During the three day program at Pegasus, the LEAD - Leadership Effectiveness and Adaptability, instrument was administered. The LEAD Self instrument is a pen and paper instrument in which respondents are presented with 12 situations, each with four alternative answers. Of the four alternative answers to each situation, there is one answer for each of the four leadership styles:
1. telling/directing style (high task/low relationship),
2. selling/coaching (high task/high relationship),
3. participating/supporting (low task/high relationship), and
4. delegating (low task/low relationship).
The LEAD Self instrument developed at the Center for Leadership Studies in 1979.
The participants earlier had gone through the Grid Leadership module. After the instrument was administered it was found that most of the participants had a high score on Coaching (High Task High Relationship) and Supporting (Low task and High Relationship) and almost zero on the Delegating (low Task Low relationship)
The facilitator explained that these scores indicate how adaptable you are as a leader based on the situation. He further clarified that there is no one style that is best among the four instead it is the leader's ability to choose the right style based on situation that determines his effectiveness. He asked the participants to map their sub-ordinates into the four quadrants and then compare them with their scores. It was clear that most participants were operating predominantly from the two quadrants mentioned above and were not directing and delegating enough.
At this point one of the participants raised a point, which is very interesting. The participant said that earlier in another Leadership Training, the facilitator mentioned that a Leader should operate from High Task High Relationship quadrant - 9,9 or atleasst balance at 5,5 and the LEAD model is contradicting with that.
At this point I realized what might have happened and could relate to the participant. In one training the facilitator says this is the best model and in another one it is contradicted, who should the participant believe. In fact I also went through similar experience earlier. This situation arose because the whole program was not fully integrated and the modules are loosely fitted together.
The Facilitator from Pegasus, may be due to time constraint or any other reason, carefully avoided going into the depths of the question - How come LEAD is contradicting with Grid. The facilitator just mntioned that both are different and LEAD indicates the preferred method.
But to be precise, according to my understanding, LEAD is built from where Grid leadership was left. Grid tried to bring out the people element part of the Manager's job and balance Manager's focus between Task and Job, which is correct. On the other hand LEAD tried to take it further by adding the Situation, the third dimension to the Leadership Style.
Therefore there is nothing wrong with GRID and there is no great difference between what Grid says and LEAD says, only difference is that Grid is just two dimensional while LEAD is three dimensional. LEAD brings in the dimension of Subordinate and recommends that the Leader adapts his style based on subordinate's current state of ability and willingness.
To summarize LEAD, the ideal style that a Leader should choose is:
1. Directive - When the subordinate is new, ability is low and willlingness is high
2. Coaching - When the subordinate is reasonably capable and needs motivation as willingness beccomes low due to the initial hurdles
3. Supporting - When the subordinate is capable but needs a pat on the back regularly
4. Delegating - When the subordinate is highly capable and is self motivated and mature to take care of things on his own.
If the Leader uses any of the style wrongly then there is a great chance that the subordinate will get frustrated andd may leave.
The above points can be very well used in a Training program for Team Leaders and Managers on how to Lead to Teams
For further details write to me or call me on 9885907580
Showing posts with label team leaders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label team leaders. Show all posts
Friday, January 12, 2007
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Team Building training for Team Leaders
As a part of a Leadership program I have just completed four sessions on Team Building. Though I didn't do a detailed need analysis, I ended up with a very good design. My formal interactions with Unit heads definitely helped me but more than that my informal interaction with Team Leaders and Team members helped me a lot.
Today, most Team Leaders in IT and ITes / BPO organizations the Team Leaders are quite young and are not exposed to working groups from the beginning. Due to the nature of work they more or less work independently. This phenomenon was first mentioned by Peter F. Drucker in his writings. He was accurate enough to predict that majority of the workforce that was earlier mostly illiterate and carrying out low-skilled or semi-skilled work would get transformed into highly literate carrying out high-skill work. The amount of work a high skilled worker would carry out in groups would be very less. Also due to the nature of work, groups would meet only to discuss common points, otherwise they would predominantly be working alone carrying out the task assigned to them. In fact most of the IT/ITes associates (I'm replacing the word worker with associate to represent the entry level workforce) are supposed to log their work every day.
A well-performing associate graduates into a Team Leader within two to four years and is assigned the responsibility of handling a team. Thus his challenges begin.
The batch that I handled had a very good mix. Some of them have been handling groups from some time and have gone through some very good experiences, while others are just getting into a group responsibility position lately.
Beacuse of this good mix I could use the "Experiential Learning" method very effectively. Instead I driving the content I allowed it to get developed through the discussions and used few team models to summarize the experience and provide a structured learning.
Broadly the 4 sessions - two full days or four half days comprised of:
1. What Teams are? What forces act in favor and against of teams?
2. Team fitness model - What are the different fitness areas?
3. A movie to elicit stages of team development and team leader behavior
4. Tuckman's four/five stage team development model
5. Role of a Leader during the Team Development. How to move the team quickly to the Performing stage and what kind of behaviors/steps can be taken at each stage.
6. How to build High Performance Teams? Role of a Team Leader - As a team member, As a Manager and As a Leader
7. Characteristics of a high performance team and which stage you should make them happen as a Team Leader.
I have used discussions, presentations by participants, one self-assessment instrument, one consensus-decision making exercise, and a single slide ppt.
I felt very happy that it went off very well and it fulfilled all the requirements I would like to have for a successful training session - Very practical, drawing out experiences from participants, driving concepts through models, examining models from multi directions, identifying the linkages and compatibility of models and then finally bring out and solve real issues. Though i couldn't do much of real issue problem solving, I am confident that the participants will do the same and I'm going to be following up with them. Given the time constraint it was worth the time. I shall share the feedback given by the participants as I receive it.
Today, most Team Leaders in IT and ITes / BPO organizations the Team Leaders are quite young and are not exposed to working groups from the beginning. Due to the nature of work they more or less work independently. This phenomenon was first mentioned by Peter F. Drucker in his writings. He was accurate enough to predict that majority of the workforce that was earlier mostly illiterate and carrying out low-skilled or semi-skilled work would get transformed into highly literate carrying out high-skill work. The amount of work a high skilled worker would carry out in groups would be very less. Also due to the nature of work, groups would meet only to discuss common points, otherwise they would predominantly be working alone carrying out the task assigned to them. In fact most of the IT/ITes associates (I'm replacing the word worker with associate to represent the entry level workforce) are supposed to log their work every day.
A well-performing associate graduates into a Team Leader within two to four years and is assigned the responsibility of handling a team. Thus his challenges begin.
The batch that I handled had a very good mix. Some of them have been handling groups from some time and have gone through some very good experiences, while others are just getting into a group responsibility position lately.
Beacuse of this good mix I could use the "Experiential Learning" method very effectively. Instead I driving the content I allowed it to get developed through the discussions and used few team models to summarize the experience and provide a structured learning.
Broadly the 4 sessions - two full days or four half days comprised of:
1. What Teams are? What forces act in favor and against of teams?
2. Team fitness model - What are the different fitness areas?
3. A movie to elicit stages of team development and team leader behavior
4. Tuckman's four/five stage team development model
5. Role of a Leader during the Team Development. How to move the team quickly to the Performing stage and what kind of behaviors/steps can be taken at each stage.
6. How to build High Performance Teams? Role of a Team Leader - As a team member, As a Manager and As a Leader
7. Characteristics of a high performance team and which stage you should make them happen as a Team Leader.
I have used discussions, presentations by participants, one self-assessment instrument, one consensus-decision making exercise, and a single slide ppt.
I felt very happy that it went off very well and it fulfilled all the requirements I would like to have for a successful training session - Very practical, drawing out experiences from participants, driving concepts through models, examining models from multi directions, identifying the linkages and compatibility of models and then finally bring out and solve real issues. Though i couldn't do much of real issue problem solving, I am confident that the participants will do the same and I'm going to be following up with them. Given the time constraint it was worth the time. I shall share the feedback given by the participants as I receive it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
