Interesting aspect of this weeks readings

warlond4k8

Leadership_in_Organizations_Current_Issues_and_Key.Chapter13.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Interesting aspect of this weeks readings

13 Leadership in public and third sector organizations

Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

Chapter outline

This chapter:

• Explains the challenges facing those seeking to develop more effective leadership in public sector organizations.

• Links the idea of leadership with the concept of ‘engagement’. • Describes a new model of engaging leadership and describes the research of its validity. • Using case studies, shows how engaging leadership can be developed.

As our public services face the reality of an end to the years of rapid growth in invest- ment, it is hard to see how the quality of service we all aspire to see – employees and citizens alike – can be achieved without putting the enthusiasm, commitment and knowledge of public sector employees at the forefront of delivery strategies . . . Engagement, going to the heart of the workplace relationship between employer and employee, can be a key to unlocking productivity and to transforming the working lives of many people for whom Monday morning is an especially low point of the week.

(David MacLeod in the preface to Engaging for Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement, 2009: 3–4)

Organizations across the public sector face enormous challenges in aiming to provide services of the highest standards to their clients and service users, while operating with strictly limited resources. This is even truer during the present global economic climate than it was when the Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) produced the report ‘Strengthening Leadership in the Public Sector’ (2001). That report highlighted the need for modernization, and for closer orientation to the needs and wishes of customers: higher expectations of public services, and increasing opportunities for, and requirement for, partnerships both across the public sector and with private and voluntary organizations.

At the same time, the Cabinet Office (ibid.) showed its awareness of the confusion surrounding the study of leadership. In this context, it was noted that,

There is little shared understanding of the qualities required for effective leadership in today’s public services [and that] . . . Fundamental to improved leadership is a clearer shared understanding of what leadership behaviours work in delivering today’s services.

(Key Findings, Section 3: 1)

Leadership in Organizations : Current Issues and Key Trends, edited by John Storey, Taylor and Francis, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/apus/detail.action?docID=589645. Created from apus on 2017-10-29 22:24:02.

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

More recently, with the greater realization that the challenges facing organizations, and society in general, are so complex and demanding that they cannot rely solely on those few people who occupy the most senior leadership positions, there has been a significant shift in the focus of leadership research. Researchers are moving away from a preoccupation with studying the characteristics of individuals who occupy formal leadership roles, to under- standing the nature of leadership as a social process – and one that is distributed across the organization, irrespective of formal role or position in the hierarchy.

The fact that times are going to be much tougher for organizations in the UK – particularly those in the public and third sector – in an era of global economic downturn, than they were in the late 1990s and the first few years of the new millennium, has focused the mind of senior management on the fact that organizations will have to get even more out of employees, and with fewer resources. However, while ‘getting more for less’ might be possible in the short term, if the method employed to achieve this ignores the potentially damaging impact on employee motivation, morale and well-being, not only will this be unethical, it will lack ‘business sense’ since any performance improvement will, at best, be short-lived. The priority of leadership must then be to address the question: How can we achieve continuous performance improvement, while reducing resources available, in a way that sustains, if not increases, staff morale and well-being?

In line with this, there is a realization that the way organizations approach leadership development can no longer be aimed purely at supporting the strengthening of ‘human capital’ by investing mainly in leadership programmes for the few. They must do far more, and also ensure that there are strategies in place for building leadership capacity within the organization by focusing on strengthening ‘social capital’ more widely.

This chapter will look at developments in leadership and its relationship to staff engage- ment, and will provide evidence that engagement works, as well as describing recent research into the nature of engaging leadership, and the validity of the model. Finally it will describe three case studies of how adopting this model of leadership as the basis for leadership develop- ment and cultural change initiatives has enabled organizations to become more effective, build their internal leadership capacity, and improve the services offered to the communities they serve.

Developing leaders or developing leadership?

In a recent article, Iles and Preece pointed out that

Leader development refers to developing individual-level intrapersonal competencies and human capital (cognitive, emotional and self-awareness skills, for example), while leadership development refers to the development of collective leadership processes and social capital in the organization and beyond, involving relationships, networking, trust and commitments, as well as an appreciation of the social and political context and its implications for leadership styles and actions.

(2006: 325)

This must surely be even more the case for public sector organizations. Thus, ‘Leadership development involves the development of leadership processes in addition to the development of individual leaders’ (Iles and Preece 2006: 323).

Leadership development, then, which is predicated on a ‘distributed’ model of leadership, is about enabling individuals and groups to work together in meaningful ways. It has, as its goal, the building of social relationships involving all members of the community, both

226 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

internal and external to an organization, in order to respond proactively and effectively to changing circumstances, and thereby achieve organizational and societal goals.

What form of leadership is required?

As described in Chapter 2 of this book, notions of leadership have changed over the period during which it has been the subject of formal study, in large part affected by changes in society. ‘New paradigm’ thinking, with its emphasis on ‘charisma’, ‘vision’, and ‘transforma- tion’, had the tenor of ‘distant’, often ‘heroic’ leadership, (e.g. Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban- Metcalfe 2002; Northouse 2007; Wright 1996). These models have, in turn, come in for criticism for a number of reasons (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2005, 2008; Collins 2001; Mintzberg 1999; Northouse 2007), particularly following the corporate scandals that resulted in the demise of Enron and WorldCom. Indeed, there has been a growing awareness of what has come to be described as the ‘dark side of charisma’ (Hogan, Raskin and Fazzini 1990), or even ‘toxic leadership’ (Lipman-Blumen 2007). This relates to flaws in the personal characteristics of some of those occupying leadership roles, such as narcissism, arrogance, self- aggrandizement and manipulation of colleagues to serve their own ends. This has again come to the fore (e.g. Tourrish and Vatcha 2005), and has been reinforced by the ‘financial tsunami’ which led to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008 and the ensuing global economic crisis, consistently attributed to the conspicuous greed of many in the banking sector.

Hogan has been at the forefront of research into ‘the dark side’, and has extolled organ- izations to not only focus on identifying the presence of certain positive characteristics, but equally importantly to ensure the absence of ‘dark side’ traits, particularly those that alienate other colleagues, most importantly subordinates, and the inability to build and support a team (Hogan, Curphy and Hogan 1994).

This mode of thinking emerged almost simultaneously in the UK and the US. In both cases it reflected an increasing awareness of the value of ‘engaging’ with staff – a value realized not just in human terms, but also in terms of the profitability or impact on the bottom line of the business. Extensive survey data (e.g. Robinson, Hooker and Hayday 2007; Towers Perrin 2005; Watson Wyatt 2006) provides correlational evidence of the benefits of the approach.

The importance of ‘engagement’

Given the fact that public sector organizations will have to maximize the realization of the potential of all of their staff, it is not surprising that the phenomenon of ‘engagement’ has moved centre-stage as a matter of serious consideration, and this in turn has enormous implications for our understanding of what constitutes effective leadership.

There is, however, no single definition of engagement. Engagement at work has been defined variously, in attitudinal, affective (emotional), cognitive, and behavioural terms; for example, as:

harnessing of organizational members’ selves to their work role. In engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during their role performance.

(Kahn 1990)

A positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption.

(Schaufeli et al. 2002)

Public and third sector organizations 227

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

. . . a positive attitude held by the employee towards the organisation and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organisation.

(Robinson, Perryman and Hayday 2004)

And as being characterized by:

. . . energy, involvement, and efficacy – the direct opposites of the three burnout dimen- sions.

(Maslach et al. 2001)

Leadership and engagement

On the basis of a three-year investigation of the nature of day-to-day, or ‘nearby’, leadership in UK public sector organizations, and a parallel study in the UK private sector (Alban- Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2007; Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2001), we define engaging leadership as leadership that has a powerful effect on the motivation, self-confidence, self-efficacy, or performance, of staff.

In essence, engagement is regarded as important to organizations because it is believed to have a significant impact on the degree of discretionary effort employees are willing to apply to their work in the organization. It is recognized that whatever their level or role in the organization, every employee ultimately chooses whether to contribute the minimum levels of performance required (or even to undermine or to sabotage output), or to go beyond the minimum required by the post and to offer outstanding effort in their role.

Over the last few years, numerous studies, most of which have been conducted in private sector companies, have shown that employee engagement is good for organizations. Thus, for example, a recent US survey over the previous five years of twenty-four publicly traded companies with a total of over 250,000 employees, found that the stock prices of the eleven ‘high morale’ companies increased an average of 19.4 per cent, while those of other companies in the same industries increased by an average of only 8 per cent – a margin of 240 per cent (Sirota Survey Intelligence 2006). A study by Watson Wyatt (2006) based on data from over 100 medium to large size companies concluded that a company with highly engaged employees typically achieves a financial performance four times greater than a company in the same sector with poor employee attitudes. A survey conducted by Towers Perrin (2005) of over 85,000 employees working for large and mid-size organizations in sixteen different countries on four continents found that companies with high employee engagement levels also experienced a higher operating margin (up to 19 per cent), net profit margin, revenue growth and earnings per share (up to 28 per cent) than companies with low employee engagement.

In a recent review of studies involving the investigation of the effects of engagement, Bakker and Schaufeli (2008) list a variety of positive outcomes for organizations, including: reduced ‘intention to leave and (increased) organizational commitment (Schaufeli and Bakker 2004), financial turnover at the end of the work shift (Xanthopoulou et al. 2007), academic performance (Schaufeli et al. 2002) and service quality as rated by customers (Salanova et al. 2005)’ (2008: 151). Harter et al. (2002) conclude in their meta-analysis of Gallup survey studies, that ‘levels of employee engagement were positively related to business-unit performance (i.e. customer satisfaction and loyalty, profitability, productivity, turnover, and safety)’ (cited in Bakker and Schaufeli 2008: 151).

228 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

One of the most encouraging aspects of a focus on increasing employee engagement is that not only is it good for organizations, it is good for the employees themselves. In Bakker and Schaufeli’s review cited above, they add that engagement, when defined ‘as a positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being . . . is the [antithesis] of job burnout’ (Maslach, Schaufeli and Leiter 2001, cited in Bakker and Schaufeli 2008: 151).

Other studies have found a link between engagement and: well-being and health (Sonnentag 2003); reduced depressive symptoms, somatic complaints and sleep disturbances (Hallberg and Schaufeli 2002); and higher self-efficacy (Salanova et al. 2005). In other words, this creates the opportunity for a win-win situation for both employee and organization in approaching the significant challenges ahead.

However, although the case for engagement appears to be unequivocal, surveys such as those referred to by Towers Perrin have found that unfortunately ‘while many people are keen to contribute more at work, the behaviour of their managers and the culture of their organisations is actively discouraging them from doing so’ (Towers Perrin 2005). Similar conclusions emerge from studies by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) and the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA 2004; Robinson et al. 2007).

The starting point must surely be, then, what kind of leadership results in high levels of staff engagement? In addition, since an organization may encourage a form of leadership that increases engagement, it is also crucial to ensure that the culture of the organization is such that it strengthens this form of leadership rather than destroys its efforts. A second question, which will be discussed in a later section, is: ‘What sort of organizational culture will sustain and nourish the appropriate form of leadership?’ These questions have been the primary focus of the authors’ research over the last decade, although at the time of beginning their first major study – which was an investigation into the nature of day-to-day leadership in the public sector in the UK – they referred to the model of leadership as ‘nearby’, trans- formational leadership, since this was the dominant terminology at the time.

Figure 13.1, below, shows the relationship between the importance of leadership and culture in influencing engagement, and ultimately, organizational performance. The boxes on the left of the diagram represent the daily input individuals apply in their job, which includes their knowledge, experience, skills and competencies, in combination with the resources provided by their organization, including information, clarity of goals, feedback and development. However, there are various moderating variables that affect the degree to which people exert effort in employing the resources at their disposal – whether personal resources or organizational – and amongst these variables are well-established factors such as job satisfaction, motivation, and engagement, with the resulting ‘performance’ repre- senting the output of their efforts. Performance of individuals across the organization enables the organization to achieve its vision. Our initial research study was aimed at identifying the day-to-day leadership behaviours of line managers that significantly affected these moderating variables, including engagement. Our second study, which will be described in a later section, was intended to investigate the nature of leadership culture that predicts team productivity, morale and well-being. The diagram also reflects the fact that, as is well established in the research literature, leadership and culture are inextricably linked (e.g. Bass 1992, 1998; Schein 1992).

What is the nature of engaging leadership?

In 2001 Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe completed a three-year investigation of the nature of leadership experienced daily in peoples’ working lives – initially in the UK public

Public and third sector organizations 229

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

O rg

a n

iz a

ti o

n a

l re

s o

u rc

e s

p ro

vi d

e d

(e .g

. ti m

e , g

o a ls

, in

fo rm

a ti o

n , st

a ff

, fe

e d

b a c k,

e q

u ip

m e n t,

e tc

In d

iv id

u a

ls ’

kn o

w le

d g

e ,

sk ill

s, a b

ili ti e s,

c o

m p

e te

n c ie

s, e xp

e ri e n c e , p

o te

n ti a l

I N P U T S

Jo b

sa ti sf

a c ti o

n ,

m o

ti va

ti o

n , c o

m m

it m

e n

t, e n g

a g

e m

e n

L E

A D

E R

S H

O U

T P

U T

In d

iv id

u a

ls ’

p e

rf o

rm a

n c

e A

c h

ie ve

m e

n t

o f

th e

o rg

a n

iz a

ti o

n ’s

vi s io

C U

LT U

R E

F ig

ur e

13 .1

T h

e re

la ti

on sh

ip b

et w

ee n

le ad

er sh

ip ,c

u lt

u re

an d

en ga

ge m

en t,

an d

th e

in p

u ts

an d

ou tp

u ts

of p

er fo

rm an

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

sector, but later replicated in the private sector. There were several reasons why they initiated this research, which it should be remembered, was at the time that the ‘heroic’ models of ‘charismatic-inspirational’ models of leadership dominated the received wisdom. These reasons included the fact that these models were:

• based on US studies; • based on studies of ‘distant’ leaders, such as CEOs of large commercial organizations, or

senior military officers; • based largely on the study of males; • based predominantly on white populations; • based, in the main, on the views of those occupying formal leadership positions.

The authors’ methodology was very different, not least because they wished to investigate the nature of ‘nearby’ as opposed to ‘distant’ leadership (Shamir 1995), and moreover they wished to understand how leadership was seen through the eyes of those whom ‘leaders’ (line managers) are intending to ‘lead’. That is, ‘nearby’ leadership was studied, as perceived by those individuals working at middle to chief-executive level, in various organizations in the public sector (and later replicated in three FTSE 100 companies) based in the UK. The findings from the public and private sectors were virtually the same (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2002; Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2007a).

The study

An empirical investigation of leadership in local government and the NHS, conducted when the first author was based at the University of Leeds, elicited the constructs of leadership of direct reports in relation to their line manager, i.e., constructs of ‘nearby’ leadership, based on actual experience (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2001).

The sample of 150 was inclusive with respect to age, ethnicity, gender, and level in the organization (chief executives; top, senior and middle managers). This research led to the development of the ‘Transformational Leadership Questionnaire (TLQ™)’, the factorial structure of which was determined among a sample of 1,464 local government managers and professionals, and 2,013 NHS managers and professionals.

Methodology

Of key importance in the present context is the phraseology used to elicit the constructs, which was undertaken using the Repertory Grid Technique (Kelly 1955). Direct reports were asked to compare line managers with whom they had worked whom they regarded as ‘outstanding’ or ‘poor’, or ‘average’, plus to consider their ‘ideal’ leader/line manager. By randomly comparing individuals in these various categories, they were asked to give specific examples of the kind of leadership behaviours that distinguished between them, such that the manager: ‘had a particularly powerful effect (positive or negative) on their motivation, self- confidence, self-efficacy, or performance’.

In other words, individuals were asked what these managers did that had a significant effect on their degree of engagement in their work. Over 2,000 behavioural constructs emerged. This led to the development of the ‘Transformational Leadership Questionnaire (TLQ)’. Details of the methodology are described in various articles and research papers (e.g. Alban- Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2008; Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2001, 2002, 2008).

Public and third sector organizations 231

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Confirmatory studies

The same range of constructs emerged in three other studies: a Home Office-sponsored and independently conducted study of 1,022 police officers and staff, which was additionally inclusive in relation to declared sexual orientation (Dobby, Anscombe and Tuffin 2004); a separate Home Office-commissioned study of leadership in HM Prison Service, conducted by the authors, which involved governor-grade staff and principal and senior officers in 48 prisons in England and Wales (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2003, Report for the Home Office HMPS confidential); a study of 743 staff from FTSE 100 and private sector companies (Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2007).

Reliability and validity

The scales that comprise the TLQ show high levels of internal reliability (α ≥ .80) and high inter-item correlations (r > .30). Evidence of its content, criterion and predictive validity comes from a number of sources (see Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2000, 2007; Alimo- Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2005, 2006, 2008; Dobby, Anscombe and Tuffin 2004; Kelly, Johnson and Gill 2006).

The fourteen dimensions that comprise this model, now referred to as ‘engaging leader- ship’, are presented in Figure 13.2. The dimensions have been described in four clusters to make the model more meaningful.

First, the emphasis is not on heroism, but on supporting others and enabling them to display their own leadership. At its core are two dimensions relating to transparency and integrity, including lack of defensiveness when criticized, and openness to the feedback of others. Secondly, it contains a persistent theme of team-working, collaboration, and ‘connectedness’, and of removing barriers to communication and encouraging the sharing of ideas, whether between individuals in one’s team, or between different teams and depart- ments, or with outside ‘stakeholders’ and partners. It reflects a respect for others’ views and experiences and a willingness to take on board their concerns and perspectives on issues, and to be open to working with their ideas.

Another persistent theme is to encourage questioning and challenging of the status quo, and to ensure that this happens by creating an environment in which such ideas are sought, listened to, and valued, and in which innovation and judicious experimentation is encouraged. It includes behaviours that encourage the creation of a culture that supports individuals’ personal development, in which the leader is a role model for learning, and in which the inevitable mistakes are exploited for their learning opportunities.

Gone is the heroic approach to leadership, along with the notion of one person – the solipsistic leader – having a monopoly on the vision. It is replaced by a ‘distributed’ approach, with a commitment to building shared visions with a range of different internal and external stakeholders. It exploits the diversity of perspectives and the wealth of experiences, strengths and potential that exists within the team, department, or organization, and with partners and other stakeholders. Given the emphasis that the government is putting on the notion of ‘place’ and the importance of partnership working across the community, it is important to note that this model encourages the removal of traditional barriers between agencies and the creation of shared visions, which transcend old loyalties for the benefit of the communities being served.

232 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Engaging leadership – in summary

In the light of our research into the nature of ‘nearby’ transformational – later referred to as ‘engaging’ – leadership, we propose the following description:

An engaging leader may be defined as someone who encourages and enables the development of an organization that is characterized by a culture based on integrity, openness and transparency, and the genuine valuing of others and of their contributions, and a concern for the impact of one’s behaviour on the well-being and morale of others. This shows itself in concern for the development and well-being of others, in the ability to unite different groups of stakeholders in articulating a shared vision, and in delegation of a kind that empowers and develops potential, coupled with the encouragement of questioning, innovation and experimentation, and of an approach to thinking which is critical as well as strategic.

Engaging leadership is essentially open-ended in nature, enabling organizations not only to cope with change, but also to be proactive in shaping their future. At all times engaging leadership behaviour is guided by ethical principles and the desire to involve others in the co-creation of ways of working towards a shared vision.

(based on Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2008: 16)

Public and third sector organizations 233

ENGAGING INDIVIDUALS

Showing genuine concern Being accessible

Enabling Encouraging questioning

MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER

Building shared vision Networking

Resolving complex problems Facilitating change

sensitively

ENGAGING THE ORGANIZATION

Supporting a developmental culture

Inspiring others Focusing team effort

Being decisive

PERSONAL QUALITIES AND CORE VALUES

Being honest and consistent

Acting with integrity

Figure 13.2 The model of engaging leadership as assessed by the TLQ

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Before describing our second study – which investigated whether embedding this model of engaging leadership in teams predicts their productivity – it is important to draw the distinction between competencies and leadership behaviours, particularly as so many public sector organizations have invested so much in frameworks based on the former, believing that it will strengthen a culture of engagement and innovation.

Developing engaging leadership and the role of competencies

There has been a substantial increase in the use of competencies as the basis of leadership frameworks which inform organizational recruitment, development, performance-manage- ment and appraisal processes across the UK public sector in line with the government’s modernization agenda of the last decade. Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that they are ubiquitous (Bolden, Gosling, Marturano and Dennison 2003). Within the public sector, these include those developed by the Fire and Rescue Service, the National College for School Leadership, the NHS, the police, and the Senior Civil Service. In some cases, there is differentiation of the competencies required of staff at different levels, and in different roles. We believe that this has been due to a lack of clear understanding of the relationship between competencies and effective leadership practice, the latter of which is clearly all about getting things done by engaging the efforts of employees (Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2009).

It is important to state from the start that we do believe that competencies or ‘skills’ are crucial for the effectiveness of anyone, whatever their job; it would be a nonsense to believe otherwise. However, it is becoming more and more evident that competency frameworks alone are not sufficient for assessing the full range of leadership behaviours that are required for effective leadership and organizational success.

Many of the competency or ‘leadership qualities’ frameworks, as they are sometimes now called, fail to make a distinction between actions that a leader performs and the personal qualities that underlie what he or she does, and this can lead to a misunderstanding of the difference between the two. Thus, for example, the personal quality of being ‘resilient’ or ‘tenacious’ is a requirement of someone who shows ‘competency’ in ‘achieving results’, just as ‘effective communication’ is a prerequisite for ‘working in a team’. However – importantly – showing resilience or tenacity does not guarantee achieving results, any more than possessing emotional intelligence ensures effective team work, or having integrity ensures that someone can be a successful finance director.

It follows, then, that the possession of certain qualities and values is necessary, but not sufficient for achieving success. If a leader is to be successful, he or she must learn to use personal qualities and other attributes in certain ways, and values need to be applied.

We are not alone in pointing to the dangers of adopting a competency approach as the sole basis of leadership development interventions. UK writers Bolden and Gosling (2006) who reviewed twenty-nine such frameworks, have pointed out that:

1 The competency approach has been criticized for being overly reductionist, fragmenting the role of the manager/leader, rather than presenting an integrated whole.

2 Competencies are frequently overly universalistic or generic, assuming that they are the same, no matter what the nature of the situation, individual or task.

3 Competencies focus on past or current performance, rather than future requirements, thereby reinforcing rather than challenging traditional ways of thinking.

234 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

4 Competencies tend to focus on measurable behaviours and outcomes to the exclusion of more subtle qualities, interactions and situational factors.

5 They result in a rather limited and mechanistic approach to development.

Buckingham (2001) argues that the competency approach is based on three flawed assump- tions:

1 that individuals who excel in the same role display the same behaviours; 2 that such behaviours can be learned; 3 that improving one’s ‘weaknesses’ necessarily leads to success.

Certainly, there is evidence that individual leaders achieve similar results using different approaches, and despite significant personal flaws (e.g. McCall 1998).

From a US perspective, Hollenbeck and McCall criticized what they saw as the four assumptions upon which the competency approach is based (Hollenbeck, McCall and Silzer 2006). In these contexts, they commented:

1 That: ‘As a descendent of the long-discredited “great man” theory, competency models raise again the spectre of one set of traits, abilities, and behaviours . . . that make up the “great leader” (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 399).

2 That effective leaders are not the sum of a set of competencies, and that the research of McCall (1998) and McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) demonstrates that: ‘What matters is not a person’s sum score on a set of competencies, but how well [or as we would put it, in what way] a person uses what talents he or she has to get the job done’ (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 399).

3 That the following tautological assumption is correct: ‘Because senior management usually blesses competencies and sometime even helps generate them, they are the most effective way to think about leader behaviour’ (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 399).

4 That: ‘When HR systems are based on competencies, these systems actually work effectively’ (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 399).

Here, Hollenbeck and McCall concluded that, ‘we see little evidence that these systems, in place for years now, are producing more and better leaders in organizations’ (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 399). They pointed out that:

[Of the companies that made presentations about competencies at the first Competency Conference, in 1994] some have failed, some no longer exist, and many have struggled to survive . . . Although we would not suggest that the advocacy of competencies by their HR people caused the problems the companies subsequently experienced, neither did the approach save them!

(Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 406)

In response to a rejoinder by Silzer, the same authors went on to argue that, in their experi- ence, ‘even when implemented effectively, competency-based systems have not worked’ (Hollenbeck et al. 2006: 407).

In defence of competency frameworks, it should be pointed out that their value should be judged in terms of what they do, not what they fail to do (Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2009). What competency frameworks – when thoroughly researched, properly constructed,

Public and third sector organizations 235

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

and differentiated to meet the particular needs of different groups of managers and pro- fessionals – can do is define and describe what actions a leader needs to be able to perform in order to achieve the goals and targets appropriate to his or her role.

Thus, a competent leader may be defined as:

. . . someone who enables the functioning of an organisation in a way that is goal directed, and is geared to developing processes and systems. This enables staff at all levels to plan effectively and efficiently, in order to achieve agreed goals. High levels of com- petency can lead to a degree of consistency, and thereby enable staff to make day-to-day decisions and short-term predictions, with a measure of confidence. Leadership com- petencies, which are often largely closed-ended in nature, are necessary in order that staff can undertake strategic planning, and in this way help to turn the vision of an organisa- tion, department or team into a reality.

(Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe 2008: 15–16)

Acceptance of such a definition leads to the self-evident conclusion that being competent is an essential characteristic of anyone who occupies a management or leadership role. It is equally true, particularly in the light of the earlier criticism, that competency on its own is not enough. In other words, being competent is necessary, but not sufficient for leadership. In response to the question, ‘What else is required?’, the answer is, a realization of the importance of the way in which the competency is enacted. This chapter has focused mainly on the nature of engaging leadership, because of the benefits it has been shown to bring to employees and their organizations. We would suggest then that the relationship between leadership competency and engaging leadership is summarized in Figure 13.3.

236 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

Leadership competencies – the ‘what’ of leadership

B C

Engaging or ‘nearby’ transformational

leadership – the ‘how’ of leadership

Figure 13.3 Relationship between ‘leadership competencies’ and ‘engaging’ leadership behaviour

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Thus, person A can be seen to be highly competent as a leader, but not very engaging in his behaviour; perhaps the kind of person who is very detailed in his planning, or who can devise very effective systems for quality control, but shows a lack of understanding of, or concern for, the needs of others.

Conversely, person B is someone who, perhaps, shows great concern for others, and creates a supportive environment in which all staff are valued, but who is unable to deliver what is required of him in terms of achieving goals or meeting agreed targets on time. Such a person’s style of leadership is highly engaging, but he shows a low level of competency as a leader.

Person C, then, is the kind of manager or professional who, by acting in an engaging way, with all that entails, can use his competency as a leader in ways that are relevant to the particular individual or situation, and which have a positive impact on the psychological well- being, motivation, and effectiveness of all those with whom he interacts.

The relationship between competent and engaging leadership can be expressed in terms of the following musical simile: ‘a competency framework could be considered like sheet music, a diagrammatic representation of the melody. It is only in the arrangement, playing and performance, however, that the piece truly comes to life’ (Bolden and Gosling 2006: 151).

Put another way, competencies can be thought of as the ‘what’ of leadership, and engaging leadership behaviours, as the ‘how’. For an effective leadership development programme or intervention, it is important to consider both aspects of leadership. The same is, of course, true in relation to recruitment, performance management and appraisal processes.

How valid is the model of engaging leadership? Does it predict productivity, morale and well-being?

Despite the strong interest in the nature of engagement and the benefits it has been associated with in organizations, and in relation to employees, this body of literature has been based solely on cross-sectional, correlational studies, which cannot be regarded as evidence of a causal relationship . As far as we are aware, there does not appear to be much evidence, if any, of the causal link between engagement and performance. One of the reasons for the dearth of such studies is that in order to prove causation, data must be gathered over a period of time, and this can be costly. To put it more scientifically: cause-effect relationships can only be inferred when independent and dependent variables between which a causative link can be adduced, are measured on different occasions, over a period of time, and shown to be linked, and when attempts have been made to control for the effect of contextual and other moderating factors which may be influencing the findings.

We were fortunate to have recently completed, together with colleagues from Kings College London University, a three-year Department of Health-funded longitudinal study entitled ‘The impact of leadership factors in implementing change in complex health and social care environments’ (Alimo-Metcalfe et al. 2007, 2008). It was designed to investi- gate whether leadership quality in multi-professional teams, in this case specific mental health teams referred to as crisis resolution teams (CRTs), is directly related to team effec- tiveness. A total of 46 multi-professional CRTs participated, involving 731 team members. These teams, which operate 24/7, 365 days of the year, were set up to treat individuals with mental health problems in their homes and supported in the community, rather than referring them for hospital/institutional in-patient care (Department of Health 2000). CRTs typically comprise ten or more staff, drawn from the following professional areas: clinical psychologists, mental health nurses, occupational therapists, psychiatrists, social workers and support staff. Although there is a designated team lead, the team is led by different individuals at different times of the day. Also, any team member performs a leadership role

Public and third sector organizations 237

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

when working with a particular ‘service user’ and their family. Accordingly, the focus was on assessing the quality of leadership in the team, rather than on any single individual.

Team effectiveness was judged by the achievement of the government’s targets for the reduction of in-patient admissions. Since effectiveness in performance could be at the cost of positive staff attitudes to work, and their well-being at work, we were also concerned to investigate these variables.

Quality of leadership was assessed at time 1 using the ‘Leadership Culture & Change Inventory (LCCI™)’ (Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2003), which is based on the fourteen TLQ dimensions of engaging leadership identified in our earlier research, to which certain competencies were added which had been identified by ‘experts’ involved in the work of CRTs. In other words, both competence and engaging leadership behaviours were assessed. The LCCI also included twelve impact measures (dependent variables), which assessed the attitudes to work, morale and well-being of the staff responding to the instrument. These included five facets of staff attitudes to work (such as job satisfaction, motivation, commitment) and seven facets of well-being (such as self-esteem, team spirit, reduced stress).

It was important also to control for contextual variables which might have been influencing the outcomes. Nine contextual variables were identified by relevant experts, which included the size of the team and the length of time it had been in existence; the resources available to the team, including medical expertise; and the team’s locality and case load.

Organizational performance, measured in terms of ‘productivity’ was assessed at time 2, twelve months later. Productivity was defined as the ratio of the number of assessments made by the team to the number of referrals for in-patient care as an average over a twelve-month period, divided by the number of members of the team.

The data were analysed in a variety of ways and full details are available (Alimo-Metcalfe et al. 2007). Principal components analyses of the items in the LCCI, which were a com- bination of items derived from the TLQ and relevant leadership competencies or ‘capabilities’ – revealed two engaging leadership factors and a single leadership capabilities factor (which comprised all the competencies assessed). These were identified as: engaging with others (16 items; α = 0.95); visionary leadership (7 items; α = 0.90); leadership capabilities (14 items; α = 0.94). In each case, the inter-item correlations ranged from 0.36 to 0.65, suggesting that the factors are unlikely to be multidimensional (Cortina 1993), and the coefficients of variation (range = 21.6–26.7) were of the same order of magnitude, and such as to suggest a high level of differentiation in the ratings (Yeomans 1968). Quantitative data were also collected in relation to nine contextual factors (e.g. age of team; composition of team; Mental Illness Needs Index for the area).

Stepwise multiple regression analyses of the relationship between quality of leadership, as measured using the three scales, to staff attitudes and well-being are presented in Table 13.1.

As can be seen, the degree to which members see their team as competent (capable) in leadership does positively affect motivation, job satisfaction and a strong sense of team effectiveness, though not the other aspects of commitment and well-being. The extent to which the team is seen as displaying ‘visionary leadership’ also positively and significantly affects motivation, and most of the aspects of well-being, including a sense of fulfilment and, importantly, reduced job-related stress and emotional exhaustion, as well as a strong sense of team effectiveness. However, only the scale ‘engaging with others’ significantly affects all aspects of positive attitudes to work, and all aspects of well-being, including contributing to a strong sense of team spirit, which neither of the other two scales predicts.

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses and structural equation modelling revealed a statistically significant positive relationship between ‘engaging with others’ and productivity,

238 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

even when the effect of the nine contextual factors (which were also significant positive or negative predictors of productivity) had been taken into account (p < 0.05 in each case). No such relationship was found for either ‘visionary leadership’ or ‘leadership capabilities’.

What this evidence suggests is, first, that the kind of distributed leadership that involves engagement with others can be shown to have a significant impact on performance, which in this instance was measured in terms of the teams’ ‘productivity’, judged by government targets of significant reductions in in-patient admissions; and secondly, that so too can a range of situational or contextual factors. This has important implications, not just for the development of leaders and leadership, but also for creating the cultural and other conditions that will enable leaders (at all levels) to be optimally effective – in other words for creating the kind of organizational DNA required not only to build, but also to sustain a culture of engagement.

In summary, this second study has provided possibly one of the first longitudinal studies to show a causal relationship between ‘engaging leadership’ – when embedded in the culture of teams – and team productivity, morale, and well-being.

These findings, together with our experiences of working with the model over the last decade, have provided us with the confidence to adopt it in supporting leadership development and major organizational culture-change interventions. We have applied it in several large UK public sector organizations – including: central government departments and agencies; local government; the NHS; the police; the Fire & Rescue Service; universities and schools; and in a number of major private sector organizations – to support cultural transformation such that they can improve their performance by embedding a culture of engagement.

Public and third sector organizations 239

Table 13.1 Multiple regression analyses for all subjects in relation to the ‘attitudes to work’ and ‘well-being at work’ items (beta coefficients) (n = 731)

Impact measure / Leadership scale Scale 1: Scale 2: Scale 3: Engaging Visionary Leadership with others leadership capabilities

Attitudes to work A high level of job satisfaction 0.56 – 0.17 A high level of motivation to achieve 0.41 0.18 0.18 Staff who are motivated to achieve beyond their expectations 0.46 – 0.21 A strong sense of job commitment 0.65 – – A strong sense of commitment to the organization 0.65 – –

Well-being at work A high sense of fulfilment among staff 0.48 0.28 – A high level of self-esteem among staff 0.46 0.23 – A high level of self-confidence 0.61 – 0.12 A low level of job-related stress 0.22 0.24 – A low level of job-related emotional exhaustion 0.34 0.14 – A strong sense of team spirit 0.70 – – A strong sense of team effectiveness 0.26 0.18 0.33

Since at least six of these items (motivation; motivation to achieve beyond own expectations; job commitment, organizational commitment; job satisfaction; reduced stress) have been shown to be predicted by effective leadership behaviour (e.g. Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe 2000a, 2000b; Bass 1998; Borrill et al. 2005a, 2005b; Parker et al. 2003; Patterson et al. 2004), these results provide evidence of the concurrent validity of the LCCI among this population.

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

The next section describes three case studies showing how we have used our model of engaging leadership in supporting leadership development and cultural change in some public sector organizations. It includes our approach to gaining senior management buy-in.

CASE STUDY AN NHS TRUST – SUPPORTING FRONT-LINE STAFF IN ENGAGEMENT WITH PATIENTS

The theme of this project was entitled ‘Liberating leadership’. The board and senior management of a large urban Primary Care Trust wanted an approach to leadership that helped the organization achieve its vision of high-quality healthcare for the community, which included several severely disadvantaged groups, and to do this through creating a culture which reflected its vision and values for its staff. The starting point was to identify the vision and values in practice, and to link these to how ‘engaging’ leadership should be enacted at all levels. The model adopted was engaging leadership, based on the dimensions in the TLQ (see Figure 13.2 on page 233).

The overarching objective was to focus on the impact of engaging leadership behaviour on patients and service users, and on staff, including those at the front line – a key aspect being to increase a sense of involvement and empowerment, and of feeling valued.

Since this project was intended to build a robust culture of engagement which required the full support of the Board, it was decided that the involvement of both executive and non-executive directors was crucial. The commitment of the Board was declared in a half- day workshop which involved significant participation from everyone attending.

It was necessary to develop a revised and shorter version of the TLQ for non-executives, which enabled all top and senior managers, together with the non-executives, to become familiar with the relevance of the engaging leadership model in their day-to-day behaviours, and to receive feedback and coaching on the basis of their TLQ results, delivered by us. The outcomes included: Board-level commitment to developing engaging leadership at all levels; personal development based on feedback and coaching; improved team working at executive levels (including relationships with the non-executives, and relationships among members of the Board); and agreement that an empowering, developmental approach was most suited to turning the vision and values into reality. Ten PCT staff were trained as internal TLQ facilitators.

Managers and team leaders were involved in workshops and action learning sets so as to build on existing leadership strengths in engaging front-line staff, and continually focusing on small changes that can make a real difference to patients and service users. The outcomes included: individual skill development; increased awareness of customer focus, greater understanding of effectively managing change and of individual working and learning styles, and seeing the service from the perspective of service users.

‘Catalysts for change’ were identified at different levels in the organization, and these individuals were trained to support the managers and teams referred to above. In association with our organization, Real World Group (RWG), they developed a range of activities for managers and team leaders for focusing on excellence in providing for service users, particularly during periods of change. In addition, RWG facilitated a six-module development programme. The outcomes included: individual skill development, including facilitations skills and increased understanding of different working systems; and facilitators trained to work throughout the organization.

240 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Evaluation

Examples of the comments made during a formal evaluation of the programme that were relevant to the practice of engaging leadership included:

• ‘I learnt many aspects of being a good leader, including the importance of supporting others, and not seeing it as a problem when people do sometimes become pessimistic/ negative about work/change, but using opportunities to engage them in finding solutions’;

• ‘I feel much more confident with knowing that the senior managers in the Trust are really committed to understanding how they can support us, rather than the other way around, as it used to be’;

• ‘The directors regularly visit us and make themselves accessible to our teams and are willing to empower us to come up with solutions to problems we face in the organ- ization’;

• ‘Very useful feedback and preparation for my new role in the Trust’; • ‘The experience with the facilitator made me feel valued and was constructive where

necessary’; • ‘Equipped me with skills to change/manage teams’.

Front-line staff working with ‘catalysts for change’ identified over thirty projects which would have a direct impact on improved patient care.

CASE STUDY A UK UNIVERSITY – MOVING TOWARDS 2020

Higher education institutions (HEIs) in the UK are facing a number of strategic challenges. These include: internationalization, which involves the recruitment and provision for the needs of overseas students; funding and sustainability, using income from research, teaching, and knowledge transfer and associated business development; market drivers, including fees and demographics; a performance culture, with influences that include organizational focus, government agendas, and ‘value for money’; the possibility of mergers and the need for differentiation; and decisions about the most appropriate form of leadership and man- agement.

In relation to leadership and management, issues include: a retirement bulge among senior academics; the need to attract new entrants; recognition that universities need to think of themselves as businesses; changing societal and government expectations; awareness of new approaches to leadership, management, and the psychological contract between employer and employee; and the importance of adopting an engaging style of leadership.

Within this context, the university developed an integrated ten-year plan, focusing on:

1 Leadership; 2 Dealing with cultural change, leader as coach, and communication; 3 Team building, empowerment and performance (creating an empowered high-

performance team).

Running in parallel are four concurrent activities: incentives and recognition; strategic career development; management skills and competency development; and one-to-one coaching.

Public and third sector organizations 241

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

The intervention started with a five-day senior manager programme for the vice chan- cellor, pro-vice chancellor, and deans, which was delivered in three stages by Real World Group (RWG) using the TLQ as the principal diagnostic tool. The programme has now been rolled out to 350 academic and administrative staff, who have participated in ‘Delivering the vision and managing people’ workshops.

In order to ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of the programme throughout the university, fifty-five internal facilitators/mentors were trained.

Evaluation (based on feedback from the client)

The benefits of the programme have been evidenced in terms of:

• individual experiences, e.g. development of new relationships with colleagues, develop- ment or confirmation of individuals’ understanding of the challenges facing the uni- versity, development of colleagues’ perspective on their leadership roles;

• culture, e.g. leadership and management development, increased visibility of senior managers and HR, a downward trend in grievance and harassment cases, the initiation of cross-university leadership/management mentoring, the creation of new cross- department courses and research projects.

The foundations have been established for a longer-term initiative and cumulative benefits based on maximizing the experience, talent, and commitment of staff across the university.

CASE STUDY A LOCAL AUTHORITY – RAISING MORALE, PERFORMANCE, AND THE QUALITY OF SERVICES

This case study involves a large local authority that was seen as clearly ‘failing’ in terms of government evaluations of performance across a range of the services it delivered to the community. This failure was attributed largely to its lack of leadership. Staff morale was also extremely low, with the council ratings falling into the lowest quartile nationally.

It was decided by the new acting chief executive and local councillors (who are elected by the local population to represent them, and usually attached to a political party) to introduce a major leadership development initiative across the population of 220 senior managers. Real World Group was told that the top managers were not intending to participate; however, we refused to be involved in the initiative unless they at least attended the programme’s introductory ninety-minute seminar.

The chief executive agreed that it was of paramount importance that he introduced this seminar by explaining to the audience of managers: why the development initiative was being introduced; the challenges facing the authority; and the outcomes that needed to be achieved if it was to avoid significant intervention by the government. Together with the top team colleagues, the chief executive was asked to attend the whole session and to join a panel at the end of the seminar to answer questions raised by participants.

We have found that eight topics are particularly valuable for increasing the potential effectiveness of an introductory session and included these in this initial workshop:

• The research background to leadership, including why and how models have changed over the decades and why management is no longer sufficient; the fact that leadership

242 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

is essential for sustained success of individuals and organizations, whilst emphasizing the crucial complementary importance of management/transactional leadership.

• The critical importance of a leadership style that engages staff in such a way that their morale, commitment and well-being is enhanced, while supporting them in increasing their effectiveness.

• Findings from our research into leadership and evidence of its validity in increasing staff morale, commitment and well-being.

• The essential role of 360-degree feedback for supporting leadership development, including an explanation of the ‘Johari window’, showing examples taken from anony- mous sample 360-degree individual reports.

• The importance and moral responsibility of using 360-degree feedback only if there is a real commitment, by managers themselves, their boss and the organization, to support it: the principles of its voluntary nature, confidentiality, ownership of the data by the individual, and, importantly, support for teams’ and individuals’ post-feedback development.

• Research findings relating to the potential benefits of using 360-degree feedback in increasing leadership effectiveness.

• The inextricable link between the leadership style of the most senior managers and organization culture.

• Discussion among groups of participants who were given sample anonymous 360- degree feedback group reports and asked to reflect on the possible culture of the organization from which they came, and to consider reasons for the differences in the ratings of various rater groups (e.g. managers rating themselves versus their staff’s ratings, their bosses’ ratings, their peers’ ratings, and ‘others’’ ratings – partners in other agencies, for example).

We encouraged as much discussion and participation in the various exercises as possible, since the idea was to reflect the style of leadership we were advocating.

The panel discussion and Q & A session was highly interactive. This approach proved to be successful in gaining the active involvement and commitment of all top managers in this major culture-change initiative, including undertaking the 360-degree feedback process, in spite of their initial reluctance. The programme involved the use of the TLQ for all managers, followed by three confidential coaching sessions, six to eight weeks apart, facilitated by RWG, at which robust PDPs were created in which very explicit objectives relating to personal, team and organizational culture improvements were identified. A programme of interventions was designed which included peer-learning sets, development modules, and other activities tailored around a combination of participant needs and council strategic objectives.

In addition, the senior managers agreed with our suggestion that we run, with them, several open workshops across the council, in various locations, to which all staff were invited and at which the reasons for the programme were explained. There were also exercises which involved staff reflecting on what difference a culture of engagement would make to their effectiveness, morale and well-being.

These workshops were so successful that it was decided to invite any of the staff in the council to become a ‘change champion’. Those who took on this role would be supported in using the engaging leadership model with their teams, using workshops and other processes and involving colleagues from partner agencies, community groups and other stakeholders as far as was possible.

Public and third sector organizations 243

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Senior managers increased their visibility by holding a series of ‘tell us like it is, and what we need to do differently’ workshops with staff in their departments at various levels. This had a very significant impact on the culture of the council and the morale and performance of staff.

Having worked mainly with the senior managers and with the change champions, we encouraged the council to cascade the programme using their own people to engage staff at all levels.

Evaluation

Following this intervention, which extended over a period of eighteen months with our involvement and continued for at least a further eighteen months under the council’s management, it was the subject of objective evaluation. Not only did the authority increase in its government rating (Audit Commission Comprehensive Performance Assessment), and receive a national award in the area of services in which it had been perceived as failing (two measures of organizational performance), but it became the first public sector organization to be listed in the ‘Sunday Times Top 20 Best Companies’. As a result of the continued commitment of senior managers in visibly supporting staff throughout the organization, and especially at the front line, the council generated over 900 ideas from staff for making the area a better place in which to work. In three years they transformed themselves from being in the lowest quartile nationally for customer and staff satisfaction, to being in the top quartile of both public and private sector benchmarks on a range of factors.

Leadership development: the key role of top and senior managers

One of the most important considerations of any leadership development initiative in any organization is the degree of support from the most senior managers. There is an inextricable link between the leadership style of the top group of managers and the culture of the organization. Therefore, before introducing any major leadership intervention, it is crucially important to try to ensure the commitment, and the active involvement, of these managers. This can, however, be problematic.

We are increasingly concerned with the conversations we have often heard in organizations in which we are invited to work, which suggest that the model of leadership that the senior managers or the HR or OD department are espousing is completely at variance to the day- to-day reality of the culture, which may be described as ‘very managerial’, ‘target driven’, or ‘transactional’. In other words, it is operating against the principles of engagement and engaging leadership. If this is the case, then the leadership development programme might, in fact, increase cynicism and turnover amongst the very people the organization is intending to invest in. It might also increase their levels of stress and disillusionment, and result in disengagement. We would suggest that there is a need for a serious reassessment as to whether the initiative should be started before such issues are dealt with, and we think that this is an ethical matter. This brings us to the vitally important topic of top management commitment to leadership development.

A number of years ago, one of the authors was commissioned to undertake an investigation into why, despite the substantial expenditure in leadership development initiatives by both private and public sector organizations, most failed after a few years. Together with colleagues at the University of Leeds, we undertook an investigation of the major factors

244 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

that impede success, involving a survey and several case studies in a range of organizations (Alimo-Metcalfe, Ford, Harding and Lawler 2000). Several findings emerged, but among the most formidable barriers identified were the attitudes of the most senior managers, parti- cularly in relation to three aspects).

The first was their reluctance to participate themselves, believing that they had little need for such support. However, they thought that managers at lower levels did need such development. This lack of commitment to continuous self-development is anathema to the notion of engaging leadership. The second barrier was created as a result of middle-level managers’ greater understanding of the nature of leadership as a result of their development experiences, and a heightened awareness of the lack of appropriate role models among the top managers. The behaviour of the top managers virtually destroyed the potential benefits to the organization of the development investment. The third impediment was the lack of general support by the top managers for the initiatives, and in particular a lack of support for the proposals made by those managers who had participated on such programmes or initiatives. As a result, cynicism among those at lower levels increased, and enthusiasm for applying the acquired development waned. This is why we take the question of whether there is top management support very seriously.

Our experience is that external consultants like us may be the only people who can challenge the top managers to accept their responsibility for actively committing themselves to support a leadership development or culture-change initiative. We believe that providing the top team with research evidence is a very strong lever, as is the provision of data from a cultural diagnostic instrument, such as the LCCI, which we are using increasingly as the first stage of a cultural intervention. Data from thousands of staff across the organization are hard to hide, or rationalize away. Such a diagnosis also provides at least four other major benefits. These are that:

1 analysing the data by level, or function, or group, etc., pinpoints which specific inter- ventions are most appropriate for various parts of the organization; plus

2 it helps identify where there are areas of strength in the organization which can, in turn, provide a resource for supporting development elsewhere – and thus builds social capital;

3 using an instrument such as the LCCI also gathers data on the specific impact of dimen- sions of the culture (e.g. the degree to which it is perceived as supporting empowerment, or encouraging innovation) on staff motivation, job satisfaction, work-related stress, morale, engagement, etc., since it includes a range of ‘impact measures’ (dependent variables). By running multiple regression and other statistical analyses on the data gathered, one can provide evidence of the ways in which staff perceptions of the culture have a significant impact on those factors that have been shown/found to affect (significantly) performance, well-being, reduced absenteeism, and other variables that contribute to organizational success;

4 by assessing perceptions of the culture pre- and post-intervention (e.g. re-running the cultural diagnosis twelve to eighteen months later), data can be gathered on the ROI (return on investment) of the intervention.

In conclusion, the current economic downturn we are facing in the UK – the worst for over seventy years – makes the case for advocating engaging leadership and cultures of engagement a ‘no-brainer’. The government has recognized its importance by commis- sioning the MacLeod Review, ‘Engaging for success: enhancing performance through

Public and third sector organizations 245

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

employee engagement’ (2009). The simple fact is that public sector organizations will have to manage exponentially greater challenges with proportionally fewer resources. Who will enable them to do this, if it is not their staff? This makes leadership an even more important ethical issue than it has ever been. Too many leaders do harm, and they often do so unintentionally. There is now a wonderful opportunity to challenge leaders at all levels, particularly those in the most senior positions, to ask themselves what do they need to do to release the massive untapped human potential residing in their organizations. What we have attempted in this chapter is to provide empirical evidence and case studies to show how this can be achieved in practice.

Questions for discussion

1 What differences do you think there might be between the nature of leadership required in public and private sector organizations?

2 What do you understand by the authors’ concept of ‘engaging leadership’? 3 What do you judge to be the most useful suggestions advanced in this chapter for

leadership development in public sector organizations?

References

Alban-Metcalfe, R. J. and Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (2000) ‘An analysis of the convergent and discriminant validity of the Transformational Leadership Questionnaire’, International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 8: 158–75.

Alban-Metcalfe, J. and Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (2003) ‘Leadership culture and change inventory – an organisational 360 feedback instrument’, Selection & Development Review, 19: 7–10.

—— (2007a) ‘Development of a private sector version of the (Engaging) Transformational Leadership Questionnaire’. Leadership & Organisation Development Journal, 28 (1–2): 104–21.

—— (2007b) ‘Development of a private sector version of the (engaging) transformational leadership questionnaire (ELQ)’, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28 (2): 101–4.

—— (2009) ‘Engaging leadership part one: competencies are like Brighton Pier’, International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 5: 10–18.

Alimo-Metcalfe, B. and Alban-Metcalfe, R. J. (2001) ‘The development of a new transformational leadership questionnaire’, The Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 74: 1–27.

Alimo-Metcalfe, B. and Alban-Metcalfe, J. (2002) ‘Leadership’, in P. Warr (ed.) Psychology at Work, London: Penguin, 300–25.

—— (2003) ‘An investigation of the attributes of leadership of prison governors and principal officers’, confidential report for Her Majesty’s Prison Service (unpublished).

—— (2005) ‘Leadership : Time for a new direction?’, Leadership, 1: 51–71. —— (2006) ‘More (good) leaders for the public sector’, International Journal of Public Sector Management,

19: 293–315. —— (2008) Engaging Leadership: Creating Organisations that Maximise the Potential of Their People, London:

CIPD. Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Alban-Metcalfe, J., Samele, C., Bradley, M. and Mariathasan, J. (2007) ‘The

impact of leadership factors in implementing change in complex health and social care environments: NHS Plan clinical priority for mental health crisis resolution teams (CRTs)’, Department of Health NHS SDO, Project 22/2002.

Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Alban-Metcalfe, J., Bradley, M., Mariathasan, J. and Samele, C. (2008) ‘The impact of engaging leadership on performance, attitudes to work and well-being at work: a longitudinal study’, The Journal of Health Organization & Management, 22 (6): 586–98.

Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Ford, J., Harding, N. and Lawler, J. (2000) British Companies at the Beginning of the 21st Century: Factors that Impede leadership Development Initiatives, London: Careers Research Forum.

246 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Bakker, A. B. and Schaufeli, W. B. (2008) ‘Positive organizational behaviour: Engaged employees in flourishing organizations’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29: 147–54.

Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: The Free Press. —— (1998) Transformational Leadership: Industrial, Military, and Educational Impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates. Bass, B. M. and Avolio, B. J. (1993) ‘Transformational leadership and organizational culture’, Public

Administration Quarterly, 17: 112–21. Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985) Leaders, New York: Harper & Row. Bolden, R. and Gosling, J. (2006) ‘Leadership competencies: time to change the tune?’ Leadership,

2: 147–63. Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. and Dennison, P. (2003) A Review of Leadership Theory and

Competency Frameworks, Report for Chase Consulting and the Management Standards Centre, Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter, June.

Bryman, A. (1996) ‘Leadership in organizations’, in S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds), Handbook of Organizational Studies, London: Sage.

Buckingham, M. (2001) ‘Don’t waste time and money’, Gallup Management Journal, 3 December (available at http://gallup.com/content/default/asp?ci=259&pg=1).

Cabinet Office, Performance and Innovation Unit (2001) Strengthening Leadership in the Public Sector, London: HMSO.

Collins, J. (2001) From Good to Great, New York: HarperBusiness. Conger, J. A. (1989) The Charismatic Leader: Behind the Mystique of Exceptional Leadership, San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass. Cortina, J. M. (1993) ‘What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications’, Journal of

Applied Psychology, 78: 98–104. Department of Health (2000) NHS Plan, London: Department of Health. Dobby, J. Anscombe, J. and Tuffin, R. (2004) Police Leadership: Expectations and Impact. London: Home

Office Online Report 20/04. Hallberg, U. E. and Schaufeli, W. B. (2006) ‘Same but different? Can work engagement be

discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment?’, European Psychologist, 11: 119–27.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L. and Hayes, T. L. (2002) ‘Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 268–79.

Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J. and Hogan, J. (1994) ‘What we know about leadership’, American Psychologist, 49: 493–504.

Hogan, R., Raskin, R. and Fazzini, D. (1990) ‘The dark side of charisma’, in K. E. Clark et al. (eds) Measures of Leadership, West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America.

Hollenbeck, G. P., McCall, M. W. and Silzer, R. F. (2006) ‘Leadership competency models’, Leadership Quarterly, 17: 398–413.

House, R. J. (1977) ‘A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership’, in J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson (eds) Leadership: The Cutting Edge, Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

IDeA (2004) The Impact of Motivation on Organisational Success, London: Improvement and Development Agency.

Iles, P. and Preece, D. (2006) ‘Developing leaders or developing leadership? The academy of chief executives’ programme in the North East of England’, Leadership, 2: 317–40.

Kahn, W. A. (1990) ‘Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work’, Academy of Management Journal, 33: 692–724.

Kelly, G. A. (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs, vols 1 and 2, New York: Norton. Kelly, A., Johnson, P. and Gill, R. (2006) ‘Time for a change: A UK model of transformational

leadership’, Paper presented to the British Academy of Management Conference, Belfast. Lipman-Blumen, J. (2007) The Allure of Toxic Leaders, London: Wiley. MacLeod, D. and Clarke, T. (2009) Engaging for Success: Enhancing Performance Through Employee Engagement,

London: Office for Public Information.

Public and third sector organizations 247

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B. and Leiter, M. P. (2001) ‘Job burnout’, Annual Review of Psychology, 52: 397–422.

McCall, M. W. (1998) High Flyers: Developing the Next Generation of Leaders, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

McCall, M. W. and Hollenbeck, G. P. (2002) Developing Global Executives: The Lessons of International Experience, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Mintzberg, H. (1999) ‘Managing quietly’, Leader to Leader, 12 (Spring): 24–30. Northouse, P. (2007) Leadership: Theory and Practice, London: Sage. Robinson, D., Hooker, H. and Hayday, S. (2007) ‘Engagement the Continuing Story’, Institute for

Employment Studies, Report 447, Sussex: IES. Robinson, D., Perryman, S. and Hayday, S. (2004) ‘The Drivers of Employee Engagement’, Institute

for Employment Studies, Report 408, Sussex: IES. Salanova, M., Agut, S. and Piero, J. M. (2005) ‘Linking organizational resources and work engagement

to employee performance and customer loyalty: the mediating role of service climate’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 1217–27.

Sashkin, M. (1988) ‘The visionary leader’, in J. A. Conger and R. N. Kanungo (eds) Charismatic Leadership: The Elusive Factor in Organizational Effectiveness, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schaufeli, W. B. and Bakker, A. B. (2004) ‘Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25: 293–315.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B. and Salanova, M. (2006) ‘The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: a cross-national study’, Educational & Psychological Measurement, 66: 701–16.

Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I., Marques Pinto, A., Salanova, M. and Bakker, A. B. (2002) ‘Burnout and engagement in university students: a cross-national study’, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33: 464–81.

Schein. E. (1992) Organisational Culture and Leadership, 2nd edn, London: Jossey-Bass. Shamir, B. (1995) ‘Social distance and charisma: Theoretical notes and an exploratory study’, Leadership

Quarterly, 6: 19–47. Sirota Survey Intelligence (2006) High Morale Again Pays Off in Stock Market Gains, Purchase, NY:

www.sirota.com. Sonnentag, S. (2003) ‘Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: a new look at the interface

between non-work and work’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 518–28. Tichy, N. and Devanna, M. (1990) Transformational Leadership, 2nd edn, New York: Wiley. Tourrish, D. and Vatcha, N. (2005) ‘Charismatic leadership and corporate cultism in Enron:

The elimination of dissent, the promotion of conformity and organizational collapse’, Leadership, 1: 455–80.

Towers Perrin (2005) Reconnecting With Employees: Quantifying the Value of Engaging Your Workforce, London: Towers Perrin Report.

Watson Wyatt (2006) ‘Effective communication: a leading indicator of financial performance – 2005/2006 communication ROI study’, research report, Watson Wyatt World Wide (available at: http://www.watsonwyatt.com/research/reports.asp).

Wright, P. L. (1996) Managerial Leadership, London: Routledge. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E. and Schaufeli, W. B. (2007) ‘Work engagement and

financial turnover: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources’, manuscript submitted for publication (cited in Bakker & Schaufeli 2008).

Yeomans, K. A. (1968) Introducing Statistics, Vol. 1, Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.

248 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and Juliette Alban-Metcalfe

C o p yr

ig h t

0 1 0 . T

a yl

o r

a n d F

ra n ci

s. A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .