ABP News
Identifying High Potential: Learning Agility and Authentic Leadership
Posted: 01/07/11Identifying high potential people is vital for any organization and current performance is often taken as an important indicator of future potential. However, a study conducted by the Corporate Leadership Council in 2005 found that 71% of high performers have limited potential at the next level. David Sharpley of Pario Innovations discussed how best to profile the attributes of High Potentials. He highlighted important links between Learning Agility and Authentic Leadership, raising far-reaching questions concerning existing assessment methods. The evidence suggests the need for a new look at how conclusions are drawn about performance and potential, with far greater awareness of the qualities that underpin future potential.
It has become evident over the last few years organizations have started to equate high potential with the concept of ‘Learning Agility’. This is linked to the view that “ability to learn from experience is what makes and develops expert leaders”. (Lombardo and Eichinger 2000, McCall and Hallenbeck 2008). This perspective is also supported by the work of Spiro et al (1988) on Cognitive Flexibility. This involves:
• ability to spontaneously restructure one’s knowledge to radically changing situational demands
• transfer of knowledge and skills beyond the initial learning situation
• speed of response and effectiveness of adaptation in response to change
The Corporate Leadership Report suggested that future potential was limited because of short-comings in Ability, Aspiration and Engagement. In this context, ‘Ability’ is not defined by IQ, EQ or Critical Reasoning, but is linked to Cognitive Flexibility and associated Learning Agility. Commenting on the report, David noted that Aspiration may be low because of low levels of motivation, which may arise because inherent strengths are not being utilised effectively in the role or work environment. Engagement may be reduced by a range of factors, which means that there is no longer any strong commitment to the organisation. He added that many staff surveys fail to identify the key drivers of discretionary effort and engagement, which are distinct factors and provide the platform for high productivity (and sustainable, long-term success).
In an organisational context, four main strands of Learning Agility have been identified:
• Mental (Cognitive): the capacity to deal with complexity and make connections
• People (Authenticity): personal insights and conviction about needs and requirements
• Change (Ambiguity): tolerance of ambiguity and willingness to explore & develop opportunities
• Results (Impact): delivery focus, achieving personal impact and motivating others
Alongside Learning Agility, we have the concept of “Balanced Processing” which is one of the cornerstones of Authentic Leadership. More effective managers make allowance for their own subjectivity by being responsive to feedback, and being able to utilise and apply this feedback to positive effect. In the words of Louis Pasteur, Chance favours the preferred mind. David made the point that ‘star performers’ are skilled in understanding the expectations of others and managing role relationships. Use of ‘Intelligent’ 360 degree feedback, which targets specific questions to key groups of respondent, can therefore play a significant part in developing the necessary insight and awareness.
By way of illustration, an important study at Bell Labs, reported in the Harvard Business Review (1993), highlighted significant differences in the productivity of average and ‘Star Performers’. These differences were not explained by critical reasoning ability or personality traits (and it is likely these would have been assessed previously). However, the Star Performers displayed more-effective work strategies, notably in terms of demonstrating initiative and maintaining contact and dialogue with customers. A subsequent productivity improvement process raised awareness of Critical Success Factors. After twelve months this achieved a staggering 25% improvement in productivity.
David highlighted the importance of gaining a better understanding of Critical Success Factors and made the point that many competency models are often not tuned in to what is really important. A case study highlighted the value of a ‘mixed methods’ approach to competency profiling, where semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis (the qualitative element) identified initial competency clusters. This was then followed by quantitative analysis based on 360 degree feedback. If competencies and statements of behaviour are valid, they should make sense to the people who are using them to provide feedback, and therefore map onto the competencies. (This is where the 360 analysis is particularly useful).
The NHS case study involved nurses and midwives in a Foundation Trust. The results revealed that the initial set of 8 competencies (and more than 60 behaviours) translated, after SPSS analysis, into five clearly defined factors based on 40 statements, which were more closely attuned to the role and context.
• Factor 1: patient / client engagement
• Factor 2: team leading / communication
• Factor 3: setting clear direction
• Factor 4: focusing on performance
• Factor 5: communicating with doctors
The study supported (i) the view that performance is strongly aligned to situation and context, and (ii) the potential value of being able to target specific questions (to gain relevant feedback from key groups). This approach also reduces the time required by respondents to complete 360° feedback. At the same time, written feedback can be more role and situation specific (i.e. tailored to different groups of respondent).
What Are the Building Blocks of Authenticity?
Authenticity has been described as the “unobstructed operation of one’s time, or core self, in one’s daily enterprise”. For a leader, this means a sense of Personal Conviction about overall requirements, which is essential in developing a wider sense of shared purpose.
Looking more closely at Authentic Leadership, we see that this involves demonstrating personal conviction and identifying with an activity. It is also about developing a sense shared purpose, which involves creating a sense of Authenticity in others. However, this vital element of Authentic Leadership is often overlooked. The concept can be contrasted with Transformational Leadership, which emphasizes use of Charisma and a Compelling Vision to overcome ‘self interest’ in order to gain commitment to organizational goals. This may work in short-term turnaround situations but is of less long-term value to the organisation.
Four core elements support development of Authenticity, which is associated with more-effective leaders:
Self-Awareness
…understand their unique talents, strengths, sense of purpose, core values, beliefs and desires… are open to experience, and receptive to feedback that supports the process of gaining this insight.
Balanced Processing
…make allowance for their subjectivity and are therefore inclined and able to consider multiple sides of an issue and multiple perspectives as they assess information in a relatively balanced manner.
Relational Authenticity
…strive to achieve openness and truthfulness in their close relationships, using selective self-disclosure to build trust and appear genuine in their interaction with others.
Authentic Behavior / Action
…respond to situations in a way that is appropriate, in the context of their role, whilst recognizing their core values and, as far as possible, acting in a way that is consistent with these values
Authentic Leadership has a strong operational focus and is very much concerned with results and outcomes. It is about achieving maximum benefit from the richness of role relationships. Increasingly, a leader needs to look at the key relationships affecting outcomes. The relevant contact groups may include: the immediate manager, colleagues, customers, contractors / suppliers, business partners, and stakeholders.
David used a Pario self-assessment case-study to illustrate how current work preferences and patterns of work behaviour can be related to the concepts of Learning Agility and Authentic Leadership. This highlighted how important factors could be explored as part of a structured assessment process.