We've had the credit crunch, the energy crunch and the food price crunch. But are we also suffering from a management and leadership crunch, asks David Pardey? Good development is crucial, he says, if we want to ward off a leadership crisis.
This summer we all suffered from the energy crunch and the food price crunch then, just as they seemed to be easing, along came the credit crunch. But, the big question is, are we also suffering from a leadership and management crunch? I don't mean at government level (although that certainly seems to be an issue), but are our businesses and public sector organisations providing the leadership and management that we – the employees and customers – deserve?
"Everyone taking on a leadership and management role will benefit from effective development, to improve both the good and the weak. The trouble is, not enough people get any development or, if they do, not enough of that development is effective."Let's get some points of detail out of the way first. I don't want to argue about the difference between leadership and management, or whether one is better/more important/a function of the other. Let's just agree (if we can) that all organisations need effective leadership and management, whether it's at the coal face - in shops and offices, in call centres, factories and warehouses - or in the boardroom.
Let's also agree (again, if we can) that effective leadership and management doesn't just happen. Some people seem to pick up the knowledge and skills required with remarkable ease, whilst others struggle to grasp the simplest of principles. However, everyone taking on a leadership and management role will benefit from effective development, to improve both the good and the weak. The trouble is, not enough people get any development or, if they do, not enough of that development is effective.
Lord Lever, founder of the Unilever empire, once said that only half of his advertising was effective. The trouble was, he didn't know which half! There are lots of organisations that wish that they could say that only half their leadership and management development was effective, because that would be a real improvement! The trouble is, far too much development activity fails to make the transfer from the training room (or online learning environment) and the workplace.
The goal of any development activity should be to enable learning, but learning for a purpose, and the purpose of any leadership and management development must be to improve leadership and management performance to enable the achievement of organisational goals, whether they be daily production targets or long-term growth of the business.
So what kind of development is most likely to enable that transfer of learning into practice? There are no guarantees that it will always work, but the kind of characteristics of a development programme that are most likely to produce real performance changes are:
1. Clearly defined learning outcomes that are linked to the identified needs of the learners and to organisational goals.
2. Flexible learning that fits into the working practices of the organisation and its business cycle.
3. Short, focused learning programmes that enable flexibility yet are part of a larger programme that has a coherent structure and inter-relationships between the elements.
4. Structures that encourage learning transfer and performance change.
5. Mechanisms for assessment that focus on application and performance.
Let's look at each of these in turn.
1. Clearly defined learning outcomes that are linked to the identified needs of the learners and to organisational goals.
It's basic common sense that you only offer training and development that individuals and their employers actually need, but it's amazing how often a leadership and development programme is constructed without any discussion with the participants beforehand, or any attempt to assess their learning needs. And, although there may be some awareness of business goals, the link between the development activity and those goals is often tenuous.
2. Flexible learning that fits into the working practices of the organisation and its business cycle.
The best time to learn about budgeting is just before and during the period when budgets are being prepared for the year. The best time to learn about recruiting new staff is when you have to recruit someone. This might seem like common sense, but far too often the gaps between learning and performance are so great that very little of what has been learnt gets transferred into practice. The ability to break learning down into small chunks and tie it into practical work activities is a far better way of ensuring effective leadership and management development.
3. Short, focused learning programmes that enable flexibility yet are part of a larger programme that has a coherent structure and inter-relationships between the elements.
There is plenty of evidence that the best learning activities start from what learners know and can do. A larger programme that is broken down into smaller units enables the flexibility whilst ensuring that the pieces of the jigsaw fit together into a larger whole – because leadership and management practice is as much about complex interactions as it is about individual, discrete tasks.
4. Structures that encourage learning transfer and performance change.
This is where we get to the crunch. The design of learning activities should enable learning transfer into practice. That means using practices like work-based tasks to encourage research and application; 360o feedback to obtain insights on the learners' performance (and any perceived changes) from peers, line managers and team members; reflective logs or diaries to encourage learners to review their own performance and identify ways of improving it; work-based mentoring to support learners in making the transfer; workplace coaching to enable learning to take place in the workplace; and action learning sets to bring the workplace into the learning environment, to drive learning.
5. Mechanisms for assessment that focus on application and performance.
Assessment is a key part of any development activity that leads to accreditation, but a learning programme doesn't have to be accredited to use assessment. The main question to ask is: if a learning programme doesn't have any assessment, how do you know that any learning has taken place? Assessment doesn't mean exams or tests, although they can be a useful component of checking knowledge or skill acquisition – the best assessment is based in the workplace and uses real work activity. This doesn't just mean S/NVQs – although they are one approach – but also include tasks that are set for learners that encourage learning transfer and enable that learning to be assessed. What's the point of learning about continuous improvement if you don't then go and lead a continuous improvement activity? And what better way to assess that learning than to use that continuous improvement activity?
All of these characteristics exist and are being used. The problem is, they aren't being used enough. Fortunately, structural changes in the education and training system are encouraging the wider use of best practice. Foundation degrees are based on many of these principles – work-based, flexible, user-driven – although there are variations in practice, with too many simply being the first two years of existing degree programmes. The Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) focus clearly on learning outcomes and enable flexibility (by credit accumulation and transfer). Coupled with this is the growing use of workplace mentoring and coaching as development tools to embed learning in the workplace, and of action learning - particularly for leadership development – so learning transfer is more assured.
Will all this help beat the leadership and management crunch? If employers look at leadership and management development as an investment in the future of their organisations and insist on embedding best practice in the programme, then the answer is 'Yes', they can.
David Pardey, is senior manager, policy & research at the Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM)
The ILM is the first and only leadership and management awarding organisation to submit all its qualifications to the QCF. It offers relatively small units, designed to accommodate one, two or three day courses, building up to a full qualification through credit accumulation and transfer. It offers employers and training providers the opportunity to deliver a Foundation Degree (accredited by the University of Hertfordshire) that is based around non CHECK work-based qualifications, by-passing the need to go through the normal university approvals process. The ILM is also a major provider of accredited qualifications in coaching and mentoring. Furthermore, the ILM requires the use of action learning in its main leadership qualifications, to support the development of effective leaders.
Read our Spotlight on David Pardey
To read David's previous features, please click on the titles below:
