Are we looking for grass in a desert?

Rakesh, the engineering director of a leading apparel brand, is excited about a potential career move as the President of Manufacturing division, a move that will give him opportunity to create the kind of difference which he dreamt of, in alignment with his Vision.

What is giving him nightmare is the readiness of the individuals marked as his successors. All 3 individuals are vertical heads of their divisions, high performers since start and perceived to be very sharp in their areas with the ability to manage any situation. However, one thing which Rakesh has observed is an unconscious tendency within himself to have a kind of mental filter and unconscious guard, whenever he is talking to any of them. In short, an inability to be completely open and vulnerable with his own team. And if he as a Manager is having this feeling, wouldn’t the situation manifest itself more powerfully to individuals below them.

So the following questions arise before him-

-       Are any of his reportees actually ready for senior Leadership role?

-       If not, where is the gap, and how have the individuals reached where they have today

One of the key competencies for a Leader is to inspire Trust within his team. As per neuroscience research, in an Environment of Trust the emotional centre of brain (Amygdala)  is less activated and body releases chemicals Serotonin and Oxytocin which are directly related to better focus, feeling of safety and high performance.

And as per 1 research conducted on US Navy Seals (courtesy: Simon Sinek), they would prefer to have an individual of Medium (even Low) Performance- High Trust in a Leadership role, than a High Performer-Low trust (here is the link for the video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTo9e3ILmms) .

Then why do organizations continue to face problems like above with Leaders or future Leaders lacking the ability to inspire trust ? Is it just lack of awareness? Is it lack or right systems or tools to identify the right leaders (or potential leaders)?

On some introspection, the problem potentially runs much deeper.

The first big challenge is our education system. As the saying goes, “You get the kind of behavior you reward”. So how can an education system which is solely based on competition, academic excellence and individual merit be expected to produce leaders practicing collaboration, vulnerability and trust as a core value.

This is not to say that such Leaders don’t exist, but Leaders practicing virtues like Trust do the same more out of personal value system and family conditioning, rather than environmental factors (As per Marshall Goldsmith, personal and environmental factors are equally important in shaping an individual).

The second challenge in continuation of above is the kind of environment around us. To share an example, the respect which graduate students get from their teachers, peers and even juniors is directly correlated to the quantum of placement figure. Its another matter that the individual might have been a free-rider in group projects and/or would have been notorious for toxic behavior.

On the same lines, even leadership evaluation systems in organizations are chiefly based on performance and potential (Latter being nothing but future performance, in Sinek’s words). So where is the room for individual factor OR what kind of person the individual is OR how much trust the individual commands?

A very interesting research on Bell lab scientists made for an interesting finding. Scientists having highest patents had only 1 thing in common- They regularly used to have lunch with quite Swedish physicist Harry Nyquist. Nyquist had warmth, deep sense of curiosity and safe vibe around him and was said to draw people out and get them thinking.

However, in industry we find organizations ready to spend billions of dollars on leadership development only to find negligible returns on investment, just because it doesn’t address the core aspect of a leader- what is kind of person he is or aspires to be ?

In short, across industry there a constant need and demand for Visionary Leaders who can inspire Trust and create a culture of collaboration and align the organization to a bigger purpose; but our own systems and processes are hindering the same goal.

Some potential, though non-exhaustive steps, could be-

·       Academic Evaluation (right from school level) should have student’s behavior as a key evaluation criteria. Practice of having ‘Moral Science’ as a separate subject or putting behavioral areas as a side note in Report Card is rudimentary and sooner its done away, the better it is

·       Corporate intake of freshers should be predominantly on internships and summer trainings, where further the final decisi

on to absorb should be based on the individual parameters of Trust and Collaboration expected of future leaders, rather than simply the performance in project and/or the quality of presentation made to senior management

·       Growth of junior staff  (future leaders) right from early stages should be subject to their meeting behavioral criterias like Trust and Collaboration, rather than simply their technical skillset. A good idea is to have assessment on organizational values along with performance goals, however execution is the key here

As I am writing this, imagining a school environment where a student gets a star in report card for pointing out a mathematical error made by his class teacher. More than the smartness, the unconscious message getting passed is that its okay to be wrong while still being in a Leaders’ role (held by the teacher here) and that voicing out your inputs is met with appreciation, not reprimanded. And imagine the same student holding a CEO’s position decades later !

In absence of this environment, maybe we shall continue to look for grass in a desert.