These are good tips. I'm sure I've already asked you, but have you read "Endurance: Shackleton's Last Voyage" yet? I wanted to recommend it as an excellent tome that touches on all of these aspects, but indirectly, by way of an historical narrative. I really liked it.
I have been a corporate executive for over 40 years and have had my head in leadership theory and practice for all that time.
With exceptions, I think leaders can be trained to be reasonably effective, but just like a swimmer some that are trained will end up winners, and others will just participate. But there is enate wiring and personality traits that contribute to the role of leadership. Those with certain wiring and traits will find the role more natural and have a greater potential for success. Those with other wiring and traits will struggle more.
A good example of training for effectiveness is the Blanchard Situation Leadership Model. I have used this for my management teams to help them become more effective. It is a prescriptive model that helps overcome leader deficiencies derived from personality traits that would otherwise create some sub-optimized leadership behavior. It would help a challenged personality type limp along to reasonable effectiveness.
Effective leaders require strong emotional intelligence and strong emotional regulation capability. They must also have strong visualization capability... the capacity to visualize a future state even if abstract, and to set goals and lead an organization to achieve those goals.
Leadership includes management, but management is a subset. In many ways management can be anti-leadership. People that are risk-averse and have a scarcity mindset might manage their teams in a way that prevent forward progress... possibly blocking needed change and thus causing a snowball effect of increased problem from lack of problem-solving.
I have worked with smart and capable people that are so attracted to harmony and agreeableness, that conflict avoidance becomes the norm of the work-culture and thus problems are allowed to remain and fester for fear of upsetting stakeholders with change. I have also worked with smart and capable people that disregard stakeholder emotional reactions and create a sea of resentment that becomes a roadblock to progress. Effective leaders navigate this and strike a middle ground where they pursue solutions to problems and progress but also do well motivating their teams toward a shared vision and set of goals.
Just like every capability, some will be born with advantages that make it easier to achieve mastery. But I think those with wiring and personality traits that make it more difficult for them can still learn behaviors that allow them to be effective.
100% agree and I also like the Blanchard Situational Leadership model. I’ve had too many poor leaders (managers?) that could not get out of their own brains to see that others even thought differently. This is why I’m a fan of personality proclivities because we aren’t looking at the world the same!
It’s a hard conversation to have, especially when you need to advise someone to step back from a leadership role (coveted) and return to where they’re successful. Other’s just naturall fall into the individual contributor / team role. My brother is one. At least he knows he’s not a leader and eschews that siren call.
Yes. So much of what hampers leadership effectiveness is the blind spots and lack of self-awareness about behavior tendencies. It is a constant learning process. Personality testing can help with self-awareness and blind-spot resolution for sub-optimized behavior. Recently my ENTJ tendencies conflicted with my 6 of 14 board members that are high sensing types. I noted the need for correction in my messaging and presentation.
I, too, am an ENJT and I, too, am constantly tripping over the S types I work with, especially at the higher organizational levels. What drives me nuts is I work my ass off to communicate at their level but they seem oblivious that they could try to see the forrest for the trees.
That’s been one of my biggest career frustration is that the Ns can see the Ss…. but the Ss cannot see the Ns
Yup, me too. I have learned to play the act of a sensing type to gain trust and respect from decision stakeholders. It is work that I would prefer to not to do... it seems a waste of time and energy that distracts from the needed effort to solve a problem of move forward in progress. But if my effort is to facilitate stakeholder decisions and cooperation to achieve a goal, then it is work I have to do... because the stakeholder pool is filled with those sensing types.
Interesting taking this to politics. Haidt in his book, The Righteous Mind, identified that liberals tend to cognate almost entirely on the moral filter of care-vs-harm, and conservative bring in a much bigger list of moral considerations including care-vs-harm. I used to just think my friends with the opposite ideological views were stupid. But after Haidt I understand that their minds cannot get to the same cognitive process. What is rational to me seems absurd to them. What seems absurd to me is rational to them. We are aliens to each other with respect to our moral filters. The only way to communicate effectively is to appeal to their moral filter. I think it is similar for different personality types. Effective communication is tailored for the audience. So having personality type knowledge is helpful.
It is a facinating book and I found it interesting that conservatives could wrangle with three more moral dimensions than typical liberals. It’s not that they devalue care/harm or fairness/equality, it’s that they value Loyalty/Betrayal, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity as well!
These are good tips. I'm sure I've already asked you, but have you read "Endurance: Shackleton's Last Voyage" yet? I wanted to recommend it as an excellent tome that touches on all of these aspects, but indirectly, by way of an historical narrative. I really liked it.
I have not read that. I'll have to look it up.
Great piece.
I have been a corporate executive for over 40 years and have had my head in leadership theory and practice for all that time.
With exceptions, I think leaders can be trained to be reasonably effective, but just like a swimmer some that are trained will end up winners, and others will just participate. But there is enate wiring and personality traits that contribute to the role of leadership. Those with certain wiring and traits will find the role more natural and have a greater potential for success. Those with other wiring and traits will struggle more.
A good example of training for effectiveness is the Blanchard Situation Leadership Model. I have used this for my management teams to help them become more effective. It is a prescriptive model that helps overcome leader deficiencies derived from personality traits that would otherwise create some sub-optimized leadership behavior. It would help a challenged personality type limp along to reasonable effectiveness.
Effective leaders require strong emotional intelligence and strong emotional regulation capability. They must also have strong visualization capability... the capacity to visualize a future state even if abstract, and to set goals and lead an organization to achieve those goals.
Leadership includes management, but management is a subset. In many ways management can be anti-leadership. People that are risk-averse and have a scarcity mindset might manage their teams in a way that prevent forward progress... possibly blocking needed change and thus causing a snowball effect of increased problem from lack of problem-solving.
I have worked with smart and capable people that are so attracted to harmony and agreeableness, that conflict avoidance becomes the norm of the work-culture and thus problems are allowed to remain and fester for fear of upsetting stakeholders with change. I have also worked with smart and capable people that disregard stakeholder emotional reactions and create a sea of resentment that becomes a roadblock to progress. Effective leaders navigate this and strike a middle ground where they pursue solutions to problems and progress but also do well motivating their teams toward a shared vision and set of goals.
Just like every capability, some will be born with advantages that make it easier to achieve mastery. But I think those with wiring and personality traits that make it more difficult for them can still learn behaviors that allow them to be effective.
100% agree and I also like the Blanchard Situational Leadership model. I’ve had too many poor leaders (managers?) that could not get out of their own brains to see that others even thought differently. This is why I’m a fan of personality proclivities because we aren’t looking at the world the same!
It’s a hard conversation to have, especially when you need to advise someone to step back from a leadership role (coveted) and return to where they’re successful. Other’s just naturall fall into the individual contributor / team role. My brother is one. At least he knows he’s not a leader and eschews that siren call.
Yes. So much of what hampers leadership effectiveness is the blind spots and lack of self-awareness about behavior tendencies. It is a constant learning process. Personality testing can help with self-awareness and blind-spot resolution for sub-optimized behavior. Recently my ENTJ tendencies conflicted with my 6 of 14 board members that are high sensing types. I noted the need for correction in my messaging and presentation.
I, too, am an ENJT and I, too, am constantly tripping over the S types I work with, especially at the higher organizational levels. What drives me nuts is I work my ass off to communicate at their level but they seem oblivious that they could try to see the forrest for the trees.
That’s been one of my biggest career frustration is that the Ns can see the Ss…. but the Ss cannot see the Ns
Yup, me too. I have learned to play the act of a sensing type to gain trust and respect from decision stakeholders. It is work that I would prefer to not to do... it seems a waste of time and energy that distracts from the needed effort to solve a problem of move forward in progress. But if my effort is to facilitate stakeholder decisions and cooperation to achieve a goal, then it is work I have to do... because the stakeholder pool is filled with those sensing types.
Interesting taking this to politics. Haidt in his book, The Righteous Mind, identified that liberals tend to cognate almost entirely on the moral filter of care-vs-harm, and conservative bring in a much bigger list of moral considerations including care-vs-harm. I used to just think my friends with the opposite ideological views were stupid. But after Haidt I understand that their minds cannot get to the same cognitive process. What is rational to me seems absurd to them. What seems absurd to me is rational to them. We are aliens to each other with respect to our moral filters. The only way to communicate effectively is to appeal to their moral filter. I think it is similar for different personality types. Effective communication is tailored for the audience. So having personality type knowledge is helpful.
It is a facinating book and I found it interesting that conservatives could wrangle with three more moral dimensions than typical liberals. It’s not that they devalue care/harm or fairness/equality, it’s that they value Loyalty/Betrayal, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity as well!
It explains why both see the other as ignorant or evil... if they cannot process a moral decision the same way.