounded by inadequate orientation to the role of the board.  In that circumstance, an individual board member has to either rely on the skills they bring to the table from their life outside of the board room, the examples set by their fellow board members (for good or bad), or they may be left to take what orientation or guidance they might get from senior leadership of the organization.  Not the ideal recipe for success.

So what's the starting point for good governance?  The first task is clearly understanding what the roles of the board are.  First and foremost a board needs to focus on setting direction - making clear choices on an organization's vision, mission and strategic directions.  Failure to fully engage in this first set of major responsibilities means that an organization can easily drift from its fundamental purposes.  And as "environmental" circumstances change so too does the organization move from objective to objective, without any clear plan and with major implications for public confidence and deterioating staff morale.  Moreover, if there is no consensus amongst the Board as to vision, mission and strategic directions how can senior operational leadership be effectively guided or held accountable for performance? 

Second, a board is required to exercise oversight on organizational performance.  It is important here to distinguish oversight for organizational performance from managing the organization.  Neither the board as a whole nor individual board members (including the Chair) should get involved in managing their organization.  The temptation to direct operations is intense, especially for those board members who lead and manage significant entities outside of the organization for which they are a board member. The board needs to remember that they have engaged operational leaders - the CEO in particular - to manage operational matters.  Ostensibly, they have utilized a robust process for recruitment and selection, have followed up with appropriate performance reviews and feedback, and have trust in the CEO and other management personnel to achieve the Board-established strategic directions.  If the Board lacks such confidence then it has erred in selection, has erred in communicating expectations, or perhaps has not been engaged in managing performance at all.  Ultimately, if that confidence erodes the choice of the Board is to more clearly communicate its expectations or remove the CEO.  The choices available to the Board does not include becoming more engaged in operational decision-making.

That being said, a Board MUST exercise appropriate oversight.  It must be clear on its expectations and establish robust and objective mechanisms by which to evaluate CEO performance on achievement of the organization's vision and strategic directions.  Moreover, a Board would do well to evaluate not only outcomes but also evaluate - at a high level - how those outcomes were achieved.  The Board has a key role in ensuring that the values of the organization are fostered and upheld.  Every effort should be made to ensure that objective, quantifiable reports on performance are made available to the Board on a regular basis.  In this regard, the Board should avail itself of a variety of forms of feedback to evaluate performance and success in achieving objectives. 

Finally, a Board manages its direction setting accountability, its oversight responsibility, and its own functions by establishing policy.  These policies must clearly distinguish Board function from management function.  Just as important, they must describe and detail how the Board itself shall function - role of Chair and other officers of the Board, how decisions will be made, what committee structures if any will be utilized, and so forth. 

As can be imagined, it is easy for Boards to become involved in non-Board activities and tasks.  Board members can easily neglect the very real work that is required to ensure proper Board functioning.   If this high-level, strategic work is not done or is done poorly, there will be little or no foundation for success for the organization as a whole. 

Boards have very real responsibilities.  The tasks they are engaged in cannot be minimized or trivialized.  We have seen too many organizational failures in recent years which can be traced back to governance failures.  Complacency about board performance is not an option.  However, effective governance does not mean becoming more engaged in operational leadership.  Nor is it to establish ever more controls and bureaucracy.  Boards need to do very real work in understanding their roles and responsibilities, establish proper structures to do their work, recruit and retain good members, and set the tone for the values and ethics that will guide the organization.

To achieve operational excellence there must be a foundation of governance excellence.  Good leadership requires good governance.
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

A Passion for Leadership

After my last blog entry on Appreciative Inquiry a colleague of mine e-mailed and posed some interesting questions.  She asked, "What compels you to write about leadership?" and "Is there something in your experience that drives you to do this?"  So bear with me as I engage in perhaps a bit of self-indulgent, public self-reflection on my passion for leadership.

The questions were great questions.  Coincidentally, they came only a day after I was also engaged in a lengthy conversation with a seasoned executive coach who posed similar questions within the context of my expanding executive coaching practice.  Her questions were similar in that they called me to further articulate a personal vision for myself and to describe my coaching and consulting practice a year further into the future.  The conversations and the answers seemed to tie very nicely together even though they took place a day apart and were inspired by different motivations.

The word "compelled" seems very appropriate in this context for me.  Some of the words used to define compelled include force, drive, duty, necessitate, and irresistible.  To me it also conveys a feeling of lack of choice.  I have NO CHOICE but to be passionate about leadership, leadership development, and executive coaching (and being coached) to reach new levels of capability and excellence.  I have always been driven to make a difference and to strive to support achievement of goals beyond myself.  I have recently begun to use a military term to describe the impact I want to continue to have as a leader and executive coach - I want to be a FORCE MULTIPLIER!  I want to be that force or capability that "...when added to and employed by a ... force [or by individual managers and leaders] significantly increases the ...potential of that force and thus enhances the probability of successful mission accomplishment."  As one individual I can have impact.  As an individual who can foster, support, engage, reveal, prod, or otherwise develop the skills and abilities of others I can have an impact out of all proportion to any individual effort. 

Individual leaders have a ripple effect on everything and everyone around them.  They set the tone and establish (consciously or unconsciously) performance expectations within and even beyond their sphere of influence.   Unfortunately the ripple effect is just as noticeable when there is poor leadership as when there is good leadership.  We have only to consider recent events in various aspects of our lives - politics, business sector, financial services, public sector - to appreciate that.  We readily see and experience the negative impact of poor or even malicious leadership.  Poor leadership and efforts to fight it are even "celebrated" in our popular culture (e.g., "Horrible Bosses").  Scott Adams captures this spirit most eloquently with Dilbert and his cronies on nearly a daily basis.  At the least we are frustrated with the results.  At worse we feel bullied, intimidated, demoralized and devalued in these circumstances. 

So I want to do good.  I want to do better.  For at least the past dozen years as I have had the opportunity to lead large portfolios I have always been excited and energized by the prospect of helping my staff succeed in their personal endeavours and advancing in their careers.  I want to continue to be, and become even more of, a Force Multiplier.  I believe I can do that within the context of my consulting practice, my executive coaching and even through this blog.  Imagine the impact of successfully helping leaders develop their capabilities and as they do so to become Force Multipliers for their staff!  Imagine that they can get and then deliver the support, energy and sustenance necessary to discover and grow their leadership to the future benefit of their organizations, their professions, their staff and ultimately their clients. 

Take up your own challenge and opportunity.  Become more of a Force Multiplier (for good).

It is about Leadership!
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Time for some appreciative inquiry...

In the past couple of weeks I have begun learning - or re-learning - what Appreciative Inquiry is.  I say re-learning as I was exposed to the concept in the area of community development in the mid-1990s and probably before that in the area of child and adolescent psychology.  Since then I've been applying the concepts (unconsciously??) in the areas of performance management and employee development in my leadership roles.

Perhaps this subject matter is old knowledge for many of you.  In my current educational pursuits it came as something of a revelation to me and a reminder of my previous experiences.  I may not have labelled my past work within the context of appreciative inquiry but clearly that's the framework in which my previous experience fit. 

So what is Appreciative Inquiry?  AI is an approach that "...deliberately asks positive questions around affirmative topics to ignite constructive dialogue and inspired action within organizations and communities." (Bliss Browne, Imagine Chicago, 2008).  This approach stands in sharp contrast to how we typically approach organizational challenges.  For the most part we have all been raised and educated in a system - particularly in a business environment - that asks us to identify problems or gaps in performance, analyze or seek out root causes, evaluate possible solutions and implement action plans.  While we may achieve success, our approach can lead to feelings of inadequacy, threat, defensiveness and conflict on the journey towards a solution.  In contrast, AI works from an underlying premise that our organizations and our people are possessed of very many assets, capabilities, resources and strengths that can be discovered, affirmed, encouraged and utilized. 

As I have come to see it over the past couple of weeks, AI fits very well with a number of topics I have already addressed in this blog over the past number of months - employee engagement, servant leadership, performance management, reward and recognition, and inspiring and shared vision.  AI requires a decidedly different style of leadership and a different approach to problem solving than what we may have become accustomed to.

So why my focus on AI at this time?  In some respects my focus comes from the coincidence of my current learning on the subject and the recent (ongoing) negative publicity for Alberta's health care system.  Many of the same themes we saw play out in 2012 have continued on into the current year.  Not only do I have the opportunity to see politicians and media making hay with "all things wrong with our healthcare system" I also get the opportunity to see many of my friends on Facebook or other forums comment about the latest news on health or on their own less than stellar experience with a doctor, an emergency room visit, or a hospital stay.  For someone who has spent the last 25 years or so of their life in the health system its more than a bit demoralizing.  I can only imagine how tough it is on the those who have to work in the system every day.

To recap, in the past couple of months the news headlines of the day have included continuing investigation into queue-jumping in various parts of the system, the ongoing battle between the government and the Alberta Medical Association on contract negotiations, Alberta's looming multi-billion dollar budget deficit which is leading to belt-tightening in all government ministries, and more than a few other stories or letters to the editor about bad patient care outcomes.

Some politicians, some in the media and others have weighed in with gusto on all or part of these stories to paint a picture of a health system not performing anywhere near what is required or expected.  Not unexpectedly, those with an axe to grind or positions to advance have been doing their level best to make as much of these problems as possible.  I contend that they are distorting and expanding on the data out of proportion to reality - and not showing true leadership.  Case in point has been the focus on $100 million in Alberta Health Services expenses that were the subject of a recently completed Auditor General's report.  Some would have you believe that the entirety of the $100 million is wasted or the result of abuse by management and staff.  Moreover, I have seen advertisements that then equate these expenses to what could be obtained in additional staff, new equipment or more surgical procedures if only these dollars were more appropriately used and people held more accountable. 

The reality of the situation is quite different in my estimation.  According to the Auditor General's report, the $100 million in expenses covers off a wide range of expenditures by 26,000 different people of which less than 1% is attributable to claims by AHS Board Members and Senior Executive - the top dogs that most people like to go after.  What many fail to realize that captured in the $100 million figure are expenses for such things as travel by front-line staff to perform their patient care duties, expenses for managers to bring their staff together and perhaps provide them a cup of coffee (e.g., "executive hospitality), and transportation costs for patients - all very necessary expenses in a health care organization with a provincial scope.  Much was also made of gift shops buying hockey tickets or other items for resale.  From my own personal experience I know that these efforts are directed at fundraising for various health facilities or program improvements - they are not done for any personal benefit.

Does our health system have challenges and issues to overcome?  Most definitely.  And if there are clear and singular abuses of power, responsibility and power deal with those in a fair and expeditious manner.  However, my concern is that by continuously focusing on all that we think is wrong we will actually lose real opportunity to build off all that is right in our system and to create an environment that promotes creativity, innovation, efficiency and quality.  Appreciative Inquiry holds out far greater promise in my estimation for building a strong foundation for the future strength and effectiveness of our health system than does this supposed "accountability" paradigm we find ourselves in currently.  AI holds out the promise of being far more proactive and creative than the current approach of some loud voices.  Imagine the strength of looking within our health system for examples of success and how those could be replicated for the benefit of the entire province!

If you are looking for an example of this that hits closer to home for you imagine if you approached your spouse, child or other loved one in the same way we are focused on our health care system.  I'm sure there are habits, behaviours or performances that you identify as being less than optimal.  I'm guessing that your relationship would not long survive a constant process of "problem-solving" with them.  I suspect that if you focused on their deficits you would succeed in creating feelings of threat, defensiveness and demotivation.  I don't see the reality of our current health care system much differently. 

Appreciative Inquiry is probably not going to be easy to adopt or make widespread in the current environment.  But with some courage and leadership I believe it is a better way to move forward and build public confidence in our health care system. 
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Grieving is a part of Leadership

I tend to think that the image of the STRONG LEADER, one who rarely or ever shows emotion, is still the standard most of us think of or aspire to (even unconsciously) in today's world.  Our society still seems to expect our leaders to be strong regardless of adversity or setbacks or changes - and perhaps to be even stronger than normal during those times.  But is that image a desirable state to strive for and emulate?  Is it even a correct assessment of reality?  Is it good for us as leaders?

In talking about grieving as a leader I'm not thinking of death and dying in the literal sense.  In this blog I've previously talked about leading through tragedy and since that entry we have had another example in the form of Newtown.  My focus is rather on the losses we experience in leadership that take on other forms - the failure of an initiative we have invested in and led, the loss of a team member or colleague to another portfolio or organization, a failure in gaining a promotion, a change in our leadership role or status (either voluntary or involuntary).  Regardless of the circumstances in question, as leaders we have experienced loss.  If we were truly committed to the success of a particular initiative or role, or if we have come to heavily rely on a peer or colleague who moves on, and whether we recognize it or not, we have grieved that loss.

I've certainly been in these types of situations.  I can recall vividly the challenge of making a voluntary change in my career and the impact that leaving "my team" had on me at the time.  Even though my time as leader was relatively short - just under three years - we had gone through some real forming, storming, norming and performing.  We were an extraordinarily young management team (average age in the early 30's) who had faced up to some pretty significant challenges - budget cuts, facility closures, divided Board of Directors.  We had a fantastic dynamic about us and the courage (or foolishness) to never say no and never say die.  We accomplished great things and were held up as a model for others to emulate.  When I made the choice to leave it was one of the most difficult career choices I had made up to that point in time and I cried as I told my team of my decision to leave.  I grieved the loss of my team immediately.  My grief was subsequently made worse when my employer chose not to hire a successor from within the organization, one that I thought would have continued to build the culture of energy, innovation and creativity we had established.  Soon thereafter the rest of the team began to disperse to other opportunities.  Something extraordinary had been lost.

I've also experienced loss in circumstances that were not entirely of my choosing.  Those scenarios are perhaps even more challenging than the one I have just described.  I'd made significant emotional investments in the organization, a role, a way of being and then it was no longer part of my day-to-day reality.  And if you are like most leaders I have known and worked with you'll know that my role was not a simple 9 to 5 position, 5 days a week - when we commit we REALLY commit!  Even the knowledge that change was coming didn't necessarily soften the impact when it came.  At the time - and with my direct reports - I certainly managed or masked my sadness well.  And there certainly was a lot of stress leading up to the moment of decision.  It was really only almost a year after the fact that it hit home with me how much I had been grieving the loss of the role, my team and what we had created over a great many years.

It wasn't until I was going through recent educational upgrading that I came to understand the depth of the grieving I had been going through over a great number of months.  The understanding came through a series of self-administered questions and work with a small group of peers.  The questions and discussions were fine enough until the conversation turned to issues of closure, and acknowledgement, and unfinished business.  Some simple questions and some conversations made me realize where I was in my journey.  More importantly, they started to give me some awareness of how the past and perhaps the lack of truly dealing with my grief was holding me back in moving forward in another chapter of my leadership.  While I had certainly put my head down and got busy in "new work" I had clearly not accepted the change to the extent required, nor had I achieved closure.  It was quite the amazing discovery for someone who had prided themselves on being the strong leader and one who has always been adept at keeping his nose to the grindstone - keep calm and carry on!

So maybe this is a lesson that you've already learned.  Maybe I'm not telling you something you don't already know from the ups and downs of your career.  But then again maybe you haven't been doing enough of your own internal assessment and workup after your losses.  So my recommendation to you through times of change and loss is to be conscious of what you may have lost, take the appropriate time to recognize that loss, use your personal network and colleagues as sounding board, and take value from the work you have done.  Your leadership will be strengthened as a result.

For myself, I don't expect to fully accept or like all the changes I've gone through, to not carry some scars for having lost something valuable.  However, it is clear that all these events and how I have been able to learn from them have made me the leader I am and will help shape me as the leader I continue to aspire to be. 
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Your leadership can be inspired by others

Just over two weeks ago my family and I did something goofy.  Over a period of two days we experienced the Walt Disney World Marathon weekend in Orlando.  Our soon to be 3 year old daughter competed in the 100 metre dash, our 12 year old daughter competed in the Mickey Mile, and my wife and I completed the Goofy Challenge - a half marathon on Saturday followed by a full marathon on Sunday.  What does any of this have to do with leadership?  Well perhaps it is a bit of a stretch, but I saw more than a little similarity between how my three girls raced and how we as leaders can be energized by those around us. 

Right off the top I have to say the performance of my three girls inspired me!  Each of them overcame their own personal challenges to finish their races.  My wife completed the two day athletic event while 18 weeks pregnant.  My 12 year old overcame her self doubts and disability to finish in a personal best time.  My youngest completed her race while still dancing to the beat of her own drummer.  Like myself, none of them won their race or finished on the podium.  However, they demonstrated tremendous character, spirit and a love of simply being in the day that reminded me of how I need to view my athletic pursuits - be glad for the ability to run (or bike or swim), to learn about myself, and to continuously improve. 



As leaders in small or large organizations we are often expected to be THE source of inspiration and direction for the rest of our staff.  That's what everyone expects of us and it is what we expect of ourselves.  Most dedicated and committed leaders have this need to be "on" all the time, establishing the strategic directions for the organization, planning initiatives to realize the directions, and motivating others to achieve the ends the organization has set.  Frequently, however, our staff can serve to inspire or reinvigorate our leadership.  As leaders we can often get caught up in grand strategies or crisis management.  We can be pulled in many directions.  We can easily lose sight of the real reason we are "in the race".  The distance between our management offices and the frontline can often make it harder to focus on making the experience of our clients the best that it possibly can be.  Yet each day many of our staff are making their very best efforts towards this very end despite the challenges they face.  Like my girls competing in their races, our staff don't have the luxury of dictating the ideal terms under which they will do their jobs.  They come to work anyway.  And the very best of our staff "compete" to the best of their ability and "cross the finish line" with a smile on their face.  They have kept their promise to their clients and to their profession to do the best they can on that day - and they will be back tomorrow for the next race.

I'm sure that most people are familiar with the concept of Management by Walking Around.  The concept is usually associated with making sure leadership is visible, informed, and can otherwise serve to motivate staff and keep everyone on track.  The leader is watching.  However, there is even more value from the MBWA exercise - keeping the leader in touch with the core work of the organization.  In the field of health care this can be critically important when considering the impact of major decisions on frontline staff and services.  Just as important, it can be challenging to keep a leader's energy at peak level with the challenges facing health care these days.  An opportunity to connect with the frontline can provide a regular boost of energy and inspiration to keep a leader motivated.  There are many inspiring people in our organizations who can continue to show us why we choose health care as our calling.  It's an opportunity too great to be missed.

Take the time to be inspired by those around you. 
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.

Leadership Development Programs - Growing Your Own Leaders!

As noted in previous blog entries, leadership talent and the ability to attract and retain that talent has never been more important than in today's environment.  The world we live in has probably never been more challenging with increasing public expectations for performance and accountability in private and public sectors, shortages of personnel coupled with impending retirements of the baby boom generation, and change that moves forward as quickly as new technological innovations can be introduced to the market.  So leadership has never been more critical.  One step that organizations have taken in response is the development and/or utilization of various forms of leadership development programs.  Some have made extensive use of external resources in this regard, while others have decided to develop such programming in-house.  Regardless of which direction an organization takes there are some key decisions to be made and some important elements to implement if you are going to achieve the full benefits of such an investment.

When organizations first conceive of implementing a leadership development program there may be a tendency to start a few levels down in the process and think of what types of courses or modules they should offer to their leaders and potential leaders.  But in my estimation, a critical first step is a review, update and connection of the organization's Mission, Vision and Values to its required/ desired leadership development program.  This can be supported by external resources/facilitation but still requires time and energy of the senior level executive team.  What the organization stands for, where it is heading, and how it will get there are all vitally important considerations in understanding what type of leadership skills will be required to sustain and build the organization into the future.

Once there is an intimate understanding of desired leadership requirements - skills, competencies, talents, abilities - these then must be translated into a range of human resource practices.  Leadership development is not simply about having the human resource or organizational development departments set up or contract for the provision of a few training modules.  To really achieve traction in leadership development effort is required to align all efforts to building, cultivating and reinforcing the required leadership skills and abilities.  At a minimum, the effort must encompass a number of key organizational functions.  At the very outset, Recruitment and Selection begins to set the tone and expectation for new leaders (whether recruited from within or outside of the organization).  It is at this point that the organization makes one of its most fundamental decisions - will it recruit based on their required leadership competencies and values or might it simply fill the position because there is too much pressure to fill a vacancy?  Will it promote from within on the basis of performance related to the stated leadership competencies or perhaps on something as simple as years of service?  The Recruitment and Selection process sends a strong message about organizational commitment to it's stated leadership values and culture.

Similarly the process of acculturation and reinforcement should be further developed and emphasized during Leadership Orientation or Onboarding.  This is where the organization can further reinforce in very tangible terms and language what it's Mission, Vision and Values are.  This is also where I believe there is a strong role for existing leadership of the organization to play a part in being role models for new and rising leaders.  Think of the enhanced power that would come from a senior leader in articulating the organization's mission, vision and values to a new batch of leaders. 

Leadership Development must also extend into other key areas of organizational function like Performance Management/Development, Reward and Recognition initiatives, and Succession Planning.  Each one of these elements or initiatives further reinforces the leadership behaviours that the organization says it values.  Performance Management/Development evaluates performance against the organization's leadership criteria and then provides opportunity as required to further develop skills as required.  This may lead to rewards or recognition that further reinforce desired behaviours.  And promotion or future opportunity should again be based on ability to demonstrate and perform to stated leadership competencies.

Specific leadership development opportunities may be driven by organization-wide requirements or may become quite individually focused as identified through the performance management process.  The range of such training efforts is virtually limitless and should be determined on the basis of the organization's goals and objectives - change management, financial planning, process improvement methodologies, communication skills, conflict management, team building, time management.  Many of these can either be developed in-house or contracted out for delivery.  Regardless of means of delivery the content should again consistently reinforce the organization's unique leadership requirements. 

One of the final considerations in any leadership development program is the need for personal investment on the part of the individual leader.  This should be undertaken in a variety of ways - opportunity to apply new or developing skills outside of the classroom setting; opportunity for self-reflection and assessment; and, coaching/mentoring resources.  To be as successful as possible all learning and development theory and information must be accompanied by the opportunity to practice - and even make mistakes - in the real world.  This real world learning is even more valuable if supported by a coach or mentor.  The choice of coach/mentor again becomes critical - they must be well aware of the organization's expectations and the leadership philosophy. 

Leadership development is a crucial investment in the success of the organization and it must be treated as an investment - not an expense.  It requires at least as much deliberation, consideration, and energy as any other major expenditure or decision.  The ripple effects from leadership - good or bad - cannot be underestimated.
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
TEC Canada Chair/Executive Coach/Senior Consultant
hadubiak@wmc.ca

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.