Keywords

Introduction and Overview

  • There are people who believe that with the passing away of Nelson Mandela on December 2013, the last great leader left our world. Whenever we ask people to tell us, when we show them about 80 pictures of generally well-known people, whom they consider to be great leaders, the names of Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela are most likely to come up. So, let us call them the “BIG FOUR.” Why are these four individuals perceived by many as great leaders? Trying to categorize the answers to this question within the four dimensions (www.innergie.nl) of professional behavior (i.e., knowledge, skills, core qualities, and motivation), it shows that most of the answers fit into the categories “core qualities” (being) and “skills” (doing). It seems that what matters most to people in their judgment of somebody to be a great leader is what kind of a person he or she is and what he or she actually did do. Apparently those “big four” showed us that (personal) values like justice, sacrifice, and forgiveness are highly appreciated and admired. And furthermore, they took responsibility; they walked the talk, and they made some pretty uneasy choices. Doing so, they influenced millions of other people. Furthermore, they showed us that one person can make a difference. That one person could be you or me. But let us be realistic. We will not all become a Gandhi, a King, a Mandela, or a Mother Teresa. We have to be grateful for the examples they gave us, and some of us might even try to follow in their footsteps in our own environment. But it proves to be hard to live up to the high standard they set, and a lot of lip service is given to their ideals. Their examples are also often used in leadership and other training courses. What can we learn from those examples? What can we learn from other leadership present in the world? Is it possible to learn how to become a leader?

  • Looking at the numerous offers for one day, two days, one week, two weeks, and so on leadership seminars, courses, and training sessions, the question seems to deserve an affirmative answer. Thousands of teachers, trainers, and preachers earn a living by creating future leaders. Yet at the same time many sources notice a lack of real leadership in the world. Apparently we do have to make a distinction between self-styled or would-be leadership and real leadership.

  • If talent would be of great importance in leadership, we probably already long time ago would have established a system of leadership talent scouting , starting in elementary schools, comparable to the scouting of talents in sports and music. As far as I know such a system does not exist, although in resumes extracurricular activities of students seem to be a pro when applying for leading positions in later life.

  • Since Lombardo and Eichinger (Lombardo and Eichinger 1996), we know that only 10 % of being a leader can be learned in formal education. The rest comes from talking to and sparring with colleagues and peers (20 %) as well as from the daily hardship of doing the job (70 %). Due to the use of modern communication technology among generation Y/Z, the percentage of 20 is likely to increase at the cost of the 70 %, and also the percentage of 10 will increase because of the possibilities to gather knowledge the Internet offers. In the model of Lombardo and Eichinger , there is no place for leadership talent and that might as well be a weak point of the model, because undoubtedly there are more and less talented leaders. However, like in sports, less talent can be compensated by hard work.

  • Being a leader, being the alpha is not for free. It comes at a cost. That cost is time and energy (Sinek 2014). We only voluntarily follow people, leaders, who do not sacrifice us but who are prepared to sacrifice themselves and take the lead in neutralizing what threatens our businesses, our jobs, our countries, our families, and our existence. Leadership is impossible without followers. And real leadership also is impossible without a vision, without objectives, and without a dream that is communicated, shared, and supported and that, ultimately, we are even prepared to fight and die for. History shows us that those visions and dreams should be constantly questioned and not followed blindly. Machiavelli already described how leaders use power, intimidation (fear), and violence to attain their goals.

  • Developing a vision requires some maturity and wisdom; becoming a leader thus also takes time. Leadership cannot be learned in the beforementioned courses, seminars, and trainings. Those might contribute to the exchange of experiences with colleagues (the 20 % of Lombardo and Eichinger). The real development of leadership skills and coaching/mentoring of leaders takes more time than a few days or weeks. It takes years, because leadership is complex.

  • Complexity however is not popular nowadays. There is a strong tendency in our society to simplify complex matters. And this tendency also affects the discussions about leaders and leadership. Who is a leader? What is leadership in one sentence? What are the three most important qualities, or even the one most important quality, of a real leader? One-liners and bullet points are warp and weft. And thus we create the myth of the complete leader (Ancona et al. 2007). Leaders are never complete, and they are more likely to be competent when they know they are not. And apart from not being complete, they also are different. Some show emotions (Aristotle: pathos); some do not (Seneca: stoical).

  • In a discussion started on “LinkedIn” (March 2014) with the question: “What is the single most important quality for a leader to have?” More than 140 (!) different qualities were mentioned by over 15,000 people who participated in that discussion. And, like so often, also the answers here have a strong self-revealing component, telling us a lot about the respondent and little about real leadership. The popularity of this kind of discussions on social media even more underscores the initial statement that complexity is not popular. And at the same time this dislike of complexity is the starting point for lots of seminars, courses, and trainings like “the authentic leader, the five Ps of leadership skills, charismatic leadership, inspiring leadership, excellent leadership, transformational leadership, samurai leadership, the three C’s, three I’s, three S’s of leadership,” and so on. Their contribution to the development of real leadership can and should be seriously doubted.

  • Leading people is a profession, like doctor, engineer, plumber, carpenter, and mason. Not every skilled professional will automatically be a good manager or leader. Not every good basketball or soccer player is automatically a good coach or team manager. Not every doctor is automatically a good hospital manager. The main task for leaders is to make sure that they create optimal circumstances in which professionals can do their job. No more, no less. Leadership is not about being the best kid in the class and knowing everything better!

In the following we will look at the development of leadership from four different perspectives, list some dos and don’ts, and have a short outlook into the future of leaders and leadership (Zeuch 2014).

People Perspective

  • Neuroscience shows us more and more that human behavior is determined by intentions and circumstances. So it is important to assess people’s intentions as soon as possible and also create favorable circumstances for personal and leadership development.

  • Leadership starts with leading yourself, followed by leading others, possibly culminating in leading an organization or company. From the people’s perspective opportunities and chances for personal development are important engagement/retention factors.

  • The assessment of leadership talent should begin early and with a possibility to participate for everyone who wants to participate.

  • The focus of leadership development should over time shift from personal development to how a real leader contributes to group and organizational development, because good leadership finally is not only about the person of the leader but also and probably even mainly about the well-being, the self-confidence, the safety, the security, and the performance of the people that together form the organization/company.

  • Thus emotional intelligence (EI) is very important for a leader. Whether a person can become a good leader highly depends on how that person relates to the followers without whom leadership does not exist and how he or she relates to the power that comes with being a leader.

  • People are not born as leaders. In an article on www.inc.com, Jeff Haden summarized this in one sentence: “No one cares how much you know until they first know how much you care about them” (Haden 2012) .

Economic Perspective

  • The scouting of leadership talent inside as well as outside of the organization/company costs without any doubt money. Well-established leadership programs however will turn out to be good investments rather than costs.

  • How many companies really evaluate the return of existing leadership development programs (if they have them)? How many companies really have an insight in the costs of failing leadership? At present a lot of money is wasted on not working (at least not for the company/organization) leadership training programs that train leaders in a one-size-fits-all manner. The real added value of leadership development comes, however, from the embedding of the learning process in the participants’ real-life leadership practice.

  • As a consequence of insufficient internal leadership development, a lot of money also is spent for hiring head-hunting agencies.

  • Investing in a full leadership pipeline in the end will prove to be very cost efficient and effective.

Risk Perspective

  • Some recent developments in China and the Middle East (pharmaceutical industry, accountancy, building/construction sectors) again clearly show the risks of failing leadership. The existence of the company might even be at stake when leaders fail to comply with anti-bribery regulations, accept or even drive wrongful accounting practices, and put personal advantage above company benefit or similar wrongful/irresponsible behavior.

  • Leaders need to be clear about policy and values of the company as well as about the behavior that is expected of managers and employees. They need to read the signs the continuously developing world is giving. Quite a few companies only give lip service to their values. They look nice at their websites, and besides, you need to have them. But whenever values are not translated into tangible expected behavior and people are not held accountable for that behavior, there is a risk of noncompliance.

Operational Perspective

  • From an operational point of view for every company or organization, it is an absolute necessity to assess the present and future leadership needs and to establish programs to fulfill them.

  • The human resources department has to play its role and needs to be staffed with people who can establish and manage a leadership development program.

  • Involvement of the C-level management is an absolute must when designing and conducting the program.

  • Especially in small- and middle-sized businesses, the HR department has to be very critical and selective regarding the outsourcing of development programs.

Dos and Don’ts

Dos

  • Assess present and future leadership needs thoroughly.

    Make sure you have a clear picture of the companies/organizations present and future leadership needs at all levels. Thorough analysis should be the basis for your leadership development program.

    Use the “ADDIE” model , originally developed for the military by Florida State University (see Fig. 1).

  • Target all (potential) leaders/make the reservoir to fish in as big as possible!

    Leadership training commonly focuses on middle- and top management. However, in recent years, the selection and training of entry-level leaders gained more attention, because this specifically targets people who, for the first time in their careers, are going to take over formal leadership responsibilities. Furthermore, it enlarges your chances for discovering in-company talent and fills up your leadership pipeline.

    A good example for this approach is Hewlett Packard.

    On the company’s website we can read: “The ability to think and act as a leader is crucial for every HP employee, regardless of role. All employees have the opportunity to complete a self-assessment against the HP leadership standards and develop leadership skills through performance feedback, learning and training resources, or working with a coach or mentor. HP’s Executive and Leadership Development team designs and implements leadership and management training for leaders at all levels. In 2011, we increased the scale and reach of training. During the year, 7,500 employees participated in various leadership training sessions, including the HP Key Talent and Executive Leadership Excellence programs. Focus areas addressed business challenges, strategic thinking and planning, financial acumen, and team leadership. Leaders developing leaders continues to be part of our strategic approach. In 2011, approximately 400 HP leaders directly supported our leadership development programs and more than 12,000 employees attended our monthly Leading Ideas webcast series, during which senior leaders provide insights on leadership topics, share helpful tips and best practices, and link to resources for HP employees. Also in 2011, HP launched Leadership Development Central (LDC) as a resource to search and source opportunities for self and team development. LDC rapidly rose to the top 10 list of sites on the @HP employee portal. The new Leadership Learning in a Box series is the most recent addition to LDC through which team leaders conduct 1-h discussion sessions focusing on skill building, managing, and motivating teams. We also help leaders enhance their skills while supporting social innovation initiatives in communities. In 2011, as part of HP’s intensive Key Talent program, individual teams of 5 or 6 HP vice-presidents brought their expertise and knowledge to 10 San Francisco Bay Area nonprofits in a 12-week social impact business challenge. They provided pro bono recommendations to address the organizations’ most significant business challenges.”

  • Translate your company values in tangible desired behavior at all levels.

    It is not enough to formulate values and communicate them to employees and the outside world. Values have to be translated in expected, concrete, and tangible behavior at all levels. Only the consequent repetition of certain behavior in the end creates desired attitudes. It is a misunderstanding that attitude changes behavior. Already Aristotle knew this!

  • Mind the sequence: leading yourself, leading others, leading a company/organization.

    Entry-level leaders, for the first time in their careers, take over leadership responsibilities. It is one of the major lessons for this target group that even though they personally might feel unchanged, their team members see them differently now. They have expectations toward the new leader; they observe/interpret/comment on their new leader. Entry-level leadership development deals with this role change.

  • Mix teaching and training with experiential learning.

    Leadership development should be a mix of training (skills), coaching, and/or mentoring as well as experience-based learning, helping participants to gain an understanding of what it means to lead themselves, other people, and organizations in daily practice and to acquire knowledge about and develop skills in major leadership instruments (e.g., planning, organizing, communicating, decision-making, motivating). Use coaching and mentoring as instruments to support participants.

  • Include new developments.

    Leadership development should address the changes in society as well as the corporate landscape and organization. Examples are:

    • Intercultural leadership

    • Increasing emphasis on sustainability

    • Leading virtual teams

    • Leading in the matrix

    • Leading without hierarchical power (e.g., for project managers)

    • Leading change

  • Do prefer several modules.

    Opposed to many other training topics which can be taught and practiced in one or two days, learning leadership is a development process over time. It is highly advisable to have a group of (future) leaders go through a sequence of experiences together, always over several months, in order to reflect and apply what has been learned during the module and determine eventual training needs. Such groups will develop mutual trust which is necessary to share uncertainties and concerns regarding their own leadership role.

Fig. 1
figure 1

ADDIE model

Full size image

Don’ts

  • Don’t mix up teaching, training, and coaching/mentoring.

    Knowledge is taught and learned; necessary skills have to be determined and constantly trained to gain excellence. Desired behavior has to be constantly repeated to become an attitude. Many activities that are called training in fact are not training but rather learning.

  • Don’t engage “trainers” who preach.

    Charismatic leadership “trainers” who “preach” about leadership are entertaining and often have good points about certain specific aspects of leadership behavior. The effect of such “training” courses, however, is limited because the topics are not transferred into the participants’ real-life environment. In order to be effective, leadership development has to break down the barrier between classroom and work, bring in real-life examples of the participants, and help them take their lessons learned back into their work environment. This requires coaches who have a comprehensive view on leadership, practice “active listening,” and are differentiated when they give advice.

  • Don’t spend money on easy-to-get training programs of which you are not 100 % sure that the people who will attend really need them to improve their leadership ability and the company performance. Especially for smaller HR departments in small- and medium-sized companies, it is tempting and easy to fill the yearly leadership development program with nice-to-have activities that anticipate trends and fads.

Final Comments and Outlook

Most of the time people who really do the work are the professionals. They are responsible for the biggest portion of revenues. Of course we know that and we also realized that there are too many management layers, so we started to create flatter organizations in an attempt to eliminate some management levels. Self-steering teams, a lot of meetings and talking. And still a lot of managers and so-called leaders don’t really know what their professionals think. Simply because they don’t ask them, they don’t listen, and they know better. At least that is what they think, because they became leaders.

And there is one other thing. Many managers believe they are automatically leaders because they were given the power to decide. Universities make their students believe that they will be the ones who are the future leaders, who will change their communities, their country, and maybe even the world and that they will inspire others, only because they visited that particular university. However, it is not that easy to become a leader, although you can become a leader in many spheres.

It would be appropriate to make a distinction between people who believe they are leaders and people who really are leaders, a distinction between so-called or imaginary leadership and real leadership. Not everybody who is called “boss” is a real leader.

What are the traits of imaginary and real leaders?

We often hear that leaders have a vision. That is true. Real leaders have an idea about how to make this world a better place for all of us. So-called leaders mainly try to make it a better place for their business, country, themselves, their relatives, and sycophants. Real leaders aim at justice and are prepared to sacrifice themselves and forgive others. So-called leaders place themselves above the law, sacrifice their people, and are sowing hatred. Real leaders really put clients, customers, and people in the first place, because they care about them and want them to feel safe and valued. They try to add value to society and to the world community, or as Pope Francis’ said, “Real power is service.” So-called leaders take power even when they are given it; real leaders take power to give it back to the people they empower. So-called leaders use force to stay in power, whereas real leaders are given more and more power, and they keep giving it back.

Most likely we will see a change in leadership paradigm. The planet and people will get more emphasized, and a bigger part of profits will be used to increase equality and sustainability. We better prepare our future leaders to play their part in that development. They will need a big vision on how their communities, companies, organizations, and countries can contribute to a sustainable economy, a sustainable world, and on how we protect democracy against being undermined by increasing inequality. Our world has always been and still is desperately in need of wise leadership.