Cultivating a Culture of Leadership: Strategies for Success

 

Leadership is a vital element in any successful organization. To cultivate a culture of strong leadership, employers must focus on developing environment and strategies that not only inspire their current leaders, but also reach out to potential leaders in the workforce.

Leadership development is not a one-time event; it takes a long-term, consistent commitment and permanent improvements to ensure that leadership skills are effectively nurtured and developed. Here are some important strategies for cultivating a culture of leadership:

1. Establish Clear Goals & Expectations: A key factor in cultivating a culture of leadership is to provide clear goals and expectations that the organization is following. Leaders need to know what results are expected and what support is provided to achieve them. Doing so provides a sense of direction and purpose, inspiring potential leaders to strive for excellence.

2. Invest in Training Programs: Investing in training and development programs for potential, new or current leaders is essential for cultivating a culture of leadership. These programs can provide employees with the knowledge and skills necessary to effectively lead teams and manage projects. By investing in such programs, employers also demonstrate their commitment to the growth and development of their leadership skills.

3. Recognize & Reward Leadership: Acknowledge and reward strong leadership. Publicly recognize and reward leaders who exemplify leadership qualities, such as taking initiative, problem-solving, and encouraging collaboration. This sends a strong message that leadership is valued and appreciated within the organization.

4. Foster Communication & Collaboration: Foster communication and collaboration between leaders and employees by encouraging team building activities, such as group lunches, retreats, and outings. This helps to create a positive workplace culture and enhances collaboration among members of the leadership team.

5. Encourage Learning: Lastly, create an environment that encourages learning. This can be done by providing learning opportunities and resources such as seminars and workshops specifically focused on leadership development. Additionally, employers should provide flexible work schedules to allow for personal development activities like taking classes or reading books on leadership.

By applying the strategies outlined above, employers can create a culture of strong leadership within their organization. This will not only help to foster and nurture current leaders, but also reach out to potential leaders in the workforce. Investing in leadership development programs, recognizing and rewarding successful leaders, fostering communication and collaboration among team members, and encouraging learning activities are all essential elements in cultivating a culture of leadership.

By taking the time to implement these strategies and truly commit to cultivating a culture of strong leadership, employers can create an environment that supports and rewards success. Doing so can result in a more productive, collaborative, and successful organization.

Best Practices describe why Punctuality matters

In martial arts “punctuality” is the key. Why?

Why I think so, I’ll explain later, let’s see how punctuality is defined in Wikipedia: the characteristic of being able to complete a required task or fulfill an obligation before or at a previously designated time. "Punctual" is often used synonymously with "on time". It is a common misconception that punctual can also, when talking about grammar, mean "to be accurate".

In business world punctuality means organizing your time effectively; to be more productive as you start or get on time; in some countries to be respectful to your hosts and well, yes – also disrespectful in others; in short, punctuality affects the individual just as much as it affects the workplace to operate more smoothly as a whole. Punctuality reduces stress as well as stress leads to poor workplace performance.

Does then being punctual strengthens and reveals your integrity?

It is said that when George Washington’s secretary arrived late to a meeting and blamed his watch for his tardiness, Washington quietly replied ‘Then you must get another watch, or I another secretary.’

When you make others wait, you rob minutes from those that came early or on time.

I recall leading a project group in a government environment: we had meetings in a place where most of attendants had their offices. The reason was not to spend time of most participants on commuting. I usually arrived few minutes earlier. Once, after several attempts of asking people to be on time, I have written on the big wall table names and numbers. Everybody seemed a bit wary while watching me. When the last person finally arrived I summed up the numbers and multiplied with average hour salary for our group. We lost almost an average monthly salary while waiting.

The importance of being punctual is not universal and varies from country to country, even within country and from culture to culture. In some places like south Europe, Latin America or Pacific Islands, life moves at a different pace than in northern hemisphere and meeting times are meant to be more incoherent.

Does then being punctual build up and reveal the extent of control a leader has?

Cross-Culture Will Radically Change Your Leadership

All of you have probably visited places where you sensed that “things” are different than those at your home place?

Paradoxically, we set our knowledge and belief as a reference / universal point when judging other cultures. We compare what we know or believe to new and different views sometimes curiously wondering how wrong they are. You are basically trapped in stability issue of which I have written in Leadership and stability, such stability that you have fallibly perceived as security due familiarity with your ‘not changing’ home place culture.

Unfortunately, in this you are wrong. There is nothing stable in this Universe. Changes and differences are all around us, also when meeting other people, cultures or leadership styles.
Differences are the outcome of Gerhard Hofstede project when asked to unify IBM corporate culture across the globe. The study was conducted within IBM between 1967 and 1973 and covered more than 70 countries. Hofstede built a methodology of different countries and cultures and how they interact based on six different categories of cultural dimensions:

• Power Distance that expresses the degree to which the less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. 
• Individualism vs. Collectivism which focuses on the questions about whether people prefer a close knit network of people or prefer to be left alone to fend for themselves. 
• Masculinity vs. Femininity where masculinity represents a preference in society for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material reward for success; and femininity, stands for a preference for cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life. 
• Uncertainty Avoidance that expresses the degree to which the member of a society feels uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. 
• Long-term vs. Short-term Orientation where Long-term orientation dimension can be interpreted as dealing with society's search for virtue and are careful how they shape today not to distort tomorrow.
• Indulgence vs. Restraint that identifies the extent to which a society allows ‘relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying life and having fun’.

Commonly used and cited methodology unfortunately is a perfect “Descartes model of dualism” so appreciated in Western hemisphere way of thinking (see: Dualism vs. Yin-Yang). With different dimensions it brings some diversity but does not allow or imply the changes within cultures.

Is there a solution that may contribute and add change to cultural dimensions methodology?

How Would a Leader Rock With Fun

Does fun have anything to do in leadership?

Did ever happen to you when you were still young that out of nothing (or for something that today would not even notice) you burst out laughing loud in a classroom? Did other mates follow?

Grown up, have you ever been in a situation when you could not stop laughing even you are aware it is not appropriate time/place? Probably, you have not.

And if it happened to you, you very likely tried to hold back and hush up knowing that the sound of (roaring) laughter is far more contagious than any cough, sniffle, or sneeze. Therefore, laugh should not interrupt the important meeting or should it?

How many times have you heard the phrase ‘work and fun’? So, do we have fun at work or we work for fun …?

The heresy?

It is well known that when we laugh we change physiologically and psychically. We stretch muscles throughout our face and as well our body, our pulse and blood pressure go up, we breathe faster sending more oxygen to our organs and tissues. Maciej Buchowski, a researcher from Vanderbilt University, conducted a small study and found out that laughter appears to burn calories, too.

In the post Best Ways to Relax Successfully I was talking how relaxation lowers stress. Laugh was purposely not mentioned as you have to have fun to do what was written in previously mentioned post. Increased stress is associated with decreased immune system. A good, hearty laugh relieves physical tension and stress.

Without any study behind I can argue that most people do not equate ‘work & fun’ together. Furthermore, as shows The Employee Engagement we are further and further distancing from engaged employees. The disengaged majority of employees probably wish it could be true to have fun at work but they have never really experienced it or been allowed to have it. And, by not allowing it, what a failure to raise productivity, development and much more. Studies demonstrate that when people are having fun at work, employee turnover is reduced. And not only turnover …

Now, think for just a moment. Think about your personal experience: when last did you have some fun and after felt more energized, focused, willing and able to get more things done?

Leadership and values

In my post on Virtue – Morality – Ethics and leadership I have written down that virtue motivates, morals and ethics constrain.

Most of the times people tend to mix virtue, morals and ethics not having a clear idea which term to use and when. We are asked for an ethical behavior or moral business and at the same time are explained that values have changed in last decades. The subject is doubtlessly too valuable. What is usually missing is an important measurement framing. Why?

Values are our fundamental beliefs. They are the principles we use to define that which is right, good and just. They guide us when we determine right versus wrong, good versus bad. We could name them our standards since we compare or evaluate deeds whether they meet that standard or fall short of it.

Leadership and behaviors

This post I dedicate to certain behaviors of a leader that mostly all of us should be familiar with. The greatest challenge lays almost always in how to recognize and distinguish them. We may assert that “ill” manner of behavior creates poor business culture (e.g. Enron, Lehman Bros, etc.) which leads to poor business performance and output. But what kind of a manner is “ill behavior”?  Ever heard of badmouthing colleagues, taking credit for other people’s work, lying about skills and experience or hiding mistakes, cutting corners?

Leaders today talk a lot about loyalty, retention, business values, of empowering employees, changes in compensation structures to gain flexibility in work schedules, of team building etc. as behaviors needed for great performance of employee. This raises a question whether in any relationship the behavior is completely reciprocal? I don’t believe so, because one party always wields more power over the other. The example may be obvious already in US: workers these days are all multitasking and happy to have the job. They are certainly not going to complain if they work 10 to 12 hours per day without being paid for the extra time.

Some of us may have already experienced a so called ‘sleeping management’ that suddenly wakes up and demands to do ‘now’ for a work to be done ‘yesterday’.

Can such behavior bring or increase loyalty and engagement in the workplace? In a positive corporate culture extra work is a signal to hire extra personnel or part timer or maybe improve planning and performance approach.

Storytelling tool in leadership

What is the perfect tool to connect with, inspire or motivate another? If you are trying to sell something, present it, give a speech or you are just the audience, the difference between interesting and boring is storytelling.

Stories are changing the way we think, act, and feel and can capture our imaginations, illustrate our ideas, arouse our passions, and inspire us. If a story is well told it can create an intense, personal connection between the audience, the idea and the teller. Think just how you have been listening to them as a child.

What exactly is a good storytelling - the art of using communication: verbal, tone and also gesture to tell components and metaphors of a story to an audience? Throughout human history stories were the actual building blocks of knowledge and by teaching them we learned to anticipate the possible consequences. Stories formed the foundation for memorizing events, persons or other data and to learn about them. That is why we could say that stories connect us with past, present, and future...

Could this tool be used in a business environment to form the foundations of a different workplace culture where hard facts failed to? Could this tool communicate and connect employees, customers, partners, suppliers, colleagues, and more?

Transformational Leadership

My quest for different types of leadership brought ‘transformational leadership’ to my attention. The concept was initially introduced by James MacGregor Burns, a US presidential biographer, to be defined as "leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of morality and motivation".

‘Transformational leadership’ is described as:

• a type of leadership style that can inspire positive changes in those who follow;
• a role model for followers;
• puts passion and energy into everything;
• inspires, sets clear goals, high expectations and "walks the walk";
• does not only challenge the status quo but also encourage creativity among followers;
• offers support, recognition and encouragement to individual followers;
• stirs the emotions of people and gets people to look beyond their self-interest
• those kind of leaders have a clear vision and are able to articulate it to followers;
• always visible and will stand up to be counted rather than hide behind their troops;
• able to prevent employees from being excessively reliant on their bosses;
• take and provide feedback;
• those leaders are good communicators;
• cultivating staff  to feel empowered and self-guided.

Rather a long list but, if you’ve read my previous posts Servant leadership, Authentic leadership, Change leadership and  Charismatic Leadership, you have already detected some notions of parallelism in all those “different” kinds of leadership.  On those I’ll dedicate one of my future blog posts.

Authentic leadership

In the post ‘Servant leadership’ I touched the meaning of added attribute(s) to the word ‘leadership’. Let me continue the subject with another example.

‘Authentic leadership’ puts an important stress on building leader’s legitimacy through honest relationships with followers (their input is appreciated) and is built on the ethical foundation thusly being able to improve individual and team performance (from: Wiki).

Authenticity has been explored throughout history, already in times of Greek philosophers. The ‘Authentic Leadership’ book written by Bill George in 2003 got the highest level of acceptance as part of a modern management science.

Atypical views on Leadership - 2

An outstanding Leadership for cross cultural team(s)

(Continues from Atypical views on Leadership – 1)

As the organization grows larger and more complex, management at the top begin to lead and decide less by firsthand experience, but more and more on heavily processed data. From their position they rarely see the business flowing in the same way as do the people down in production or on the sales floor. Four decades ago, IBM tried to unify corporate culture in its subsidiaries all over the world. Geert Hofstede carried out a world-wide survey on employee values. The result was very informative and demonstrative. There were other researchers of the same topic too. A common conclusion of all those studies is that “we are definitely different”.

Back to Adam Smith. He characterized economy as three orders in society: those who live by the rent, by their labor, and by the profits. Joseph Schumpeter described economy also as three-folded: monetary, interests, and value theory within a natural-law perspective. And they were not alone in dividing economy in three parts. One does not need to be an outstanding expert to deduct: a (free) market, which by definition is something imaginary, can be perceived as a Holy Ghost; a (private) property, which equals to omnipotence – the God; and a labor, which can be linked to a sacrifice for higher capital gains – Jesus Christ. Is then the economy just a new “global religion” with all needed attributes? If you remove fundamental attribute of any religion -“trust”- from all economics factors, what do you get? A meltdown of today currencies, companies values, stock markets … Or choose a next attribute – “permanent growth” of profits which is in collision with all natural laws (even Universe is limited). The focal point of economy driven capitalism paradigm is the accumulation of capital or wealth. It propels uncontrollably, destroying the natural environment and exploitation of resources beyond recovery. There is also no room for other ‘opinions’ than economic measures that drive our lives today. Is this a kind of a “medieval” way of thinking?

Atypical views on Leadership - 1

An outstanding Leadership for cross cultural team(s)

Have you met a person that was thinking in a completely different way to yours? What kind of impression does it leave on you? Do you dismiss it immediately, or you find it worthy, erroneous  …? 

For me it is exciting, definitely because my life path is somehow atypical, too. In our core we people are similar no matter where we come from. Not long ago I had a TEDx talk about the human behavior that surpasses “the cultural background noise” – “the noise” that accompanies us throughout our life and normally influences our values, ethics and morals, mentally and subconsciously. Unfortunately, this kind of reasoning I find that is still missing in common stances and leadership practices. Let me try to show some examples which are going to be based on atypical views.

From the management’s perspective, managers perform tasks, manage people and do business. Accordingly, there are numerous methodologies and tools helping to manage business and people: Just In Time Production, Kobayashi’s 20 keys, Six Sigma, Business Process Reengineering … to name some. In business environment, do all these methodologies and tools really come out the way we need them to? Current economic and financial situation makes us doubt it. If these tools were as efficient and as great as claimed, then we should not see companies struggling and vanishing. Why it is then so?

IQ & EQ for Leaders

Human beings are complex integrated systems. It is hard to define them by some theoretical calculations as hard as it is to quantify demanding processor’s unquantifiable actions. Nevertheless I teach my students two measures commonly used to explain humans and their roles in leadership.

IQ (intelligence quotient) is representing a person’s reasoning ability (measured using problem-solving tests) calculated by a mathematical formula that is supposed to be a measure of a person's intelligence. The quotient is traditionally derived by dividing an individual's mental age by his chronological age and then multiplied by 100 (thus IQ = MA/CA x 100) to get the statistical norm or average taken as 100. The most direct ancestor of today's intelligence tests was developed by Alfred Binet. He did it due to a request of an education commission in France in order to distinguish some intellectually impaired children from other intellectually normal ones. Later on Binet’s intelligence test was revised extensively to get the today's version of IQ by Lewis Terman.

EQ (emotional intelligence) is the level of your ability to understand other people, what motivates them and how to work cooperatively with them. It is a combination of: Self-awareness - the ability to recognize an emotion as it happens; Self-regulation – having a control when one experiences emotions; Motivation - one achievement that requires clear goals and a positive attitude; Empathy - the ability to recognize how people feel which is important to success in your life and career; Social skills - the development of good interpersonal skills which is as well tantamount to success in your life and career.

Virtue - driven company

What YOU put up with is what YOU have to live with!

Modern corporate culture

Although companies today dispose of all kinds of employee assessment systems, the employees are still managed by managers rather than lead by leaders. Being treated as a cost, even expendable or hopeless, the staff, normally, acts in the same way.

Banks or financial service companies analyze the companies’ performance. For the writing of “the analyst reports” normally young people, freshly out of the school, are used. The report which mostly does not make any significant sense is then solely used by management as a base to steer the staff and processes the way they always wished but were ‘afraid’ to do. So we begin to work to live rather than live to work.

I might also say that in companies “a terrible job” is done when screening and matching people to tasks. Thousands of low level employees are hired but not empowered to actually change anything even in their own field of expertise for which they were hired. Their work is just to do the job (execute higher level decisions). Companies do not dispose of a long term plan to keep best people engaged; they don’t reward them for exceptional actions. No incentive is provided to those that are willing to be innovative. The incentive, if at all, is meant for those that do fewer errors and are willing to compel to the system. The employees are not empowered to solve problems. They are required to rather avoid them (by punished errors). Thusly, companies create a symptom of “someone else's problem”, certainly not my problem, not my responsibility.

In the companies that are not just managed but being lead by true leaders the employees come first and are encouraged to stand up and do it differently.

Social vs. Economical system

If these two systems could or not be compared we should first lay out some definitions.

The social system is represented by people or groups of people. It is a social structure that refers to entities or groups of people that are definitively in relation to each other by having different functions, characteristics, origin or status. A social system is comprised of interdependent set of cultural and structural elements understood as a unit. Sociology is the study of human social behavior and especially the study of the origins, organizations, institutions and development of human society.

The economic system encompasses the production, distribution or trade of goods and services and consumption by different individuals, businesses, organizations, or governments. Economy as a study deals with the production and consumption of goods and the transfer of wealth and explains how people interact within markets to get what they want or how they accomplish certain economical goals.

To understand if the systems are comparable or not we should probably dig even more and try to outline also the basic differences between socialism and capitalism.

Organizational success and failure

An organization exists because of participation of employees who work in it. It is like a living organism: the brains are represented by the board of directors; vital organs are main managerial posts. The rest are employees. However, when one organ fails in a human body it is a problem for the whole body. If it works perfectly, the importance of each and every part goes unnoticed.

The organizational success or failure is hardly a one man game. The days of a single great decision maker at the top have shifted to strong decision making skills at all levels and across groups. No organization succeeds or fails based on the responsibility of only one individual. Yes, the leader holds the power to make the decisions and has the ultimate (not sole) responsibility. But a leader can only be held responsible within a reason for that which was in his/hers control.

We know today, supported by research, that the capacity to exercise control does enhance results. Also well explored is the fact that a company's culture is pushed down from the top. Companies that have failed, such as ENRON, have had management that abused the trusted power. The employees simply did what they were told to do. This proves to be a rigid culture lacking of transparency game. Another example of a rigid culture and leadership vision deficiency can be perceived in Kodak’s case where leadership somehow didn’t notice the shift coming in the technology related to films used for photographs.

Organizational change

Organizational change is, or should be, just one of the processes within the strategy’s frame and company vision. Why then companies have to “struggle” when introducing changes? Why do they need to change? Ever changing environment, markets, products are just pushing the limits of a current stability of the companies and provoke never ending chain of changes.

In his blog Bernard Marr says “a good mission statement articulates the purpose of the company, basically why it exists, what it does and for whom. It should serve as an ongoing guide that spells out what the company is all about. The mission should focus on the here and now.” And where do we see a necessity for a change that a company should follow? In “a vision statement where the goals and aspirations for the future are outlined. It creates a mental picture of a specific medium-term target and should serve as a source of inspiration.”

But are these definitions enough to smoothly drive a change? Company’s organizational culture, as described in the previous blog: “Organizational culture and martial arts,” is the sum of values and rituals defined by rules. It is also a part of a “bigger picture” that surrounds an organization and each of us, as I explained in my TedxTalk. And these substances present difficulties or even block a change. Employees of a company, as others, are perceiving stability as security therefore opposing changes. Consequently, a permanent conflict prevents a peaceful process of change.

Corporate governance in multicultural organization

Corporate governance refers to the issues associated with the way corporations are structured, managed and operated. The use of the term “corporate governance”, the evolution of the concept and what it entails has started in the early 1980’s.

 Among the first was the Cadbury Committee. They defined the purpose of corporate governance in 1992 namely, as a set of processes, customs and policies that frame the business of the company and help manage the subsidiaries. This is then operationalized in a uniform method through administered or controlled directives.

The most quoted and referred to document in this field is the OECD principles corporate governance. OECD defines it as a set of relationships between a company’s management, its board, its shareholders, and other stakeholders. Corporate governance also provides the structure through which the objectives of the company are set. The means of attaining those objectives and performance monitoring are determined. So, the main recommended principles are stated as rights and equitable treatment of shareholders, interests of other stakeholders, role and responsibilities of the board, integrity and ethical behavior, disclosure and transparency.

Organizational culture and martial arts

Organizations are made for employees to work there and not opposite: employee should fit the organization. As the organization grows larger and more complex, management at the top lead and decide less by firsthand experience, but rather more and more on heavily processed data. From their standpoint they rarely see business flowing in the same way as do people down in production or on the sales floor. To understand huge amounts of data and information that is streaming toward them, after a throughout long training, they finally achieve to see the reality through the distorting glasses they've had to put on. Decisions they make and the responsibility they shoulder relies on tangible data. But these glasses somehow filter out emotions, feelings, sentiments, moods, and almost all the nuances of human situations that are part of everyday organizational culture consequently filtering or better losing all the tacit knowledge that drives business processes.

Organizational culture is the sum of values and rituals defined by rules. It is also a part of a “bigger picture” that surrounds an organization. This poses some problems if organization shock-wave through different cultures.

Four decades ago IBM tried to unify corporate culture in its subsidiaries all over the world. Geert Hofstede carried out a world-wide survey on employee values. The result was very informative and demonstrative. There were other researchers of the same topic too. A common conclusion of all those studies is that “we are definitely different”.

Nonverbal – body language and Leadership

There are two types of people—those who come into a room and say, “Well, here I am!” and those who come in and say, “Ah, there you are.”(Frederick L. Collins)

Communications are verbal but, equally, if not more important, are those that are non-verbal. This accounts to between 50 to 70 percent of all communication – facial expression, eye gaze, gestures, and tone of voice. The way you listen, look, move and react lets other people know whether or not you pay attention, if you are being truthful, and how well you are listening.

Martial arts are based predominately on non-verbal communications. Once I asked my teacher: “Shifu, when two great martial arts masters meet how do they recognize who is better?”

Virtue – Morality – Ethics and leadership

The three: virtue, morality and ethics are not new philosophical terms. To Aristotle the good for human beings must essentially involve the entire proper function of human life as a whole. And this must be an activity of the soul so that expresses genuine virtue or excellence.

Virtue, in short, is a desire for honourable things. Aristotle defined the virtue as habits of acting or dispositions to act in certain ways. In China the term Dé is probably the closest modern English equivalent that means ‘virtue’ in the sense of ‘personal character,’ ‘inner strength,’ ‘virtuosity,’ or ‘integrity.’ Chinese character Dé, written as 德, is composed of the radical彳followed by the number ‘fourteen’ or shí sì (十四) over ‘one’ or yī (一) ‘heart / mind’ or xīn (心). The simple meaning is that one has to have a big heart for fourteen people.