How can today’s leaders become more effective?  Zoe O’Connor outlines the compelling findings from the latest research sponsored by ER Consultants

 A couple of years ago, ER Consultants sponsored a former colleague, Sonia Bicknell to research the notion of leadership, to review the multitude of publications and to dig deeper into the whole concept*. So, what did that research reveal?

The first discovery was that there are nearly 3 million articles or books on this subject in The University of Cambridge Library alone and, more importantly, that very few are based on any kind of robust research. In fact, most are anecdotal. That does not stop us reading them as is illustrated by the thousands of hits received by Amazon.com every year on the subject.

But what is leadership? Current discussions with our clients remind us that this is still a key question for many senior teams. Many are still grappling with how to define it, where to find it, how to develop it, where to apply it, how much of it is needed and when to change it.

A selection of the most compelling findings from the initial research are outlined over the following pages. It is important to be aware that Bicknell’s ‘angle’ was the early stage firm. Pre-conceived ideas of leadership did not dominate how they acted to survive and grow, so that the impact of change could be observed in a manageable timeframe. The research was a mix of desk research and careful observation, dialogue and interaction with people in leadership positions, testing the hypotheses. The theoretical underpinnings on which the approach was based included: change, cognitive dissonance and sense-making/sense-giving, about which a great deal has been researched
and written.

Leadership as a process not a person

There are many levers and enablers in organisations that if galvanised help develop direction and push or pull people forward. Take recognition and reward. Effective leadership is a process that continuously seeks to develop a shared sense of coherence so that we pull in the same direction. While some individuals in leadership positions may be charismatic and inspiring, the rest of us have to optimise the range of levers and enablers at our disposal. High profile individuals are
not simply charismatic; they make full use of the leadership process.

Leadership in the context of a dynamic organisation and its operating environment

As Gary Ashton indicates in his article (on page 4), leadership and organisation go hand in hand, in a dynamic dance. Unless we take into account the organisation’s history, current reality and future options, we don’t know where and how to pitch our leadership capability. At the same time, if we don’t take into account our own history, our preferences and values, our current modus operandi and what we aspire to, we may end up in leadership positions where neither we nor the health of the organisation can flourish. On page 7, Anne Bennett illuminates how coaching helps individuals to get in touch with themselves and the parts they can play within
their organisation as self-awareness is a must for effective leadership.

Coherence as the moving target

The research shows that the roles of leadership are primarily three-fold: that of interpreter, moderator and constructor, in a changing environment. To be able to create coherence within ambiguity and uncertainty, the leadership task is to tap into sufficient sources so that a helpful picture can be drawn and to generate sufficient interest and belief in that picture to stimulate aligned movement. This involves interpreting data, then moderating that interpretation depending on whether they want more or less radical change, and constructing a version that best serves the organisation. The trouble is that the scenes keep shifting and today’s coherence may be tomorrow’s nonsense, so the job never stops. Hence the notion of coherence as an ever-moving target but one upon which alignment depends. Ann Gammie’s article, starting on page 9, describes some of the complexity that underpins and penetrates what people learn about leadership and highlights some of the challenges of retaining coherence.

Dialogue as a principle tool of leadership

In an ever-complex world, the capacity of anyone to keep track of all the potential changes affecting their organisation is severely stretched. This pushes leadership into a different domain – that of purposeful dialogue to ensure sufficient sense is both made and shared as commonly held sense. In this respect, the dialogue is more like co-creation, where the act of involving others to make sense of the world at the same time persuades all parties of the coherence that is drawn. By taking a more collective approach to creating sense we are likely to develop a more substantial ‘sense-scape’ that will include not only economic, social and commercial data, for instance, but personal and emotional data too. As Natalie Carolan describes in her article on emotional intelligence (see page 13), effective leadership requires not only self-awareness, but social-awareness, self-management and relationship management – all of which contribute to sense making and giving.

Words are the building material of sense

The last point I wish to raise here is the use of language to make and give sense. It sounds obvious, but it is a factor that may be underplayed. Too often we have organisations and leaders operating at one or other end of the extremes; very little that is articulated in a visible, accessible way, or, reams of ‘papers’ that overwhelm our capacity to make sense of them. We under-utilise a wider range of ‘word mechanisms’ available to us – stories, metaphors, theories of action, ideology and so on. Differences in language (i.e. dialects) and language construction means that what you say may not be perceived in the same way by everyone. In short, the sense-making will vary. Yet by simply being more thoughtful with our use of language and being more conscious of what meaning we wish to convey, could result in more effective leadership.

The points above represent a glimpse into the vast world of leadership and, I hope, indicate that we all need to look beyond our personal profiles and embrace a much wider concept of leadership if we are to be effective.