This is an edited version of the original essay
Ewart Wooldridge
"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population".
So reads the citation of the Nobel Committee for Barack Obama to be awarded the prize for peace. All of us – even his staunchest supporters – were probably somewhat surprised by this news. What had he really achieved as a world leader to deserve it? How could he accept it at the same time as he was contemplating an escalation of the war effort in Afghanistan – and struggling with ratings on his personal leadership back home?
Even if we set aside the extreme views of some right wing TV presenters and Republican politicians in the US, did we not really feel they had come up with their award just two or three years too early?
The Obama phenomenon is not just about the sense of relief that someone with the right values could follow the disappointing era of George W Bush, nor that he was the first black President of the US. It was about how he had got there, his uplifting journey to the most powerful leadership role in the world via the tough world of frontline community work in the most challenging communities of Chicago, and from very complicated family roots and relationships across many continents.
So it is perhaps this sense of leadership as a journey as opposed to a series of episodic achievements (or failures) that I might have understood earlier to good effect, where assessment of performance is as much to do with direction of travel and espousing of the right values and behaviours as it is with delivered targets.
Early expectations can of course prove to be short lived or seriously contested. We only need to reflect on the early Tony Blair period with its enormous transformational expectations to know that perceptions can change. And the same may happen with Obama – although hopefully not. But maybe the Nobel Committee saw enough genuine promise here to take Obama on trust. Two very important phrases underpin their decision. Firstly they discerned a quality within him that suggests an alignment with values and attitudes that are shared very widely. It has enabled him to make with absolute conviction some very courageous speeches to the Muslim world in Cairo and on nuclear disarmament in Germany and Russia. Secondly they focused on his capacity to give people hope which a lot of leaders forget to do as they jostle to compete on the altar of short term targets and delivery.
Like most of my generation with a range of management experience from the mid-1980s onwards, my leadership career has been against a backcloth of performance assessment by measurable outcomes – from Management by Objectives to Public Service Agreements, from Payment By Results to Key Performance Indicators. Of course deliverables and outcomes matter, but they focus on the end of each phase of the career leadership journey, rather than assessment of qualities during the journey itself. What followers look for in their leaders is that inner beacon of values, energy, hope, challenge and support – rather than a simple recitation of beautifully formed deliverables. A leader overwhelmed by the prospect of undeliverable targets loses the energy and vitality to provide those other forms of support and motivation to team members and colleagues.
To help us to be better leaders we may need many more examples of the Obama mould at more normal levels and ordinary domains of leadership, otherwise the 'leadership by measurables' contingent wins the day every time. We know this emphasis on being the compelling role model throughout the leadership journey is instinctively right: we just do not have the courage to stick with it in the face of current paradigms of delivery-focused leadership thinking in the public sector. We also do not want to face up to the paradox that leadership is a complex and multi-faceted thing that thrives on being nurtured, that needs time and does not thrive from being 'done to'.
From all this, the concept about change that I wish I had known and understood sooner in my career was 'emergent change'. It challenges the change management methodology (still prevalent in many target based approaches), that change management simplistically involves steering a project or programme from point 'a' to point 'b'. The truth however is that in today's change management journey, we will only know a limited amount of the terrain we are crossing, and most of the challenges – or indeed necessarily changed goals – will emerge as we go.
I once invited the senior commander of the British invasion force in Iraq to address a management conference in higher education. He said that when they landed off the Shatt al-Arab waterway en route for Basra, they only knew 25% of what they really needed to know. The leadership skill was to apply their well trained leadership sensors to fill in the remaining 75% that was unknown, and to offer that skill of interpretation to the rest of the force that provided that vital confidence to proceed with the invasion. They reached Basra with the minimum of loss. Leaders in less dramatic and more conventional situations may feel they know a lot about their context, staff, threats and opportunities, but the reality is they do not. The real change skill is about coping with uncertainty, ambiguity and ambivalence, and for many this is not something that comes naturally.
So, the leadership model I have come to understand better over time is that developing leadership capacity is about equipping staff and organizations to be "change ready", to be resilient in the face of a lot of ambiguity and uncertainty. I cannot promise them a clear route map for a particular change initiative, but I can interpret for them, coach, mentor and advise. Whilst competences are important, the other 'c word' – confidence - may be of equal validity as a leadership trait and something that leaders must critically impart to and develop within their team.
In conclusion, the lessons and recommendations which I draw from this quick scan of my personal leadership learning are:
• judging leaders more on the values and models they offer their followers, and their confidence building characteristics to inspire delivery through them
• a model of change which is emergent, where the prime goal is to foster sustained 'change readiness'
• an approach to employee engagement which understands the psychological contract, and builds on the idea of co-creation with users with a strong sense of place.
Ewart Wooldridge is the chief executive of the Learning Foundation for Higher Education
From Bubb's Blog
From Whitehall Watch
