Dialogue on Level 5 Leadership

Kelly:  So, I’ve been thinking about a problem that I suppose has always been (and will always be) with us, but is more glaring now, at the tail end of the recession.  We have solid, very experienced executives who excel at operational leadership.  They can always be counted on to “take the hill” with whatever resources they’re given, and with revenue and profits under such severe pressure, they’re the current stars.  The thing is, their focus on managing conservatively for today actually gets in the way when we move back into growth mode.  We need them to lead their teams toward innovation, creative investments, increased capacity, new ideas, but that’s not their strong suit.  Feels like we can’t have it both ways, but I’ll bet some companies have worked through this.  Any insights?

Belinda:  One way business writers approach this very common situation is to encourage partnering, so that an analytic left-brain “thinker” works with an imaginative right-brain “innovator” to accomplish what neither can do alone.  For example, Apple’s Steve Jobs successfully functioned as the innovator while leaving the details of running the business to COO Tim Cook.

But I don’t think that completely answers the question.

In what is called the Level 5 model of leadership, based on Jim Collins’ initial research in his book Good to Great, the leaders you describe who thrive in conditions requiring conservative operational leadership are called Experts.  They are great at rational decision making as long as they stay within the area of their expertise.  Doing the same thing repeatedly, and doing it very well, is their strength.  Interestingly, right-brain thinkers can also be Experts, it’s just that their expertise is in a different arena. 

The challenge is to develop beyond simple expertise, which is all about being good at one thing, and move into more flexibility as a leader.  In the Level 5 model, Experts develop into Achievers who are good at getting the task done, then Achievers develop into what are called Individualists, who are more emotionally intelligent.  We know, though, that we need to get the job done and do it in a way that works effectively with people. 
 
Kelly:  Interesting.  I understand what you’re saying about Jim Collins’ model, and I admit some of our more senior leaders have moved beyond being “just” Experts, but actually developing Level 5 leaders in an organization seems like a long run proposition.  What can companies do in the near term to get more aware and connected leadership and energize their teams?

Belinda:  You’re right, it is a long-term commitment.  In the short term, what is called for is a bit of humility and having a look at the research that supports taking a broader view.  A few recommended steps might include:

1.  Bringing younger members and those with alternative perspectives onto the leadership team.

2.  Learning from the success of Southwest Airlines (The Southwest Airlines Way : Using the Power of Relationships to Achieve High Performance by Jody Gittell) and other companies that have cultivated the “people” aspect of leadership.

3.  Engaging an advisor who understands Strategic leadership (a little shameless promotion here) to explore longer-range planning.

By the way, the language of Experts, Achievers, and Strategists is from the work of Susanne Cood-Grueter. She is a contributor to Action Inquiry: The Secret of Timely and Transforming Leadership, which is a good place to begin reading about developmental leadership.

I’d love to hear about what our readers have found useful.   What has your experience been with this question?

Comments

[Kelly Cannon]

Hi Belinda

[Maureen Metcalf]

Hi Belinda and Kelly,

One option for leaders to consider is taking the MAP assessment created by Susann Cook-Greuter (www.cook-greuter.com) to determine where they fall in the leadership levels which will help establish the "current state". From this place they can work to determine their development goals. Research by Bill Torbert as well as Jim Collins suggests that the leaders who test at "Level 5" or Strategist using the MAP assessment are significantly more likely to successfully transform organizations and sustain the changes.