I recently read an article by Peter Bregman titled Why So Many Leadership Programs Ultimately Fail. The main point of the article is that “… there is a massive difference between what we know about leadership and what we do as leaders. Most leadership programs teach knowledge.”
This hit home pretty hard since I have been in the training and education business for over 33 years. We have always had a quasi joke that said that we are not teachers because teaching implies that learning is taking place, thus we are instructors. Learning, by our definition, is a relatively permanent change in behavior. A behavior is observable and since we rarely had the opportunity to see new, long-term behavior from our students, we could not truly ascertain that they had learned.
So the outcome of the training we provided was knowledge. Knowledge by itself is relatively useless. We all know a great deal of stuff. Even a non-swimmer knows what to do to stay afloat. Throw that person in the water and he now has to apply that knowledge. For knowledge to have value, it must be applied and then it becomes an observable behavior.
Education and training are also different animals. Education is the type of general stuff we were provided in our early years. Two plus two equals four. This is knowledge. Training provides specific task-based programs where we are taught to apply knowledge to specific situations.
When we provide fundamentals of servicing radiology equipment courses, we provide mostly education, even if there are laboratory exercises. When we provide a specific product course on a particular manufacturer’s machine, we are providing mostly training. In one we provide the knowledge necessary to be applied in the other.
Back to Bregman’s article regarding leadership training. He is essentially saying that most leadership training is not training at all, by our above definition. We spend a lot of time and effort and money on leadership education. We generate a great body of knowledgeable, well-educated leaders. We provide that education in a safe, non-threatening environment. The evaluations are anonymous to ensure safety and preclude bruised feeling and egos. His conclusion is that no leaders fail due to lack of knowledge, they own that part. Most failed leadership is the result of lack of what Bregman calls emotional courage.
He states that what makes leadership difficult is not the theoretical, it is the practical. It’s not about knowing what to say or do. It is the willingness to place yourself in the discomfort, risk and uncertainty of saying it or doing it. It is about doing this without separating yourself from others and remaining strong in the face of uncertainty. It is speaking and doing when others are silent.
In the TV show “Game of Thrones,” the son asks his father, “Can a man still be brave if he’s afraid?” The father replies, “That is the only time a man can be brave.”
This means that saying or doing the easy things does not demonstrate emotional courage. Emotional courage can only be demonstrated when it needs to be said or done and you are the only one who will stand up. Doing the right thing when others may get angry, or against a politically correct situation, or a distracted situation, and not becoming defensive yourself, is emotional courage. John Maxwell makes a very clear distinction between managers and leaders: Managers do things right, leaders do the right things.
Bregman states that, to be effective, training must be conducted in a real life environment without the safety of a controlled classroom. This is where leaders can be challenged to be courageous in the face of whatever fear they are facing. This is where they can ask themselves, “What will it take for you to speak up?”
I have conducted customer relations skills seminars for many years now. I speak on communications, personalities, dissatisfaction, competence and other topics. When I am given additional time, I even conduct role play exercises where we put volunteers into likely circumstances and observe and evaluate their behavior.
The attendees leave energized and ready to take on those difficult customers. I do a marvelous job of providing valuable knowledge. I suspect that the knowledge disappears, or at least fades, rather quickly for most and they get squashed like a grape by their irate customers.
I have often been accused of being disruptive at meetings because I am willing to say what others don’t want to hear. Sometimes they just don’t want to hear my voice. I now have Bregman’s article and permission to be my normal emotionally courageous and witty self.