COVER STORY
calm daily briefings, along with his reassuring presence in the city’ s Emergency Operations Centre, not only helped Calgary get through the disaster – it defined his reputation as a good leader.
The importance of character Good leadership is a function of competencies, character and commitment to doing the hard work of leadership. But even though it has long been known to be a foundational element of leadership effectiveness, character has traditionally received the least attention in research as well as day-to-day practices. This is an issue because a shortfall in one of the three pillars of good leadership will undermine the others. And that will ultimately lead to performance problems for leaders and their organizations, not to mention all the related stakeholders, including the public interest. At the Ivey Business School, we therefore contend that organizations need to start paying as much attention to character as they do to competencies.
“ A shortfall in one of the three pillars of good leadership will undermine the others.”
At Ivey, our interest in character was sparked by the 2008 financial crisis, which led me to start a research program on leadership and character with my colleagues Mary Crossan and Jeffrey Gandz. In our work with senior leaders from the public, private and not-for-profit sectors, we found – unsurprisingly – that character matters. In fact, we found it matters a lot.
The leaders we talked to in our research had little difficulty concluding that character flaws played a major role in the lead-up to the financial crisis. They talked about how the lack of good character contributed to organizational demise in the not-for-profit sector. They agreed that poor judgment on the part of city leaders had negative affects on the perception of municipal politics. But there was no consistent understanding of what character really meant. This is understandable because character is often loosely defined. But since it is a rather ambiguous concept, character has seldom been used in recruiting, selecting, performance rating, promoting, disciplining or developing current and future leaders.
There are at least three explanations for the significant disconnect between the perceived importance of character and its actual use in organizations. First, character is a“ loaded” word and, as we found out during our conversations with leaders, it has different meanings to different people. Second, a language or vocabulary with which to address character issues in the workplace is lacking. Leaders told us they need a contemporary, practice-focused vocabulary with which to address character in performance management discussions, leadership development interventions and governance issues. Third, leaders have long lacked the tools needed to move from thinking and talking about character development to actually doing something about it.
Character dimensions Our qualitative( e. g., focus groups and interviews) and quantitative( e. g., surveys and longitudinal research designs) research involving over 2,500 leaders from the public, private and not-for-profit sectors resulted in the identification of 11 character dimensions or virtues. Each of these dimensions consists of a number of behaviors – which we call character elements – that are illustrative of the dimension. The dimensions and elements are an amalgam of virtues, personality traits and values that enable excellence. Virtues refer to situation-appropriate behaviours that are widely seen as representative of good leadership. Some of these virtues are personality traits, such as resiliency and openness, which are relatively stable dispositional variables. And some of the virtues operate as values, such as being equitable or transparency.
Judgment is placed at the centre of the character framework since it plays a critical role in decision-making and subsequent performance. Judgment is the outcome of the application of the character dimensions in situationappropriate ways. For example, the wise leader understands when it is appropriate to foster collaboration and be considerate of other peoples’ concerns and when it is best to demonstrate initiative and go at it alone; when to act with determination and confidence and when to be patient and reflective; and so forth. Since judgment is central in orchestrating and activating the character dimensions as required by the situation, it follows that leaders should be comfortable to express all dimensions – a tall order for most! Yet we need our leaders to be capable of handling myriad challenges and seizing opportunities when they present themselves.
Each character dimension matters – because of what it contributes to leader behaviour, and because of what happens to leader behaviour if the dimension is missing. Imagine, for example, what happens when leaders with high drive lack temperance – reckless behaviour typically results. Or, consider the outcomes of a candid conversation where the leader lacked empathy and compassion – resentment and a decline in morale are likely outcomes. And, without integrity, accountability will always be suspect. Strength of character resides in our capacity to call upon any dimension of character at any time.
Taking character into account Our research has also found that leaders generally agree that organizations do not do a very good job taking character into account in making decisions about hiring, promotion and succession. For example, a systematic and thorough character assessment during the hiring process is seldom done well. Often it is driven by the absence of negatives rather than a focus on the character dimensions that are thought to be particularly important in a given role. For example, to say,“ I’ ve heard nothing bad about the applicant’ s character,” certainly does not mean the candidate has demonstrated courage, integrity, accountability, temperance or other character dimensions. This begs the question how we can embed leader character into organizations to build excellence.
10 Q4 2016 www. amcto. com