According to PricewaterhouseCoopers it costs a year’s wages to recruit a member of staff and train them to the level of their predecessor and yet executives are still too busy to get it. Executives don’t pay enough attention to engagement – US statistics variously state that 66% of employees feel disengaged or that 60% are actively looking for new work and yet retention of talent is still underplayed in many boardrooms.

Let’s not just think about the cost of replacement but how much they cost when they are employed. A disengaged employer is far less effective in their role than an engaged employer, Keith Ayres notes that while a disengaged employee may be giving only 50% effort, we still pay them 100% of their salary. This means that a significant portion of payroll costs are valueless to the organisation as there is no effect. How much of your wage bill is frittered away without contributing to your bottom line? 

If the average salary of an employee in a 500 person organization is £25,000 then the annual cost of disengagement is over £4 million and £17, 200 a day. I think that deserves a CEOs and Board’s attention.

Instead of dwelling on the doom and gloom, consider another cost: opportunity. What would your world look like if instead of just studying your employees through your annual survey, you spent time actually engaging them in conversation about what they care about? What if you involved them in decisions that affect their life at work and the welfare of the company at large? What if you empowered them to do, to connect with each other, recognize one another for great work and truly collaborate? What could those sorts of employees do for your success?

Well this is the sort of opportunity that would be identified with Sampson Hall’s Gordian Model. Boards would be able to exploit this and many other opportunities which would be identified in the process as they drive their organisations to success. http://www.sampsonhall.co.uk/services/our-metrics/the-gordian-model.html

Anyone who watched the television last night will understand how each of us is programmed to ignore the evidence of failure and proceed in a positive way. That’s why we often harm ourselves through smoking, alcohol and unprotected sex even though we are fully aware of the consequences. So in our lives we always assume it will never happen to us and yet when it does in business we rarely see failure as a positive.  In life we are programmed to see a positive outcome otherwise we would not take risks and we would not develop and learn as a race. What we have to do is take the positives out of failure and use them in business as well.

When we plan to succeed there are automatic built in components of overcome failure because nothing worthwhile in life comes easy we are all more robust if we have and maintain a vision of eventual success.  Failure is not our enemy; but it is our friend. As a race we don’t always like adversity because it hurts. However, think of what adversity has delivered to our society in terms of a hunger and drive for success. It is not adversity that kills businesses. What kills businesses is a lack of understanding and education as to how things such as adversity and failure are actually assets, and not liabilities.  Every organisation if it is to exploit its opportunities should look for the positive in each situation. I like the old Chinese saying “I complained because I had no shoes until I saw a man who had no legs” makes real sense. Often it is only our lack of perspective that allows the fear of failure to control our thinking.  If we maintain perspective in terms of our real situation we can learn as much from failure as we can success.

Failure is not something to be avoided but something to be encouraged, all creative ventures yield to the maximum when failure is embraced rather than shunned.  Failure is often seen perceived as a weakness and yet we all have weaknesses as we are all flawed as humans that is in our nature! It is the strong man that knows his weaknesses. It is only when the limits of anything are known through it breaking or failing that we are we able to understand its flaws and  develop something new, it is only then that we have a  real need to change. That is as Donald Rumsfeld would say when an “unknown unknown” is possible because an “unknown known” has become a “known known”. Failure brings us knowledge and development and should always be viewed positively as long as it is not repeated too often because that only exposes an inability to learn the lessons of failure. If you keep on doing the same things you will always get the same results. As Albert Einstein said “the definition of insanity is doing the same things over and expecting a different result”.

A key skill for today’s leader is knowing what to remember and what to forget. Sometimes it is good to forget sometimes it is essential to remember this article assesses the importance of forgetting to leadership

Modern Leaders must be able to make clear decisions drawn from myriad bits of information; their decisions need to reflect a big picture understanding. With information becoming so abundant in this modern age, it is very easy to become overloaded and therefore not to comprehend the big picture. Total recall has often been associated with a high level of intelligence and hence achievement but this is not always so. When in a positions of leadership the opposite is more the case. Those with total recall often have difficulty differentiating the information and hence making strategic decisions. They more readily miss-understand the overall point or concept because they get so enmeshed in the detail. Detail is for managers and not leaders as forgetting, it turns out, has enormous value for leaders and big picture thinkers; forgetting and forgiving are both key attributes to good leadership. But timing is essential.

General Sir John Hackett as a commander in the 8th Kings Royal Irish Hussars employed a driver who had failed in battle as his own tank driver so showing compassion and leadership as he knew that the man would give anything not to repeat the experience of such failure and yet Hackett’s humanity and compassion would serve his reputation as a leader as they were quickly evident to the rest of his men! General Hackett had chosen to forget and forgive and General Hackett was an outstanding leader.

The other reason for forgetting detail is to enable strategic clarity. One of the greatest exponents of total recall was Solomon Shereshevsky who could recite entire speeches, word for word, after hearing them once. In minutes, he memorized complex math formulas, passages in foreign languages and tables consisting of 50 numbers or nonsense syllables. The traces of these sequences were so durably etched in his brain that he could reproduce them years later.  However, the issue was forgetting them and when Solomon was asked to make decisions, as chair of a union group; he could not see the big picture and tripped up as he was so entwined in irrelevant details. .   “Human memory is pretty good,” says cognitive neuro-scientist Benjamin J. Levy of Stanford University. “The problem with our memories is not that nothing comes to mind-but that irrelevant stuff comes to mind.”

“The act of forgetting crafts and hones data in the brain as if carving a statue from a block of marble. It enables us to make sense of the world by clearing a path to the thoughts that are truly valuable. It also aids emotional recovery after a traumatic incident. ‘You want to forget embarrassing things,’ says cognitive neuroscientist Zara Bergstrom of the University of Cambridge. ‘Or if you argue with your partner, you want to move on.’ In recent years researchers have amassed evidence for our ability to wilfully forget. They have sketched out a neural circuit underlying this skill analogous to the one that inhibits impulsive actions”.  Wilful forgetfulness aids self confidence and enables forgiveness of others.

Leaders need to learn when to remember and when to forget. Given that the best learning is experiential then the experience of failure must be built upon rather than being dwelt upon. Leaders must learn to accept failure as part of an individual and teams development however, they must also remember failures if they are repeated too often. They must also remember lessons from previous failures in order to prevent themselves from becoming involved in systemic failure. As Albert Einstein said ”the definition of insanity is doing the same things over and expecting a different result”.

Leaders benefit from selective forgetfulness of their own failings and others failings as well as forgetting detail to enable strategic clarity as detail is the domain of managers. For leaders there’s a time to remember and a time to forget!

The problem with the modern world is the speed of change. When one compares the speed an individual changes and the speed with which an environment can change and compare both with the speed of organisational change you can instantly identify the mismatch. So why is this obvious phenomenon such a challenge for the modern leader? Quite simply it’s because different issues and different problems require different characteristics and styles of leadership and leaders need to be more style savvy. The world now moves so fast with its new technologies that leaders who are autocrats struggle to keep up. Sometimes control needs to be exercised from on high sometimes influence comes from a lot further down the secret is exercising the right level of influence and control at the appropriate level at the appropriate time. Successful leadership is as much about the right environment as it is about the leader’s characteristics and a rapidly changing environment will challenge any leader however proficient.

Let’s just take three types of problem and assess the characteristics a leader may need to possess to be effective in delivering progress or a solution to each problem type. Keith Grint in Problems Problems Problems defines three categories of problem. The first is a Critical problem one that needs a solution now; they are problems that require a rapid solution to prevent further escalation. Here a leader needs to be both decisive and considerate in their actions; decisive to prevent the problem from running out of control instantly and yet considerate to all those involved with a view to a longer term solution. The London Riots are a fine example of a critical problem escalating. A wicked problem is more ambiguous in its boundaries or very complex where time may not be a consideration. Here a leader needs to understand and recognise the root causes of the issue and manage all those parties and agendas involved in the problem. Patience, intellect, emotional intelligence and understanding are key attributes required of a leader as they try to construct a collaborative solution. An example of a wicked problem is teenage pregnancy.  Now the third type of problem is the tame problem where the issue can be quickly and easily resolved although time may not be a consideration. In an efficient organisation these are dealt with relatively simply through process and operating procedures. They are the province of management and only become significant when they are raised at too high a level where they can quickly become disruptive. A leader needs courage and confidence to enable the organisation to deal with tame problems whilst maintaining them at the correct level. Courage to trust and teach followers, confidence to delegate and empower followers. Leaders need to establish organisations that understand of each member’s responsibilities, allocated boundaries and expectations. They therefore instil an ethos of ownership and responsibility that ensures problems are resolved quickly and effectively.

Control is the conundrum that confuses many in leadership roles, who has it, when should it be relinquished or delegated and how is it perceived? A leader is generally in a pre-ordained position of control at the start of a critical problem but has to work hard to maintain that control to engineer and sustain the long term solution. With a wicked problem the work begins in earnest straight away as the potential leader wrestles with the problem in order to generate the required understanding and environment to enable them to become a permissive leader. The third tame problem requires an ethos and culture of understanding and empowerment to exist so that responsibility is easily shouldered at the appropriate level. This requires a hierarchy enabling the delegation of control and trust from the leader downwards to the appropriate level. This is where the true potential of servant leadership shines through as the leader becomes the enabler rather than the controller or owner of the issue or the enforcer of a solution.

The skill sets and attributes required of the various leaders for each of the problems are different. This is why a leader needs the right circumstances and environment to become a lauded leader. A great leader’s skill sets and personal attributes have to match the moment. The old English proverb still rings true “opportunity makes the man”

The modern world where life is fast, communication is fast and technological advantage short lived, amplifies the requirement for flexibility and creates the need for an extended range of attributes from a leader. This can be achieved either by a group of leaders or a chameleon like flexible leader who has the innate qualities to lead and influence for an extended period of time. The current business environment is not the time for autocracy, and it is not the time for ponderous committees- the modern leader must be equipped with a toolbox of varied attributes that are suited to different environs and situations, but like anything in life it is the ability to recognise and understand the issue and produce the right tool to influence and lead at the right time that will make a leader stand out. Leaders need to comprehend the challenge that the modern pace of life imposes on their own leadership longevity and hence their utility as leaders. Leaders need to comprehend every situation in terms of scale and risk and they need to constantly be aware of both in order to apply the right style or model to the situation. Historically continuity and stability has helped leaders to prosper and yet modern life is about change. The one continuum in modern life is change itself – it is just quicker than it has ever been!

A leader enables followers to follow and but followers make leaders. Both Churchill and Hitler were adored by their followers and loathed by each other’s followers. There is no single set of attributes which make one individual a greater leader than another, just great leadership opportunities to match a leader’s characteristics to a particular situation or environment. Both Hitler and Churchill served a tough apprenticeship of failure until the right opportunities arose. Both were extremely successful for just a relatively short period of time. How many leaders are truly successful for an extended period of time? What apprenticeship did they serve and how did they lead? Questions that are worthy of pondering as the answers are key to the argument that leaders in today’s world need to be far more flexible and adaptable than their predecessors. They cannot just be selected they have to be developed so that they have the full range of qualities and attributes to meet their particular environment. Leadership is as much about learning as it is about knowing and a leader has to be flexible to provide the appropriate response.

We have entered the age of empowered individuals. Leaders use potent new technologies and harness social media to organize themselves and focus interest on their agendas and activities. Most are ordinary people with access to new information tools that can virally create large global audiences for their messages.

The more traditional hierarchical institutions of modern developed societies, whether they are governments or companies, are not prepared or ready for this new social power or leadership as the riots in London and the recent occupy campaigns in cities around the World exemplify.

This power has resulted in the emergence of a new dynamic form of leadership and new styles of leader – they are individuals who do not hold formal positions of authority, they operate and influence at every level within society virtually – top, middle and bottom. They are interested in political, social and organisational change. They challenge the status quo of the traditional institutions and the established concepts and practices of leadership. The speed of action of such groups implies revolution although given the pace of modern life it may just reflect more rapid evolution.

The world is changing and potential leaders now have phenomenal access through modern technology to potential followers; but are we really seeing the emergence of a new ‘grassroots leadership style’ or just a virtual reaction to current geo-political and economic issues and imbalances on global organisational and social stages?

This new technological advantage neuters traditional power and law enforcement and quickly turns virtual agendas into reality and action on an unprecedented scale. What we are seeing is the emergence of a new type of social leadership, irrespective of position or power or authority – relational rather than hierarchical. The concept of a fluid collective responsibility with time relevant ‘liquid leadership’  that builds, fades and morphs – where leadership comes to the fore at the top, centre, or edges of an organisation be it virtual or real. Leadership based more upon time relevant expertise, knowledge, and relational connection. It is a transient relationship where power is virtual and yet influence is real – a matter of permissive leadership with influence presiding over old fashioned traditional enforced authority, control and autocracy. Speed is of the essence and speed creates a phenomenal advantage for these new free running leaders. Accordingly, social power or the ‘power with’ rather than ‘power over’ provides the collaborative advantage even on the global stage. Witness the Arab Spring. This new leadership can be momentary and omnipotent, as powerful and transient as it is weak and ineffective. Predictable-maybe sometimes, yet surprise brings potency and it’s this new leadership’s unpredictability in terms of uptake or influence that can make it difficult to control.  A popular cause and the means of unfettered communication are at the heart of this new leadership. Alliances fostered in an information age where national agendas are undone by social perceptions.

This  new leadership has a precedent; it is  similar in shape to the old terrorism of Al Qaida and Osama bin Laden. Where a religious and social agenda created a fanaticism that spawned martyrs by the thousand. Where social agendas pampered to by a sensationalist press created a myth of omnipotence. Perhaps the new anti-establishmentarianism will be seen as  the new terrorism when viewed from an old fashioned state government perspective

This new leadership comes and goes dependent upon the social situation and leaders come and go dependent upon the relevance of their expertise and the access they have to social media and the scale of their audience. This new form is so dynamic it resembles a ‘liquid leadership’ of a group coalesced by only a  social strategy or  popular agenda.

These new groups herded together by social conscience or injustice often present a preferred response  to those transgressors they oppose. Their preference is for action, to engage, not ignore; work with each other, not against to resolve issues  by whatever means whether the establishment likes it or not.

Business needs to understand this new dimension of leadership, if it does not it will miss out on an opportunity. It needs to harness the social and economic power this new form of leadership affords  For to understand and develop a new business leadership culture based upon influence and empowerment will bring with it a quantum change to the  long established way leadership is currently practised using some of the somewhat antiquated autocratic leadership theory.

“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 is 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 are 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!

How important is leadership in relation to success? Some modern academics argue that success can happen without top level leadership. For me one 0f the key ingredients to organisational success is top level leadership. We have all seen successful organisations driven by the philosophy and drive of one key individual fail as that individual is replaced by someone else. We have all seen organisations that seem to carry on in perpetuity  as leaders come and go. So what makes the difference? Richard Branson,   Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Bill Gates  and last but not least Steve Jobs all run or have all run globally important successful organisations in recent times. However  Barclays, McDonalds, Disney and BP are also all successful  global companies that have broken the shackles of  an individual’s leadership style and competence and still preserved their status.  TESCOs after Sir Terry Leahy  and now under Phillip Clarke are still in leadership transition that will bring  many challenges particularly with consolidation after such rapid Global growth. The way that Phillip Clarke takes the organisation forward will be fascinating as we enter challenging  financial times throughout the world apart from Brazil of course.

Organisations are all different and all have leaders who serve them in differing ways  but success and leadership are linked and here are a few leadership aspects that ensure the maintenance of success within an organisation.

Key to any successful organisation is understanding of its current position. How many organisations truly know where there current position vis a vis competition, product life span and commercial risk. Without a leader focused on understanding the bigger picture in terms of risk, succession and positioning an organisation can only have a short lifespan.

All businesses have an ethos/culture  and it is important that if relevant that culture is preserved after all it is what got you there in the first place. Organisations that have a successful and relevant culture need to preserve it through induction procedures for new employees,  succession plans to ensure those who have grown up within the organisation who understand its doctrine are its future leaders as they preserve the continuous inspiration afforded by that ethos/culture.

Every organisation needs a vision and the vision must be owned by all within the organisation. Vision is not the sole province of senior executives they are the custodians but for vision to be effective it must be owned by the people within. If it is it will generate self sustaining pulling power to drive the organisation to the achievement  of its vision.

Within the vision  are objectives which whist being aligned to the overall vision they must also be challenging and rewarding to those who are responsible to achieve them. They must be timely and measurable and they must be clearly understood.

Goals  within  objectives are simply tasks to fulfil and as tasks they also need to be inspiring and achievable. They also need clear boundaries and controls to keep them on track and the desired end state of the task  must be easily recognised.

Now risk and leadership are particularly closely linked particularly in the more frugal times. A leader needs to know what are the true risks the organisation is taking; what are the warning signs and what are the implications should the worst case come to fruition. There are plenty of  recent examples of when this did not happen Zavi, Woolworths, RBS and then lets look at the US banking collapse in 2010 with 20 banks closing in two months with well over 100 closing in the year. Risk has moved up the leadership agenda and needs to be considered and understood at the highest levels.

Leadership is about the art of the possible it is not the science that management is as it is far more futuristic in its doctrine. It is about the use of experiential learning to influence and motivate people for the future and the challenges that brings. Management is a science and therefore based in the present and based on sound evidence. Lets take targets as an example managers set targets to motivate and control performance. Leaders understand where the organisation is and ensure  continuous improvement through effective inspiration, motivation and judgement.  Both are required in an organisation but for me the manager is the policeman for the leader, the person who keeps people on the successful track set by the leader.

Sometimes leaders just don’t understand what the true consequences of their decisions and actions are. Self sabotage by leaders comes about through ignorance, over confidence,  omnipotent self belief and delusion. One only has to look at the musings of dictators as they come to the end of their terms in power to draw examples I rest my case with the current furore around FIFA. The problem is that rarely is an autocratic leader told the truth by subordinates. The confidence required to reach power can quickly become the confidence that ensures the fall from power.

Leaders need to have a trusted sounding board somewhere in their team such as  Josh Bolten, George W Bush’s chief of staff,  who always tried to encourage others to be frank in front of the president.”I took it as my role as chief of staff where an issue was truly presidential to insist that the disagreement be aired in front of the president in full glory. So I found myself needling cabinet officers and senior advisers and prodding them into taking the extreme form of disagreement that I knew existed outside the room to give the president a real chance to make a decision, and for the boss that I served.” The role of trusted adviser becomes essential when in a crisis.

However that  sounding board has to remain enlightened and cannot become like the leader dizzy and deluded on power.  True “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” and yet when one truly reflects on the great transformational leaders of our time they are some of the most humble: Mother Theresa, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela. All possessed self awareness  and all possessed a deep understanding of humanity. Humble, yet their legacy is far more powerful and omnipotent than many of the organisational leaders made in our modern capitalist society.

I believe that self awareness in a leader is a rare talent. As people reach the upper echelons of power they begin to believe in their omnipotence they are constantly worshipped by their teams of obsequious followers who in themselves are dependent upon the leader to preserve their own social status. A study done by Coopers and Lybrand a few years ago indicated that when asked CEO’s indicated that only ll% of their employees believed they were taking risks to deliver any bad news up the chain. However, the middle managers felt differently. 33% said bad news in their company (Fortune 500) was a career limiting risk and 50% of lower level employees agreed with the middle managers

A leader who reflects on personal actions and decisions, one who rejoices in their teams achievements and not their own; a leader who empowers their people without pomp and ceremony;  one who recognises the fragility and weaknesses of being human in themselves and all those around them is the real thing. For it is to them and only them that the true trust  of followership is given.

Self awareness whether self-induced or externally initiated is key to keeping a leader straight and true for self-sabotage can easily slip into a leaders repertoire without it. And when it does there will inevitably be a fall as the leader arrogantly chooses the wrong path.

So you think you are a leader? Well how good a leader are you?

A good leader is dedicated, for to inspire and motivate a team you have to be. But how good are you at all the various sometimes unpleasant duties of leadership? For leadership is a duty and not a bauble to aspire to.

Moral courage is the primary characteristic for without it you walk by things that you really should own. And if you walk by, every single member of your team learns to walk by as well and n0 one owns the issue – so it festers . As a leader you must always have the moral courage to own an issue however unpleasant the consequences may be.

Honesty is critical to success as a leader and it is being honest with yourself and your team. Sugar coating only lasts so long and it is something that doesn’t always work particularly if it is over used.

A leader sets the example and if they are respected that example becomes the norm for the team. A leader who demands punctuality and regularly arrives late destroys their own leadership potential.

A leader is watched all the time they continually communicate. Leadership is not something you can switch off and on.  A leader communicates even by ignoring someone or something and leaders have to be continually aware of how and what they are communicating.

Leaders must be the bearer of bad news. When it comes to delivering it to the team it is a task that cannot be delegated. If it is delivered honestly and compassionately the message is not distorted and the effects can be monitored and reactions controlled. If it is delegated a leader succumbs to the rumour mill and all its toxicity.

Leaders make judgements and decisions they don’t avoid them. But leaders can’t afford to make too many bad judgements otherwise they will erode their credibility.

Leaders need to deliver they cannot rest on their laurels leadership brings with it a duty to deliver regularly.

Leaders must show equality even when they don’t like team members they must treat them equally. One famous coach stated that he didn’t like his team all the same but he loved them all the same.

Being a great leader may bring rewards but it is far more about servitude and duty than ever it is about status and reward.

As a leader how well do you do? Easy ask your workforce and generally if you, the leader, ask they will tell you the good bits that you do well. But how often do people tell their bosses their weaknesses? It is not generally a career enhancing move and if it does happen it happens because of high emotion or alcohol when it is delivered in its least effective way.

So how can a leader measure their effectiveness? Leadership cannot  be easily quantified as there are so many variables that need to be brought into the equation and as leadership is about motivating and inspiring many of the calls are qualitative rather than quantifiable in their measurement.

As leaders generally have some form of control over those they lead few people are rarely honest about their boss. I think David Ogilvy’s quote on market research is never more true than when asking about someone’s boss.

“The trouble ………….is that people don’t think how they feel, they don’t say what they think and they don’t do what they say.”

People seem to develop an allegiance to their leader and this allegiance is often achieved in the early days of a leadership relationship when a group accepts a leader. However, once the leader is established the group begins to follow the leader unquestioningly and that is why so many strong and good intentioned leaders so often inadvertently stray from the path of righteousness.

Leaders need challenge if they are to be at the peak of their game and that challenge has to test their mettle.  The problem is most of us find challenge uncomfortable and we normally rid ourselves of those who challenge us for fear of being usurped.

So leaders have difficulty with challenge from within the team; therefore perhaps self challenge is the answer? Well it is if you are able to keep it up, but we all know from our physical training that we are generally much more effective when we are encouraged and cajoled to greater effort. So perhaps a challenging mentor is the answer, but a mentor can be expensive and some are better than others. They also need to really understand the issues if they are to challenge effectively.

Leaders need to be able to be challenged and the safest challenge is an inanimate challenge that can be achieved through an effective means of measuring leadership efficacy.  A measurement that includes objective and subjective data and one that assesses a leader and their effect.

We at Sampson Hall have developed such a tool that is non-judgemental, a tool that identifies opportunities within an organisation, a tool that measures and tracks progress, a tool that enables the diagnoses of the causes of a situation rather that just treating the symptoms that manifest themselves.