Part of being human is being imperfect. At some level we all would agree with this. Why then do we often act so coy about the need for leaders to get bigger and better at their role. As individual contributors, we often engage in development to contribute at a higher level or prepare for something we want to see happen. As leaders, we must always change and get bigger because our context and people require it.
A really smart and wonderful client recently said that his weaknesses as sighted by his directs did not represent reality but rather their perceptions. I agree. He felt some relief when he realized this. However, as a leader the reality that most matters is that of the people you are trying to inspire to their best contribution. In a leadership role, other's perceptions of us carry more weight than our own. Leaders are accountable for getting work done through others. We often need to grow and change for them. Thankfully we also reap the benefits.
A concrete example is forthcoming. A client has promoted a leader to a higher level position due to her technical competence and the fact that she has delivered results in her prior role. However, they also know from feedback that this executive has some required interpersonal development and needs to learn to better manage people. She now has a much larger section of the business. Her boss is hesitant to mention this when the promotion is discussed because he doesn't want to diminish the accomplishment. Or, more commonly, the boss ignores what they know and doesn't say anything. In about six months dissatisfaction with newly promoted executive's leadership style surfaces. Still the head guy is hesitant to deliver contrary feedback - they did promote this leader.
The company promoted someone who they trusted to deliver results. That makes sense. With a larger staff, people management takes a bigger priority in the new role. The necessary feedback is not about the executive. The feedback is about the new context and the new requirements of the larger role. It is not a blaming moment but represents a change and is based upon the demands of the position. This is normal. This is not just semantics. If the company wants the team to succeed and do their best work, the promoted executive needs to expand her people management skills. This will be good for her, good for her team and good for the company. The change is not about the executive. It is for her people and the company. This is the requirement of leadership. We don't do it for ourselves, we do it for the business and our people. Once we become leaders of human beings, we change for them, and often reap the benefits ourselves.
So I think the conversations is more like this: "You do great work. We promote you. And because of the expectations-the larger staff, bigger demands, more complex role, role of a Vice President, etc.-of this position we need you to grow. As part of your transition we will help you leverage your current strengths and expand your skills. We particularly want you to work on _______. We request this because we want you, your team and our organization to continue to do well." Gosh, as I write this I wonder why this is not the normal discussion that we have when we promote someone. Better yet, when you get promoted, ask for feedback and development. Just assume that you have room to grow and you will.
Keep growing. Get bigger.
Posts
