Kim Woods Only
145Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
Non-Governmental organization
leadership And Development.
a Review of the literature
~ Ph.D. Candidate Dragoș – Cătălin apostu (National School of Political Studies and Public Administration, Romania)
E-mail: dapostu@gmail.com
Abstract: Leaders of the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) often face extraordinary chal- lenges – both at a personal and organisational level. These challenges are demanding, and distinct from those faced by governments or the for-profit sector.
NGO leaders are often isolated and unsupported. There is talk of a leadership deficit, because of the shortage of talented leaders and the growth of the non-profit sector generally. As a result there is some ur- gency in attempts to develop a new generation of leaders, and to provide relevant support to existing and future leaders. Leadership development programmes designed for NGO leaders must as a consequence in- corporate best practice and current experience rather than rehashing tired, traditional approaches to lead- ership training.
This paper examines the role of leaders and leadership in NGOs. It draws on the analysis of recent research into the characteristics of NGO leaders, and explores the challenges of designing leadership de- velopment programmes appropriate to the needs of NGOs. This paper identifies the elements of successful leadership development, and assesses the skills or competencies that need be developed.
Key words: NGO, skills and competencies, leadership, capacity building, leadership devel- opment programmes, change and transformation
146 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
introduction
Non-Governmental Organisation
(NGO) leaders often face extraordinary chal- lenges – both at a personal and organisation-
al level. They work long hours with limited
resources in uncertain and volatile political
and economic circumstances to help the most
marginalised and disadvantaged members of
their communities. The complex managerial
challenges they face have been documented
in a small, but growing, body of research
(Smillie, 1995; Fowler, 1997; Eade, 2000; Lewis, 2001; Smillie & Hailey, 2001; Edwards & Fowler, 2002; Hailey & James, 2004; James et al., 2005). Reviewing this literature one can but conclude that these challenges are de-
manding, and distinct from those faced by
governments or the for-profit sector.
NGO leaders are often isolated and
unsupported. There is talk of a leadership
deficit, because of the shortage of talented
leaders and the growth of the non-profit sec-
tor generally. As a result there is some urgen-
cy in attempts to develop a new generation
of leaders, and to provide relevant support
to existing and future leaders. Leadership de-
velopment programmes designed for NGO
leaders must as a consequence incorporate
best practice and current experience rather
than rehashing tired, traditional approaches
to leadership training.
Perspectives on leadership
Definitions
There are a wide range of definitions
of the concept of leadership and the role
of a leader. Dictionary definitions identify
a leader as one that provides guidance by
going in front, or causes others to go with
them. Leadership is defined as the capac-
ity to lead. In a recent review of leadership
theory Northouse (2004) identified four com- mon themes that run through much of lead-
ership theory: 1) leadership is a process; 2) leadership involves influence; 3) leadership occurs in a group context; 4) leadership in- volves the attainment of goals. Based on this
analysis leadership was defined as “a process whereby an individual influences a group or
individuals to achieve a common goal”. But
it is clear that no one definition encapsulates
all the facets of leadership. Consequently we
must accept there will be a range of different
interpretations and perceptions of leadership
and what leaders do.
Another way of trying to identify the
different elements of leadership is to create
a typology of different kinds of leadership.
This typology is derived from the research
reviewed in this paper, and outlines four dif-
ferent types of NGO leader: 1) Paternalistic; 2) Activist; 3) Managerialist; and 4) Catalytic.
1. Paternalistic leaders typically dem-
onstrate a patriarchal or matriarchal style
of leadership. Their approach is often built
on established personal or kinship relation-
ships. They can inspire great loyalty, and
have strong, close, possibly even a familial
relationship with staff and volunteers. But to
outsiders they can appear autocratic, reliant
on hierarchical ways of working or top-down
organisational structures, and overly-depen-
dent on traditional relationship which may
not be sustainable in the long run.
2. Activist leaders are actively engaged
in advocacy and lobbying work. They are
highly motivated, often charismatic, and typ-
ically focused on a single issue. They have
the ability to channel the anger or concerns
of local communities and solidarity groups to
147Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
achieve political imperatives. In practice they
energise and inspire “followers” with clearly articulated messages – sometimes at the ex-
pense of dealing with more mundane mana-
gerial or organisational issues.
3. Managerialist leaders are rated for
their managerial and administrative abili-
ties. They typically demonstrate an instru-
mental ability to manage organisations, and
can effectively establish reliable systems and
appropriate structures, as well as manage a
diverse workforce with established roles and
responsibilities. While they may not be com- fortable with change or coping with diverse
partners and external stakeholders, they
demonstrate a “professional” approach to development, have a track record in raising
funds, meeting deadlines and undertaking
commissions as a “contractor”. 4. Catalytic leaders typically act as stra-
tegic catalysts within the NGO context, and
have the ability to promote and implement
change. They demonstrate a wider world-
view, and the capacity to take a longer-term
strategic view while balancing tough deci-
sions about strategic priorities with organ-
isational values and identity. Their success
as change agents depends on their ability
to delegate work to talented colleagues, so
freeing time to engage actively with external
stakeholders and partners, build coalitions
and strategic alliances, and be involved in a
variety of networks.
The value of such a typology is that it
goes beyond simple definitions and gives
an insight into the variety of different lead-
ership styles around. The typology high-
lights the complexity of trying to identify the
characteristics of successful leaders – if only
because, in their own ways, each of these
different leadership types is successful in
the particular context in which it operates.
However, as will be explored later, the “cata- lytic” leadership type is more likely to gener-
ate longer-term, sustainable, strategic growth
than the others.
leadership traits, styles and Competencies
Our attitude to, and understanding of,
leadership has developed and evolved over
time. Early thinking about leadership has
been influenced by the belief that leadership
was innate and that some individuals were
born with certain traits that made them ef-
fective leaders. This led to much interest in
the personality and charisma of what came
to be known as “heroic leaders”. Researchers assumed that it would be possible to identify
and isolate a definitive list of leadership traits
(Stogdill, 1974). This ambition has never real- ly been fulfilled. But a review of the research
on leadership traits suggests that leaders
score higher in such areas as ability (intelli-
gence, relevant knowledge, verbal facility), sociability (participation, co-operativeness,
popularity), and motivation (initiative and persistence).
However, this emphasis on leadership
traits was open to the criticism that it under-
played or overlooked the influence of exter-
nal factors. For example, there was concern
that the focus on the individual was at the
cost of an understanding of the impact of
distinct organisational cultures on the way
different leadership styles evolved and de-
veloped. In the 1970s researchers therefore began to focus their attentions on what lead-
ers did in practice and how organisations
shaped different leadership styles, rath-
er than attempting to identify or measure
148 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
leaders’ underlying characteristics or traits. In particular, researchers were interested in
the way leaders adapted their public per-
sona and leadership style to suit the situa-
tion they found themselves in or the people
with whom they were involved (Hersey &
Blanchard, 1988; Mintzberg, 1998). In the 1980s there was renewed inter-
est in those leaders who actively promoted
organisational change. Arguably such trans-
formational leaders enabled ordinary people
to achieve extraordinary results (Peters &
Waterman, 1982; Bass, 1985). In some ways this was a return to the trait-based analy-
sis of the “heroic leader” with its focus on a leader’s ability to communicate and inspire, or act as a catalyst for change. Interestingly
in the late 1990s there was a reaction against this approach, partly because only a few of
such transformational leaders achieved sus-
tainable success and partly because as organ-
isations became flatter, more decentralised,
and less bureaucratic their leaders needed a
new skill-set based around networking, ne-
gotiation, delegation and team building. This
reaction is reflected in recent research that
endorses the value of “quieter”, humbler, less charismatic leaders who are keen to be seen
to be part of a broader management team and
actively encourage others to succeed (Bennis
& Nanus, 2004). In a similar vein Mintzberg (2006), drawing on his work with local lead- ers in enterprise development agencies in
West Africa, argues that the future lies with “fostering” a new generation of leaders who can practise what he refers to as “engaging management”. Such leaders have the abil-
ity to engage with or inspire others through
their thoughtfulness and humility.
Whatever the ebb and flow of research- ers’ interest in leadership there seems to be
an ongoing fascination with efforts to iden-
tify the key characteristics and core compe-
tencies of successful leaders. In particular,
interest has focused on the role and impor-
tance of individual competencies. Such com-
petencies are seen as distinct from general
skills in that they are considered to be the
underlying characteristics found in any indi-
vidual that lead to, or are causally related to,
effective or superior performance. This inter-
est has led to what is now referred to as the
“competency approach” to leadership. The development of the competency
approach is partly the result of the growing
interest among organisations as to how to at-
tract talent and how best to identify and re-
cruit a new generation of leaders. It is also
partly driven by the needs of those involved
in designing and running leadership devel-
opment programmes who want to identify
the skills, competencies and capabilities that
they should be trying to encourage and de-
velop. The interest in this approach reflects a
desire to identify and harness the leadership
competencies and management skills that
lead to effective performance. This has re-
sulted in organisations, and human resource
specialists in particular, placing great em-
phasis on measuring, monitoring, appraising
and comparing core competencies. As a con-
sequence they have created a range of typolo-
gies or frameworks which identify the mix of
skills and competencies needed .1
However, this emphasis on measure-
ment and ranking may be at the cost of
1 Examples of such typologies or frameworks can
be found on the following websites:
•CEML Framework of Management and Leader-
ship Abilities www.managementandleadership-
council.org
•Investors in People Leadership and Management
Model www.investorsinpeople.co.uk
149Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
valuing less tangible leadership behaviours
such as intuition or good judgement (Bolden & Gosling, 2006)
While these competency-based typolo- gies commonly paint a picture of leaders
as multi-talented individuals, there is some
concern that they under-play the negative as-
pects of strong leadership and over-idealise
the role and character of strong leaders. The
impact of “bad” or incompetent leaders must not be ignored or overlooked. The down-
side of strong leaders is that they can exploit
their power for their own benefit or agenda.
Their central role leads to a degree of depen-
dency among their staff that in turn may lead
to their disempowerment and de-skilling.
Such strong leaders have been characterised
as out of touch with reality, inflexible, ego-
centric, and isolated. This in turn can lead to
poor judgement, abuse of power, confusion between personal and organisational inter-
ests, and corrupt and unethical behaviour
(Kellerman, 2004). Such poor performance or unethical be-
haviour can threaten the viability, credibility
and sustainability of any organisation. In the
context of the non-profit sector these con-
cerns highlight the importance of identifying
appropriate leadership competencies that re-
flect the values of the sector and the needs
of individual staff and volunteers. They also
suggest that one should be cautious about be-
coming over-reliant on mechanistic compe-
tency frameworks – in particular those that
don’t incorporate intangible personal com- petencies such as how personal judgement is applied, and how personal relationships with
teams, colleagues and “followers” develop.
followers and teams
Despite this concentration on the char-
acter and competencies of successful leaders,
many researchers and commentators argue
that you cannot understand the dynamic role
of a leader unless you see it in the context of
their relationship with their “followers” (col- leagues, subordinates, or team members). Such “followers” can play a crucial role in reinforcing the power of individual lead-
ers, influencing their behaviour, and help-
ing construct internal systems and structures
that act to enhance the status of those they
see playing a leadership role (Howell and
Shamir, 2005). The success of most leaders is determined in part by the resources, ener-
gy, expertise and knowledge that such “fol- lowers” can muster. Leaders can attempt to
control or manipulate them through fear or
coercion, but more often than not, they have
to work with their “followers” or colleagues in an egalitarian and co-operative manner.
Appreciation of the influential role of
such “followers” is critical in informing our understanding of the socialisation process
that shapes the leadership style adopted.
This relational or team-based approach
to leadership is supported by the concept of
“distributed leadership”, in which there is a shared sense of purpose and ownership of is-
sues at all levels of the organisation. This con-
cept suggests that leadership is a collective
task based on shared decision-making and
delegated authority. Leadership is therefore a
social process in which everyone is engaged.
As such leadership development should be
seen as an investment in building human
capital and developing the “collective capac- ity” of organisation members to “interact and work together in a meaningful way” (Day,
2001). As will be explored in the following
150 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
sections this emphasis on leadership as a col-
lective process, rather than something that is
specific to one individual, means that leader-
ship development is as much about how best
to manage teams and delegate authority, as
it is about building networks and maintain-
ing good personal relationships. It should be
seen as an investment in building the social
capital of an organisation.
These different theories and concepts of
leadership provide insights into the different
facets of individual leaders and the dynam-
ics of leadership. We can only conclude that leadership is a complex phenomenon. It is
also something we need to understand and
develop because of its crucial role in mobil-
ising resources and motivating people. This
is particularly true for many civil society
organisations (including NGOs and com-
munity-based organisations). For too long capacity builders have neglected the key role
that local NGO leaders play in the develop-
ment process, and overlooked the complex
and collective dynamics of leadership within
many NGOs. They appear to have underesti-
mated the influence of the particular culture
and context in which many NGO leaders op-
erate, and as a result many capacity building
initiatives designed to support a new genera-
tion of NGO leaders have been inappropriate
and irrelevant.
ngo leaders: Context and Culture
This section focuses on the evolving
role of NGO leaders and the way the envi-
ronment in which they work impacts on this
role. It draws on research from a variety of
sources, and sees leadership in the particu-
lar cultures and contexts in which NGOs
operate. What is clear from this research is
that not only do individual leaders play a
central role in shaping the destiny of many
NGOs, but that their role and effectiveness
is in part determined by the environment in
which they work (Kelleher & McLaren, 1996, Fowler, 1997, Smillie & Hailey, 2001, Hailey & James, 2004, James et al. 2005).
There are also worries about the lack of
leadership talent to be found within the con-
text of the non-profit sector as a whole. This
“leadership deficit” will become a matter of urgency as the sector expands over the next
twenty years. It is estimated that in the US
alone over half a million new senior manag-
ers will have to be developed for leadership
positions in the period 2007–2016. What is also apparent is that many of these jobs will be filled by individuals recruited from out-
side the sector who will have had limited ex-
perience of running non-profits at a senior
level. Currently it is estimated that only 40 per cent of senior management positions in
US non-profits are filled by internal appoint-
ments, and that the remainder are recruited
externally (Tierney, 2006). In the 1990s the International Forum
on Capacity Building, which was an inter-
national coalition of NGOs concerned with
building the organisational and managerial
capacity of the sector as a whole, consistently
voiced its concerns at the quality and avail-
ability of appropriate leadership. It argued
strongly for increased investment to develop
a new generation of NGO leaders (1998 and 2001). CIVICUS, an international alliance of civil society organisations, similarly identi-
fied the lack of NGO leadership talent as a
matter of particular concern. It suggested
that this was partly a consequence of the rap-
id turnover of senior staff and the difficulty
in replacing them, and that NGOs needed to
151Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
do more to recruit and retain effective leaders
(CIVICUS, 2002). Unfortunately much of our understand-
ing of the way leaders work and what mo-
tivates them is based on research into the
role and character of leaders in the business,
political or military sectors. Furthermore,
much of this research is based on studies in
the developed industrialised countries of the
North, with a particular focus on the individ-
ualistic, low power distance cultures of North
America or Europe (Kotter, 1996, Adair, 2002, Bennis & Nanus, 2004). Relatively little re- search has been undertaken on leadership in
the non-profit or public sector, and what re-
search there is has mainly been based on the
experience of US non-profits and has focused
on the work of Boards rather than individual
leaders. Allison (2002) reviewed the number of books concerned with non-profit manage-
ment carried by Amazon.com, and estimated
that only about 10 per cent were concerned with non-profit leadership – virtually all of
which were based on the US experience and
were concerned with Board and Governance
issues.
Much of the current leadership research
is therefore not relevant to the different so-
cial, cultural and political environments in
which NGO leaders work (Hailey & James,
2004). While NGO-specific research and writ- ing on leadership may be in short supply, it
does exist and is growing. Some of the con-
clusions of this work are analysed below.
Responding to Culture and Context
Clearly leadership styles are contingent
on the context in which they are applied. But
they also depend on the ability of the indi-
vidual’s diagnostic skills and judgement to
know what style to adopt and when to adapt
their style to suit the circumstances. This in-
fluence of culture and context on leadership
styles is highlighted in the recent research
into NGO leadership in South Asia (see for
example Smillie & Hailey, 2001) or sub-Saha- ran Africa (see for example Fowler et al., 2002; James, 2005a). The conclusions are supported by the findings of researchers analysing the
characteristics of leadership styles of African
managers generally. Mintzberg (2006) refers to what he calls their “engaging” manage- ment style, while Jackson (2004a) highlights the importance of a “humanist” style in the African cultural context.
Any understanding of the role and per-
formance of NGO leaders must incorporate
the environment in which they work. Recent
research into NGO leaders in Kenya, Malawi and Uganda highlights the way in which
they operate simultaneously in three differ-
ent worlds – the global aid world, the urban
context in which they live and work, and the
rural village setting where many of their ex-
tended family still live (James, 2005a). This research reveals how NGO leaders have to
adapt to new leadership roles, the stresses
arising from pressure of work, and the de-
mands of organisational crises – commonly
around financial shortfalls, internal conflicts
or tensions between the staff and the Board.
Kaplan (2002) concludes that the unrealis- tic and artificial demands placed by aid do-
nors adds to the pressure faced by local NGO
leaders. The donor’s emphasis on tight proj- ect schedules, over-hasty timeframes and
quick results is both unrealistic, developmen-
tal bad-practice, and has a negative impact
on the credibility and confidence of NGO
leaders. Such demands have a detrimental
effect on the ability of many NGO leaders to
152 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
pursue long-term goals or develop a degree
of financial sustainability.
There is an ongoing debate as to the
influence of culture on management strate-
gies and leadership styles (Jackson, 2004a). Contradictory evidence suggests that on the
one hand, the more participative and col-
lective leadership style that many NGOs
espouse is shaped by the collectivist nature
of society found in much of the developing
world; on the other hand, the more auto-
cratic approach adopted by individual NGO
leaders is the product of the high power dis-
tance dimensions common to these cultures.
However benign this role may be, it detracts
from their ability to make hard decisions or
play a more “professional” managerial role (James et al., 2005). In turn this places indi- vidual leaders under great personal pressure.
They have to meet the expectations and finan-
cial demands of family members, and man-
age the “power distance” relations between themselves as managers and their staff. It has
also been suggested that the paternalistic na-
ture of many NGO leaders is a natural conse-
quence of the high levels of commitment and
shared sense of ownership common to many
NGOs (Fowler, 1997). The paternalistic nature of some leader-
ship in the NGO sector is a matter of some
concern. There are many anecdotal stories
about the detrimental impact of paternalistic
founder leaders, “charismatic autocrats” or “the guru syndrome”. On the one hand such leaders demonstrate drive and commitment,
and a remarkable ability to mobilise people
and resources; on the other hand they are
criticised for dominating organisations, be-
ing unaccountable, and failing to adapt to
changing circumstances. Chambers (1997) suggests that many NGO leaders achieve
things through their “guts, vision and com- mitment”, but the way they use (or abuse) power is a “disability” that jeopardises or- ganisational effectiveness. He argues such
charismatic leaders are “vulnerable to acqui- escence, deference, flattery and placation”.
They are not easily contradicted or corrected.
As a result they actively suffocate promis-
ing initiatives that may threaten their power
base, relationships or position of patronage.
Despite these concerns most of the re-
cent research into NGO leadership empha-
sises the significance of good leadership. An
effective leader can transform an organisa-
tion by providing direction, inspiring staff,
mobilising new resources while still main-
taining a clear organisational identity, and
promoting shared values.
working Relationships and Participation
As has already been noted leadership
behaviour is directly influenced by leaders’ definitions of themselves in relation to their
colleagues and work teams. As such leader-
ship is not so much about individuals as it is
about relationships. It is a dynamic process
of mutual influence between leaders and fol-
lowers. A noteworthy finding of the recent
research among NGO leaders has been the
way in which leaders have embraced a more
participatory leadership style. Traditionally
dominant leaders are increasingly sharing
decision-making with their staff and encour-
aging a more participatory culture in their or-
ganisations (James et al., 2005). One of the paradoxical issues that re-
search has uncovered concerns the way
in which successful NGO leaders man-
age the tensions inherent in being a strong
153Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
individual lead while still appearing to be
highly participative and collegial in they way
they manage. Many NGOs espouse collective
decision-making and participatory manage-
ment, yet have clear hierarchies and accept
strong leadership. To some, the concepts of
leadership and participation seem incom-
patible. Yet what has emerged is that strong
leadership and participatory management
can be complementary and compatible.
What is also striking from any review of this research is the different roles that such
leaders have to play whatever the culture or
context. Their success is determined by their
ability to work in a participative manner, be
comfortable with sharing their leadership
role, and work in a collective style. As a re-
sult many NGO leaders have a chameleon-
like ability to play different roles and adopt
different leadership styles. Yet they are also
capable of undertaking the most basic man-
agement tasks, as well as balancing the de-
mands of different stakeholders in ways that
do not compromise their individual identity
and values. These “development leaders” display an extraordinary set of skills and
competencies because of the complexity of
the contexts in which they have to operate
and the challenges they have to face.
NGo leadership: evolving roles and
Characteristics
This section focuses on the key charac-
teristics and competencies shared by NGO
leaders.
Competencies and Characteristics
Typical of the competencies commonly
associated with leadership are the ability of
a leader to communicate vision or strategy,
inspire teams, motivate individuals, and
identify opportunities and initiate transfor-
mation. Recent research in the UK sponsored by ACEVO, which represents and supports
the leaders of non-profit organisations in
Britain, suggests that they exhibited an un-
usually broad range of competencies com-
pared to leaders in the public and private
sectors (Bolton & Abdy, 2003). They need a rare balance of inward-looking (manage-
ment) and outwardlooking (influencing) skills, with exceptional communication and
networking skills, as well as resilience and
emotional attachment.
This finding reflects the belief that effec-
tive leaders display high levels of “emotional intelligence”, and their performance is deter-
mined by their emotional maturity and abil-
ity to mobilise their emotional intelligence
(Goleman, 2000). Emotional intelligence de- scribes one’s innate ability to feel, use, under- stand and learn from your own emotions and
those of others and of groups. Those with
high levels of emotional intelligence have an
ability to motivate both themselves and oth-
ers. Many effective leaders demonstrate high
levels of self-awareness, are capable of self-
management, are socially aware and are well
able to manage a diverse range of relation-
ships. Emotional intelligence represents the
intangible aspects of leadership that are all so
important.
Many international NGOs have created
assessment tools that try to capture both hard
skills and some of these softer, more intangi-
ble, attributes. For example, the International
Federation of the Red Cross introduced an
“Effective Leadership Inventory” of over sev- enty questions both to elicit and to reinforce
the leadership qualities the Federation be-
lieves its leaders will need to demonstrate in
154 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
order to ensure the continued success of the
organisation. Similarly, the Save the Children
Alliance has established a set of Leadership
Standards that apply to all levels of the or-
ganisation, independent of function or coun-
try. The list of standards is selfmeasurable,
and has been designed to encourage learning
and self-improvement. It is based on the indi-
vidual leader’s ability to envision (create and communicate individual strategy), enable (identify and apply appropriate tools, pro-
cesses, and people), empower (develop effec- tive teams), and energise (communicate and inspire through personal leadership).
As was identified earlier, there is also a
small but growing body of research whose
findings give practical insights into the char-
acter and capabilities of NGO leaders in
both Asia and Africa. For example, research
in South Asia highlighted the distinct charac-
ter and leadership style common to the lead-
ers of large NGOs in Bangladesh, India and
Pakistan (Smiley and Hailey, 2001). This re- search emphasised the crucial role of individ-
ual leaders in the development and growth
of these organisations. The leaders studied
had a highly personalised and distinctive
leadership style. They appeared pragmatic,
rational and aspirational. They also demon-
strated a striking ability to balance compet-
ing demands on their time and energy with
their own values and ambitions. They ap-
peared both managerial and value-driven.
They had clear and ambitious development
aspirations, as well as an ability to under-
stand and work with what resources they
had and the volatile environment in which
they found themselves.
Such “development leaders” could be characterised as being value-driven, knowl-
edgebased, and responsive. In practice this
meant that they had:
• a clear vision and a firm personal
value-set. This gave them a strong sense of
commitment to helping the rural poor that
they were able to share with, and use to in-
spire, others;
• a willingness to learn and experi- ment. This meant they were comfortable
applying new technologies or developing in-
novative organisational forms, and keen to
draw on science or other sources of applied
or professional knowledge;
• a curiosity and ability to scan the ex- ternal environment. As a consequence they
were able to track changes, analyse trends,
and identify ways to respond to changing
circumstances;
• strong communication and interper-
sonal skills. These enabled them to motivate staff and engage with a cross-section of soci-
ety in a proactive and positive manner;
• the ability to balance competing de-
mands on their time and manage the pres-
sures from a range of different stakeholders.
NGo leadership and Change
As has already been noted, strong lead-
ership is most needed in times of change when
organisations are experiencing rapid growth
or operating in a volatile environment. NGO
leaders demonstrate a chameleon-like ability
to balance competing demands and a diver-
sity of roles according to the circumstances
and the individuals involved; for example,
balancing their personal vision with the prac-
tical needs of local communities, as well as
the demands of donors or the vested interests
of local politicians.
But it should also be noted that many
NGO leaders have built their reputation by
effecting change in very traditional, static,
155Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
even paralysed, communities. In other words
they are the source of change, and the cause
of instability. Such “catalytic” leaders (see the typology in Section 2) are change agents who promote innovation and mobilise new
resources. This is well-exemplified in Uphoff
and Esmans (1998) review of “successful” ru- ral development programmes, which high-
lighted the catalytic role of key individuals
in leadership positions. These individuals
played a crucial role in initiating change and
guiding innovation; a role made somewhat
easier because they were “outsiders” them- selves, coming as they did from outside the
rural community studied, and as a result bet-
ter able to promote new thinking or argue
for change. Uphoff and Esman describe this
group of unusually able and motivated indi-
viduals as “development entrepreneurs” or “social innovators”.
The capacity to play different roles and
balance competing demands, as well as de-
velop strategies that enable them to cope
with the exigencies of complex and difficult
external environments appears to be one of
the hallmarks of many successful NGO lead-
ers. Interestingly this echoes the findings of
the ACEVO survey of non-profit leaders in
the UK, who demonstrated an unusually broad range of competencies to handle the
demands of competing stakeholders and or-
ganisational change.
One consequence of this interest in
the role of individual leaders in promoting
change is that there is greater awareness of
the need for these individuals to become
more self-aware and change their own be-
haviour and attitudes if genuine change is
to take place. In other words leaders have to
change themselves, not just try to change the organisations. As Nelson Mandela famously
commented “you can never change society if you have not changed yourself”.
Research in both the private and non-
profit sectors reinforces the point that such
personal change is crucial. For example,
Quinn (2000: 116) notes that “the bottom line is that they (leaders) cannot change the or- ganisation unless they change themselves”.
Edwards and Fowler (2002: 42) writing about developments in civil society note that “it is rarely possible to generate substantial change
in human behaviour simply by altering the
rules and institutions that govern our lives.
The missing ingredient is personal change
which acts as a well spring of change in oth-
er areas”. While James (2003) also noted the way behavioural changes are preceded by
highly personal internal changes in his re-
search among local NGO leaders in Malawi.
The crucial question is how to ensure such
personal change occurs? This challenge
seems to lie at the heart of the work of those
designing and running leadership develop-
ment programmes.
the Challenge of leadership Development
This section focuses on some of the is-
sues which need to be considered by those
involved in developing a new generation of
leaders. There is now much greater recogni-
tion of the importance of personal change,
individual empowerment, experiential learn-
ing, and face to face support. Leadership
Development Programmes (LDPs) have evolved over time from formal, structured,
one-off training courses to more process-
based, experiential programmes with an
emphasis on personal development and
self-directed learning. This shift reflects
156 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
frustration with the limited impact of tra-
ditional one-off training courses with little
real follow-up, and a greater appreciation
that more holistic, self-learning programmes
spread over time are better able to develop
personal confidence and new leadership
competencies.
The varied challenges which NGOs are
up against have focused attention on how
to develop a new generation of NGO lead-
ers. In practical terms this is reflected in the
increased investment in LDPs. For example,
Save the Children Fund is in the process of
identifying core leadership competencies
for its senior staff, and is currently develop-
ing in-house leadership development cours-
es. Similarly the Organisation Development
Department of the International Federation
of the Red Cross has introduced a series of
leadership development workshops for the
senior staff and Board members of different
Red Cross societies. CARE, and a consor-
tium of US-based NGOs, are developing a
virtual NGO university (LINGO – Learning
for International NGOs) whose initial pro- grammes will focus on NGO leadership
development. These are not just one-off ini- tiatives but part of a growing awareness of
the importance of developing the role and
skills of NGO leaders (Lewis 2001; Smillie & Hailey 2001, Hailey & James 2004, James 2005a).
Empowerment and transformation
The primary purpose of any NGO-
based LDP is to develop a new generation
of NGO leaders. All the indicators are that
not enough talented natural leaders are ei-
ther attracted to, or remain in, the sector.
Recent research suggests that one of the
biggest challenges facing the non-profit sec-
tor is the dearth of leaders – a problem that
is only going to get worse as the sector ex-
pands (Tierney, 2006). The task of any LDP is to both mobilise existing talent but also to de-
velop and motivate new leaders – in part by
helping ordinary managers or administrators
to become effective leaders. So LDPs prepare
people to play roles beyond their normal ex-
perience or frame of reference. One measure
of the success of any LDP is to what degree
it helps transform personal behaviour and
change attitudes.
Such personal transformation is depen-
dent on greater self-awareness and willing-
ness to engage in new ways of working or
thinking. Raising awareness and promoting
personal change is therefore a crucial compo-
nent of any successful LDP. Unfortunately too
many NGO capacity building programmes
have overlooked this obvious fact. They have
focused too much on organisational and in-
stitutional issues rather than trying to pro-
mote changes to the attitude and behaviour
of individual leaders. One implication of the
current interest in emotional intelligence, as
well as team-based or collective leadership,
is the need to develop competencies that pro-
mote collaboration and networking, but also
which ensure real personal change.
This focus on individualised self-de-
velopment raises the question as to whether
leadership behaviours and competencies can
actually be developed through some form
of taught training course. Or do we just ac- cept that leadership is an innate characteristic
that some individuals are lucky enough to be
born with and which can merely be refined
– like the natural balance that a gymnast has
or the sense of perspective that a great art-
ist enjoys. The consensus today is that while
157Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
some leadership qualities can be developed,
there are some personal characteristics that
are less amenable to change through a lead-
ership development process (drive, perse-
verance, emotional resilience, etc). Thus we need to accept that LDPs cannot develop
the ‘complete leader’, but they can go a long way in developing key leadership skills and
behaviours.
Some of these skills cannot be taught in
the traditional sense of the word, but can be
developed through promoting greater self-
awareness and generating some insight into
the impact of personal behaviour or leader-
ship style on others. Experience suggests that
such insights can best be developed through
some process that builds on participants’ own experience, and provides feedback through
mentoring and coaching sessions, 360-degree appraisals, learning sets, or team building ex-
ercises. 360 degree is an increasingly popular feedback mechanism, as it enables individu-
als to gauge the attitudes and perceptions of
their colleagues (superiors, peers and sub-
ordinates) as to their management style and behaviour in a systematic and facilitated
manner. It acts as a reality check based on
external sources, but for it to be effective it
needs to be administered by trained facilita-
tors. If badly administered it is not worth do-
ing, because it alienates participants, creates
artificial tensions between work colleagues,
and casts doubt on the efficacy of other ap-
praisal or feedback mechanisms. But if done
well it can be of immense value in raising sel-
fawareness and acting as a catalyst for per-
sonal change.
Practical Experience and strategic reality
One of the challenges for those involved
in such capacity building work is how to
design interventions that will develop NGO
leaders who can thrive in, and not just cope with, the complex environment in which
most NGOs operate. There is also greater
appreciation of the role that leaders play in
organisational change. As a result those in
leadership positions have to gain insights
into both the context in which they operate
as well as the organisational challenges fac-
ing local NGOs. LDPs need to develop an
understanding of these strategic challenges,
and help participants become more strategic
in their thinking and entrepreneurial in their
actions. The current interest in social entre-
preneurship has highlighted this dimension
of leadership development work. Successful
LDPs ought therefore to be rooted in the
practical experience and strategic reality of
those running CBOs and NGOs, but also in-
corporate the findings of recent research in
this area.
Methods and Approaches
Leadership development therefore isn’t about a single training event, it is about a
process that incorporates a range of activities
including:
• coaching and mentoring;
• self-assessment questionnaires;
• psychometric testing (such as Myers
Briggs or 16PF); • journaling and narrative description; • photographs and video diarying;
• cases and simulation exercises;
• specialist workshops and seminars;
• learning sets and peer group support;
• internships, attachments, second-
ments and observation exercises.
This mix of inputs and approaches not
only provides participants with specific skills
158 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
and experiential learning, but also insights
and feedback that help promote greater self-
awareness and self-confidence in their role
as leaders. Of the activities identified it is ap-
parent that coaching and mentoring play an
increasingly important role in leadership de-
velopment – to the extent that it is commonly
expected that most individuals in leadership
positions should have the support of some
kind of coach or mentor.
International experience suggests that
there is a move to support such developmen-
tal processes with new web-based e-learning
opportunities. Such e-learning initiatives are
attractive because of their flexibility and low
cost to deliver internationally. But there are
commonly high attrition rates with web-
based programmes. The success of such dis-
tance-learning initiatives depends on regular
feedback and intermittent face to face con-
tact, as well as access to the wider ‘communi-
ties of practice’. It seems that because of the innovative nature of many e-learning initia-
tives, participants need to work at their own
speed, and slowly build their confidence in
the process and the technology involved. It is
not a process that can be forced or imposed.
In conclusion, the current thinking sug-
gests that leadership development should
be seen as an emergent, experiential and be-
spoke process. LDPs should be seen as pro-
viding a safe space to explore new issues,
receive feedback and reflect on personal
performance and behaviour. Because of the
emphasis on experiential learning, many suc-
cessful programmes incorporate a planned
programme of secondments, attachments
and job rotation. As such they should not be seen in the same light as traditional training
courses, but more as a mix of methodolo-
gies that help generate self-awareness, build
confidence, analyse options and explore
ways of implementing alternative solutions.
Conclusions
All the evidence suggests that the lead-
ership of NGOs is an issue of some impor-
tance. Such leaders can shape the destiny of
not just the organisation itself, but also the communities with which they work. Effective
NGO leaders do have a pro-poor agenda,
and can impact the lives of the most vulner-
able and disadvantaged. Unfortunately there
is some concern about a growing “leadership deficit”, and where the next generation of
leaders will come from and how they will be
developed or trained.
leadership Development: A Personal
Challenge
Experience tells us that NGO leaders
don’t want or need traditional skill-based training programmes with fixed and finite
structures. Instead they want flexible, per-
sonalised, process-based programmes that
are geared to their own needs; programmes
that are concerned with the strategic and op-
erational issues they have to cope with on a
daily basis. As a result there has been a move
away from generic, skill-based traditional ap-
proaches to leadership training to more be-
spoke, process-based programmes designed
to develop the untapped potential of individ-
ual leaders.
One consequence of this shift to a more
personalised, process-based approach is that
many different methods and techniques are
employed, including coaching and mentor-
ing, personal reflection, diarying, learning
sets and peer group support. Thus the de-
sign of LDPs is increasingly based around a
159Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
modular mix of inputs, with greater empha-
sis on experiential learning, personal learn-
ing or “learning from within”. This reflects the realisation that lead-
ership development cannot be reduced to a
checklist of characteristics or competencies to
be worked on and ticked off. LDPs build con-
fidence, offer alternative solutions, and help
individuals deal with issues of personal con-
cern. As a result they incorporate techniques
and group processes to help overcome com-
mon psychological barriers such as low self-
esteem, lack of selfconfidence, fear of failure,
and stress.
Another aspect that is often overlooked
is the role of LDPs in attempting to alter un-
acceptable behaviour or attitudes. As has al-
ready been noted there are issues about the
dark side of leadership behaviour. This is not
just about the abuse of power for personal benefit, but also about the way autocratic
behaviour displayed by some NGO lead-
ers becomes ‘addictive’ and disempowering (James, 2005b). Such negative behaviour, which may have a highly detrimental effect
on small organisations, can be addressed
through self-awareness and conscious-
nessraising as well as ongoing mentoring
or coaching. It also implies that LDP pro-
grammes should not merely be available to
established leaders but also to a new genera-
tion of potential leaders early in their careers,
before inappropriate behaviour has become
the norm, or autocratic habits have taken
hold and solidified into addiction.
There is also a more sophisticated un-
derstanding of the range of social skills and
leadership competencies that such pro-
grammes should be developing. This has
been reinforced by an appreciation of the im-
portance of emotional intelligence as a core
competency. Research in the different dimen-
sions of emotional intelligence has empha-
sised the centrality of the way we manage
ourselves and our relationships, and brought
out the role of a few fundamental capabili-
ties (self-awareness, selfmanagement, social
awareness and social skills) as crucial deter- minants of effective
leadership (Goleman, 2000). There is therefore much greater appreciation that lead-
ership development is a complex, dynamic
and highly personal process. Leadership
skills develop and evolve to suit the context
and culture in which they operate. They can-
not be simplistically transferred.
leadership Development: A Capacity
Building Priority?
This paper has identified some of the
challenges that NGO leaders face, and con-
cludes that they need a set of attributes above
and beyond those commonly found. In par-
ticular they need integrity, personal strength,
political acumen and managerial ability to
balance the competing pressures they face as
well as the judgement and insight to know what leadership style or strategies best suit
the circumstances. They also need to main-
tain their personal values and deep-rooted
contacts with the community within which
they work. As a result they will develop a
remarkable ability to adopt different man-
agement styles while remaining true to their
values and aspirations, and where appropri-
ate work in a participative and consensual
manner.
The future of many NGOs depends on
their ability to recruit and retain effective
leaders who are self-starters, can inspire oth-
ers, and have the ability to effect real change.
160 Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
Such ‘catalytic’ leaders (see typology in Section 2) have the ability to take a longer- term strategic view while balancing tough
decisions as to strategic priorities with organ-
isational values and identity. Their success
as change agents depends on their ability to
delegate work to talented colleagues so free-
ing time to build coalitions, develop strategic
alliances, and work as ‘boundary spanners’ across organisational divides. Above all they
are effective and committed networkers who
can lever up resources and enhance status
and impact by actively engaging with exter-
nal stakeholders and working with a range
of partners.
It is also clear from any review of the
research that leadership and management in
the NGO sector is different from leadership in
other sectors. NGOs are vulnerable to the exi-
gencies of donors, the political sensitivities of
governments, and the needs and imperatives
of the local community. Development NGOs
are susceptible to the unpredictable demands
of an uncertain development environment.
The question for the future is how will such
organisations find or develop a new gener-
ation of managers or leaders who can meet
these challenges. Thus, leadership develop-
ment needs to become a priority issue on the
NGO agenda – an issue of central importance
for all those concerned with capacity building.
reFereNCes:
1. Adair, J. (2002) Effective Strategic Leadership, London: Macmillan;
2. Allison, M. (2002) “Into the fire: boards and executive transitions”, Non-profit Management & Leadership, 12(4): 341-51.
3. Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: Free Press.
4. Bennis, w. and nanus, B. (2004) Leaders, New York: HarperCollins
5. Bolden, r. and Gosling, J. (2006) “Leadership competencies, time to change the tune”, Leadership, 2(2): 147 – 63.
6. Bolton, M. and Abdy, M. (2003) Leadership, London: ACEVO.
7. Chambers, r. (1997) Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last, London: IT Publications.
8. CIVICUS (2002) “Connecting Civil Society Worldwide”, Newsletter No 175 August, Johannesburg.
9. Day, D. (2001) “Leadership development: a review in context”, Leadership Quarterly, 11(4): 581 – 613.
10. eade, D. (2000) Development & Management, Oxford: Oxfam.
11. Edwards, M. and Fowler, A. (2002) Reader on NGO Management, London: Earthscan.
12. Fowler, A. (1997) Striking a Balance: A Guide to Enhancing the Effectiveness of NGOs in International Develop- ment, London: Earthscan.
13. Goleman, D. (2000) “Leadership that gets results”, Harvard Business Review, March – April: 79 – 90.
14. hailey, J. and James, r. (2004) “Trees die from the top: international perspectives on NGO leadership develop- ment”, Voluntas, 15(4): 343 – 53.
15. hersey, P. and Blanchard, k. (1988) Management of Organisational Behaviour, Prentice Hall, NYC.
16. howell, J. and shamir, B. (2005) “The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process”, Academy of Management Review, 30 (1): 96 – 112.
161Change and Leadership
No. 17 ~ 2013
17. jackson, t. (2004a) Management and Change in Africa, London: Routledge.
18. jackson, t. (2004b) Cross-cultural Management and NGO Capacity Building, Praxis Notes 1 – 4, Oxford: INTRAC.
19. James, r. (2005) Autocratics Anonymous: A Controversial Perspective on Leadership Development, Praxis Note No. 14, Oxford: INTRAC
20. James, r. with olapido, J. isooba, M. Mboizi, B. and kusima, i. (2005) Realities of Change: How African NGO Leaders Develop, Praxis Paper No. 6, Oxford: INTRAC
21. kaplan, A. (2002) Development Practitioners and Social Process: Artists of the Invisible, London: Pluto Press.
22. kelleher, D. and Mclaren, k. (1996) Grabbing the Tiger by the Tail: NGO Learning for Organisational Change, Ottawa: Canadian Council for International Cooperation.
23. kellerman, B. (2004) Bad Leadership, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
24. kotter, J. (1996) Leading Change, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
25. lewis, D. (2001) Management of Non-Governmental Development Organisations: An Introduction, London: Routledge.
26. Mintzberg, h. (1998) “The Managers Job: Folklore and Fact”, chapter in Harvard Business Review on Lead- ership, pp. 574 – 585, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
27. Mintzberg, h. (2006) “Developing leaders, developing countries”, Development in Practice, 16(1): 4 – 14.
28. Northouse, P. (2004) Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd Edition), London: Sage.
29. Peters, t. and waterman, R. (1982) In Search of Excellence, New York: Harper Row.
30. Quinn, r. (2000) Change the World: How Ordinary People Can Achieve Extraordinary Results, New York: Jossey Bass
31. smillie, i. (1995) The Alms Bazaar, London: IT Publications
32. smillie, i. and hailey, J. (2001) Managing for Change: Leadership, Strategy and Management in Asian NGOs, London: Earthscan.
33. stogdill, r. (1974) Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research, New York: Jossey Bass.
34. tierney, t. (2006) “The Leadership deficit”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, 4(2): 26 – 35.
35. uphoff, N and esman, M. (1998) Reasons for Success: Learning from Instructive Experiences in Rural Devel- opment, West Hartford, Conn: Kumarian.