ENGLISH RUGBY AND LESSONS IN LEADERSHIP

England against France in the quarter finals of the 2011 World Cup in New Zealand. Expectations high after France's dismal performance against Tonga, so what happened? I believe English sport has yet to learn some real leadership lessons that are applicable to business as much as they are sport.
The first one I call leadership and it is interesting in several perspectives when it comes to this performance. The coach was one of the best on field leaders English Rugby has produced. Martin Johnson was a true leader someone with presence who commanded respect from his players. He is still a character who is held in high regard within rugby circles and it is perhaps his presence that has had a debilitating effect on the development of pitch leadership. Leadership has to be present at every level within a team and players need to know when to follow and when to lead. There was a distinct absence of leadership on the pitch that disastrous match.
I saw a lack of passion amongst the England players that certainly was not evident amongst the French. Passion is inspired by vision; a vision of victory that drives belief and frees up players. It is key to an outstanding performance and that belief belonged to France on that day. I saw little evidence of the emotion and passion from the English team before, during and after the game which I believe was caused by their lack of belief.
For me sport is about dynamism it is about seizing the initiative and making your opponents react. For when they are reacting they are not focusing on their game and therefore not able to seize the initiative. England became predictable. England lacked that dynamism as they were constantly   reacting to the French and therefore unable to play their game. They were predictable ball out to Tuilagi and let him break through. He never did.
Pressure played its part as it caused some crucial mistakes in terms of decisions and handling errors. England lost several opportunities to score as because of such errors. Good leadership and mental toughness ensure that control is exercised in all areas of the game. I believe from the evidence in front of me that desperation came into England's game. Players must learn to handle international pressure through experiencing similar pressure in other environments!
Selection is always going to be controversial and it is here that I believe Martin Johnson needs to learn the Alex Ferguson lesson of knowing when to let players go and when to blood new talent. I believe despite the arrival of Tuilagi, Lawes and Youngs this side was picked too much on sentiment and old allegiances. Every boss needs to know how and when to nurture talent and when to let it go. For me Wilkinson, Moody and Tindall had gone a tournament too far.
Self control comes from self awareness and self control is key to team cohesiveness and victory. If each member of a team maintains that control and awareness they maintain their role in the team at that moment, if they lose control then the team begins to disintegrate. The second French try is a perfect example three players to one French attacker leaving an unmarked Frenchman and a gap for the try. Self awareness and team awareness in terms of what is my role for the team now are essential in international sport one error can be fatal.
My last comment is flexibility if something is not working there is no point in pursuing it. If you do what you always do you will get the result you always got. Match tactics and plans have got to be adaptable to the situation players have to understand several options if a team is to have the inherent flexibility to win major  tournaments. I thought England were one dimensional and that was the power dimension. When they came up against an equally powerful team they had nowhere to go.
So the key lessons for me for Rugby are:
Develop leadership at all levels,
Develop a winning vision,
Maintain the initiative,
Understand and minimise the impact of pressure,
Learn when to let go of players,
Develop player self awareness and role awareness
Maintain flexibility.
These are all lessons that are as applicable to business as they are sport and I believe the English Rugby Football Union needs to take a good hard look at its leadership development throughout the game.

LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP

There are several levels of leadership required within an organisation and certain levels are better undertaken by particular types of people. This means that the characteristics that best suit one level of leadership may not be so useful in another. Yet most organisations drive their leaders through the various tiers without acknowledging the different attributes and skills required.
Early leadership is generally measured on results. So a successful leader is one who achieves results. They tend to be task oriented and hard taskmasters who drive their teams forward. Great in a sales environment great when measured against targets and within results oriented organisations.
Yet as these leaders move away from the front line or coal face their attributes may become less applicable. Driving a small team in a tactical environment is very different from the people skills required to motivate and influence larger teams perhaps through their own team leaders rather than directly. Leading from a greater distance away is far more challenging and people oriented. No longer are the close in results the only requirement but getting teams to stay motivated and to contribute over the longer term becomes an issue.  Vision and strategy need to be developed and bought into People in these roles have to have developed their comprehension of social identity and leadership styles in order to be fully effective. They are divorced from quick results and move into a position where they have to lead people to generate long term results.
The ability to see and understand the big picture is often rare in leaders as they are too close in and results oriented. Organisations need to identify strategic high performers and nurture them in order to sustain and enhance their market position.
It is this sort of talent management that marks out the companies with genuine longevity.

HITTING THE WALL

Businesses appear to have a lifespan and it is only very powerful and agile businesses that survive through a paradigm shift. A fine example of failure is the American rail road businesses who believed they were invincible in the rail business rather than flexible in the transportation business! Woolworth's once one of the UK's strongest retailers suffered in the same way. So why do businesses only last so long?
Look at football clubs,  the only ones recently who have had longevity are Manchester  United and Liverpool although Liverpool's glory days were  along time ago. Are Manchester City and Chelsea future proof or just riding on the crest of a wave provided by a rich benefactor. What are the ingredients for longevity?
Having a strategy is key to longevity as it defines an organisations destiny, Key to strategy is vision which is an ability to assess where to position now for the long haul whilst identifying where the long haul leads. Vision is key in any strategy and unfortunately as businesses get entwined in the economics of the here and now vision is rarely evident in organisations. With vision comes risk management,  an organisation has to identify the threats that will challenge it on its journey and manage those challenges until they are small enough to deal with. Talent management is another key part of strategy particularly the development and retention of high performers. Organisations that map out their destiny using strategy shape themselves and their environments to achieve. Businesses that don't have a strategy will hit the wall.
When businesses are small and easy to control processes are less important,  however as a business grows processes become more and more important as they allow leaders and managers time to focus on strategic rather than tactical issues. Time spent in the weeds reinventing the wheel is ill spent time and costs businesses, however if processes are put in place and control delegated senior members of a business can begin to map out and shape the future of a business. Small businesses that remain without processes remain tactical, waste time and hit the wall.
Review and renewal are key to development just look at the Manchester United story when players such as Paul Ince, Roy Keane, Eric Cantona and David Beckham were sold or moved on to be replaced by fantastic talents. Manchester United are not afraid of renewing when necessary without sentimentality. So should a business be when necessary after all a business in only in business to satisfy its customer's needs rather than its worker's needs. Businesses need to know that they match their customers needs and regularly review their relevance. Businesses that are too internally focused and sentimental will hit the wall.

STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP

"There are too many leaders of the U.S. civilian space program, and not enough leadership. These several leaders at this point are not in agreement regarding how best to transition away from 30 years of the space shuttle being the visible centerpiece of the U.S. human space flight effort. Attempts at leadership without agreement among leaders are a recipe for short-term confusion and longer-term drift". a recent comment from the Washington Post which reflects the lack of strategic leadership as time, technology, politics and economics overtake the vision as the Shuttle Programme comes to an end.

"In more than 40 years of close observation of the U.S. space program, I don’t think there has ever been more uncertainty and fear of impending program collapse. One result of the current confusion is the too-widespread impression that  the final flight of the shuttle means that the U.S. program of human spaceflight has come to an end" writes John Logsdon.

So what is strategic leadership and how would it have prevented the infighting within the US's Space Programme and allowed it to carry on in a relatively seamless manner?

For me strategic leadership is about vision it's about long term projection and the ability to communicate a dream and make that dream tangible within an organisation. The problem with long term is the ambiguity induced by time. Things change over a period of time and things are changing faster than ever as the pace of life quickens. This makes strategic vision really difficult but really essential in leading an organisation.  More difficult as it is more intangible and it is more essential to hold an organisation on its course in a swiftly changing environment. Moral courage, drive and determination are all required in a strategic leader in shaping the future and taking an organisation forward.

Strategic leadership also involves risk and its mitigation. Risk is another thing that very few modern organisations have a handle on as evidenced in the recent US banking Crisis and even the more recent struggles with national debt within the European community. Risk involves three things the ability to identify future threats to an organisation, to put in place means of identifying the proximity of those threats and finally preparing strategies and plans to mitigate those threats. Now again the speed of life makes the management of risk much more difficult as the unforeseen happens in an instant. Take the recent riots in UK sparked by the police and the independent police complaints commission not dealing sensibly with the unfortunate death of a suspected criminal. Now a true strategic risk practitioner may not have seen that coming but surely they would have controlled the rioting in London sooner certainly before it spread to other cities or prevented it taking place in other cities by having contingencies in place. Threats need to be pre-empted if they are to be mitigated hence strategic managers of risk need to be aware of and sensitive to their changing environment through exploring worst case scenarios. This can be easily accomplished by modelling, gaming or red teaming. Thinking the unthinkable allows for effective contingency planning and aids risk mitigation.  Identified risk also needs to be communicated and devolved to as close to the action as possible, for it is here that the truly empowered and enlightened employee can prevent the threat.

Strategic Leadership is also about talent management; making sure that the right people is in the right place at the right time. Whether they have been nurtured or hired is irrelevant, it is ensuring that they are where they are needed.   I like the following quote as it epitomises talent management to me:

“The best leader is the one who has the sense to surround himself with outstanding people and the self restraint not to meddle with how they do their jobs” Author unknown

Don't talent manage people out of the organisation by telling them what to do and how to do it? Mentor and develop them to exploit their own individual potential and maximise their utility to the organisation by empowering them by telling them what you want done and affording them the authority and resources to do it! They will develop and learn even when wrong; now that's talent management!

Strategic leaders are brave; they are prepared to tolerate mistakes providing they are learned from. Strategic leaders are visionary and excellent communicators. Strategic leaders are risk takers but every risk they take is calculated and every threat mitigated as far is possible.  They believe in the power of the organisation rather than their own power. That's why true strategic leaders are rare creatures!

WHERE ARE THE LEADERS?

The public disturbances and rioting that is going on in London as I write this blog appear to be spreading to other cities across the country. The Prime Minister, Home Secretary and Mayor of London have all returned early from their holidays to provide leadership to a situation where a tragic death has allowed opportunistic petty criminals to exploit a situation which should have been controlled a good deal earlier.  Where are the leaders?

Leaders make decisions and influence decisions as Marshall Goldsmith stated "Every decision in the world is made by the person who has the power to make that decision - not the "right" person, or the "smartest" person, or the most “qualified" person, and in most cases not you. If you do not influence this person, you will not make a positive difference. Make peace with this. You will have a better life! And you will make more of a positive difference in your organization and you will be happier." It is up to members of the public, the police, the local communities and the national power structures to make decisions and influence decisions, to become leaders otherwise without such people a nation careers blindly and ignorantly towards anarchy. Basically it is about having the guts to lead!  Every bit of media reporting I hear or see blames someone else: it’s the rioters fault, it's the police's fault, its the Government’s fault. Now is not the time to blame but the time to come together as a community the time to replace selfish agendas with social ones perhaps it is even the start of Cameron’s “Big Society".  Leaders rise from such occasions, leaders influence and leaders take responsibility; they are the ones that will allow those who are perpetrating the crimes to see the error of their ways, they are the ones who will ensure that the right policing measures are put in place to prevent further escalation. They unfortunately seem to be conspicuous by their absence. I wonder where are the leaders to create harmony?

BUSINESS RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES

Who in business truly understands what risk is and how to manage it? Not many I would suggest given the recent crisis in banking and even fewer when it comes to managing national debt levels. Risk has to become better managed by businesses and politicians if we are to avoid the full effects of the current financial climate.

Risk is key to assessing opportunity as without risk business opportunities would not exist. Everything would be obvious and therefore every opportunity would be seized instantly without fear of failure. Well, human nature does not function that way! Humans are naturally risk averse, our survival instincts steer us away from perceived danger in order to protect us and in doing so they prevent us from exploiting opportunities using our innate intellect to manage and mitigate the risk. It is only when we are forced to take risks that we bring our excellent risk management potential to the fore.

However the national picture is somewhat different national risk now that's something we leave to the experts expecting them to use rigour and expertise in their deliberations. Unfortunately many of today's politicians are not expert and many are less than rigorous in their managing of national financial risk!  Some are just politically irresponsible scoring political points when there is a national debt crisis.

Personal opportunities exist in all our lives and yet we nearly always shy away from them. We want to be popular, we want to look good, and we want to conform and to be correct.  We want to be recognised and rewarded and those actualisations are normally associated with conformity rather than originality.  Yet being odd pays dividends in today's entrepreneurial world as risk takers reap the greatest rewards. Our herd instincts our desire for popularity drive the majority of us away from risk naturally and hence how many times have we not seized an obvious opportunity for fear of failure!

If as individuals we don't take risks there is very little chance of business organisations taking risk. The consequences don't just affect me but all those around me. I do not want to be blamed by those closest to me for strategic failure. Recently businesses have not needed to take risks hence risk mitigation is a lost art to many organisations. Yet business leaders are paid to judge and mitigate risk. Today's business leaders need to take risks and they need to understand those risks, to identify the warning signs that pre-empt failure. Life is risky and in extreme times life becomes more risky.  Yet as we enter a global recession no leader seems able to grasp the nettle and seize the opportunity; rather they would follow like lemmings other organisations into the economic precipice.

Politics are a totally different matter and it is here where some of the finest aspects of democracy are exposed as the desire to conform so necessary as an elected politician prevents daring and risk mitigating leaders from ever achieving political greatness. Bring on the benign dictator or the enlightened autocrat for they are the ones who will light the path to economic recovery. They would take risks and their enlightened approach would ensure that in exercising their judgement they had mitigated the risk to their people and managed it accordingly to ensure success.  As true leaders they would focus on success rather than avoiding failure. Tough times need tough decision makers who may not choose to conform. The only issue is democracy after all a leader cannot lead without the peoples’ mandate and yet the majority of the people will always vote for the politician or party who holds the middle ground.

Businesses are the same and businesses now need to be original in their strategic concepts if they are to lead others away from global recession. Strong leadership, strategic vision, opportunity exploitation and risk mitigation are all essential characteristics required of today's business and political leaders and yet they are the characteristics that have been absent when strategic failures are analysed.

TRUST RISK JUDGEMENT AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

How do people develop as leaders without the benefit of experiential learning? I meet so many coaches who claim to develop leadership within their coachees who have never been in leadership positions themselves. Their experience is based on learning from books and not in practice. I believe that three key attributes of a leader which cannot be developed without experience are developing trust, managing risk and exercising judgement.

An effective team has to trust its leader and trust each other if they are going to be cohesive in their disposition. How does a leader earn the teams trust without developing that trust through experience? Team members must identify their leader as trustworthy before they will trust them. It is the same with other team members. Trust has to be earned and it has to be earned through experience it cannot appear on order.

Leadership is about recognising risk and mitigating it as far as is possible. But like most things in life managing risk comes from experiencing life and experiencing risks. What risks are worth taking and what are not? Leadership and the management of risk are about the future they are therefore more of an art than a science as they cannot be prescribed. Risk management is about experience and the gut feel developed through the hard knocks of life.

Risk is exercising judgement and making the right calls comes from learned wisdom which is a combination of classroom and book aided learning and experiential learning and it is this rich combination that informs the great leaders. The combination and the ability to associate current circumstances with knowledge that allows the great leader the wisdom and judgement to effect change within an organisation in the right way at the right time.

Leadership can be learned from a book but it is a brave leader who reaches judgements based solely on non experiential learning. Most great leaders I have met and come across stretch their leadership through the combination of   non experiential and experiential learning mixed with the ability to hone their leadership through reflection and pre emption of the issues that will challenge their leadership.  You can't be a leader without feeling it! You can't be a leader without learning as you experience it!