Leadership
EMPOWERING LEADERSHIP
was sent by the chief executive to ‘select’ individuals to request their participation. Some respondents expressed resentment at the directive, some perceived it as punitive, and others were fearful about why they had been chosen. Very often, these same respondents later told us they benefited from participating in the course, applying the methods in their own departments and encouraging others to learn them. Furthermore, as the partnership initially targeted senior leaders, some participants at this trust viewed it as ‘elitist’. This created an ‘us and them’ divide that was difficult to break down. It is important to recognise that, while commitment from the top is crucial, leadership is distributed across the organisation and is more effective where it is diverse and inclusive. The goal of a training programme such as Lean for Leaders is to create an ‘army’ of leadership actors to champion the application of improvement methods. Did the chief executives complete the Lean for Leaders training? Yes, but not at the beginning. The case for chief executives to complete mandatory training in lean improvement methods was not immediately apparent. However, the importance of role-modelling the behaviours “Are we guilty of pointing the finger at a person, rather than the process?”
expected of others emerged as an important enabling factor. It was apparent through the evaluation that all five chief executives had adopted new leadership behaviours as a consequence of their involvement. Frequently voiced leadership mantras included, “Leaders need big ears, big eyes, little mouth,” and, “Leaders should be problem framers, not problem solvers.” Both mantras remind us that improvement requires a coaching style, where a leader’s role is to listen, observe, and encourage employees to use improvement principles to solve the problems they face. In other words: “Those who do the work know best how to improve the work.” Leaders should be concerned with promoting a culture of improvement by increasing the capability of people across the organisation, rather than applying the tools themselves. However, leadership theorist Richard Cyert asserts that a leader cannot persuade others to focus on a desired direction without a strong intellectual position. Hence, persuading others to participate in the Lean for Leaders training and engage with the improvement programme generally required leaders to have invested their own time and attention in the same. It is a case of “actions speak [at least] as loud as words”. It’s also a demonstration of respectful behaviour that ultimately underpins a successful management system. Senior leaders who ‘go first’ send a message to everyone that this is important and requires their attention. Few would argue they don’t have the time if the chief executive did. The idea that leadership could be ‘standardised’ might
seem extreme, but there are elements that can and should be. Developing ‘standard work’ for leaders can help to establish new routines that foster coaching behaviours and enable a culture of continuous improvement to grow.
by Nicola Burgess I t is widely recognised that organisational change requires commitment from those at the top. When improvement initiatives hit the rocks, a lack of leadership commitment is often blamed. Are we guilty of pointing the finger at a person, rather than the process? After all, blaming an individual rarely yields a satisfactory conclusion. But if leadership is a process, then leader behaviours can be learned, role- modelled, and even standardised to produce positive results. This can be seen through the NHS partnership with the Virginia Mason Institute – an initiative that involved five hospital trusts adopting an organisation-wide approach to improvement, underpinned by lean principles. These were introduced systematically through an improvement infrastructure,
the development of a team of improvement specialists at each trust who were charged with training the organisation’s leaders in improvement methods. Initially, the Lean for Leaders training programme was targeted at more senior leaders, with the aim of moving gradually towards middle, then frontline leaders over time. This tiered approach to teaching improvement methods played out differently across the five hospitals. The differences were stark. At one extreme, the organisation that appeared most ‘culturally ready’ for the improvement approach exhibited a palpable excitement among senior leaders, who were eager to learn about the methods and conduct their own projects. A waiting list was established and maintained across the full five-year partnership. The training was quickly opened to all staff in leadership roles, regardless of seniority or title. At the other end of the spectrum, another trust’s culture was less receptive to change and senior leaders were reluctant to engage with the training. Subsequently, a formal invitation
Changes to leadership style, rather than changes of leadership, are essential for developing an improvement culture across an organisation. And, in the case of health and care providers that exist within a wider system of governance and oversight, the efficacy of a coaching style is enhanced when similar behaviours are adopted by leaders across all levels of the system. By empowering staff to drive improvement in this way, leaders can shine a light for others to follow and create a brighter future for organisations.
incorporating significant investments in leadership training and coaching. This ranged from monthly meetings of the five hospital chief executives, where leaders learned from one another, to
Learn more leadership lessons from the Virginia Mason Institute Partnership with the NHS.
Sustainable Development Goals
Warwick Business School | wbs.ac.uk
wbs.ac.uk | Warwick Business School
50
51
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog