How Incompetent Are The Majority of Leaders?
I find Leadership is a word thrown around a lot on social media associated with aspirational quotes, platitudes and in general viewed through rose tinted spectacles. The reality of Leadership is actually very different, an occupation Sisyphean in nature, something that no-one really talks about and consequently never prepares for.
Let’s explore this now.
Competence vs Incompetence
In 1965 Dr Derek J. de Solla Price, a Physicist and Mathematician at Cambridge University, discovered the Square Root of any given population do 50% of the work, known as Prices Law, e.g. In a population of 10 the first 3 produce the same output as the remaining 7. In a population of 100 the first 10 produce the same output as the remaining 90 and so on. With mathematical certainty we can see as an organisation grows in size, Competence increases linearly while Incompetence increases exponentially.
I’m not going in to detail on Prices Law as the purpose in this case study is to provide a simple demonstration that in any organisation at any point in time incompetence considerably outweighs competence. If you want to learn more about the scale and financial impact of Prices Law then please do check out: Learning & Development: The Cost of Incompetence
In practical terms this model shows leaders inescapably spend most of their time managing and mitigating the risks and decisions associated with incompetence, including their own. This is why the burden on those in leadership roles is so great, far from a fancy job title and pay cheque.
In greek mythology Sisyphus was a king punished by Zeus, forced to roll an immense boulder up a hill only for it to roll down every time it neared the top, repeating this action for eternity. By comparison leadership is a near Sisyphean way of life containing anxiety, frustration, excitement, satisfaction and achievement broken up with milestones, as opposed to endless memes of joy as shared on social media.
Time for an example:
While supporting senior leaders in a large enterprise a transformation was announced and a restructure followed. During this period of change, what many would prefer to call a period of uncertainty, a section of the population were going to be made redundant. Understandably this resulted in very high levels of anxiety, not only in those that would exit the company, but also in the leaders responsible for keeping operations ticking over while overseeing this transformation. This affected everyone from team to senior leaders, a genuine and visible test of character, integrity and tenacity under prolonged duress.
Impact on Leadership
The model below is based on a matrix by Professor Tim Knoster, who discovered the correlation between the components of strategy and human fallout, which ultimately determine the level of success or failure in any endeavour. I’ve modified it considerably for a business context, however this is a valid model for any individual, team or organisation in pursuit of a specific outcome. This can be anything from delivering a career defining presentation to a team winning a major sporting tournament. In the context of this article we are only interested in the column labelled Capabilities & Skills.
This model demonstrates anxiety is a direct consequence of a lack of skill in any given scenario, an emotional signal raising awareness of being in over your head. I’m not going in to any more detail as the purpose in this case study is to provide a simple demonstration of the correlation between anxiety and skill. If you want to learn more about what anxiety and confidence actually are, their relationship with competence and how to leverage them as a force for good then please do read High Performance: Confidence vs Anxiety. In our example leaders at all levels faced 3 specific problems:
Managing their own anxiety as they plunged in to the unknown.
Managing the anxiety of those in their charge as they also plunged into the unknown.
Keeping the business operating and on track while under considerable duress.
There is a superb quote that sums this situation up, which I first heard from a Navy Seal: “Under pressure you don’t rise to the occasion, you sink to the level of your training. Thats why we train so hard.” It’s an adaptation of the original quote by Archilochus, a Greek Philosopher from around 650 BC: “We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training.” This is unequivocally the case.
Unlike the military, leaders in the business world do not train for worst case scenario, they are also typically appointed based on merit in technical ability as thats whats measured, not their ability to think strategically then rally and organise people. As an ex-paratrooper this is something I continually find bewildering, especially as the world of work becomes less transactional and more algorithmic, relying on strategic partnerships, trustworthy relationships and decentralised decision making to deliver meaningful outcomes. All skills the military excel at while operating in the most hostile conditions imaginable.
In fact, I recently spoke with a CFO reflecting on their career trajectory and experiences, someone I first met many years ago as a team leader. Looking back they found it interesting they had to endure a tremendous amount of rigour and scrutiny over many years in terms of training and certification to do the finance bit of their role, which at the level of CFO they attributed 25% of their current salary. Yet the exact opposite was true for the leadership aspect of their role, which they attributed the other 75% of their current salary. This was also true for any previous leadership role held. No formal preparation whatsoever for the part of the job that arguably contained the vast majority of responsibility.
This led them to wonder exactly how much damage was inflicted on those in their charge, by not just their own incompetence, but by leaders as a whole as a direct result of being continually and woefully under equipped. If you want to learn more about Leadership styles, their impact on organisational culture and business outcomes please do read: Leadership: Styles, Cause & Effect.
In our example this would rapidly become abundantly clear as most, if not all, had never been in this type of high stress situation before nor had any training to deal with it.
Performance
Below is a representation of an ideal growth, development or progress scenario using a simplified version of Prof. Mihály Csikszentmihályi Flow model, which he originally discovered in 1975 after identifying the components of high performance. I have updated this to demonstrate the relationship between Strategy, Operations and High Performance, which can be applied to any individual, team or organisation. By looking at the relationship between Challenge, defined as: Degree of difficulty to be overcome, and Support, defined as: Available resources. Four states emerge:
Anxiety: Missed deadlines, avoidance of interaction, negatively impacts employee sickness absence.
Apathy: Absence of enthusiasm or presence of indifference, negatively impacts employee retention.
Comfort: Lack of activity and accountability, negatively impacts employee productivity.
Flow: Pro-active, self-directed, emphasis on personal responsibility, positively impacts all of the above.
Based on what we have learned so far it’s fair to say the leaders in our example shot straight to the top left corner of our model. To get them in to the top right quadrant, or as close as possible as quickly as possible I was given permission to give everyone a crash courses in behavioural economics, influencing and communication, especially as one particular section of the population posed a significant financial risk.
Literally overnight we set up workshops, which I wrote and delivered, that taught all the leaders, from team to senior, the skills they needed to have meaningful conversations with their team members, individually and collectively. They had to become comfortable with discomfort and prepare for managing hostile responses from a large number of emotionally charged people. Something that people pleasing / agreeable personalities in leadership roles find particularly painful due to their preference for avoiding all and any perceived conflict.
These skills mitigated the risks associated with disruptive personalities struggling to come to terms with their situation, of which there were a few. In the population that posed a significant financial risk we retained 100% of the people, who also exceeded their end of year KPI’s, right up to their exit dates.
I had no idea what a big deal these results were at the time as I hadn’t supported an organisation of this scale through this level of change before, I just did what I thought was obvious and considered it a really interesting experience. I particularly enjoyed witnessing those I had supported demonstrate the best versions of themselves when it mattered most. Learning to leverage a new skillset that will last them a lifetime. This, for me, is the beauty of applied psychology, it’s relevant everywhere as everything is ruled and run by humans, and we are unbelievably predictable.
Conclusion
Even though Leadership is a world demonstrably filled with managing incompetence that far exceeds competence we shouldn’t lose sight of the message behind aspirational memes, after all they provide something to aim for. With that said be under no illusion. They do not represent the day to day reality of leadership by any measure. You will be tested, you will sink to the level of your training and your character will be revealed for all to see. After all you signed on the dotted line to watch over those in your charge.
What you can do, to the best of your ability, is take the time to understand the responsibilities you will hold for yourself and those in your charge. Set your ego aside and weigh them against what you and your potential team stand to gain with you at the helm, in terms of ideology and actual outcomes, i.e. Purpose that transcends your daily activity. It’s the only way to make the Sisyphean task of rolling a boulder relentlessly uphill worthwhile.
So, how might you proceed to give yourself the best chance to be your best self on your worst day?
Determine when and how you tip in and out of the 4 different quadrants.
Ask those around you for feedback.
Take note of what you are doing well.
Take note of what needs work.
Set some next steps to up your game accordingly.
Repeat.
If would benefit from support to design and implement, or update, a leadership development program ensuring you take a strategic approach, then please do schedule a call with me by putting a 60mins in my diary at a time that suits you. We can discuss your situation and options over an eCoffee.
Best Wishes
Kenny
