Well, there are special trainings based on the books and work of Stephen Covey. He is a highly respected specialist on this subject.

Personal leadership is often a matter of finding your motivation within yourself and of being passionate about the job that you do. Is your staff passionated? If yes: then what could possibly hold them back? If no: is there anything you can do to passionate them and motivate them to be passionate and then become leaders? Does your staff have enough space to breath and to provide the leadership you (and maybe they themselves as well) wish?

These are a couple of questions that you could consider to help you on your way. I would recommend you to look for material about this subject by Stephen Covey, as I already wrote.

Links:

• https://www.stephencovey.com/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Covey

posted December 31, 2008

There are two theories for management style: Theory of X and Theory of Y
X Theory: people are not willing to work and it should be initiative for them to work. (Carrot and stick), this theory is perfect for manufacturing companies which have definition process (for instance: there is no changeable way for producing goods). This style is like pyramid (it means there is gap widening between managers and staff)
Y Theory: people are willing to work, so there is no pressure on them to work. Most of advertising and marketing companies use this style of management. So there is no distance between managers and staff.
Nowadays; it is believed that, it is better to use the combination of Theory of X and Theory of Y.
I think, it is better to use encouragement way to motive them. For instance, by awarding them such as: increasing their salary as the result of company which caused by his or her efforts.
On the other hand, you can negotiate with her or him to know about his or her viewpoint.

posted December 31, 2008

Dave: You've received some good, reasonable answers.

I will add the following, based on my experiences providing leadership training to many for-profit and nonprofit organizations:

When we see people doing a good job, we often reward that behavior with a promotion into the ranks of management and leadership. What we forget is that someone who may have been outstanding in their prior position may not have a clue what to do when it comes to managing people.

Nurse clinicians are a good example. Nurses who work at the bedside are often very good at what they do. They have learned the techniques and the skills that make them good at the clinical aspects of their jobs. However, many nurses who are "rewarded" for being such skilled clinicians by being promoted to management and leadership roles - as nurse managers, supervisors, directors and so forth - may not sparkle immediately (or at all) in leadership roles.

I'm not picking on nurses; this is true of nearly any classification of worker who is "hands on" in a particular field and is then promoted into a leadership role because they are so good at what they do.

The bottom line is that we should not assume that the qualities we seek and admire in leaders are automatically inherent in any individual simply because they hold the title. Most employees who are placed in leadership roles have not learned anything about leadership. They want to do well and they want to excel, but they don't know how. And, in some cases, we have anointed people as leaders who really don't care to assume that role. They love being clinicians or customer service reps or firefighters in the field and they don't wish to become "management". But, not very many people are going to refuse a promotion or decline a title because it may mean they will be perceived by co-workers and higher-ups as being less motivated or inspired when what they are is realistic and good judges of their own abilities and limits.

The same is true of teams. We assume that if we take several bright, competent people and put them together in a group that somehow a magnificent team will be born. Not true - not without some guidance and direction and a will to become that well-greased team. Just because we call a group a "team" doesn't mean that it is one or that the people in it can work well together.

I find when I conduct leadership trainings among people who already carry the title (e.g., managers, supervisors, directors) neither the expectations for themselves or the expectations they have for those who report to them are well defined. They are - as another respondr has said below - "punting". They don't really know what they expect of others or what is expected of them as leaders.

I find that when those who are in leadership roles (because they have a title that supposedly denotes that) take the time to define what others expect of them and what they expect of themselves, the idea of what it means to be a leader becomes clearer. When they take the time to assess their leadership styles and the traits they have that will help them develop their leadership capacity, things also become clearer. When they ask themselves what they think it means to be a leader - what those benefits and challenges will be in that job - things become clearer.

I would couple this with the comments of Tim, Juan and Rob. Then you may begin to see some progress in leadership within your organization.

Best,
SUE

posted December 31, 2008

As Executive Director, Dave, I assume from your question that you have staff people reporting to you that are not, in your view, providing the leadership needed to their direct reports.

My view is:
1. As suggested by Tim, take serious stock of your self and your management style. To be fair, you probably need to get some outside help. If you are currently (or after you start) giving clear deliniation of the assignments and what kind of behavior and leadership you are looking for, prepare to move to step 2. (However, at each step take honest stock of your leadership and contribution. It is highly likely, unless you just joined last week, that your style or what they think you're saying you want is contributing to your problem. It should be a warning to you if all your staff leaders can't or won't lead)
2. In my experience it is not unusual for a well rounded ED to take over an organization and be faced with staff managers who say: "Just tell us what to do!". If you're a good leader you may want them to identify priority needs in their area and to provide plans of attack. If their experience and expectations are that the ED will identify all projects and tell each staff leader specifically how to proceed; you have a number of challenges.
3. You have to be very clear that you have different expectations of them for the organization to move forward. You have to be clear that you understand the organization can not progress if you are a one person band. Rather than delegating areas of responsibilities, you seem to be faced with the need for both training and re-trainiing. This sounds like an organization that needs a total overhaul. Either people learn to lead to your expectations or they will not be able to occupy staff leader roles. Very good EDs understand that this is often their lot: build strength in to organizations that have not had them. They have the skills to change the organization. If you are not one of these highly trained top 10%, get some outside help to come in and help you.
4. If at all possible, find the one staff leader who you feel can get on board with your approach and make that person successful quickly.
5. After adequate evaluation (of you and the team leaders) consider replacing the weakest member of the leadership team with someone you strongly believe understands the team leader role you need.
7. Using your two success stories, continue to work to separate those who can and will progress from the others. It is telling that you seem to state the staff leaders are all unwilling or unable to lead.
8. Monitor progress, keep coaching to success, keep reminding people of the new model. Bring in board members and outside EDs for quick testimonials of your approach. Find clear practical written support for what you're doing (Board Source, Non Profit World, etc). Highlight progress by leaders who advance.
9. While most people will direct you to writings on good npo leadership, you may benefit from reading Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team. If appropriate, you might have your staff leaders read it and discuss parts every other week.

That's one approach. Good luck.
Ed Runner

posted December 31, 2008

I would suspect there is a referent leader. Who organizes the pot-lucks? Who makes sure the holiday decorations get up? Who do the others in the office turn to for "advice"?

That is probably your referent leader. Very gently begin using that person as a conduit.

Covey and all the others are great, but good old Machevillian intrigue works best.

Bill

posted December 31, 2008

Let the team know that you are considering hiring a 'team leader' and watch them all line up at your office door to discuss why they are upset that you didn't consider them for the lead position. Then you get to tell them all, one by one, that you don't see a leader in the existing team. Then watch their performance for the next few weeks, suddenly you will have 5 leaders, all ready to be in charge. Funny how that works :)

Good Luck!

posted December 31, 2008

Hand out exemplary punishment to a few of the guys who do not listen to the "leader" that you have thrust upon them...eventually everyone will toe the line if their survival or well being is at stake.

This is not as bad as it sounds...humans are very irrational when selecting or electing their leaders...most of the time(99.99%) the decisions to be taken by the leader are obvious and often as in a game of chess the only practical choice that can be made....so the so called leaders have little value to add in any case...except promptly laying claim to the credit for a fortuitous good decision or finding a scapegoat for an accidental bad one.

sanjay9negi@hotmail.com

posted December 31, 2008

No kidding, I think Tim has an excellent point. Most of the time, this type of situation occurs because the person asking for leadership is not himself/herself providing it. A manager tells people what to do, a leader asks people what they need to accomplish what you need them to do. A manager shoves the herd in the general direction of the goal, a leader gets the herd to follow him/her and work together to reach the goal.

posted December 31, 2008

I think the first thing to do is define the problem. Determine which it is- unwilling or unable. They aren't the same and are somewhat mutually exclusive. Offhand, it's probably not unwilling unless it's someone who desires a prestigious title. If that is the case the problem is actually the system. I'd second Tim Brown's point.

posted December 31, 2008

The staff isn't responsible for leadership. That's management's duty.

Sure, there are people who can lead from inside the pack; they naturally gain the respect of their peers, volunteer for projects, and so on. Some eventually take on formal leadership/managerial roles. But some people are staff because they don't want to be managers.

Before you do anything else, I'd suggest having an honest talk with the person(s) you are concerned about. Ask how they feel about taking on leadership roles. They may feel unprepared, in which case some training or a couple of good books might help them step up to the plate. Or it may be they just don't want to take on formal leadership roles, but are happy doing what they do. (One hopes they do it well.)

In which case, I refer to Tim Brown, Juan and Rob, who make good points.

posted December 31, 2008

Building on Karen's points and agreeing with her references...

Everyone is responsible for leadership. The minimum would be to lead your self-improvement and to provide a personal vision on your own service to your customers.

Please consider:

Create expectations of leadership performance for each role on your team, including yourself. Involve the team in this process.
Provide an environment that enables people to reach the expectations.
Conduct reviews of these expectations with the people for whom the expectations apply. Allow these reviews to be 360.
Analyze and adjust as needed.

posted December 31, 2008