Leadership theory

An alternative to leadership and management frameworks?

In our research and discussion related to the current review, we have begun to hear voices of dissent. The Scottish Leadership Foundation, for example, is currently working with public-sector organisations in Scotland to move them away from competency and standards frameworks. The National College for School Leadership seems to be reconsidering its position; and the Institute for Leadership and Management is launching a process to develop its own leadership standards in reaction to the current project under way by the Management Standards Centre.

It seems much has already been done to define what “qualities”, “competencies”, “standards” should be sought from our leaders but, as the current debate would imply, this has done little to improve the quality of our leaders and leadership other than, perhaps, for specific organisations (i.e. those who have gone through the process of developing their own framework). Take, for example, the work of CEML on identifying management and leadership abilities. They produced a list of 83 attributes (condensed from 1013) based on a meta analysis of previous research, however, this has not been adopted as the norm as the current exercise contests. What is to ensure that the new National Occupational Standards in Management and Leadership will be any more successful?

Perhaps, therefore, it is time to conceive of alternative ways to view management and leadership standards:

• 
  Should we be recommending ethically and socially acceptable forms of behaviour? – almost a “Leadership Charter” that leaders can sign up to?
  
• 
  Should we be promoting “mindsets” that leaders need to master rather than the behaviours they exhibit?
  
• 
  Should we be questioning leadership styles, approaches, behaviours and methods to reveal their weaknesses rather than searching for some Holy Grail of leadership?
  
• 
  Should we focus instead on leadership development to explore what does and doesn’t help improve organisational performance rather than providing a post-hoc description of leadership qualities?
  

In many ways a leadership competencies or standards framework is like a psychometric profile – useful for illuminating current practice in comparison to a norm but dangerous and potentially damaging if misused. To work as a psychometric assessor (e.g. for the MBTI) you must be qualified in the tools’ application and interpretation – perhaps the same should be true of leadership and management frameworks to prevent their abuse.

9.