Leadership development--its evolution and measurement: analysing the various leadership models, the author argues that leaders achieve much more if properly developed and if they do learn, develop and apply new skills, this will help an organisation deliver more effectively. The key, he suggests, is adoption of the Full Range Leadership model.


MANY OF US HAVE READ ABOUT, listened to and participated in the leadership development debate within industry. It seems though that the key question of getting value from leadership development remains: 'How do we successfully develop individuals with leadership potential to fulfill their promise and impact positively on the business performance?'

There will always be the natural leaders who have been brought up in a leadership environment and almost have it in the blood. In contrast there are many more of us reliant on experience and development before we can blossom as leaders. It is often the case that the best leaders are not identified early on, but that a particular event, a motivational speech or an opportunity to lead may have a lasting impact. As business leaders we should provide that opportunity and environment where personal growth is encouraged and rewarded. This paper argues that art types of leaders achieve much more if properly developed.

From whatever 'leadership baseline' we all emerge there is great potential to do more of what we do well, less of what we do not and create the chance to learn, develop and apply new skills. If properly atigned and measured any and all these will help an organisation to deliver more effectively.

Trait Leadership

As confidence is derived from knowledge and the application of proven theories and models it is important to understand how leadership development has evolved. First there was Trait Leadership. This looked at the traits of people and specifically suggested that many leaders are born and not made. Scientific evidence supports this and a recent US study outlined that up to 43 per cent of leaders are born with these natural genetic abilities.

Trait Leadership development involved very little self-awareness, ptenty of mutual back slapping and a 'welcome to the club' approach. Little attention was paid to human interactions and behaviours with leaders using status, rank, job title and consequent power to get things done. In today's politically correct environment this claim has often sparked fierce debate. Despite the evidence, trait readership now has far fewer places to thrive.

Functional Leadership

In 1965, John Adair, a Scots Guards officer, developed the Functional Leadership model. This was a natural progression and sought to prove that leaders could actually be trained and supported to carry out tasks effectively. Adair introduced the concept of task, team and individual where the leader would consider the needs of all three components in determining the best way to proceed. He also stated that at any one time one of the components woGd be more influential than the other two.

Adair's Functional Leadership model was successful but Lacked situational context. It still assumed that leaders would be followed through duty rather than respect. However, it was not long before the increase of people power went on to challenge Adair's theory.

A new theory of leadership was developed that not only allowed leaders to deliver the task but also get the best out of their people.

Situational Leadership

Devetoped by Paul Hersey--Ohio University, this was called Situational Leadership and aimed to build on the task, team and individual appreciation and introduced reLationship behaviour. This new approach drove leaders to engage in two-way conversations with their individuals and teams, going on to understand inner strengths and motivations. This meant that leaders could combine the situation and task at hand with the state of the individual or team's readiness to act.

Different leadership styles were required to accommodate this state of mind and so Hersey created the telling, selling, participating and delegating styles of readership. Managers and leaders were forced out of their offices to engage with their people and use these different styles to meet the needs of the situation. It helped inspire people and make them feel they were important. It built trust in, and some respect for, the leader atiowing him or her to target opportunities with greater confidence.

Situational leadership is still commonly taught to give individuals an appreciation of the different styles of Leadership. It does not however deal with many of the leadership skills required to support modern day organisations. Whilst different styles of leadership allow for handling situations appropriately, the role of the leader has moved on yet again.

In today's organisations leaders need to look further out in strategic terms and further inside their organisations in terms of delivery to achieve sustainable results. Flatter structures, share price pressure, an increasingly fluid employment market and more discerning customers have all made the role of the teader even more pressurised. The need to grow the business and get better than average returns on all forms of investments have put leaders in the spotlight to a greater degree than ever before.

Full Range Leadership

In 1985, to support this increasing need, Bass created the Full Range Leadership model (FRL). FRL fully accepts the trait, functional and situational theories, but goes on to identify skills, attitudes and behaviours that support different leadership needs within an organisation.

Different phases of an organisation's evolution require different leadership skills. For exampte, a business in long-term saLes decline with no real vision will need Transformational Leadership to address not just the immediate issue but to research and sell a longer- term strategy. This will require intellectual market place stimulation and plenty of inspirational motivation. Sir Richard Branson, Bill Gates, Anita Roddick, Sir Terry Leahy and Martin Johnson CBE all come to mind as transformational leaders continually moving their organisations on to greater success.

On the other hand, a business running smoothly with further organic growth opportunity has a different need for its leaders. This business needs to be more Transactional and grow the margins in the business with effective control and targeted performance. FRL ago accepts that strong leadership is required in roles where the task is more management by exception where auditing or health and safety requirements are the primary function of the role.

FRL also recognises that some leaders are avoidant of their responsibility, so as to provide a measurement for ineffective leadership. This Full Range Leadership model makes it easier to break down its four types of leadership into critical skills. It also provides a sensible development structure recognising that leaders need time to develop skills as they gain the appropriate experience. In the earlier stages of a career these will almost always be got at different levels within culturally and mechanically different organisations--all of whom may have very different leadership development priorities and needs.

Four Features

It seems therefore that the FRL model has four distinct features:

* Firstly, the model matches leadership types with appropriate skills allowing chief executives to more clearly define the specific needs for their individuals or teams and align the development lessons to the business objectives

* Secondly, this structure makes the measurement of leadership development possible through the Nlultifactor Leadership Questionnaire. It is a 360 degree tool that allows industry to bridge the gap between development costs and perceived returns

* The model appears to provide the first all inclusive glue for leadership development. It can deal with the different needs of the business cycle, all levels and parts of the organisation and be a common platform for personal growth

* FRL works best when organisations have a sustainable human capital strategy that is aligned to the vision. It therefore tends to promote and prove that well defined targeted investment in people creates significant returns.

In the course of writing this paper I have become even clearer in my assertion that as a strategic tool, coupled with strategic intent and clarity, the FRL model provides the best solution for organisations to get best value from leadership development. It allows Situational and Functional leadership methods to thrive whilst providing the framework for appropriate definition, measurement and alignment activity.

To conclude, it seems that with the correct application of the Full Range model and acceptance of the Situational Leadership methods the question at the head of this paper can be answered. As always though, success in leadership or team development does also rely on:

* A belief that human capital development is a corner stone of sustainable organisational growth

* Development objectives and togs that are easily understood and aligned to the vision of the organisation

* Mature individuals who are ready to take on responsibility

* Simple, continual and measured activity

* Transformational leadership in itself.

Organisations short of any one of these will not optimise the returns available from leadership and team development. Even with the best products and processes in the world it is effective and genuine leadership that will help organisations generate and sustain growth.

For more information contact the author, John Fay MBE, Managing Director, SFL Ltd, tel: 01785 760999; email:john.fay@sfl-inspire.com
© Copyright 2007 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
© Copyright © 2005 DMG World Media Ltd.

http://www.allbusiness.com/print/392991-1-22eeq.html