The biggest threat to local government in the coming months is not around finding cuts, efficiencies and new ways of working. It is around implementing those changes.

A few years ago Harvard Business Review featured an article by Michael Watkins, based on a book he co-authored with Max H. Bazerman on Predictable Surprises: The Disasters You Should Have Seen Coming. It is imperative that we look at the ‘predictable surprises’ facing local government. Watkins points to many examples where disasters, mistakes and problems could have been avoided.

He cites three key areas for leaders to monitor:

Did you recognise the threat?

• Can your middle managers implement the changes you want?
• How will staff react to redundancies or change?
• Will all the politicians support the hard decisions?
• Have we got the skills and new ways of thinking to deliver Total Place?

We did some scenario planning around community cohesion with the leaders in one council. We asked: What happens if there is an India-Pakistan war (possibly nuclear)? Worried looks on everyone’s face, “Goodness, that would have a devastating impact and we have not thought about it at all.” It’s a good example of a predictable surprise!

Did the leader prioritise appropriately?

Every local government leader is under tremendous time pressure. Leaders will be judged by their ability to balance the strategic and the operational – and their capacity to initiate new ways of working.

• Is sufficient thought and time given to reducing the likelihood and impact of disaster?
• How did the leader react?
• Disasters do happen – are you ready?
• Are you confident you can engage people to respond quickly and effectively?
• Has your organisation got the capacity to stop a disaster from becoming a catastrophe?

Watkins rightly delivers this sombre message:

“If a damaging event happens that was foreseeable and preventable, no excuses should be brooked. The leader’s feet need to be held to the fire.”

How do you avoid the smell of burning toes? A few items from our leadership ‘checklist’ might help:

• Is there a danger of your being over-reliant on intuition? How do you ensure predictable surprises are rigorously reviewed?
• Is there a danger that you ignore the power of short term pain when you focus on long term gain? Psychological research shows immediate, certain negative consequences are a key driver of behaviour. In other words, short term pain mobilises people into action – whatever the longer term benefits may be.
• Does your organisation listen well? Will concerns, key pieces of information and fresh ideas reach the leadership team? If you are seen as a leader who goes his/her own way, or discourages bad news, you may be the last to know when a disaster looms.
• How effective is your risk management? Is it a mechanistic tick box exercise or will you be able to spot that Manager A is likely to handle change badly, or Department B is going to resist even the smallest change? Where might unexpected cost issues come from?
• How aligned are your leaders?  Silo working, too narrow a focus on targets and territorial behaviours can all stop ‘upstream thinking’, innovation and more effective working. Whose behav-iour can limit your capacity to succeed? Who is your predictable surprise?

In times of turbulent change, leaders will be judged more harshly and more quickly than in ‘normal times’.
Keeping a delicate eye on the predictable surprises is an important tactic to both survive and thrive in demanding times.

To download a pdf version of this article click here

A very good friend was trained at Sandhurst. He took a patrol out on night manoeuvres through a dense wood - trying to avoid being discovered by the enemy. His team came to a break in the woods and had to cross a road. This was a danger point threatening the patrol with discovery - and defeat - in the exercise. He gathered his men in a ditch by the side of the road, they synchronised watches and agreed that when he signalled them they would move quickly across the road, keeping low and throw themselves in the parallel ditch. The signal came, my friend kept low, crossed the road and flung himself in the ditch, only to find the rest of his patrol were still in place where he had left them. He was a leader without followers. However clear or urgent his instructions had been he was in one place and his team were in another.

Ira Challeff created the term “followership”. As my friend’s story illustrates, it is the actions of followers that determine the success of a leader.  We were fortunate enough to spend some time with Ira recently. He describes follower as a role not a personality type. We decide whether to take that role. As Ira points out people do not like to describe themselves as a follower.  We may be reluctant followers, we may be compliant followers - or we may be courageous followers. Ira points to the well-chronicled failures of followers - failure to pass on important information, failure to challenge wrong decisions, failure to respond to challenges. Followers were ineffective in Enron, Andersons, Lehman Brothers - but of course, the reason for that failure is strongly linked to the leadership culture. Effective leaders engage followers, they encourage and actively enable openness and challenge. they respond positively to the bad news or the reality checks that come from further down the organisation. In turn this leads to empowered followers who have the confidence to make decisions, be proactive, be innovative - and support the success of the organisation. 

In times of challenge and change it is so easy (and tempting) to revert to a command and control style of leadership. This creates compliant followers. The more courageous leader wants to tap into the passion and intelligence of their teams, to find the new and more effective ways of working, to have front line staff who can be powerful ambassadors for the organisation. Ira’s book ‘Courageous Followers’ gives a refreshing insight into the impact of leadership - it is an essential read whether you are on night manoeuvres or have bigger battles to fight in the day to day challenges of enabling organisation change.  

Leadership does not happen in a vacuum – good leaders in one situation can be terrible leaders in another and different situations demand different leadership qualities from us. In Caret’s recent Catalyst publication, Professor Prabhu Guptara looked at how it is not only our qualities as leaders that is important; but also the fit between those qualities and the environment that we are in.

Environmental scanning is an essential part of any strategy development but a global economic shift is largely out of our control as organisations and individuals. What we can do is manage our teams. As we try to fix an uncertain future, how do we keep our teams motivated?

It’s partly a matter of communication and reassurance, but I suggest it has a dimension we don’t always consider - in strategy discussions do we look only to our own wisdom or that of our top colleagues and professional advisors, or do we take into account in an active and deliberate way the advice we can get from customers and political leaders?

The more diverse perspectives you can get into your strategy process the more likely you are to come up with a range of possibilities that makes sense. Teams will be much more reassured by the actions you take to ensure this wide and diverse input into decision making because that will demonstrate that you are doing things in a way that takes political and economic uncertainties into account.

Read more…

The Work Foundation has just published some work called Exceeding Expectations: the principles of outstanding leadership. It looked at outstanding leaders. Three key themes emerged that we believe help organisations move from Good to Great and are worth ‘benchmarking’ yourself against.

1. Reaction follows action: outstanding leaders understand their impact on others. They empower others to make a difference, they stretch people to unleash energy
2. Performance comes through people: organisational outcomes e.g. productivity, quality, innovation and great customer care are all achieved by engaging others, enthusing them, growing them, building confidence, creating trust and passing on power
3. Their impact comes through others: outstanding leaders are comfortable about acknowledging their own weaknesses, keen to empower others and have great self awareness

We like this ‘high impact leadership’ thinking! Very useful for 2010

WL Gore is an amazing company which seems to continue to thrive in times good and bad.  Many things help explain this striking achievement not least what has been dubbed (by Director Magazine) its guide to management:

1. Belief in the individual. If you trust individuals and believe in them, they will be motivated to do what’s right for the company.
2. Power of small teams. They encourage fast decision-making, diverse perspectives and collaboration.
3. All in the same boat. Associate stick plan means all staff share in the risks and rewards. It gives incentives to contribute to the organisation’s success.
4. Long-term view. Investments are made for long-term success and fundamental beliefs never sacrificed for short-term profit.

I don’t know about you but I find much that inspires and challenges me in equal measure in these easy to understand (if difficult to implement) principles.

These are times of tension and paradox.  I am thinking of the need every organisation has for a clear and compelling picture of the future on the one hand and stubborn unpredictability on the other.  In some cases leadership is frozen into inaction as a result.  Some leaders however, choose instead to play with a range of scenarios of alternative futures. Last week a senior manager told me she was finding it very difficult to plan.  That was understandable given her understanding of planning:  that it is about predicting the future.  Things got a bit easier when she started to build and juggle alternative, supplementary, or contradictory pictures of the future and then begin to tease out resource implications and impact assessment.  How does planning work in your organisation?

The Guardian recently carried an article with the theme “an obsessive focus on people - rather than a rod of iron” is the key” in tough times. They reported on research by The Work Foundation challenging the assumption that workers with a “controlling and target - driven approach” are essential. Their report stated that in tough times “Outstanding leaders focus on people. Instead of seeing people as one of their many priorities they put the emphasis on people first.”  In short the report finds that those leaders with good emotional intelligence are able to bring people through change and enable change to succeed.

Our experience of working with leaders who are driving substantial and often painful change reinforces this. Insensitive leadership of the “we have not got time to discuss this, just flipping do it” camp can produce early results but also produce disengaged, resentful, antagonistic staff leading to poorly implemented and unimaginative change. Change is not judged by the calibre of the change plan but by the effectiveness of its implementation - which in turn is driven by engaging key stakeholders. The Guardian article also quoted an extensive piece of research by the Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM) showing that 31% of UK employees have low or no trust in senior management. This lack of trust will fuel resistance to change and leads to situations where many people bring their bodies to work but leave their commitment at home!

The good thing about emotional intelligence is that whilst some people will have some natural traits much of it can be taught. Leaders can raise their self awareness, can learn to manage their emotions and frustrations, and can develop their ability to make a positive impact and build good relationships with others. The Work Foundation encourages leaders to understand their staff. Our experience shows that leaders need to be more hands on in change; they need to monitor morale closely and recognise that even their most gifted staff can adopt strange behaviours in times of stress. Leaders need to be more prepared to give their team’s clear focus and to intervene when there are blockages. Leading change is about enabling others to change - those leaders that enable well in the coming months will make the difference between success and failure.

Click here to comment

Oliver Nyumbu, Caret’s Chief Executive, will consider how senior managers can minimise the risk of haemorrhaging good talent at a forthcoming Birmingham Forward lunch event on 2 February 2010.  He will also explore sustainable strategies for developing an engaged and energised workforce.

For more information and booking details please click on the link to the Birmingham Forward website below:

http://www.birminghamforward.co.uk/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=137

Perhaps annual or six monthly performance appraisals are a resounding success in your organisation.  If that is the case, then count your blessings because on the whole, performance appraisal is a failed enterprise. Consider for example the fact that, as research shows: 

• Managers don’t like doing appraisals - some would rather attend ten dentists’ appointments on the same day than do an employee appraisal.
• Employees don’t always find a positive experience

Or consider this:

• Employees hired by the appraiser receive higher scores than others
• Evaluations are more positive for underlings with managers from the same social demographic
• Performance reviews (in jobs where work is difficult to assess objectively) mostly reflect employees’ ability to ingratiate themselves with the boss

The spectacularly damming aspect of the traditional review process is that it fails to help employees to learn something about a better way to work. But as Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer’s article suggests ‘A recession is a good time for managers to focus more on evidence and less on received wisdom or old habits. Asking hard questions about performance management would be a good place to start.’ Read his whole article for further discussion