Isn't the demand for a diagnostic the sort of thing we need to resist? I appreciate the provocative questions in it but to me it felt overwhelming and not empowering.
Why do you think we should resist diagnosis, Johnnie? What’s a better alternative?
I’d also argue that empowering somebody who isn’t ready to lead in the context you need them to lead in is potentially pretty problematic, especially if you don’t offer them a navigation aid.
Good questions, I'd like to unpack this more. I felt a bit guilty after leaving my earlier comment as it was snarky, I apologise for this. And I am genuinely interested in teasing this out if that's helpful at all.
First, I like what i would call your diagnos*is* of the problems leaders face. They are overwhelmed, something i find again and again in my conversations with them. And what I often hear is that the last thing they want is another grid, matrix, model or diagnostic*ic* tool.
It seems to me that is part of the interesting creative tension that you articulate so well.
So when they ask for a diagnostic, I would want to ask for more information about what they mean, and what they need before defaulting to what could easily feel like the umpteenth self-completion questionnaire.
I do see that empowering leaders in this environment is highly problematic but giving them another tool might be doing more of what's already not working.
OFC I know this is partly me defaulting to my own personal preferences. In my own life, whenever I have felt anxious and distressed, being offered an impersonal questionnaire is the last thing I need.
A good friend like to say that some questions need to be lived in before they are answered. Are we in danger of rushing to categorise and solve rather than taking time to let the key insight that Maya is reaching to settle in, and for them to find others who are struggling too?
The diagnosis is merely a first step. This one is extremely generic. It works far better when it’s contextual, i.e. generated after a discussion with the leader being diagnosed, and awareness of the organisational context they are operating in. It aims to do two things.
1: explore where the leader’s complexity of thinking is unable to contain the complexity of the environment - the practice quadrants
2: explore how that’s showing up in the self - the thresholds
Together, they pinpoint sources of the overwhelm and can identify developmental practices, rituals and lenses to move through it and lead well. Eventually, they develop an orienting sensibility (far better term than mindset).
Timing. I see McKinsey have now rediscovered humans. I suspect cultural inertia makes their prescription unswallowable, although it will not stop them from writing expensive descriptions ;-) https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-inside-out-leadership-journey-how-personal-growth-creates-the-path-to-success#/
Isn't the demand for a diagnostic the sort of thing we need to resist? I appreciate the provocative questions in it but to me it felt overwhelming and not empowering.
Why do you think we should resist diagnosis, Johnnie? What’s a better alternative?
I’d also argue that empowering somebody who isn’t ready to lead in the context you need them to lead in is potentially pretty problematic, especially if you don’t offer them a navigation aid.
Good questions, I'd like to unpack this more. I felt a bit guilty after leaving my earlier comment as it was snarky, I apologise for this. And I am genuinely interested in teasing this out if that's helpful at all.
First, I like what i would call your diagnos*is* of the problems leaders face. They are overwhelmed, something i find again and again in my conversations with them. And what I often hear is that the last thing they want is another grid, matrix, model or diagnostic*ic* tool.
It seems to me that is part of the interesting creative tension that you articulate so well.
So when they ask for a diagnostic, I would want to ask for more information about what they mean, and what they need before defaulting to what could easily feel like the umpteenth self-completion questionnaire.
I do see that empowering leaders in this environment is highly problematic but giving them another tool might be doing more of what's already not working.
OFC I know this is partly me defaulting to my own personal preferences. In my own life, whenever I have felt anxious and distressed, being offered an impersonal questionnaire is the last thing I need.
A good friend like to say that some questions need to be lived in before they are answered. Are we in danger of rushing to categorise and solve rather than taking time to let the key insight that Maya is reaching to settle in, and for them to find others who are struggling too?
Hope that is more helpful tham my first effort!
The diagnosis is merely a first step. This one is extremely generic. It works far better when it’s contextual, i.e. generated after a discussion with the leader being diagnosed, and awareness of the organisational context they are operating in. It aims to do two things.
1: explore where the leader’s complexity of thinking is unable to contain the complexity of the environment - the practice quadrants
2: explore how that’s showing up in the self - the thresholds
Together, they pinpoint sources of the overwhelm and can identify developmental practices, rituals and lenses to move through it and lead well. Eventually, they develop an orienting sensibility (far better term than mindset).