Put a hand on your heart, and remember the last course on leadership and / or motivation and / or teamwork and / or coaching and / or interpersonal relationships and many other skills associated with the exercise of leadership, which you have attended, or you have had to send someone from your company.
It is assumed that those who have participated in such training, among other things, will have achieved, almost without realizing it, “Being true leaders” (as I recall, the recent promotion of one of these activities said).
Now, I resort to your frankness inviting you to please answer these questions: What direct impact did that training generate in meeting the final number that you or those you have sent should reach in terms of business objectives? How were beautiful words such as "Neurolinguistics", "Visual Calibration", "Assertiveness", "Responsiveness", "people-centered leadership", "empathy", among others, put into daily practice, when to your boss the only thing that Interesting to know is how are you going to do to reach 20% profitability this year or open that damn distribution channel before the competition? How did you make the post-course motivating effect last just over a week?
Good instructors, delicious food, comfortable room, excellent material… but do you remember how you felt the first day after the course when you saw your boss, colleagues and collaborators, running after the number, caught up in the daily newspaper? How was that what the theory of “Mr. Young ”, written 20 years ago for a first world reality and therefore, little applicable in Argentina 2005?
Take me out of the doubt, how did you manage to transfer the best leadership practices of General Motors that you were taught, to your company that is an SME of 300 people with problems of salary dissatisfaction and difficulties in obtaining a loan?
And fundamentally, were you able to verify and measure the evolution of your leadership-related behaviors and their direct impact on the fulfillment of your objectives? Did this training help you or your company to measure the return on investment made, in terms of your own performance, or that of the person who sent the course?
Of course…. to development of behaviors linked to goals
It is evident that the current offer of leadership training (with a few exceptions), is very far from helping you answer these questions, therefore here is the first paradox:
The aim is to develop behaviors that are later not measured in terms of the impact on the business objectives of the person who hires said course. Remember in this sense an old axiom of management: "what is not measured, is not changed, and what is not changed, is not improved."
And have no doubt that the evolution of behaviors that are intended to be improved can (and should) be measured, changed and improved.
The following table represents the axes in which we are working on this change, according to different applications developed by our clients in Argentina and Latin America:
In this way, traditional Training via course, migrates towards a methodological process, which allows to align and measure changes in individual behaviors and work teams, and its corresponding impact on business objectives.
An example…
"We took them to go horseback riding, to sail, we named them leaders of change, they went to as many leadership courses as you can imagine…, we spent the dollars that you also imagine… And look at the results of the sector !!", - he roared not long behind me the Commercial Director of a major service company.
And he continued… "I only know one thing: I don't want more courses, or outdoors, or anything."
More words, less words, recurring complaint.
This executive did not question the technical qualities of his team members.
His concern was not the skills… but the attitudes and behaviors of that team, which directly and negatively impacted a business goal… no more, no less.
This comment represents the “crisis” of the current leadership training model, which I consider far from business, expensive, theoretical, impossible to measure in terms of business goals and reactive to how much fashion and / or guru comes from outside, with recipes very nice but difficult to apply.
The success cases in which in my capacity as Consultant I have to intervene have four salient characteristics that go beyond the category and size of the companies that no longer choose to take courses, but to enter into a true process of change, aimed at develop business-oriented leadership behaviors:
1. They have a Human Resources area involved and self-perceived as the "owner" of the business; willing to understand the problems of other departments (at the time, their internal clients), leaving aside the traditional role of "course buyer / supplier".
2. A total conviction on the part of the “number one” of the specific organization or area, to invest perhaps more time in developing habits and behaviors linked to objectives, but with the certainty of having continuous and concrete measurements and modifications of the leadership effectiveness and its impact on company results.
3. The importance of translating these results into the performance evaluation of the leaders immersed in this process of change and its impact on bonuses, awards, etc.
4. These companies know (or we help them know) about the importance of operationalizing (turning into measurable and observable behaviors), the challenges of their leaders. For example, “our leaders must make a difference”: what does that mean in terms of increased profitability? What is for this Company to “make a difference”? What specific behaviors are behind that phrase? Is it the same to “make a difference” for a commercial leader than for another of systems?
Definitely…
I do not proclaim an "anti-course" position; I do say that traditional training should be part of a much more comprehensive and systemic process of change, where the course is part of that process and not the process itself.
In this sense, it is time that each one from his role (people in charge of Human Management, Consultants, Trainers, Designers) propitiates that the entrepreneurial training, especially that with claims to develop current or future leaders, make their own "reconversion" and assume that the needs and especially approaches should be reviewed.
This "turnaround" involves assuming that today things go far beyond developing personal qualities in "8 hours course", but rather involves, above all, work at the corporate level in the following aspects:
- Review of the organization's value systems. Definition based on these values on what role is expected of leadership to achieve business objectives. Creation of behaviors associated with the concept of defined leadership. Development of personal leadership skills and attitudes. on the basis of the defined values. Constant evaluation of the performance of leaders in the fulfillment of said behaviors. Measurement of the impact that the leadership role generates in the business objectives.
I just forgot to tell him that, as many course promotions allude, "this article will quickly change your life and, in addition, you will get results that today, you did not even dream of. Take my advice… don't believe it !!…
