opinion

I’m increasingly working with clients who consider themselves ‘different’ or who others experience as ‘different’ in their working environments. It can be a struggle between authenticity and fitting in, and it’s not comfortable. Some of these leaders have been expressly recruited because they’re different – because they represent ‘new blood’ or because they’re thought to be able to bring in new ideas from other sectors or other organisations.

What’s often forgotten, however, is the weight and power of the prevailing culture, which no new blood can change alone or fast.

Sometimes that culture relates to the stage of vertical development of the organisation as a whole, and particularly of its leaders.

Complexity

We are living in times of unprecedented, and growing, complexity, which it is the leader’s role to manage, negotiate and enable their people to flourish in. It’s important, incidentally, to note that ‘complex’ isn’t the same as ‘complicated’: according to Dave Snowden in ‘A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making’ complicated contexts may contain multiple right answers, and although there is a clear relationship between cause and effect, not everyone can see it, or see it immediately. This is the realm of ‘known unknowns’. On the other hand, in a complex context, right answers can’t be ferreted out: the whole is far more than the sum of its parts. There are many competing ideas, and there are no right answers. This is the realm of ‘unknown unknowns’ – and it’s the territory of uncertainty.

What is vertical development?

Adults develop, from childhood onwards, through stages of cognitive, attitudinal and emotional development which research over decades has shown to be definable and predictable. As leaders move through the stages they can develop their capacities to deal with complexity, ambiguity, uncertainty and volatility – capacities which are critical if the leader is to flourish and deliver on the demands of their role.

Nick Petrie writes, in ‘Lessons in vertical development’ that children mature, and, as adults, they become capable of doing more complex tasks through further stages of development and new capabilities and perspectives. Petrie likens this to an upgrade to your phone’s operating system.

Stages of Vertical Development

One way of looking at the stages of development uses consultancy Harthill’s seven-stage model, which they conceptualises as seven stages:

Opportunist
Diplomat
Expert
Achiever
Individualist
Strategist
Alchemist

In my work with, or through, leaders I most commonly encounter leaders who seem to be at the stages in the middle of this schema. David Rooke, who sets out the seven stages in his article ‘Seven Transformations of Leadership’ , defines these middle stages (or ‘action logics’ – what motivates us to take action) as follows:

Expert: characterised by the pre-eminence of logic and expertise, and the quest for rational efficiency

Achiever: characterised by an orientation to action and goals

Individualist: characterised by the interweaving of competing personal and organisational action logics, and the creation of unique structures to resolve gaps between strategy and performance.

The misfitting of developmental stages

When leaders have a sense of not fitting in, the reason can be a dislocation between their individual stage of development and the stage of development of their peers, their reports, their seniors or the organisational culture as a whole. One specific reason for the misfit is that while, at any given stage, we draw on all the earlier stages we’ve come through, we can’t relate to the later stages: they’re out of our awareness. A colleague who’s at a stage of development later than where we are, literally sees the world through different lenses, which offer a different view of complexity from ours – typically a bigger, more detached and objective, more comprehensive and holistic picture at each stage.

That misfitting can be a frustrating process for everyone involved. The leader at an earlier stage may be puzzled by what the leader at a later stage is talking about, and the leader at a later stage may be frustrated by colleagues at an earlier stage not seeing the fuller picture that they can see, with its interdependencies and relatively greater ease with uncertainty and unpredictability – even though the individual at a later stage has also been through that earlier stage.

Addressing the misfit

The leader at a later stage can feel lonely and isolated (especially as there are fewer leaders in the population at later stages than at earlier stages). They can’t force their colleagues at earlier stages to see and relate to the world from a later stage, but they may find that they can relate more easily by both using concepts and language that will be meaningful to their colleagues at the stage those colleagues are at, presenting the world of the later stage through earlier-stage concepts, and by finding or creating outlets for themselves – new, interesting activities, especially with others at a similar developmental stage (whom they’ll recognise by the way they think, speak and address situations). Documentary or visual resources, experiences, groups and conversations that are novel, exploratory or experimental will often nourish and satisfy their evolving awareness and development.

^{Photo by Christophe Maertens on}^Unsplash

Being different - and vertical development

We are living in times of unprecedented, and growing, complexity, which it is the leader’s role to manage, negotiate and enable their people to flourish in. Vertical development recognises that adults develop, from childhood onwards, through stages of cognitive, attitudinal and emotional development which research over decades has shown to be definable and predictable. As leaders move through the stages they can develop their capacities to deal with complexity, ambiguity, uncertainty and volatility. Children mature, and, as adults, they become capable of doing more complex tasks through further stages of development and new capabilities and perspectives. When leaders have a sense of not fitting in, the reason can be a dislocation between their individual stage of development and the stage of development of their peers, their seniors or the organisational culture as a whole. The leader at a later stage can feel lonely and isolated, but they may find that they can relate more easily by, on the one hand using concepts and language that will be meaningful to their colleagues at the stage those colleagues are at, and by finding or creating outlets for themselves – new, interesting activities, especially with others at a similar developmental stage.

The leader's profile

There’s a common perception that the effective leader is the leader with an imposing presence. It can be easy to assume that the expressive, obvious character in the room is also the most obvious leader. Introverts have a particular challenge when they need to raise their profiles, especially when it comes to developing their careers and strengthening their network connections of stakeholders. Introverts can find engaging with others in meetings tiring and costly in terms of energy. There are endless practical tips on raising profile. However, this ignores an important – and arguably more powerful - area: how to ‘just be’. To find comfort and safety in the authenticity, ease and truth of being yourself without trying to match anyone else, and without trying to match the imagined expectations or assumptions of other people. That comfort with being yourself – being happy in your own skin - conveys natural confidence and gravitas.

Conflict

Conflict is usually costly, painful and damaging. What are the alternatives? Some might say compassion. Others might say community, cohesion, or connection. Others might opt for peace or safety or kindness. Or collaboration or cooperation. Conflicts can pass in a moment and leave no apparent trace, or they can leave deep and long-lasting physical, emotional, mental, social, or economic wounds – and at its worst, individual or collective trauma. Not being in conflict brings a greater chance of wellbeing, of efficiency, of a sense of safety and of organisational or societal health. Besides needing emotional intelligence, not being in conflict, or defusing conflict, can take humility, a willingness to be vulnerable, and psychological safety. We can do worse than be guided by Marshal Rosenberg’s principles of non-violent communication, and a shift in thinking and conceptualisation from ‘you and I’ to ‘we’.

Time as gift or tyranny?

The author of ‘Time Shelter’, Georgi Gospodinov, treats time as a gift to the sufferer of memory loss, rather than the enemy it so often seems to be as a factor in our working lives. This perception of time as something we can have power over contrasts strikingly with the relationship that many leaders and managers – and indeed organisational cultures – seem to have with it: a perception that treats time almost as a ‘thing’, and that sees us as victims of it. Our relationship with time enshrines an intimate connection with achievement. In turn, achievement is connected to a sense of self-worth. We can feel like we are at the mercy of time, in contrast to a sense of emergence, but there is a richness in the emergence, enabling the capacity to perceive, accommodate and integrate a broader perspective. This is important for the task of leadership: to step back and see more interdependencies and more viewpoints.

Responsibility - and hedgehogs

Imbalance in the way responsibility is used (and not used) in systems of all sorts, including organisations, is large-scale and widespread. Too much responsibility may be assumed (albeit unconsciously). This shows up with leaders who work hard to make sure that everything that needs doing is done, typically to a high standard, no matter whose responsibility it actually is. Inappropriate responsibility may be imposed in childhood, and taken on into work, via an expectation from one or other parent. When leaders fail to take on responsibility that is theirs, it may be that they feel inadequate to the task or may fear failing, and may persuade themselves that by not acting they don’t risk failure. Like the hedgehog who freezes in the middle of the road, they are likely to incur failure rather than avoid it. One of the classic situations in which appropriate responsibility is not given is represented by the micromanaging boss. In all these scenarios, both the team and the leader are weakened and become brittle: they lack resilience and the capacity to learn, develop and change as much as they could, and/or as much as they need to.

The Right Kind of Wrong

Amy Edmondson's new book 'Right Kind of Wrong: Why Learning to Fail Can Teach Us to Thrive' explains how we get failure (a potentially invaluable learning opportunity) wrong, and how to get it right, highlighting that the most successful organisational cultures are those in which you can fail openly, without your mistakes being held against you. We're living in turbulent times, and, as Amy Edmondson points out, failure is both more likely than ever – but if it’s the right kind of failure, it’s also more valuable than ever. While most failures in organisations are treated as blameworthy – and there are failures we should definitely work hard to prevent – there are others we should welcome. The latter are the intelligent failures.

David Hockney, painting, and coaching

I recently had the opportunity to visit the stunning David Hockney exhibition in London (‘David Hockney: Bigger & Closer (not smaller & further away)’. It prompted reflection for me both on what it offers to my conceptualisation of coaching and what I can learn that might enhance my clients’ experience of coaching with me. I found the exhibition nourishing, exciting, inspiring, refreshing, perspective-opening and deeply calming. It stimulated my thinking on how I might raise my awareness and challenge myself to look in more depth, and call on more perspectives and insights, with clients. Is there any sense in which I currently satisfy myself with looking partially, on a relatively small scale, or only in one perspective? Besides widening our perspective, the artist also highlights the rewards of looking in every direction at the same time, all the time. He characterises water as illusive, because all the patterns you see are on the surface. If, as coach, I take those patterns as the only patterns, then I’m only seeing part of the person I’m working with, and only some of the influences they’re subject to.

Who do you think you are?

I often hear leaders characterising themselves and their styles by reference to a set of behaviours, or a set of beliefs or values, or a combination of behaviours and beliefs. It's in this territory that the idealised self resides. The idealised self is the subject of quest, but probably not what is here now. And yet what is (and who is) now is, in a sense, the most powerful self we can be. However, I don’t often hear leaders describe their style by reference to their sense of who they are when they are truly present to themselves. Leaders I work with who discover and accept who they are tell me that the self- and system-awareness that is part of the discovery give them a palpable sense of acceptance, self-acceptance, peace and freedom. And from that emerge sustainable awareness of perspective, clear-sightedness about the ‘what’ and the ‘how’, compelling and engaging leadership, and capacity to relate healthily, learn and develop self, others and the organisation.

Where am I going? Achievement, development and transformation

Objective-orientated - directional - coaching will be appropriate for certain clients with certain types of coaching need. However, such coaching isn’t developmental coaching, or indeed transformational coaching. Development and transformation tend to be emergent: just because a client doesn’t appear to be going somewhere doesn’t mean nothing is happening. On the contrary, a great deal might be happening. A lack of structure in the emergence shouldn’t be confused with a lack of something valuable. There’s another aspect too to this kind of emergent coaching: not just acceptance, but radical acceptance. This, in turn, relates both to radical inclusion and to ‘weak signals’. All are important underpinnings of outstanding leadership.

Managing relationships: a somatic-relational lens

I’ve been working with a number of clients challenged by managing upwards or managing relationships with peers. In a variety of ways, I invited these clients to become aware of the bodily sensations and impulses towards movement that their individual experiences evoked for them. We worked together on the meaning of those sensations and impulses for them, and we worked at depth on any links with the various facets of how their ‘problematic’ relationships showed up in practice, with compassion and with a focus on the potential that new types of connection offered. Old messages and out-of-date interpretations came to the fore. Across these clients’ experiences there emerged an acceptance of ‘what is’, and an acceptance of ‘the other’ as they were rather than trying to fight it or resist it. They became more perceptive about the impact of ‘the other’ on them and theirs on ‘the other’. They felt more settled, safer, more trusting of themselves. They enacted more of their own true capability with a sense of greater space and freedom. Something important was released for them.

opinion

Recent Posts