Years ago, a development program was undertaken to enhance organizational performance amidst significant market changes. The aim was to assist leaders in improving self-leadership, team management, and overall organizational responses. During this period, a senior colleague questioned, “Does leader development actually work?” This genuine inquiry was unexpected and momentarily rendered a speechless response. It felt as though a core belief had been challenged.
This question lingered, touching on a persistent doubt about the true impact of leader development efforts. Despite numerous anecdotes from leaders claiming benefits and organizational improvements, there were instances of leaders reverting to old habits under pressure, prompting a reconsideration of the approach to leadership development.
The investment in leadership development is staggering, with reports estimating $14 billion annually in the USA (2012) and $366 billion globally (2019). Regardless of the exact figure, it represents a significant investment. A 2014 McKinsey & Co report, “Why Leadership Development Programs Fail,” suggested that successful programmes should:
- Match specific leadership skills and traits to the context
- Embed leadership development in real work
- Investigate the mindsets underpinning behavior
- Monitor impact to make improvements over time
These recommendations imply that altering leader behavior can enhance organizational effectiveness. However, there is a possibility that this assumption overlooks major factors driving organizational dysfunction and ineffective leader behavior.
The Environment’s Role
Traditionally, leadership development has focused on improving the individual leader, with the belief that better leaders will solve many problems. But what if the environment in which leaders operate is part of the issue? This concept is not new. Kurt Lewin proposed in 1936 that behavior is influenced by both the person and their environment – B ƒ (P;E). Social psychologists Ned Jones and Dick Nisbett further highlighted the tendency to attribute behavior to individuals rather than situational factors.
Neglecting the environment is akin to taking a fish out of its tank, cleaning it, and returning it to the same dirty water. To improve leaders, the environment they work in must also be addressed.
Redefining Leadership Development
Rather than solely focusing on making leaders more strategic or collaborative, the question should be how to create environments that foster strategic, aligned, and collaborative decision-making. A crucial aspect of any leader’s environment is their team. Research from 6 Team Conditions shows that team structure influences behavior. By consciously designing their teams and ensuring the six conditions for high performance are in place, leaders can enhance their environment and shape effective behavior.
High-performing teams exceed stakeholder expectations, demonstrate excellent collaboration, and continuously learn and adapt. In the face of global challenges, high-performing leadership teams are urgently needed to navigate complex times. But how can leaders design such teams?
Where to Begin?
The second chapter of “Senior Leadership Teams – What It Takes to Make Them Great” (Wageman et al., 2008) advises, “First, decide if you need -and want- a team.” Leading leadership teams requires courage and commitment. The first step is determining whether there’s a vital business need that would benefit from a leadership team rather than a collection of individual leaders.
In today’s volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world, leaders often need real teams to meet stakeholder expectations effectively. Different types of teams suit various contexts:
Informational Teams
These teams exchange information to keep individual leaders informed and aligned. For instance, a CEO in the oil and gas sector might bring together top leaders bi-weekly to share key data, ensuring everyone remains aligned on organizational performance.
Consultative Teams
Consultative teams provide robust debate and counsel, helping individual leaders make informed decisions within their portfolios. These teams support the team leader and allow members to learn from one another through constructive debate.
Coordinating Teams
Coordinating teams manage operational interdependencies, ensuring that key initiatives are implemented in a coordinated manner. For example, an Operations Committee in a large organisation might meet weekly to align on critical interdependencies.
Decision-Making Teams
Decision-making teams collaborate to make crucial decisions that significantly impact the enterprise. These teams require clear purpose, the right people with collaborative skills, and well-designed work practices to facilitate effective decision-making.
The Importance of Team Design
Without conscious team design, leadership teams often devolve into turf battles and fail to make collective decisions. Understanding how team design shapes leader behavior is crucial to avoiding blame and fostering effective collaboration.
Rethinking Leadership Development
The question, “Does leadership development work?” is complex. While improving individual leaders is essential, addressing the environments in which they operate is also necessary. By consciously designing teams and focusing on creating supportive environments, leadership effectiveness and organizational performance can be enhanced.
Leadership development is not just about developing better leaders; it is about creating conditions that enable leaders to thrive. Rethinking the approach and considering both the individual and their environment can achieve lasting impact.
Ready to transform the leadership approach? Begin by evaluating the team’s structure and environment. You can learn today how high-performing teams can be designed and a culture of effective leadership fostered.
This article was written by Nicholas Conigrave Partner 6TC Australi on 6 Teams Conditions