The Reflective Leader. Alan Smith

can be more challenging than it sounds as the leader needs to hold the overall vision (‘We want to support as many homeless people as possible’) as well as the strategy of how to get there (‘We are going to open another homeless centre before the end of the year’). The strategy then needs to be broken down into a series of aims which are crucial if the strategy is going to be delivered (‘We have to increase the number of donors to fund the new centre’, ‘We need to recruit someone to lead the project’ and ‘We have to identify and train thirty volunteers by September’). Although the overall vision may stay the same, the strategy and the aims will change over time.

      Some leaders have little grasp of what they are trying to do or how they are planning to achieve it. If the leader is not clear then no one else in the organization is likely to have much clarity either. Worse still, colleagues may hold subtly conflicting views that have never been articulated but which work against the organization succeeding. One of the features of most growing organizations is that not only is the leader articulate about what they are doing but that they have built a team and a workforce which also knows where they are going and how they expect to get there.

      Some think that the role of the leader is to devise the vision, the strategy and the aims and then tell everyone else in the organization what they are. It is true that one role of the leader is to ensure that there is a common vision, strategy and aims.However they should not feel that they have to produce these alone. There are few leaders who are so omnicompetent that they understand all the external factors and internal processes which impinge upon the organization. How much better to engage everyone’s creative energies and ideas at the earliest stage to really understand what is happening both in the organization and in the wider context. This can then become the basis of future plans which are much more likely to succeed if everyone has already worked on them together.

      There is another problem when a leader decides the vision, strategy and aims and then tells their colleagues what they are. Telling people something does not mean that others will necessarily implement it enthusiastically. Indeed, persuading others to adopt a vision and a strategy may involve a great deal of time explaining what they are and why they should adopt them. Generally it is more effective and much quicker to involve our colleagues at the earliest stage. Having been consulted and engaged in the process, they will understand the reasons for it and why it is better than the alternatives.

      Once the broad strategy has been agreed, the leader has to be careful not to get bogged down in micromanagement. This is a fine judgement to be made here. Some details of an organization’s work need watching very carefully as they could threaten the overall success. But there will be other areas where we need to trust our colleagues to work out the best way of implementing the strategy. If the overall leader decides every last detail they are likely to disempower colleagues and create a dependent culture which stifles creativity and the taking of responsibility.

      One thoughtful leader makes a distinction between principles and preferences. He argues that we need to be very clear about the fundamental issues and the guiding principles of our work. These are non negotiable. However, there are other areas which he calls preferences, where people can be given freedom to get on with the job in the way that they see fit.

      For reflection

       Can you articulate succinctly the overall vision of your organization?

       What are the three most important aims of your organization that will deliver the strategy?

       Does everyone in your organization know what they are? If they do not, what are you going to do to share them?

       Does everyone know their part in implementing the vision, strategy and aims?

      2. Know your values

      Angela started work as a solicitor in a Midlands city in the 1970s. In her first few months she was disconcerted that several clients asked her to do things that she considered unethical. She was clear she would never do anything dishonest or immoral. As a result she lost several clients, much to the criticism of a colleague who was eager to build up the firm’s business as quickly as possible.

      She recounts the day when a well-known businessman stomped out of her office angrily, saying that she was naive and needed to be more ‘flexible’. For several years she struggled to build up her client base, but gradually her reputation as a woman who had high principles won over. Looking back, she believes that the growth of her firm (she is now the senior partner) is not just because they are good at their work, but is also due to their reputation for integrity.

      Most of us want to work for an organization we can be proud of. We would like it to have an excellent reputation and be renowned for its positive ethos and values. However, the way that we maintain the highest values is by the leader embodying and practising them, relentlessly and consistently.

      How do we develop a workforce that is passionate about what we are doing? How do we become known as an organization that treats its employees and customers well? No amount of management technique or spin will suffice. The key way such changes come about is through a leader who lives out these positive values day by day. As Leo Tolstoy was reputed to have said, ‘Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.’

      Most employees or volunteers look for a leader who they can respect and emulate. It sounds rather old fashioned, but they want people who lead by example. Here the age-old maxim, found in various forms in all the world’s main religions, holds true: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Or to put it in another of its popular forms: Treat others as you want to be treated.

      Most of us instinctively have an innate sense of fairness. We can spot a leader who has double standards and who grabs everything they can get. When a leader complains that the workforce is only interested in what they can take out of the organization, the first thing they need to do is to look at themselves. Do the employees or volunteers see a leader who believes so much in what the organization is doing that they are prepared to make sacrifices? Is the leader recognized as someone who is giving all their energies and passions to it? Perhaps all they see is a leader only interested in the perks. Many of us are willing to work sacrificially, often way beyond the hours that are expected, when we believe in the worth of what we are doing.

      Or take another feature of many successful organizations: loyalty. How do we hold onto good employees or volunteers in a competitive market? Beyond a certain level of remuneration we cannot buy loyalty. If employees or volunteers are treated as if they are dispensable (‘I’m the boss and if you don’t want to do it my way then leave’), then they are not going to be loyal when we are going through difficult times. What builds loyalty is a leader who is loyal.

      The most important resource in any organization is the staff or volunteers. When people discuss how they want to be treated, high on the list is that we want to matter for who we are, not just for what we do. We want our views to be respected, our contribution to be valued and to be treated fairly. These are deep human aspirations that transcend time, class, religion and gender. Where mutual respect is taken seriously in an organization, most people will be set free to give of their best. Conversely when an organization treats people as dispensable, where suggestions are rubbished and favouritism is rife, many employees do the minimum required.

      The leader sets the standards of the organization. There are several areas in which this is important. For example, it does not take staff or volunteers long to discover if the leader is untruthful. When the leader asks someone to tell a lie, even if it is about something unimportant, it may resolve a difficult situation in the short term. But from then on it is known that it is all right to be economical with the truth. If it is acceptable to be untruthful to someone outside the organization, then why not to each other?

      Another area is gossip. Some leaders are renowned for talking about their colleagues behind their backs in unflattering terms. Not only are their abilities mocked but even their motivations are called into question. Often done with humour this may be superficially amusing and can be flattering to those in the leader’s ‘in group’.

      However, if we know that the boss is someone who talks about others behind their