Not everyone on the agency
staff or Board is a good candidate for membership on the Leadership Team,
although most people think they would make effective Team members. For this
reason, Team members are specifically recruited and not added on a volunteer
basis. People are invited to join the Team, not simply asked to sign up. Below
is a series of questions to use when screening potential Team members. As we
decide who to recruit, keep in mind we are not recruiting sales people or
cheerleaders. We are recruiting people who can establish meaningful, stable
connections with stakeholders and who can sustain those connections over the
long term. Sales people and agency cheerleaders may meet these requirements,
but their success with sales or cheerleading does not necessarily mean they
would be successful Leadership Team members. Similarly, a person’s position
from the Management Perspective does
not mean he would necessarily be an effective Leadership Team member.
Successful leadership connections require a specific set of skills not
distributed equally among those associated with the agency. – Here are the
questions, with comments about each.
- Is he culturally
competent? “Cultural Competence is
the capacity to respond appropriately to the various cultural environments
in which we may participate, enabling us to strengthen our relationships
and accomplish our mutual purposes. Cultural competence is both a value
and an essential set of skills in our mobile, fluid society.” - Does he treat people the way
we want agency stakeholders to be treated? Agency staff members treat
clients and stakeholders about as well – or as badly – as they treat each
other. Attention should be given to all of the potential Team member’s
relationships with other staff. Even if all but one or two of those
relationships are fine, attend closely to the one or two that are not. A
good Team member has effective, acceptable relationships with everyone
associated with the agency. For any potential Team member, use his worst relationships as the reference point. If this is how he relates
with stakeholders, is it acceptable? If not, he is not a good candidate
for Team membership. - Is he consistent from
relationship to relationship and situation to situation? Good Team members are
consistent. Their behavior, attitudes, demeanor, and self-presentation
change little from person to person, from situation to situation. They do
not run hot and cold, on again – off again. They are predictably
themselves most anywhere we encounter them. - Is he friendly and interested
in people? This does not mean all Team
members are outgoing and extraverted. However, it does mean Team members
are comfortable meeting new people and in being in new or somewhat novel
situations. Also, they enjoy getting to know people and learning about
their experiences and interests. - Does he take his good manners
along everywhere he goes? This is not a minor point. There is never a good excuse for bad
manners and behaving rudely, inappropriately, or insensitively are
guaranteed ways to offend or otherwise alienate stakeholders. Effective
Team members exhibit their good manners with everyone, every time,
wherever they are. If a potential Team member exhibits bad manners or
inappropriate behavior with anyone, anywhere, assume they will probably
behave similarly with stakeholders, sooner or later. This is a risk not to
be taken. - Is he helpful and cooperative?
This too is not trivial. An important element of a leadership
connection is the Team member’s being seen by the stakeholder as helpful
and cooperative. A goal of the connection is to support the stakeholder’s
success specifically as it relates to agency success but more generally as
it relates to the stakeholder’s interests and personal priorities. If the
potential Team member is not helpful and cooperative with others at work,
he is unlikely to support an external stakeholder’s interests and
priorities on a consistent basis. - Does he take care of his
responsibilities, including both personal and professional
responsibilities? This is an obvious criterion
for Team membership but deserves some extended attention. No one wants
someone who is irresponsible on the Leadership Team; but if the candidate
is actually irresponsible, he should not continue to be associated with
the agency. Here, attention is on people who exhibit minor lapses or are
not as responsible as they should be now and then. This includes both his
professional and personal life. What he does on his own time matters and
is the Leadership Team’s business. The team is limited to people who are
responsible and who conduct themselves responsibly all the time,
everywhere they are. A lesser criterion runs the risk the next small
responsibility lapse or indiscretion will happen with a stakeholder or
come to the attention of a stakeholder. Either way, it would represent a
serious debit to the leadership account of the Team member and, by
association, to the accounts of all Team members. - Does he do what he agrees to
do? Our assessment attention here is on important
agreements and commitments but also on minor agreements and commitments.
Team members are scrupulous about doing what they say they will do, with
everyone, every time. The Leadership Team cannot afford to have any of its
agreements or commitments disregarded or ignored, ever.
Does this mean a Team member is never unable to keep an
agreement or honor a commitment? Although always keeping agreements and
commitments is the goal, situations and circumstances infrequently preclude
keeping agreements or meeting commitments. When this happens, the Team member
lets the stakeholder know immediately, along with a sincere apology and an
explanation about why the stakeholder’s expectations are not being met. Also,
no matter how magnanimous the stakeholder is in accepting the apology and
explanation, it is still a significant debit from the Team member’s account
with the stakeholder. When assessing potential Team members, simply assume they
will not be any more responsible with stakeholders than they are with everyone
else.
- Does he do things on time? This is a sub-element with being
responsible but warrants specific attention. Stakeholders should and do
expect things to happen when they expect them, when the Team member says
they will happen, and so on. For the Team member, this means being sure he
is where he is expected when he is expected. It means activities and
events occur when they are scheduled to occur. It means stakeholders get
information or feedback when they expect to get them. It also means phone
calls or emails are returned the same day, every time. Time matters and being
on time is essential. Any successful candidate for the Leadership Team
takes being on time very seriously, with everything, with everyone, every
time. - Does he stay calm when he is
dealing with important issues or having a serious conversation? This is especially important
when dealing with difficult issues or when having conversations where
emotions may run high. This does not mean Team members are emotionally
flat or do not have strong feelings about some things now and then. In
fact, a lack of observable feeling and emotion is easily mistaken for
indifference and not caring. We are focusing here primarily on moderate to
intense negative emotion, especially anger and frustration. Expressing
anger and frustration directly with a stakeholder is most always
counterproductive. The point sometimes missed is sharing angry feelings
and frustrations about someone else with a stakeholder is also
inappropriate and counterproductive, even if the stakeholder shares their
similar feelings with the Team member. People who hope to join the
Leadership Team must be skilled emotional Managers who have a demonstrated
ability to stay calm under stressful circumstances and when people’s
choices and behavior are quite contrary to their expectations and
preferences. The best Team members are rarely to never overtly, negatively
reactive to people and circumstances. - Is he energetic and positive? This assessment criterion does
not need much comment. People who seem tired, disinterested, and detached
are not good Team members. People who are critical and negative are not
good Team members. People whose energy and enthusiasm seem artificial or
forced are also not good Team members. The need is for Team members who
manage everything they do with an appropriate level of energy, engagement,
interest, and positive demeanor. Assess candidates for the Leadership Team
over time and in all areas of their work life. Assume if they occasionally
seem tired, negative, and less than fully involved, they will occasionally
behave the same way with stakeholders. This can quickly lead to debits in
their leadership accounts with those stakeholders. - Is he a hard worker? A reality understood but
seldom acknowledged is if people associated with the agency were to only
do what they are required to do and only do it when they are required to
do it, few agencies would operate smoothly and none would excel. It takes
the little extra from those people who go beyond what is required for the
agency to run smoothly and especially for the agency to excel. These people
are good candidates for the Leadership Team. If they also do what is
required when it is required, keep their work current, and consistently
meet all of the expectations for their positions, they meet the hard
worker criterion referred to here. - Does he make good choices? This assessment criterion
applies to the work life of anyone who wants to join the Leadership Team
but also extends to his personal life. If someone makes bad choices
anywhere, he is more likely to make bad choices with stakeholders than
someone who has no history of making bad choices. Additionally,
stakeholders are more likely to learn about bad choices made by him than
by others who have no record of bad choices. The connections with
stakeholders enable those stakeholders to trust the judgments and choices
made by Team members and any history of bad choices works against this
outcome. Included here are choices affecting other people negatively,
jeopardizing agency or service outcomes, or leading to private or public
censure. Also, choices related to personal appearance, dress, choice of
associates and activities and such are also considered. Be sure Leadership
Team members consistently make choices and decisions in their professional
and personal lives not reflecting negatively or adversely on the Team or
on the agency. - Is he accepting and tolerant
with others? Any indication of overt
prejudice, cultural insensitivity, sexist views, or other behavior
suggesting a negative, indifferent, or superior orientation to any
particular group of people are unacceptable. People with such tendencies
and inclinations should not be associated with the agency in the first
place. We may assume agency Management has already dealt with them and
they are no longer with the agency. Our attention here is on more subtle
issues. We can pick up on these issues by watching how an individual
relates to and interacts with various groups of people. Does he
interact differently with men and women, children and adults, young people
and older people, agency clients and staff, people in Management and those
who are not, and so on? Good candidates for the Leadership Team relate to
and interact with everyone in very similar ways. There is no sign of
non-acceptance or intolerance. They interact with and relate to people
based on each person’s merits and not on his membership in a
particular group, class, or status. – It is worth noting this level of
non-judgmental behavior is considerably less common than one might expect. - Is he assertive without being
demanding, confrontational, or pushy? Leadership Team members are
able to comfortably and clearly present agency interests and priorities,
suggest ways in which stakeholders may support those priorities and
interests, and convey their points of view to stakeholders. Additionally,
they initiate contacts and interactions and actively pursue connections
with stakeholders. They also are skilled in managing those times when they
disagree with stakeholders, think stakeholders may be acting in ways
contrary to agency interests, or have to take action not supporting
stakeholders’ interests or priorities. There are also those times when
stakeholders have to simply be told no. Diplomacy is fairly easy when
everyone agrees and is headed in the same direction. When people disagree
or are heading in divergent directions, maintaining leadership connections
is much more challenging. Leadership Team members are skilled at managing
these challenging times assertively while avoiding the natural tendency to
become demanding, confrontational, pushy, or – what is just as bad – the
tendency to avoid the people and situations all together. - Is he considerate? Excluded here are people who
are sycophantic or excessively deferential. They do not make good
Leadership Team members. However, adjusting to or accommodating to the
special situations, preferences, beliefs, values, or difficulties of
people are to be expected with considerate people. There is nothing
artificial or self-serving about their behavior. They are consistently and
somewhat automatically considerate with everyone in most any situation.
They are what we simply call genuinely nice people. Leadership Team
membership is limited to genuinely nice people, people who seem to be
naturally considerate. - Is he dependable? The notion here is somewhat
more complex than it may at first seem. It means Team members do what they
are expected to do when they are expected to do it, are where they are
expected to be when they are expected to be there, and produce the results
they are expected to produce when they are expected to produce them.
Beyond these important areas of dependability, successful candidates for
the Leadership Team demonstrate additional areas of dependability. These
areas are reflected in the questions in this assessment. Consider each
question and ask if the Team can depend on the candidate to continue
behaving and performing consistently with respect to the expectation
suggested by the question. For example, can the Team depend on the
candidate to continue treating everyone the way it wants agency
stakeholders to be treated? Look at each assessment question and consider
whether the candidate can sustain the expectation. Only those people who
can be depended on to meet those expectations over the long term are good
candidates for the Leadership Team. - Is he a good listener? This question incorporates a
notion a little beyond what may be obvious. Along with attentively hearing
what is said, the Team member also asks appropriate questions and for
necessary clarification so he understands what is being said. This
understanding includes insight into the motivations and interests of the
person talking. Once the Team member understands, he remembers what was
said and takes appropriate action based on the communication. Taking
appropriate action is, then, the evidence of having listened. The
appropriate action might be a verbal response or some other action in the
future. Whatever the action is, it lets the stakeholder and others know
the Team member did indeed listen. People being seriously considered for
the Team demonstrate good listening skills in all areas of their
professional and personal lives.
A related point is important here. Along with accurately and
carefully listening, Team members have to also communicate accurately and carefully.
Is the candidate consistently understood correctly and completely or do people
occasionally misunderstand or misinterpret his meaning or intent? The
Leadership Team cannot afford to have its messages and intentions
misunderstood. The ability to communicate clearly and appropriately with
everyone with whom the candidate interacts is an essential NAME=”ehsm_OLE_LINK197″>NAME=”ehsm_OLE_LINK196″>prerequisite for
Team membership.
- Is he patient? We have all heard patience is
a virtue; and from the Leadership Perspective, this aphorism is definitely
true. Leadership connections do not develop quickly and usually not
without a fair measure of ups-and-downs in the process. As the Leadership
Team assesses people who may join the Team, the Team is patient, not
rushing the selection process or shortcutting it. They also limit their
selections to people who are patient – patient with them and patient with
other people. Select people who will be patient with stakeholders, who are
comfortable with leadership connections developing on stakeholder time. - Does he understand and support
the agency’s interests and priorities? It is not uncommon to talk
with someone who has leadership responsibilities with an agency and hear
him say he does not understand or agree with something the agency
is doing or with some action the agency did or did not take. Through his
behavior, he either explicitly or implicitly makes it clear he disapproves
and perhaps thinks the agency’s choice was somewhere from ill-advised to
stupid. Suffice it to note this is behavior never seen in successful
Leadership Team members. There are appropriate opportunities within the
agency to pursue such differences and disagreements, but sharing them with
stakeholders and potential stakeholders – which includes almost everyone -
is not appropriate. People who are being considered for Team membership
are screened very carefully to be sure they do understand and support the
agency’s interests and priorities. A mistake here can lead to the person’s
doing more damage to the agency’s reputation than the Team can ever expect
to fully repair. - Is he someone who you want to
be a primary agency representative? This is the bottom line. Will
the person be invited to join the Leadership Team or not? As the
decision is being made, understand this person will represent the agency,
its staff, its clients, and everyone else associated with the agency.
Stakeholders and others will fairly assume everyone associated with the
agency is like this person, strengths, shortcomings, and all. As a Team
member, are you comfortable with others judging you based on their
perceptions of this person? If so and if he has done well with the other
assessment questions, he will likely be a good Team member. If not, be
slow to select this person even if he has done well with the other
assessment questions. Just know the future success of the agency depends,
in part, on getting this decision right.