Author: Steve Wolinski

Introduction to Feedback

In my opinion there is one activity that stands above all others in its ability to transform individuals into exceptional leaders: feedback. In this case feedback is defined as data provided to individuals that facilitates greater self-awareness and behavioral change. There is no doubt that education on leadership behavior, modeling of effective leadership, and the opportunity to practice leadership are all worthwhile tools. But there is absolutely nothing that can supplant feedback as a method for facilitating development in organizational leaders. And, if this is true, it begs the question “what type of feedback should a leader seek”? There are a multitude of types of feedback and also methods used to collect, formulate/interpret, and distribute feedback. These include, but shouldn’t be seen as limited to, assessments, multi-rater feedback, experiential activities, and personal and direct input from key stakeholders.

Assessments

The assessment category is comprised of feedback that comes from various tools that provide normative data on areas such as personality, cognitive ability, learning style, interpersonal tendencies, and values. The use of the term normative indicates that these assessments compare a person’s answers to norm groups and uses this information to draw tentative conclusions about an individual in the previously mentioned categories. These tools are often available online and are most often accessed through a consultant or psychologist certified in the administration and interpretation of the instruments.

Multi-Rater Feedback

It could be argued that multi-rater feedback, such as 360 surveys, is a type of assessment. I view these as distinct from the aforementioned assessments in that the data is subjective and observed versus normative. That is, the data is typically derived by asking for the observations and ratings of a leader’s behaviors by his or her boss, peers, subordinates, and other key stakeholders such as clients and vendors. This information is typically gathered by having the stakeholders read a variety of competency-based statements and then rate how well the individual in question reflects these competency statements. Most multi-rater feedback data is collected online using different software or consulting services.

Experiential Activities

These activities can be highly structured and facilitated, such as simulations, case studies, or planned and facilitated experiential exercises. They can also be much less structured, anchored in actual work, fall under the umbrella of action learning activities. The more structured activities are typically facilitated by a consultant and the feedback consists of the consultant’s observations and interpretation of the leader’s performance in these activities. In contrast, action learning often involves leaders working on actual work tasks or projects and then reporting back to others (peers, coaches, mentors, etc.) on actions taken and progress made. The leaders then receive feedback from on the progress and are encouraged to identify lessons learned from this data ways that these lessons will be applied to future efforts on the task or project.

Direct Input from Key Stakeholders

The data collected in multi-rater feedback and experiential activities is obviously comprised of input from others. The difference with direct input is that the feedback is typically received straight from a person as and received in a conversational setting. And most often one of the primary objectives for these conversations are to receive developmental and performance feedback from key stakeholders or trusted others. The most common examples of this type of relationship are executive coaching and mentoring relationships. But it isn’t limited to these contexts, and there is also some interesting and worthwhile work being done in such areas as peer coaching circles and feedback via social media methodologies.

Final Comments on Feedback

My intent in this blog was to share my opinion on the vital importance of feedback to leadership and a few or the more common methods used for gathering, interpreting, and sharing feedback. In my next blog I will provide more of an evaluation of these different methods. In the meantime I would love to hear what others think about the role of feedback in becoming an effective leader – as well as any thoughts or comments on different approaches to feedback.

Meaning at Work

Gurnek Bains and his colleagues at YSC Consulting have written a book called Meaning Inc: The Blueprint for Business Success in the Twenty First Century. In it they argue that it is critical for leaders to create organizational cultures that have meaning and are meaningful for team members. The authors state that these cultures are evidenced by key attributes such as an invigorating sense of purpose that goes beyond business success and which makes people feel they are changing society as opposed to just servicing needs.

Role of Leadership and Creation of Meaning

Gurnek et al state that creating meaning is the most important factor in generating high levels of commitment and engagement in contemporary organizations. The authors suggest that there are four primary challenges for leaders that want to develop organizations that create and provide a sense of meaning for employees.

• The first is something called a Focus on “Why”. This is about mobilizing the efforts of employees by clarifying why their activities are worthwhile and meaningful.
• The second is the cultivation of a Good Enough Mindset. This is said to be a leadership perspective or mindset characterized by an absolute commitment to serving the capacity for creative growth of one’s colleagues and followers.
• Third is something called a Meaning Making Spike. A spike is a towering strength possessed by a leader that, when properly developed, enables the person to have a unique and special impact in any situation they engage. The authors believe that spikes tend to happen in one of three primary categories: Creativity, Coherence, Compassion, and Courage.
• The fourth and final challenge is, and the one that is the foundation for the other three, is Insight. In this case, insight is viewed as an understanding of leadership strengths and areas requiring development, an advanced understanding of organizational culture/context, and an appreciation for the needs of organizational stakeholders.

Importance of Meaning

I personally believe that – barring any profoundly dramatic disruptions to the global business landscape – the importance of creating meaning for organizational members is only going to increase in the years to come. The question is whether leaders are prepared to have such meaningful influence. And, if not, what can be done to make it so.

Adaptability and Resiliency as Overlooked Leadership Qualities

In my mind the unsung hero of effective leadership are two related and overlapping qualities: adaptability and resiliency. The ability and, probably more importantly, the willingness of a leader to adapt his or her thinking, behavior, or strategy based on changing circumstances, miscalculations, or other factors, is a historically underrated quality that is starting to get its due in this rapidly changing world. And maybe even more so than adaptability, resiliency — discussed here as the capacity to bounce back from perceived and actual mishaps, set-backs, and adversity — has been overlooked as a leadership competency.

Research on Resiliency

I recently read that Ceridian Corporation conducted a study and published an executive briefing on organizational resilience. They arrived at the conclusion that resilient organizations are those that are able to respond to two seemingly paradoxical imperatives: 1) managing for performance (enhanced by consistency, efficiency, and immediate results) and 2) managing for adaptation (enhanced by innovation, improvisation, anticipation, and commitment to long-term benefits).

In my mind what is reflected here is a mindset that embraces disruption to organizational plans, strategy, and operating procedures, as normal and inevitable. The leader that maintains this mindset does not react with shock, dismay, or confusion to disruption of the best laid plans. Instead, he or she is eager to analyze the circumstances, ascertain the meaning behind the unexpected, and determine whether there are appropriate adjustments to be made. In addition, leaders demonstrating this type of leadership are able to build more resilient direct reports, teams, and ultimately organizations.

Origins of Resiliency

It is the viewpoint of many psychologists and sociology experts that resiliency is a quality that is partly inbred and partly developed through childhood experiences and modeling. The problem with this viewpoint is that it presumes that a person’s level of resiliency is pretty much set by the time they are in early to middle adulthood. It is my opinion that a certain amount of resiliency – definitely enough to make a difference as an organizational leader – can be developed in adults simply by embracing a worldview that change, disruption, and mishaps are as normal and predictable in organizations as salaries and vacation days. Or perhaps it is more analogous with the sentiments I heard expressed by a veteran of the Iraq conflict: “It is a given, no plan ever survives first contact”.

In the following weeks I will be exploring the role of resiliency and adaptability in leadership. It would be great to hear from others if they have any thoughts, questions, or references on these competencies.

As mentioned in my last blog entry, there is a growing need – and interest — for leaders to know how to lead change in their respective organizations. There is significant outcome data that demonstrates a strong correlation between the skills and knowledge of the individuals responsible for leading change and the actual success of organizational change initiatives. This again begs the question: What leadership behaviors or competencies are most strongly associated with effectively leading or overseeing change initiatives?

I stated in my last entry that there are six leadership competency areas that, in my opinion, distinctly enhance the ability of a leader to successfully coordinate and drive organizational change. Refer to my blog entry from November 24^th for descriptions of the first three: Systems Thinking, Strategic Savvy, and Organizational Agility. In this entry I will introduce the second three: Capacity Building, Creative Communication, and Grit. Please know that the names for these competencies are ones that were arbitrarily assigned by me. They are definitely in use elsewhere to explain qualities quite different than those found here.

And again, as stated in my last blog, it is important to know that these competencies are intended to correspond most directly with mid-level leaders operating in medium to large organizations. This is based on the assumption that these leaders are the ones most often assigned direct responsibility for overseeing or leading change initiatives in organizations of this size.

Capacity Building

This is essentially the wherewithal to develop the overall capacity of change team members, key sponsors, and other relevant stakeholders, to effectively embrace and drive organizational change processes. In addition, this competency area is directly associated with a leader’s effectiveness at securing the resources and support that is necessary for a specific change initiative to succeed. Thus, the leader is both equipping and providing the requisite “equipment”.

Creative Communication

This competency area is marked by the skilled use of communication strategies and interpersonal exchanges to facilitate change initiatives. The leader has an understanding of the types of communication to use at different junctures in the change process. He or she also demonstrates a variety of advanced and well honed communication skills of his or her own, including verbal, face-to-face, group presentation, non-verbal, written, electronic, and symbolic.

Grit

This competency area is evidence by a willingness to personally commit to the big picture of an organizational initiative, even at the risk of sacrificing success on short-term goals. This is a common dilemma for leaders responsible for change in an organization – and this competency speaks both to the willingness to make tough decisions and the ability to recognize which decisions are going to have the greatest impact on the success and sustainability of a change initiative.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations. Website, Email.

Leadership Competencies and Change

The growing need for change leadership in organizations is widely acknowledged as some estimates are as high as 70% of all large scale change initiatives fail to meet the objectives delineated at the beginning of the process. The research and literature on change indicates that a primary reason for the success or failure of a change initiative hinges on the skills and knowledge of the individuals responsible for leading the change. In light of this, one obvious question arises: What leadership behaviors or competencies are most strongly associated with effectively leading or overseeing change initiatives?

In my opinion there are six competency areas that enhance the capacity of a leader to coordinate and drive organizational change: Systems Thinking, Strategic Savvy, Organizational Agility, Capacity Building, Creative Communication, and Courage. I am going to introduce the first three in this blog entry and will follow up with an overview of the other three next week. It is important to note that these competencies are intended to correspond most directly with individuals that are in a mid-level leader role, within medium to large organizations, and with responsibility for overseeing or leading the actual change initiative.

Systems Thinking

This is an advance understanding of how an organization is in fact an interrelated set of relationships, processes, strategies, and cultural influences. It is the ability to see the broader context of the organization and sensitivity to how the different elements are apt to influence and interact with each other when a significant change is introduced into the system. And while it is impossible for anyone to predict exactly all the ripple effects of change in a system – the leader with the capacity for thinking systemically will accurately anticipate enough of the ripples to make a significant difference.

Strategic Savvy

This is basically an advanced knowledge of the factors that are most critical to the success of an organizational change initiative. And it isn’t just the knowledge of these factors — it is the ability to use them in support of the change process. In essence, it is the understanding and wherewithal to develop and oversee a coherent change strategy. It is an appreciation for factors such as change sponsorship, communication strategies, and success metrics. And of course it isn’t just an understanding of the factors – it is the ability and willingness to leverage the factors to drive change.

Organizational Agility

This is about knowing who to get involved and knowing how to get them involved in order effect positive organizational change. It entails a finely honed understanding of the larger relationship network within an organization — and the requisite skills to navigate, influence, and establish the involvement and/or support of key players pursuant to the change initiative. The person that is organizationally agile has solid interpersonal influence and, what might be referred to as, an advance level of applied emotional intelligence.

Next Time

My next blog entry will describe the behaviors/competencies of Capacity Building, Creative Communication, and Courage. But in the mean time, it would be wonderful if any readers were willing to share their reactions to the first three and any other thoughts, questions, comments you may have about this idea of change leadership competencies.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations.

Guest blog submitted by Krista Peterson

This dialogue about onboarding and new leader transitions is so multi-faceted, and there are so many interesting directions we can go. Let’s go deeper into the aspect of culture.

External Executive Hiring

Steve commented about the prevalence of organizations hiring externally for key roles. From my experience, both as a retained recruiter, and as an executive in an organization, I can attest that one way that a newly hired executive can derail goes back to a poor selection process. When the organization has been unclear about what they were actually looking for and subsequently selected the “wrong” person, the likelihood of derailment is even higher.

If companies are choosing an external candidate over internal candidates 75% of the time, it would serve them well to be really clear about the job outcomes, expected business results, team dynamics, and the leadership talents and skills needed to be most effective before they engage in a search. A robust search process can then screen candidates for leadership traits, experience, cultural fit, and past behaviors that most closely match those needs. Also, communicating what the culture is like to external candidates is critical during the selection process, so the candidate can self-select and make informed choices about pursuing that organization.

Cultural Fit

Sometimes even the best selection process can miss some of the subtle things that can lead to derailment. Cultural fit is one of the more subtle aspects to navigate, for there are many things at play that make it a complex one to figure out. On the surface, you have the corporate culture of the organization, this is usually known and easily described by employees. Then there are the sub-cultural elements of the organization or division, that may be less known. They represent the unwritten rules of engagement, how the work actually gets done in the system. It is these unwritten rules that can be harder to tease apart. Layer on top of that, the leader’s previous culture, which has influenced, in part, the leader’s style. What may have been culturally acceptable and rewarded in the previous company, may not be tolerated in the new organization, and because it is an unspoken rule, often no one has communicated this to the new leader clearly.

Case Study on Culture

One new leader I was coaching (at the derailment stage) came in to the organization at a Director level. His past experience was incredibly strong and industry specific. He was brought in as an expert to lead the expansion of an existing product line. His former company culture was very competitive, bordering cut-throat, and leaders there were rewarded for their independent thoughts and actions. The new organization was far more collegial and rewarded collaboration and partnership. The leadership skills that were nurtured and encouraged in one environment were derailing him in the new organization. No one had offered enough feedback, and so the subleties of the cultural and his leadership style was clashing. He was getting business results and was driving the new product line, but he was disenfranchising his team and cross-company partners every step of the way.

The Role of Feedback

Especially related to cultural fit, feedback plays a critical role. It is nearly impossible to communicate upfront every nuance of the culture, but as the new leader behaves in ways that run counter, feedback is essential to making early course-corrections. In next week’s entry will look at different types and approaches to feedback. In the meantime, it would interesting to hear how others work to ensure that new leaders are clear about the culture, especially in relation to a leader’s own strengths and opportunities? We would also welcome thoughts, ideas, and questions on the role of feedback in general.

Guest Writer Information

Krista Peterson, MA, is Founder, Principal Consultant, and Coach at Stone River Consulting in St. Paul, Minnesota. Her phone number is 612-719-7658; e-mail is kpeterson@stoneriverconsulting.com

Krista brings nearly 20 years of experience in leadership development to the practice, largely from her time at Target Corporation, where she served as the director of talent development, leading the organization’s strategy for developing leaders. She also led the creation of an internal executive coaching function, and expanded the onboarding services delivered to new leaders.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations.

Hiring External Leaders

There appears to be a trend in companies increasingly looking outside the organization for new leadership. Some studies estimate that more than thirty percent of Fortune 1000 Companies are led by chief executives who were recruited externally. Sessa and Taylor (2000) found a growing bias toward external executive hires, noting that when corporate selection committees were open to both internal and external candidates, an external candidate was chosen 75% of the time. It is clear that externally hired executives are often favored because new perspectives are considered valuable, specific leadership competencies are desired, and a belief exists that an externally hired leader will be unabashed about implementing change.

Leadership Derailment

While it is hard to assail the logic of considering external candidates for openings in key organizational roles – it is easier to question the limited amount of time, energy, and resources that many organizations devote to helping these executives transition into their new positions. It is especially surprising that organizations will take the risk of an unsuccessful transition when, as Krista Peterson mentioned in her blog entry on November 2, there are certain factors that have been proven to contribute significantly to derailment. And here are numerous studies that demonstrate that — without a well developed transitional strategy — external hires are significantly more likely to fail than leaders promoted internally.

Onboarding Strategies

Fortunately, numerous companies are availing themselves of the research on derailment factors, and are employing onboarding strategies to mitigate these factors and assist external leaders in making successful transitions. But it is clear that for these efforts to be successful, onboarding cannot simply take the shape of a glorified employee orientation process. In my opinion, one of the most important factors of transitional success is for the incoming executive, and those assisting with his or her transition, to have an advanced level or understanding of three things:

• Unique aspects of the organizational culture
• Dynamics of the teams the executive is entering (whether as a leader or colleague)
• Personality, knowledge and leadership skills of the incoming executive

The first two factors require some level of awareness and/or assessment of the culture and team dynamics. The third requires an individual assessment that can then be used to guide the design of an onboarding strategy that effectively navigates the transition of the external leader into the organization. and onto the teams. This of course is a distinct oversimplification of factors related to onboarding – and it would be great to hear what others have found to work.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations. Website, Email.

Guest blog submitted by Krista Peterson

The guest post on October 24 by Greg Waddell describes the delicate balance of leadership and management well, especially the whitewater rapids of change that most leaders are facing. Now, consider, amidst all the organizational change, new strategies and emerging business, the leader leading (and managing) all of that change is new in his or her role.

Challenge of Leadership Transition

A leadership transition is a critical change for the organization, the new team, key stakeholders and especially the new leader. The need for the newly hired leader to get up to speed quickly, understand the business, navigate the culture, build relationships with key stakeholders, assess and lead their new team, and understand their own personal leadership strengths and needs in the context of this new role can be a daunting task. So daunting in fact, that one research study* cited that 40% of leaders new in role will fail or be fired within the first 18 months. No one wants to believe that their newly hired executive could become a statistic. And yet, most companies are not doing a lot to support new executives during this critical transition.

Onboarding

In my opinion, critical transitions aren’t just defined by new leaders coming in from the outside. I have seen plenty of highly successful leaders make an internal, cross-functional move, and fail to make the transition effectively. In fact, they sometimes have it worse than the external new hire because they are usually a highly talented leader with an internal track record of success, and therefore are often left alone to figure it out. Sink or swim is not the best onboarding strategy with any employee, and especially not key leaders being counted on to drive the strategy forward for the organization.

Derailment Factors in Leadership Transitions

I would like to take the next month to create a dialogue about what causes new leaders to fail, and the kinds of support new leaders need for long-term success. I have seen plenty of new leaders fail, some fast and hard, others more slowly, in a painful rollercoaster of ups and downs. Regardless of their speed of derailment, they all have had some things in common that boiled down to the following causes: poor cultural fit, unclear role expectations, or an inability to get results.

What are some of the other causes of derailment you have seen in a newly hired leader? It would be great to hear what others see as some of the more common factors. Please share your thoughts.

*Bradt, Check and Pedraza, 2006

Guest Writer Information

Krista Peterson, MA, is Founder, Principal Consultant, and Coach at Stone River Consulting in St. Paul, Minnesota. Her phone number is 612-719-7658; e-mail is kpeterson@stoneriverconsulting.com

Krista brings nearly 20 years of experience in leadership development to the practice, largely from her time at Target Corporation, where she served as the director of talent development, leading the organization’s strategy for developing leaders. She also led the creation of an internal executive coaching function, and expanded the onboarding services delivered to new leaders.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations.

Guest Submission by Amanda Trosten – Bloom

Strengths Spotting

In my last post, I offered history and some detail on the Five Core Strategies of Appreciative Leadership. Today, instead, I’ll share some of the practices of Appreciative Leadership. But first, I must make a confession. We’ve all heard it said that we teach what we need to learn. Not surprisingly, co-authorship of Appreciative Leadership has reminded me of things I know and believe – but may not consciously enact on a daily basis. It’s also brought me face to face with new frontiers in my own appreciative leadership.

Take Illumination, as an example. I know about Illumination. I’m privileged enough to be surrounded by people who deeply acknowledge my strengths. I regularly, intuitively and clearly see other people’s strengths. But do I share what I see just as regularly, maintaining a 5-to-1 ratio of positive-to-negative comments about who people are and how they operate? Absolutely not. In fact, when I’m in the thick of things, I have an unfortunate tendency to comment only on what’s broken, what didn’t get done, and what’s still on the horizon. In our book, we describe a practice called strengths spotting that helps me address this unfortunate tendency. It’s a simple but profound process:

1. Ask someone to tell you about something they’ve done that they feel proud of.
2. Listen, watch their expressions, and make note of the underlying strengths that they’ve expressed or described.
3. Share what you heard.

Strengths spotting can occur in a casual conversation, or formally: in a job interview, performance development session, or career planning process. “By asking for and listening to stories and thereby illuminating strengths, you can easily identify what a person wants to do and is capable of doing. You can then consider if this person’s strengths are a good fit for the available job.” (Appreciative Leadership, p. 69).

Positive Questions

There are other examples like this for me: principles I know, but forget to turn to … practices I believe in, but forget to apply. For example, “The Wisdom of Inquiry” suggests that we ask more and tell less. I’m profoundly aware of the power of positive questions to engage. But when I really get going, there are very few people who have more answers (or are more certain in their answers) than I. On balance, my “ask-to-tell” ratio (Appreciative Leadership, p. 31) is a great deal lower than I wish it were. How has this book helped me boost it? It’s elevated my awareness, and encouraged me to plan ways and times that I will ask more questions. Speaking engagements, meetings with clients, in the face of criticism: these are all opportunities to ask more questions, rather than lead with answers.

Conscious Decision Making

Here’s another example. The strategy of Integrity calls us all to conscious decision-making. It suggests that every decision we make affects other people, and other choices. When I automatically say yes to too many things, or take on too many projects or responsibilities, I feel great about sharing my gifts and helping people out … but at what cost? I start “speeding” – perhaps forgetting to consider other people in the process. I sleep badly, and get grumpy. I get absent-minded – perhaps forgetting other obligations, or dropping balls that other people have to pick up. In other words, my unconscious decision to over commit regularly and negatively impacts the people around me … not just me. It hinders the greater good. “Appreciative Leadership consciously attends to the choices they make, both personally and collectively, to create a world that works for all.” (Appreciative Leadership, p. 170)

Appreciative Development

Why, you might ask yourself, do I share these challenges of mine? My hope is to remind myself (along with those who read this blog) that we are all on this Appreciative Leadership journey together. We’ll never fully “arrive” … instead, we’ll do the best we can a day at a time, using the best tools and resources that are available to us. The book Appreciative Leadership – co-authored with Diana Whitney and Kae Rader – offers generative stories and practical tools that can help each of us walk that path a little more consistently and consciously. In so doing, it may help others do the same – and make the world kinder, better place. Lena ecunk’unpi, hecel oyate ki ninpe kte. (“We do these things so the people may live.”)

Amanda Trosten-Bloom, Managing Director, Corporation for Positive Change, Twitter: @ATrostenBloom, amanda@positivechange.org

---

[A1]Link to last post

Bias for Appreciative Leadership

This blog entry – consistent with my entry from October 7 — is a commentary on Whitney, Trosten-Bloom, and Rader’s book Appreciative Leadership: Focus on What Works to Drive Winning Performance and Build a Thriving Organization. I want to be transparent about my biases related to this current series of blog entries on Appreciative Leadership (AL). I am a big advocate and believer in Appreciative Inquiry (AI) and have been using it in my work with organizations for many years. I have also been trained in AI by Amanda, Diana, David Cooperrider, and numerous other AI thought and practice leaders. Now while my wholehearted faith in the principles of AI might predispose me to an automatically favorable response to AL, having a strong familiarity with AI should also equip me to proffer an informed, honest, and critical analysis of the author’s integration of AI into a leadership model. I hope that this balance of bias and knowledge will make for some worthwhile and helpful commentary.

In a nutshell, I am really pleased with AL as a leadership model. My opinion is that AL, and the Five Core Strategies in particular, provide a wonderful framework that consultants can use in leadership development, executive coaching, succession planning, organizations change, and a myriad of other areas. My initial reaction to reading the AL book was to assess how consistent the model was with the core principles of AI itself. Once satisfied that there was indeed a high level of alignment, my second response — not unlike that of Shona Garner in her response to my original blog on AL – was to assess how clear, tangible, and applicable the core elements of AL might be to leaders and this consultants, like myself, that work with leaders. In my estimation, the AL model of leadership put forth by Amanda and her co-authors provides a coherent and accessible initial framework that is nicely grounded in theory, examples (aka stories), and competencies (i.e. knowledge, skills, abilities, and qualities). I would like to provide a quick overview of some of the KSAQs that are explicit (or that I am interpreting as KSAQs) in the Five Core Strategies as outlined by Amanda in her October 13 blog entry.

Strategy 1: Inquiry

• Emphasizes “asking” over “telling”
• Employs purposefully positive and value-based questions
• Invites people to share thoughts, feelings, stories of success and ideas for the future
• Cultivates environments in which people feel both empowered to make decisions and take risks, and encouraged to learn, experiment, and innovate

Strategy 2: Illumination

• Actively seeks to discover the unique skills, abilities strengths and positive potential of every person and situation
• Looks and listens for what works, when individuals and groups are operating at their best
• Share stories of success and disseminates best practices
• Anticipates and at seeks to fulfill people’s need for recognition and celebration
• Aligns strengths by providing opportunities for people to do more of what they do well
• Finds opportunities to facilitate collaboration with others whose strengths are complementary

Strategy 3: Inclusion

• Acknowledges and addresses people’s need for belonging and creativity
• Brings diverse groups of people “to the table” for crucial decisions and planning
• Engages people in a manner that fosters safety and encourages equal voice
• Accommodates conversational differences
• Enables people to contribute in ways that are both comfortable and empowering

Strategy 4: Inspiration

• Acts in ways that are energetically positive
• Uses elevated language and broadly shares uplifting stories
• Puts forth visions of what’s possible or “hopeful visions”
• Provides the resources and paths for attaining the “hopeful visions”

Strategy 5: Integrity

• Demonstrates honesty, transparency, authenticity, and moral or ethical conduct
• Employs holistic approaches to support the authentic expression of human potential, and to foster the design of life-affirming products, services and organization
• Makes conscious choices to serve the whole (i.e., whole person, whole organization, whole world), and encourage or empowers others to do the same
• Encourages and expects others know they are expected to give their best for the greater good

Conclusion

I hope is okay with Amanda that I have attempted to create a bullet-pointed delineation of the Five Core Strategies. It is my default setting at this point in my career to try and simplify and functionalize any leadership approach. I am sure that this is an inadequate attempt to achieve this goal and would be interested of Amanda, or others, think that I am capturing some of the key KSAQs of AL.

——————–

Steve Wolinski provides leadership development, organizational change and talent management services to numerous public, private and non-profit organizations. Website, Email.