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: [email protected]

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.