Leadership Lessons From Pope John Paul II

"Heroes are rebels with a cause. Rebels because they challenge the traditional ways of thinking and refuse to follow the herd. They have a cause, a vision, that's larger than life." - Sharif Khan, author of Psychology of the Hero Soul

From a small-town Polish boy born to a retired army officer to become Pope; from a hard life in Nazi occupied Poland, his mother dead of kidney and heart failure, an older brother dead from scarlet fever, to become quite possibly “man of the century.” How did such an unlikely candidate for the head of the Roman Catholic Church rise so quickly to such prominence? What leadership lessons can we learn from this global spiritual leader who so moved the world? Here is a brief timeline snap-shot of Karol Josef Wojtyla’s exemplary leadership:

Knowledge
1958: Pope Pius XII names Wojtyla auxiliary bishop of Krakow.

By this time, Wojtyla was a professor of ethics and had two doctorate degrees; he had studied theology in clandestine during the oppressive Nazi occupation of Poland.

Leadership lesson: leaders are readers. Specialized knowledge is key to leadership along with general studies. While Wojtyla had two doctorates in his field, he also studied philosophy and literature and was also a playwright and a poet. If you were to take an hour-a-day reading up in your field and applying the knowledge, within a period of five years you would become an ‘expert’ within your field. People are hungering and thirsting for a leader with knowledge and experience.

In Wojtyla’s case, he took the time to gain knowledge of the world, himself, and beyond. As a chaplain for university students in Krakow, he used to go on frequent camping and kayaking trips and offered counseling and mentorship to the students. On these excursions, he would usually take an hour or more to be alone by himself to reflect, read, and pray. These moments of solitude gave him a strong internal compass and knowledge of self required of all great leaders.

Humility
1978: Elected Pope John Paul II becoming the 264th pope and first non-Italian pope in 456 years; refuses formal papal coronation in favor of a simple inauguration ceremony and chooses not to use the royal plural “We” referring to himself plainly as “I”.

Wojtyla was not impressed by the trappings of power and its symbols and made that clear from the day he was elected Pope. He had a very simple, plain, and honest way of communicating that endeared people to him. He exemplified the servant-leader role by embodying one of the titles of the Pope: Servus Servorum Dei (Servant of the Servants of God).

Leadership lesson: leaders are humble. We can learn from Wojtyla’s example by not isolating ourselves in the corner office or ivory tower with each successive promotion, hiding behind closed doors and a sea of fancy titles, diplomas, awards, certificates, and press-clippings.

Like Wojtyla, we can make ourselves available to our people with open doors, seeking to understand and encouraging dialogue. Leadership by walking around and talking to people and listening to their needs earns respect and trust.

Heart
1979: Visits his homeland, Poland, for the first time as Pope and speaks to his people, inspiring Solidarity, the first independent labor movement in the Soviet bloc.

Risking his life against the totalitarian Communist Regime in Poland, Wojtyla returned to his homeland and did not speak in the typical, official ‘visiting dignitary’ tone. He spoke from his heart, from the gut, soul-to-soul – in their language. The people of Poland saw themselves reflected in him; he encouraged them to not crawl like animals but walk tall and ‘be not afraid.’ The crowd went wild and a flame of rebellion and counter-revolution was lit in the collective consciousness of the Polish people, sparking the Solidarity movement for independence and freedom that eventually toppled the Communist Regime.

Leadership lesson: leaders have heart. Intellect is not enough; both head and heart have to be married. If you want to win over people, risk letting down your guard and speak from the heart. The leader that speaks from the heart almost always wins over reason alone.

Forgiveness
1983: Meets with assassin Ali Agca in prison.

Just two years after the assassination attempt on his life by gunman, Mehmet Ali Agca, and several months of painful recovery, the Pope visited Agca in prison and offered forgiveness. (Much later, in 2000, the Italian government granted clemency to Agca, on the Pope’s request).

Leadership lesson: leaders are willing to forgive. We are all fallible human beings that make mistakes. The mark of a true leader is his or her willingness to forgive. It’s also a smart leadership strategy in the long-term. While there’s no excuse to keep someone who consistently fails to learn from their mistakes, the boss that fires an employee for making a big mistake is often mistaken for doing so. After all, there’s always the risk that the next person hired could potentially make the same disastrous mistake. But by offering forgiveness to the person that errs, that person is unlikely to repeat that same mistake, and will most likely remain fiercely loyal to you.

Responsibility
2000: Offers a day of apology for sins committed by members of the Catholic Church over the centuries; visits Israel and pays homage to the victims of the Holocaust.

Wojtyla was the first pope to visit the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland in 1979, and later in 2000, he visited Jerusalem’s Yad Vashem in remembrance of the six million Jews who died in the Holocaust, praying for reconciliation between Christians and Jews and apologizing for the sin of anti-Semitism by Christians.

The day that former U.S. President, John F. Kennedy, took full responsibility for the Bay of Pigs fiasco, was the day he became a leader. The day that Wojtyla apologized and took responsibility for the sins of anti-Semitism committed by Christians, was the day he became a truly respected global leader.

Leadership lesson: leaders take full responsibility for their organization. Blaming and complaining is the mark of a loser. We can make excuses or we can make progress – but we certainly can’t do both. To be a leader, you must take full responsibility for your actions, your team, and ultimately the whole organization or cause you lead.

Uncommon Leadership
1982 – 2003: Receives PLO leader Arafat; Meets Gorbachev as first pope to meet with a Kremlin Chief; visits Cuba and meets with Castro; becomes first pope in history to enter a mosque.

Despite criticism from many corners on the controversial issues he supported, Wojtyla was not one to ever back down. He stood for what he believed in and had the courage of convictions. As a leader, he was tough but flexible. His flexibility allowed him to meet famous, and infamous, world leaders and address difficult issues that made him unpopular in certain circles. But he also had the inner toughness and steely resolve to break down walls and foster reconciliation. As Pope and head of the Roman Catholic Church he knew his role was to unify the Church while serving as an apostle of justice and peace. He stood his ground and never wavered, even if it meant alienation.

Leadership lesson: leaders stand for what they believe in. Leadership is not about winning a popularity contest. Stand up for what you believe in. Be strong and be firm. A divided mind is weak; a united mind, clear and singular in purpose, is powerful beyond measure.

Legacy: Rebel with a Cause
1920 – 2005: A legacy of leadership.

Pope John Paul II was a rebel with a cause. A champion of human worth and dignity, a freedom fighter, a torch bearer for social justice, he left a lasting legacy of leadership and moral example that the world can follow. Asked once, if he feared retaliation from government officials, he replied (according to biographer George Weigel), “I’m not afraid of them. They are afraid of me.” Indeed, he relayed a message to the world that will echo through eternity: “Be not afraid!”

Leadership Learning: The Real Costs Of Not Doing Leadership Training

A report from the Said Business School at Oxford University in the UK found that British businesses and public sector organizations are wasting almost $140 million on executive education programs that are poorly conceived and delivered.

The study went on to say that 35 per cent of HR directors and 21 per cent of other executives believed that their current training and development programs were meeting corporate strategic objectives. The bulk of the money was being spent on individually developed courses for senior executives.

If those businesses want to quit wasting all that money on bad management training, I know where they can get their moneys worth. And it doesn't have anything to do with having more academics design special courses, events, and outings for senior staff.

Here's a novel idea folks. Why not spend your money on leadership training and development down in the trenches, where it will really do some good?

Most companies don't do nearly enough of that. In 2003, just 7 percent of training budgets in the US were spent on first line leaders and most of that was for learning administrivia and for prophylactic HR.

The fact is that front line leaders don't get much training at all and precious little of it is actually about leadership skills. Maybe that's because companies think they're saving money by not investing in front line leader training.

True, there's no budget line item absorbing funds that might be spent on the executive dining room, or art for the CEO's office. But there are what economists call "opportunity costs," the costs of not training front line leaders.

There's the opportunity cost of lost productivity. Good frontline leadership builds both morale and profitability.

There's the opportunity cost of lost leadership. Great companies develop most of their own leaders. If you have to go outside for leadership you incur recruitment costs and transition costs.

Finally, there's the cost of lawsuits. Good frontline leadership creates organizations where lawsuits are less likely. And, ff the company is sued over a supervision issue, defense will be easier if the leaders have been doing their jobs.

How about your company? Do you develop your own leaders? Do you help them develop the skills they need to improve morale and productivity and avoid lawsuits? Think about that the next time you consider the training budget.

Leadership Just by Being Yourself

Leadership is all about being yourself and demonstrating personal authenticity rather than learning some formula from a text book. Aspiring leaders therefore need to be true to themselves; not slavishly following other’s ideas. Role models can be powerful and it doesn't hurt to model excellence when found; executive coaching is based on this premise.


Real leaders are prepared to reveal their weakness, because they know they are not super-human. Obviously this doesn’t mean technical weaknesses or functional failings; this would fatally flaw their performance. Instead, what is meant is that leaders should reveal their personality quirks – maybe they are bad tempered in the morning, are somewhat shy with new people or a little disorganized. Such admissions show they are human and this resonates with others confirming that the leader is a person – not merely a role-holder.


Revealing their true selves, leaders can allow others to know and help them and this makes for better teamwork; followers can also feel better if they’ve got something to complain about. Thus by sharing at least some of their weaknesses, leaders can prevent others from inventing damaging problems.


True leadership is therefore much more than a demonstration of strengths. Real leaders acknowledge their shortcomings and may even make them work for them.


Good leaders always rely on their ability to read situations. They develop a ‘feel’ for an environment, and interpret soft data without having to be told. They know when team morale is patchy or when complacency needs shaking up. There are three levels of situational sensitivity, each of which has its own specific skills.


Effective leaders are continually learning about the motives, attributes and skills of their important subordinates. They get to know their people through formal and, often better, informal contact such as when travelling together.


Effective leaders read their teams. They analyze the compound balance between team members, the tension between the tasks and processes, and how the team builds its competencies.


Finally, they are concerned with defining the cultural characteristics of their organizations and keep their finger on the pulse of the organisation’s climate.


It sounds tongue-in-cheek to say that leaders care for their people. Ever noticed the cynicism in the workforce upon seeing a manager return from a people-skills training course with new concern for others. Effective leaders don’t need a training programme to convince their employees that they really care. They clearly empathize with their people and care intensely about their work.


Genuine concern is difficult because it always involves some personal risk – showing some part of yourself and your most strongly held values can seem quite scary. It may also take some detachment – the ability to stand back, see the whole picture and sometimes take tough decisions. Leadership never was a popularity contest.


Effective leaders use their differences and move on to distinguish themselves through personal qualities such as sincerity, loyalty, creativity, or sheer expertise.


Using these differences is a critical leadership skill. But, as always, there is a danger - too much distance makes it impossible to sense situations properly or to communicate effectively.

Leadership Is Action... Not Position

People respond to good leadership! Period! It is in all aspects of our lives, not just business. A mother is a leader in her home; a son may be leader of a team sport or a daughter the leader of the debate team. A group relies on the person in charge to actually lead them to success. A true leader is highly ethical, honest and respected.

In our society we have leaders and followers. Are we born to one or the other? No! Can you hone your leadership skills? Absolutely!

The leaders that I admire seem to have all of these in place:

a) They think BIG! They don’t put a ceiling in place. Instead, no limit is set as to how big or how much better something can be.

b) The goals are firmly set in place and the eye does not come off of it.

c) They make known to all involved the final product that they are all going for, example, if you sell widgets, it takes x number of widgets to be affluent, or you want to win that football game and ultimately the title. Know what you’re going for.

d) They can get compliance to orders.

e) When goals are met they set new goals or raise the bar.

People will follow your lead willingly if you are honest, ethical, if you are consistent and treat them with respect. Rewarding someone when a job is well done is always appreciated. A good leader will also off load someone who consistently hinders the group who is just not a team player.

You can improve your own self- respect and become an inspiration to others. How great is that!

Leadership Development - Secure The Future

“At senior levels of an organization, the ability to adapt, to make decisions quickly in situations of high uncertainty, and to steer through wrenching change is critical. But at a time when the need for superior talent is increasing, big U.S. companies are finding it difficult to attract and retain good people. Executives and experts point to a severe and worsening shortage of the people needed to run divisions and manage critical functions, let alone lead companies. Everyone knows organizations where key jobs go begging, business objectives languish, and compensation packages skyrocket.”
Elizabeth Chambers etal, McKinsey & Company, The War for Talent

In a recent interview, Dr. Jay Conger states, “Business organizations are not designed to be great training grounds for leadership development. They are great training grounds for execution of an existing business model and, if [the business model is] right, all you need are managers. The problem is that every few years that business model comes under attack and, when it does, you need leaders. Now the problem is that you haven’t been developing them, so you get blown out of the water.” (“Why Chief Executives Fail,” May 2003, Management Today)

As faithful readers know, I’ve had the pleasure and honor to meet some of the world’s greatest leaders and leadership gurus from Sir Richard Branson, General Tommy Franks, and Captain Mike Abrashoff to Dr. Warren Bennis, Dr. Henry Mintzberg, Tom Peters, and most recently Dr. Jay Conger. Through our work with Linkage Inc., we help support broadcasts of these famous people by designing and developing participant and facilitator guides that many clients use to turn a 90-minute presentation into a true learning and growth opportunity.

I recently had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Jay Conger to discuss the topic of leadership development and succession planning. Dr. Conger has found that companies who are successful at identifying and developing leadership talent address each of the following key components:

• Sponsorship – personal, active, and regular involvement at the highest levels.

• Selection – matching capabilities with organizational needs; avoiding complex competency models; acknowledging and addressing things that will derail a potential leader.

• Assessors – objectively and subjectively measuring performance and results.

• Participants – engaged and personally committed potential leaders, resulting in greater self-direction and organizational loyalty.

• Development linkages – using stretch goals and a myriad of assignments, participants are being developed – not merely identified – for succession in a purposeful and planned manner.

• Tracking – measuring the effectiveness of the leader – and the leadership selection and development process – to ensure continual improvement in developing the leadership bench.

In his book, Growing Your Company’s Leaders: How Great Organizations Use Succession Management to Sustain Competitive Advantage, Dr. Conger outlines the characteristics of companies who are winning the war for talent through their leadership development systems. These characteristics include:

First, the most effective systems are simple and easy to use. All participants – not just those running the systems but candidates as well – have easy access to them. Data is secure but open to those who need it. The winning systems are nonbureaucratic, uncomplicated processes. As an element of that simplicity, there is a unified approach to succession management to ensure consistency and to maintain objectivity of succession management between different business units, organizational levels, and geographic areas.

Second, the best systems are developmentally oriented rather than simply focused or replacement oriented. System processes are clearly more concerned with the continuing growth and development of the employee than with an ultimate job title. They introduce a discipline into the organization that continually reminds everyone that leadership development and talent retention are critical priorities and every manager’s responsibility. The system becomes a proactive vehicle for managers and executives to reflect on the progress of their talent and the opportunities they require for genuine development.

Third, highly effective systems always actively involve the very top players of the organization. The CEO and the executive team are committed sponsors and champions-proactively participating in determinations of talent and in “next steps” to ensure the maximum development of their talented employees. Effective succession management is seen as a critical strategic tool by senior executives for attracting and retaining their most talented leaders.

Fourth, best practice succession systems are effective at spotting gaps in talent and at identifying important “linchpin” positions. They highlight existing or emerging needs where there are potential shortages of talent within the firm. They focus intensively on linchpin positions-a select set of jobs that are critical to the overall success of the organization. These positions and the individuals who fill them merit and receive regular and intensive attention. The better systems also identify the best jobs for development and whether there are a sufficient number of these or shortages.

Fifth, succession planning still does the job of monitoring the succession process, enabling the company to make certain that the right people are moving into the right jobs at the right time and that gaps are being spotted early. The best systems incorporate frequent checkpoints throughout the year. These checkpoints monitor who is where and where the person should be going next. A checkpoint function is built into the system to spot a problem before it becomes a problem! Succession management is so important that the best practitioners don’t ignore this function for even a quarter.

Finally, the most successful systems are built around continual reinvention. One of the clearest insights from our research is that effective succession management is a journey, not a destination. Best practice companies did not succeed in their first efforts at succession management. Similarly, none have rested on their laurels since having their process up and running. They continually refine and adjust their systems as they receive feedback from line executives and participants, monitor developments in technology, and learn from other leading organizations. To avoid the ever-present danger of becoming bureaucratized and mechanical, best practice systems therefore actively incorporate dialogues and debates about talent and about the succession process. There are continuous “conversations” about what is needed for the future of each candidate, about who should be where, and when. There are continuous conversations on the part of the guardians and designers about the planning process and how its utilization can be improved.

(Growing Your Company’s Leaders, pp 12-15)

Leadership Development/Succession Planning Capability Scorecard

Entelechy has created a Leadership Development/Succession Planning Scorecard based on Dr. Jay Conger’s research to help you determine the strength of your company’s (or department’s) succession planning/leadership development process.

If you would like to receive a complementary copy of Entelechy’s Leadership Development/Succession Planning Capability Scorecard, click on the link below:

http://www.unlockit.com/docs/Leadership Development Scorecard.pdf

(Note: you must have Acrobat® Reader® installed to view the attachment.)

Terence R. Traut is the president of Entelechy, Inc., a company that helps organizations unlock the potential of their people through customized training programs in the areas of sales, management, customer service, and training. Terence can be reached at 603-424-1237 or ttraut@unlockit.com. Check out Entelechy's website at www.unlockit.com.

Leadership Development - How Can Your Business Grow by Having Good Leaders

The largest collection of matter on leadership.

leadership is a word we come across quite regularly on radios, television and newspaper. We have now also made it accessible in article markets.

If you are planning to build a wonderful career, maybe you should first go through some preliminary training. Nowadays, there are very successful leadership programs being developed. Leadership programs will help you to acquire some very necessary skills. Leadership programs will give you the needed power to achieve the best both in your career as well as in your personal life. Leadership programs will be the management-training program you are looking for. As well as good professional training, they will help you gain self-confidence and self-respect, things that are very helpful in your private life. These programs are undoubtedly a very effective way to gain the assurances that you will need to be ready for a prosperous career and life.

Writing an article on leadership was our foremost priority while thinking of a topic to write on. This is because leadership are interesting parts of our lives, and are needed by us.

We have included some fresh and interesting information on leadership. In this way, you are updated on the developments of leadership.

I know from experience that a leadership program can easily improve and perfect a person because I have been teaching leadership courses for years. If you go to a leadership program with the right attitude, confident that you desire success, you will become a perfectly changed person. Naturally, there are people who challenge the necessity of the leadership programs. The success of the leadership programs depends usually on the way they are taught. As people who teach leadership programs are different, as different are the profits you can take from leadership programs. From young people to older, all of them make the best use of any type of leadership programs. You can choose between practically different leadership programs, although almost all of them have some fundamental elements in common.

As the information we produce in our writing on leadership may be utilized by the reader for informative purposes, it is very important that the information we provide be true. We have indeed maintained this.

One of the key components of all leadership programs is that they are aiming to build up abilities to work in a team. Some leadership programs even acquire this building of team-working abilities as the center of the whole leadership program. As an example, I will tell you that I have heard about leadership programs which center on the fulfilling of physical tasks as lifting every member of the group over a wall.

Of course, the point of this is not to gain muscle mass but to learn how to work as a team. This part of the leadership programs will teach you how to seek each member’s strengths and weaknesses. Leadership programs will teach you how to leave behind the egotism you have and to put all your strengths into the group work. This is probably the most important lesson that the future leader will learn from the leadership program.

We do not mean to show some implication that leadership have to rule the world or something like that. We only mean to let you know the actual meaning of leadership!

The second fundamental component of leadership programs is that leadership programs usually tend to emphasize on self-confidence and self-esteem. A leader should be first of all self-confident. A leadership program has to teach you how to be convinced that everything you say is important. The leaders have not become leaders because they are more capable, or more intelligent than other people are. Surprisingly, it may turn out exactly the opposite thing. The leaders have become leaders because they more confidence than the other people to contend that what they say is important.

We hope that with this article, we have covered more than just a fragment of the available information of leadership. The world of leadership is too vast to be covered in a single article.

Leadership Development

Leadership, what is it and what is the difference between being a manager and being a leader?. Definitions of leadership, there is not a single definition that everyone agrees on. Manfred Kets de Vries, a professor at INSEAD, says that leadership is a set of characteristics, behaviour patterns, personality attributes that makes certain individuals more effective in achieving a set goal or objective.

Another way of describing leadership is to say that, to get the best out of people, individuals, teams, organisations, they need to be led, guided, persuaded, motivated, inspired, to be committed, to do their best, to work together to achieve a common objective. This, rather than the pure management approach of being told, directed, ordered, and treated as subordinates.

True leaders are recognised as being the leader, and their followers accept that they need to be guided by that leader, but they do not feel that they are mere subordinates. A good example is the captain of a sports team - hockey, baseball, netball, cricket, soccer, football, athletics - these are individuals who have an individual role to play, yet find time and ways to motivate and encourage others to do their best, to use their own individual skills, knowledge and experience (scoring goals, defending, winning races, hitting home runs) whilst at the same time working together as a member of the team to achieve team objectives.

There are other ways of defining leadership, managers perform transactions, and leaders bring about transformations.

The transactional manager influences others by appealing to self-interest, primarily through the exchange of rewards and services. The relationship between this type of manager and the follower is seen as a series of rational exchanges that enable each to reach their own goals. Transactional managers supply all the ideas and use rewards as their primary source of power. Followers comply with the leader when it’s in their own interest - the relationship continues as long as the reward is desirable to the follower, and both the manager and the follower see the exchange as a way of achieving their own ends.

The transformational leader inspires followers to not only perform as expected, but to exceed expectations - transformational leaders motivate followers to work for goals that go beyond immediate self-interest, where what is right and good becomes important - these leaders transform the needs, values, preferences and aspirations of followers. They do this so that the interests of the wider group replaces the self-interest of individuals within that group.

It’s interesting that research has shown that the way women leaders describe how they behave, lead, is in line with the transformational style, whereas most male leaders when describing themselves use words and phrases that describe the transactional style. There are exceptions of course, and in some situations the leader can by viewed differently by different groups. Many people in the UK would not describe Margaret Thatcher as transformational in style, but more likely they would use words such as dictatorial, domineering, riding roughshod over opponents, yet others, in her close team for example, describe her as charismatic, motivational, inspirational, kind, supportive.

We can see from this look at Leadership that there are different ways of describing what a leader does, and how, at least in some ways, this is different to how a manager behaves. Individuals recognised as leaders makes it obvious that there are great differences in the way in which certain leaders behave. On the surface there are great differences between the leadership style of Prime Minister Thatcher, and that of the Indian industrialist Rajiv Bajaj. Yet both are widely acknowledged as highly successful leaders. The common factor, it seems, is that all are able to persuade others to follow them, in order to achieve success in their particular field. They all have something that brings diverse people together, to work as a team, to aim for and work hard to achieve a common objective. It is, perhaps, a special talent, or characteristic, or personality trait, or set of circumstances that they find themselves in, or perhaps a combination of all of these. Perhaps leaders are born with this ability, perhaps it is something that can be, or has to be, learned.

Leadership Crisis - How A Crisis In Leadership Can Ruin Your Business

Keep everyone interested with what you find here on leadership.

After reading this article on leadership, you may not have to search anywhere else for more matter on leadership. It’s all here.

According to a recent government report the business world is currently in a leadership crisis. Up and coming managers, those who will be our business leaders of the future do not see examples of “inspirational leadership” in their work places. Employees long to see a genuine shared vision, real confidence and trust in teams and respect for colleagues, customers and employees. Less than 40% of managers actually see these traits on display in the workplace.

Maintaining the value of leadership was the main reason for writing this article. Only in this way will the future know more about leadership.

We did not write too elaborate an article on leadership as it would be then difficult for the common man to read it. We have written this article in such a way that everyone will be able to read and understand it!

It was at the spur of the moment that we ventured to write something about leadership. Such is the amount of matter that is available on leadership.

We were furnished with so many points to include while writing about leadership that we were actually lost as to which to use and which to discard!

life is short. Use it to its maximum by utilizing whatever knowledge it offers for knowledge is important for all walks of life. Even the crooks have to be intelligent!

Where did all our leaders go? Perhaps we have placed too much emphasis on management of our businesses instead of leadership. I would hazard a guess that more people are comfortable with the thought of becoming a manager then they are with being asked to take the position of leader. Therefore, naturally we have more aspiring managers than leaders but a much bigger percentage of managers are capable of becoming leaders in their fields that are actually stepping up to this role. Why?

What is leadership? Perhaps we don’t have as many leaders as we need because not enough of us understand what leadership is really all about and who can become a leader. Can you take someone who isn't a natural leader and turn them into one? Are we all leaders in our own unique way? What do Leaders do and what skills do they need? Leadership is about behaviour first, skills second. Good leaders are followed chiefly because people trust and respect them, rather than the skills they possess. Leadership is different to management. Management relies more on planning, organisational and communications skills. Leadership relies on management skills too, but more so on qualities such as integrity, honesty, humility, courage, commitment, sincerity, passion, confidence, positivity, wisdom, determination, compassion and sensitivity. Some people are born more naturally to leadership than others. Most people don't seek to be a leader. Those who want to be a leader can develop leadership ability. Leadership can be performed with different styles. Some leaders have one style, which is right for certain situations and wrong for others. Some leaders can adapt and use different leadership styles for given situations. Some leaders are big, bold and brash characters, others are quiet, unassuming but determined and visionary. As a leader you must know yourself and know your own strengths and weaknesses, so that you can build the best team around you. Leadership is about finding the best in yourself and giving the best of yourself. Leaders always go first, setting the example, walking the talk, doing not dabbling.

Remember this article for further use. You may never know when your knowledge about leadership may come in use.

Leadership And Team Management

Establishing An Appropriate Organisational Structure, by: considering the strategic direction and objectives of the organisation; considering the desired organisational culture; identifying the critical activity areas of the organisation; deciding on an appropriate organisational structure. This is an essential first step. Before any changes or new directions can be taken the leaders must decide on an organisational structure that will support the strategic direction being taken, and an organisational culture that they will be aiming to create. The management teams network that is then put in place will be compatible with the structure and contribute to developing the desired culture.

Deciding On A Management Teams Structure, by; planning a network of management teams to match the requirements identified in the previous activity; agreeing individual team structure; agreeing individual team objectives, roles, responsibilities, size, location, resource needs; identifying team member and team leader profiles for each management team. The planning undertaken here will provide the template for the new structure, when implemented. This planning is best carried out as a factual, needs based, exercise. The role of the team, and its objectives, should be allowed to dictate size, location, team leader and team member profiles. Resource implications should be dealt with after the structure has been agreed. Existing and potential personnel should be assessed against these only at the next stage, when the teams are populated. Option 1: Assessing Existing Teams, by: identifying existing management teams; analysing the objectives of existing teams; evaluating the performance of existing teams; evaluating the performance of individual team leaders; comparing each management team profile with the newly defined requirements. In many, if not most, organisations this will be necessary due to legislative constraints and-or ethical considerations. However, the existing teams are unlikely to be appropriate, other than in part, and the outcomes of this action will simply identify what are likely to be major gaps and changes that will need to be made, in order to match the new requirements. Option 2: Removing Existing Teams, by: removing the old structure completely. This option is the most effective, a total reengineering, but the most radical. If possible, this is the better option, as the organisation can make the changes required to most appropriately match the new strategic direction, and move forward unhindered by partially or wholly unsuitable management teams.

Implementing The New Management Teams Network, by: providing information about the changes to all affected - in most organisations this will mean at all levels and both internally and externally; selecting team leaders and team members; establishing the teams in their locations; training each team in its new role, responsibilities, objectives, and operational activities; providing appropriate resources for each team; launching the new network into active service . A critical stage, this needs to be managed as a major change activity, and as a major project. An executive level manager should be appointed to oversee the changes. Communication with all stakeholders, who will be many, at many levels, and both internal and external to the organisation, will need to be managed carefully.

Implementing A Management Team Performance System, by: designing a rigorous teams performance appraisal system; monitoring the performance of individual teams; taking appropriate corrective action where when necessary. Many organisations operate an effective employee appraisal system, but this usually only applies to operational employees and junior managers. Middle and Senior managers must also be appraised on a regular basis, ideally more frequently than operational employees, as the managers’ actions usually have greater negative or positive impact. This line of thinking must also be applied to management teams, because of the degree of influence and impact of the team collective decisions and actions. The leaders of the organisation must be continuously aware of the performance levels of their management teams, and take action to maintain or raise that performance level as necessary. Implementing a performance appraisal and continuous improvement approach to the network of management teams is vital. In the early stages of the life of the teams the focus will be on awareness and understanding of the objectives of the team, and identifying training and development needs to support new or adjusted roles. As the team grows and matures, the monitoring will focus firstly on consistency of performance, and then on supporting a continuous improvement in that performance. At all stages in the life cycle of each team, performance appraisal must be a regular and visible process.

Network Review And Refresh, by: arranging regular reviews of the appropriateness of the management teams network; assessing the suitability of each part of the network against newer versions of the strategic objectives; assessing the structure of the network against the current organisational structure and culture; making appropriate changes to individual components and-or the overall structure of the network. A major review should be held every year, as a key part of the review and adjustment of strategies and objectives in the annual strategic planning process. At this review point minor or major changes should be agreed, to adjust the network so that it continues to match the requirements dictated by the refreshed strategic and operational objectives. In addition, the condition of the management teams network should be an agenda item on at least quarterly executive level meetings, where corrective action can be decided on where necessary.

In Summary: establishing a compatible management teams structure is an essential first step in ensuring that the organisation’s strategies are implemented successfully. Without a robust network of management teams, appropriate to the size and complexity of the organisation and its strategic objectives, the strategic and operational objectives will not be achieved. Effective management teams are the driving force behind the achievement of objectives. This network cannot be successful if it is weak or flawed. It is the role of the leaders of the organisation to ensure that the management teams network is strong, dynamic, and focused on achieving its objectives, in its individual parts and collectively.

Leadership - How Can Leadership Programs Be Measured?

Perk up your presentation with these facts of leadership.

This article on leadership aims at providing you with all the necessary matter you will need to understand more about leadership. So read it well.

Leadership matters. Any one person may have an effect on the behavior of others at any time. The nature and intent of that effect determines the influence, direction and outcome of leadership. Organizations depend on leadership for direction, momentum and a plan for sustainable success. How do we recognize leadership exists? How do we develop leadership? How can leadership be measured? These are questions this article seeks to explore.

How do we recognize leadership or know that it exists? Generally, leadership is defined by characteristics and results. Yet formal leadership development nearly always focuses exclusively on characteristics, relying on hope that results will ensue. Unfortunately, leadership is seldom really measured beyond an intuitive or anecdotal approach.

Never be reluctant to admit that you don’t know. There is no one who knows everything. So if you don’t know much about leadership, all that has to be done is to read up on it!

For example, a person in a leadership role is deemed "successful." We want to replicate the leader's success, so we try to replicate the characteristics, skills, values, competencies, actions and behaviors of the leader. We edify and attempt to emulate these qualities in others, but we seldom get the same results. Corporate America is full of "competency-based" leadership development programs, what one might call the "injection-mold" approach. Competency-based leadership development has an effect on organizational culture, no doubt, but not always the desired effect. Leaders who somehow "measure up" to the desired competencies do not always produce desired results.

Ultimately, producing results is the reason we study leadership, the reason we seek to develop leaders, the very reason we need leaders. So it stands to reason that leadership also has been measured based on the results produced, regardless of how those results were achieved. We need look no further than Richard Nixon or Kenneth Lay to recognize the down side of such one-dimensional measures.

Getting information on specific topics can be quite irritating for some. This is the reason this article was written with as much matter pertaining to leadership as possible. This is the way we aim to help others in learning about leadership.

The leader's role is to establish the conditions (the culture, the environment) under which others can take right action to achieve desired results. "Desired results" are best defined by the vision, mission, values and goals of the team or organization. Therefore, leadership is best measured by the how well followers execute the vision, mission and goals while "living out" the desired values. This leads us to a new premise: that leadership should be measured by the results produced and how they are produced, as so often stated. However, there is a critical third element, that is, by whom are the results produced. If it is the leader that produces the desired results, then this should rightfully be attributed to individual action without any contributing effect from the behavior of others.

There is an obvious link between communication and leadership -- the basic reason for communication and for leadership is to prompt some form of behavioral response or action. Leaders must communicate by speaking, listening, reading, writing and action. Leaders produce results and as other authors have stated, "Leaders get results through people." Follower behavior, not leader behavior, defines leadership. This might lead one to argue, wrongly, that there is little difference between leadership and coercion. Coercion, or creating an environment using fear or incentives as motivational tools, may work temporarily yet is seldom sustainable. Performance declines, conflict ensues or people leave.

Using the intuition I had on leadership, I thought that writing this article would indeed be worth the trouble. Most of the relevant information on leadership has been included here.

Ultimately, the brand of leadership we seek in contemporary life is best defined, developed and measured based on whether intended results are achieved, how they are achieved, the value of these results to others, and whether followers take discretionary action to achieve the leader's vision, mission and goals. Leadership depends on the achievements of followers. Leadership development must be tied to intended results of those who are lead more than competency sets of those who lead. Evidence of effective leadership can be found in the daily attitudes and habits of followers. Ultimately, leadership can be measured by the achievement of discretionary goals by followers

All this matter was written with passion, which led to the speedy completion of this writing on leadership. Let this passion burn for some time.

Leadership & Teamwork

Strong, positive teamwork is defined by a leader who has a vision and the ability to inspire his or her team to work toward the realization of that vision.

The leader is not threatened in the least by the expertise and diversity of his or her team. Rather, a good team leader engages his or her teammates in a discussion about what quality looks like, what is needed to perform and complete the job, and empowers the team members to always strive for quality improvement.

Let’s break all that down into its component parts. The first is a clearly defined leader. I believe every team must have a leader. There must be someone who is in charge and makes the ultimate decisions.

Team members may take turns being the leader as long as everyone is clear who the leader is on any given day. Another variation of that theme is to have certain people be the leader for projects that are in their area of expertise. However, in every event, there can be no question among teammates who is the leader for that day or project.

The leader needs to have a vision. This is similar to Covey’s second habit, “Begin with the end in mind.” A true leader creates the end product twice---once mentality and then in its actual form. It is impossible to lead toward a fuzzy vision. People are simply not inspired to follow uncertainty.

Having the vision is not enough to inspire teammates to strive toward the same goal. A good team leader knows how to help each teammate see how the end product or service will be useful and what, exactly, their individual contribution is toward that end.

How does the janitor contribute to fans’ enjoyment at a professional baseball game? By providing a clean, neat bathroom experience---that’s how. If the janitor sees himself as a critical cog in the big picture goal and he receives positive recognition for it, then he is more likely to perform his job with enthusiasm.

Another component of being able to inspire one’s teammates is having a clearly defined mission that everyone, preferably, has had a part in developing, but if not, then at least team members can agree to the previously established team mission.

This becomes important in times of conflict between team members. When there is a dispute to be solved, it is helpful to have an already established way to measure the solution. Solutions are always held up against the mission and whether or not it will move the team closer or further from the ultimate goal.

The other advantage of having a mission that has been agreed upon by all team members is that it can enhance cooperation. One of the most difficult things to manage on a team is an individual ego. There can be petty jealousies and a competitive spirit that can kill the cooperation of the best team. The mission statement is a way to minimize this potential for disaster.

The mission remains the focus that everything else is compared to. An individual’s action is either helpful or hurtful to the mission and dealt with accordingly. The group’s goal must always be placed above any individual’s desires or ego. Jealousy and backstabbing have no useful place on a team.

A good leader is in no way threatened by the expertise and diversity of his or her team. The best leaders are always seeking information from the front line people who are doing the actual work. Without information from team members, the leader’s hands are tied behind his or her back.

It is also critical to use team members in their areas of expertise. Leaders can’t know everything about everything. There will be team members who have skills and abilities that surpass those of the leader in certain areas. A good leader will ask for help when it is prudent.

This is also a time to value diversity. Having a team made up of people who all do the same jobs in pretty much the same way really has no value. One person could more easily do the job than assembling a homogenous team.

The value of a team comes from its heterogeneity. Getting feedback and suggestions from people who do things differently is what will spark the creativity and the genius of the team. This is what masterminding is all about. Tap into the wealth that is already there.

Finally, a good leader holds the bar high. He or she does not ask his team to be average or mediocre. Average and mediocre can be easily replaced. The leader asks his or her team to collectively do their very best and when they are done, the leader asks them to always strive for continuous improvement. The work is never done. The team should always be evaluating what has been implemented and be comfortable making suggestions for ways to do it even better.

Previously, I mentioned that a good leader empowers his or her teammates. Creating a need-satisfying environment does this. Team members must get along and know that the leader and the company have their best interests at heart. They must feel important, listened to and respected. They must have the freedom to make choices within the context of their assignments and they must have some fun in their work.

It is also critical for team members to feel safe. This means that they are not fearful in any way. The team leader is critical in fostering this environment for the empowerment of the entire team.

Leadership – Do We Know What It Is? 4 Pointers To Start You On The Road To Becoming A Leader

Copyright 2006 The National Learning Institute

A great deal of work has been done by many authors and researchers in trying to identify and define "leadership". The vast body of research has focused on leadership traits, habits, competencies, behaviours, styles, values, skills and characteristics. Dave Ulrich (Ulrich, D et al, Results Based Leadership, Harvard Business Press, Boston, 1999) categorised much of the research into:

- Who leaders are - values, motives, personal traits

- What leaders know - knowledge, skills and abilities

- What leaders do - behaviours, habits, styles and competencies

However, when one looks at the vast body of research into leadership, it is mostly concerned with: - the inputs of leadership and leaders, - not the outputs – ie. what leaders achieve.

Two significant factors have led to a great deal of the confusion around the issue of "leadership" and the definition of leadership itself.

Firstly, many authors erroneously use "leadership" and "management" interchangeably as if they were the same thing.

Secondly, a great deal of the research into leadership has been with people who are in formal organisational positions (e.g. supervisors, managers, senior executives) – the inference being that leadership is an integral part of the formal management role (Parry, K.W., Leadership Research: Themes, Implications, and a new Leadership Challenge, Leadership Research and Practice, Warriewood 1996).

Our experience in designing, developing and implementing management and leadership development programs, processes and interventions over the last twenty years has led to the development of The Leadership Benchmark™ (http://www.nationallearning.com.au/index_files/LeadershipDevelopment.htm), a 360 developmental tool for leaders and aspiring leaders. Much of the initial research emanated from focus groups of key stakeholders (participants, peers, managers, staff, customers, suppliers etc) conducted as part of these development initiatives and the subsequent follow-up interviews, coaching sessions and evaluation processes and forums.

In developing The Leadership Benchmark™, we have clearly delineated that:

- Leadership is different from and distinct to, management – it does NOT necessarily occur as part of a formal management position

- Leadership is contextual and therefore has to do with outputs (what the leader achieves) as much as what the leader is or does (inputs)

1. Leadership v's Management

Almost 100 years ago, Mary Parker Follett described a manager as “one who gets things done through people”. This description is still used by management educators and scholars today, but in my opinion should be changed to: “one who gets the things done that are described by the organisation in the manager’s role or position description, through the people they have been assigned”. My contention is that, if you are a manager, then:

- You become a manager when you sign on for the job

- You only become a leader when your people say so

So, you get given the title of “manager” from the organisation and people will do things for you (either well or not so well depending on how well you manage them) because of WHAT you are not WHO you are. Only your people (your team, the people you manage) can give you the title of “leader”.

In other words, the organisation gives you your “corporate” manager’s hat that lets everyone in the organisation know that you are officially a manager. Then, your people, when they believe in you, give you your leadership badge, your badge of honour!

I am indebted to my colleague Dennis Pratt (Pratt, D., Aspiring to Greatness – Above and Beyond Total Quality Management, Business & Professional Publishing, Sydney 1994) for enabling the clear distinction between leadership and management that has assisted our research in developing The Leadership Benchmark:™ . This distinction is described as:

• Leading: Leadership occurs at all levels of the organisation. The essence of leadership is concerned with creating the following conditions that encourage others to follow:

- A shared understanding of the environment.

- A shared vision of where we are going.

- A shared set of organisational values.

- A shared feeling of power.

• Managing: While the leadership function is “big picture” the management function on the other hand, has a narrower focus. Leavitt described leadership, as “path finding” while management was “path minding”. Management is situational and invloves:

- Getting things done (task focus)

- Through people (relationship focus).

2. Leadership is contextual and is concerned with outputs

The Leadership Benchmark™ focuses purely on the following four outputs achieved in any particular organisational context by the leader:

- A shared understanding of the environment.

- A shared vision of where we are going.

- A shared set of organisational values.

- A shared feeling of power.

Whereas many other (quite legitimate) management 360 tools focus on the management function. Managers who aspire to be leaders therefore need more than the feedback they might get from a normal 360 managerial profile.

3. If you are a manager, what does this mean for you?

Anyone in the organisation can become a “leader” irrespective of their formal organisational position. Just because you have a formal title of “manager” does not mean you are a leader. So for example when a fire breaks out in the building and the brand new young employee who has just completed induction training, and who instructs people to follow the evacuation procedures impeccably, shows as much leadership as the CEO who has just announced the new corporate strategy for everyone to follow.

Here’s a quick test to gain some indication on your status as a leader. Once you have been in your current role for say, 9 to 12 months, ask yourself “Would my people do the things I now ask them to do even if I were not their manager?” If you can truthfully answer “Yes”, then you are well on the path to becoming a leader. I suspect, that many of you will probably answer this with a “Maybe” – try not to be concerned at this, as the road to leadership is a long one, but a truly rewarding one. If you are concerned that it seems to be taking you “forever” to develop as a leader, keep in mind the experience of one of the greatest leaders of our time, Nelson Mandela who spent 27 years in prison waiting to show how he could lead his country!

4. How to develop yourself as a leader

Our research indicates that leaders become leaders because they do four things (at least) for us:

1. They help us understand and make sense of our environment. So for example, when things aren’t working out or are unclear for us, they are able to explain what is happening in practical terms that we can understand.

2. They help give us a sense of direction. They are able to paint a picture of a brighter future and help us believe that we can achieve the things we want to achieve.

3. They give us a belief in the values that are important to us. In doing so, they make us feel part of a team of people that share these values and have the same aims.

4. They are able to make us feel powerful by allowing us the freedom to make decisions about our life, work and the future.

If you are looking to develop yourself as a leader, then I would suggest working with your team to put in place some strategies to achieve the four leadership outputs we have described here.

Leadership - Why Successful People Arent Always Successful Leaders?

Many people assume that if someone is successful it is because they have good leadership skills. Some people assume that if a business is successful it is because it has good leaders. Leadership isn't something that is particularly easy to pass on to other people. Sometimes a company is successful because a past leader was very skilled as a leader and the current leader simply has kept things running the same as before.

Great leadership is a rare skill. For most people it doesn't come naturally. It is amazing how many organizations are successful even though they have only marginally competent people leading them. Many times this is because the structure of the organization helps make up for a leaders short comings. Sometimes it is because a particularly talented staff that makes up for the leaders deficiencies.

Any leadership development training should take into account some of the basic facts, which ought to be made available to the individual concerned for developing his leadership skill and techniques.

The training or program must adequately deal with deliberations on leadership, and not limit the understanding of the term to its limited sense. Any reference to conventional typecast leadership should be shunned. The training should also incorporate a comprehensive understanding of leadership virtues as applicable to individual requirements, and highlight the subtle differences between leadership and management.

The program should also take into account the attitude of people towards the individual qualities of the leader. It is imperative that leadership development training should be ideally structured in relation to the advancement of the individuals concerned, instead of looking for strengths in personal qualities.

While great leadership skills can make someone successful, the inverse is not true. Being successful doesn't make you a good leader. If you are looking for leaders to learn from make sure you are looking for people who actually have good leadership skills and not just someone who is successful. You can't assume that someone is a good leader just because they have had success. Many times people try to emulate people who have had success and try to follow their leadership styles. While this might be a good thing people often end up mimicking the bad habits of individuals.

The leadership development training also tries to make it clear that that collective requirements are of greater importance than individual necessities. Leadership development training tries to develop the quality of an individual to see a vision and look into the future, and develop his ambitions and aspirations.

One crucial virtue that such training emphasizes is that potential leaders should have the capability to see how details fit into the big picture. Such training also stresses the need to have the attitude that helps one to view things from the point of view of other individuals, and also able to comprehend in the proper manner the most suitable approach towards them.

Leadership

Although some people treat the terms management and leadership as synonyms, the two should be distinguished. As a matter of fact, there can be leaders of completely unorganized groups. On the other hand, there can be managers, as conceived here, only where organized structures create roles.

Separating leadership from management has important analytical advantages. It permits leadership to be singled out for study without the encumbrance of qualifications relating to the more general issues of management.

To clarify, leadership is certainly an important aspect of managing. The ability to lead effectively is one of the keys to being an effective manager; also, undertaking the other essentials of managing -- doing the entire managerial job -- has an important bearing on ensuring that a manager will be an effective leader. Managers must exercise all the functions of their role in order to combine human and material resources to achieve objectives. The key to doing this is the existence of a clear role and a degree of discretion or authority to support the manager’s actions.

The essence of leadership is followership. In other words, it is the willingness of other people to follow that makes a person a leader. Moreover, people tend to follow those whom they see as providing a means of achieving their own desires, wants and needs. Leadership and motivation are closely interconnected. By understanding motivation, one can appreciate better what people want and why they act as they do. Also, leaders may not only respond to subordinates' motivations but also arouse or dampen them by means of the organizational climate they develop. Both these factors are as important to leadership as they are to management.

Leadership can be defined as influence, that is, the art of influencing people so that they will strive willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of group goals. Ideally, people should be encouraged to develop not only a willingness to work but also a willingness to work with zeal and confidence.