How many times in your life have you heard
someone say that a particular person is a “born” leader? Like most people,
probably quite a few times over the years. The question now is… do you and your organization actually
believe this to be true?
Even a number of renowned experts on the topic
of leadership indicate that they buy-in to this concept. Yet contrary to this
often held belief, there is no empirical research or data to support such a
belief or take such a position.
While there is no credible evidence to support
the idea that leaders are born, there is ample evidence to also support the
fact that leaders in like fashion cannot be “trained”. The American Society of
Training and Development states that U.S. based businesses spend in excess of
170 billion dollars annually on leadership based curriculums, yet the vast
majority of these immense expenditures are spent on leadership “training”.
Although every human being has a capacity for
leadership, such individual potential
must be “developed”, which is an entirely different protocol from training.
The problem that exists is that training is grounded in the acquisition
of new technical skills, systems and techniques for executing tasks. Moreover,
the traditional methodology for training is one dimensional and equates to a
one size fits all approach. Whatever the lead sensory system of the trainer
happens to be, it will become the singular delivery modality that will be
afforded to the trainees in mass. Unfortunately, everyone doesn’t learn the
same way, process information in the same way or assimilate the learning
opportunity that is being provided in the exact same way.
As well, the vast majority of training is
provided in a monologue environment which is typically manifested in the form
of lectures and power point presentations. Simply stated, traditional training
modalities are delivered in a sterile environment which historically focuses on
past experiences and result outcomes… Rather than business pipelines, current trends
and future needs.
The idea of training is fundamentally an
attempt to standardize people and processes by blending to a “norm”.
Consequently, these endeavors are all too often referred to as “best
practices”, which are typically the safe play when it comes to normalizing
people and processes.
In stark contrast, the act of developing leaders focuses on the
progressive development of core leadership competencies, knowledge retention
and the ability to implement the learning on demand. Developmental leadership
is ultimately transformational.
Leaders and leadership candidates readily indicate
that they dread training and will seek to avoid it at every turn. However, they
embrace the idea of developing their leadership abilities because true
development programs are fluid, collaborative, hands-on and actionable.
Following below are 10 of the prominent key differences between training and
development:
Training conforms to standards > Development
focuses on maximizing potential.
Training focuses on the present >
Development focuses on the future.
Training indoctrinates > Development educates.
Training tests patience > Development tests
courage.
Training focuses on technique and content >
Development focuses on people.
Training maintains the status quo >
Development serves as a catalyst for innovation.
Training emphasizes compliance > Development
enhances performance.
Training focuses on efficiency > Development
focuses on effectiveness..
Training is transactional > Development is
transformational.
Training blends to a norm > Development
transcends above and beyond the norm.
If your organization seeks to distinguish
itself, grow forward and evolve as a viable business entity, then your
leadership must develop the appropriate competencies to facilitate these
outcomes.
As your valued resource partner, we
provide formal development programs
that will assist your organization, its leadership and your people to… Learn more… Do more… Become more.
Copyright © 2015 Developing Forward
| Thomas H. Swank, CBC
No comments:
Post a Comment