Critical Thinking

Leadership, Information, and Communication Research

For this assignment, first review these readings from Module 2:

Generation matters. (2015). Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings, 32(3), 52.
Likierman, A. (2009). Successful leadership—How would you know? Business Strategy Review, 20(1), 44-49.
Trybus, M. A. (2011). Facing the challenge of change: Steps to becoming an effective leader. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 77(3), 33-36.

Next, use the template (link below) to summarize the readings with appropriate in-text citations. Information on how to cite correctly is found in the CSU-Global library under

CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA: In-Text Citations

. You will receive more information on how to paraphrase, summarize, and complete in-text citations in Module 3.

Review the Module 2 Critical Thinking Rubric for full details on how you will be graded on this assignment.

ORG300 Critical Thinking Assignment

Option #2: Leadership, Information, and Communication Research

Instructions: Review the following resources. Write a summary of each, including appropriate in-text citations. Information on how to cite correctly is found in the CSU-Global library under

CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA: In-Text Citations

		Reference	Generation matters. (2015). Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings, 32(3), 52.
		Summary of the article including citations

Reference

Summary of the article including citations

Likierman, A. (2009). Successful leadership—How would you know? Business Strategy Review, 20(1), 44-49.

Reference

Summary of the article including citations

Trybus, M. A. (2011). Facing the challenge of change: Steps to becoming an effective leader. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 77(3), 33-36.

Spring 20n • Models of Leadership 33

Facing the Challenge of
Change: Steps to Becoming
an Effective Leader
By Margaret A. Trybus

T his position paper makes the case that all leaders need to become agents of change. The stepsto becoming a change agent are analyzed, including knowing one’s organization, assessing
one’s leadership skills, gauging people’s reaction to change, learning the process of change, and

making a commitment to change. The author analyzes Fullan’s model of the phases of change

to provide a guideline to create the change process in a variety of settings. Current and future

leaders will become reflective regarding how they can develop the skills necessary to meet the

challenges of change from both an organizational and individual point of view.

The ability to lead change has become a valuable skill as organizations, including schools,
are required to transform in order to meet higher expectations for success. The pace of
change is rapidly increasing, and the conditions to foster change are more demanding. The
learning curve to become a change-agent leader, therefore, is steep and may pose challenges
for individuals who seek to have organizations benefit from change even as they recognize
the barriers that exist for individuals to change. How, then, does a leader prepare to be a
change agent, and what steps might he or she take to become one?

Know the Organization
Leaders know the sense of urgency to change and respond to the pressure to change
(Reeves, 2009). One of the first steps they must take is to assess why the change is
needed and how quickly the leader must produce the change within the organization.
Accountability to federal and state mandates and local district requirements to meet
adequate yearly progress and improve student learning are key factors to consider. Other
forms of organizational change might be localized, such as accepting a new leadership
team when a new superintendent or principal takes charge. Whichever form of change is
anticipated, the organization as a system has to move from what it is to what it will become,
and the leader needs to anticipate how the current reality must be moved to formulate a
new vision.

Senge (1990) introduced the concept of a”mental model” (p. 8), which is an assumption
or a picture that influences how a leader might see the change and envision the steps
necessary to take action to bring it about. “Organizations shift to a new state as a result
of the new interactions and ideas” that are inherent in the change (Fullan, 2004, p. 166).
Accordingly, leaders who want organizations to change must create a vision that is shared
before it is implemented. “Vision refers to a picture of the future with some implicit or

34 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin

explicit commentary on why people should strive to create that future” (Kotter, 1996, p.
68). The vision helps to make the change more coherent, understandable, and valuable to
the organization. It sets the direction of change. Therefore, an important step to becoming
a change-agent leader is to create a vision for change with those within the organization
who will be charged to implement it.

Know Oneself and Self-Assess Leadership Skills
Leaping into or sustaining change also requires introspection as to what leadership
qualities and skills will be necessary to reach the desired outcome. Today’s leaders may
not have positional power or the title of change agent, but they do possess the courage and
passion to lead the change initiative simply because they believe in the need to change and
have the skills to bring it about by working with others. They see change as a necessity
and also an opportunity to experience both personal and organizational growth (Evans,
2010). Accomplishing such growth means being skilled at developing relationships of
trust, communicating the change vision effectively, and empowering others to take action
toward change (Fullan, 2001).

Effective change agents, in addition to being visionary, know how to stimulate people by
modeling risk taking and by providing intellectual and emotional stimulation and support
when followers face the challenges inherent in change. Fullan (2007) called this “leveraging
leadership” (p. 44), which means paying attention to developing leadership in others for
the good of the organization. Change-agent leaders do not succeed by working alone but
rather by building a culture of shared leadership where ownership is distributed—i.e.,
where “everyone has the right, responsibility, and the ability to be a leader” (Lampert, 2002,
p. 38). This belief is critical to bringing about change and works to minimize resistance
to change. Leaders develop skills to facilitate change by working with teams where
collaboration is essential. Administrators, teachers, parents, and students then play critical
roles that determine if the change will be successful (Fullan, 2008; Hall 8C Hord, 2006).

Know How Others React to Change
Because change is complex, a leader must understand resistance to change. Inherent in the
change process is the anticipated ĴMÍ/J back that change provokes. The readiness to change
varies within individuals, even when the organization desperately needs to change. This
means the change-agent leader may have to make compromises to meet the needs of the
organization while still being responsive to the needs of the individual.

When people believe change is imposed upon them and they cannot make
meaning of the change, they will resist it (Evans, 2010; Fullan, 2007). This resistance
causes change-agent leaders to feel overwhelmed because their leadership may be
threatened and their competence challenged. Successful leaders are cognizant of the
inherent fear of change and do not minimize the human factor that must be managed.

Margaret A. Trybus, Ed.D., is the president of Iota Chapter, Lambda State j
(ii..), where she has been a member for 30 years. A past recipient of the I

liEnima Reinhardt International Scholarship and Lambda State scholarships, !
.she has presented at state leadership workshops on the topic of change |

riind- leadership, wliicli she teaches to doctoral and master level students at j
Concordia University Chicago. As a change-agent leader, Margaret strives to j

‘ ehipowcr women educators through DKG by actively recruiting her graduate
students to become future chapter leaders. Margaret.trybusifficuchicago.edu

Spring 2011 • Models of Leadership 35

Change-agent leaders know how to apply pressure with support, while being sensitive to
what appear as /o55e5 rather than gains. Rather than just suggesting what will be changed
and how the change will occur, such leaders must take an approach to answer the why
change question in a way that will help people envision personal gains along with the
organizational ones. This will help people maintain their identity and integrity while in
the change process.

Evans (1996) captured this idea of helping followers when he suggested creating
psychological safety:

The change agent must make clear his caring and support, his commitment to
working with people to take the difficult steps toward new learning. He must
reaffirm connection and help make the change meaningful to people by finding the
familiar in the new and strength amidst the weakness, (p. 58)

Helping people develop coping skills through change will require the leader to be
compassionate even when facing the most resistant colleagues. This means developing
patience, humility, and the belief that each individual is of value and worth in order to
develop a collaborative approach to change.

Learn the Process of Change
Fullan’s (2007) model of the phases of change will help the leader design a process that
makes sense of planning, implementing, and monitoring change. These three phases
require an understanding of the necessary
amount of change, which may be either first or
second order. First-order change may work to
improve the effectiveness of what is already in
existence and may only involve select groups
of individuals. Second-order change is more
systemic in nature and requires large-scale
alterations to organizational structure, norms,
and beliefs (Evans, 1996). Change-agent leaders
are astute at assessing the capacity for first- or
second-order change and may strategize an
approach that determines if the change process is
at the beginning stage or initiation. During Phase
1 initiation, leaders need to determine whether
the change is feasible or desirable and whether
it builds on what may already be in existence
(Fullan, 2007). This is a critical component that
assesses support for the change and the resources
needed to implement the change.

Phase 2 of Fullan’s model is the actual implementation of change, which can last
from 2 to 3 years depending on the clarity of the actions that need to be taken. Often
implementation starts with piloting an initiative and measuring its outcomes. Such field
testing of implementation before going to a larger scale allows the change-agent leader time
to work with implementation teams of willing volunteers. This strategy helps develop the
shared leadership needed for implementation and can produce data (not just beliefs) that
are used to build acceptance for the change.

Phase 3, “called continuation, incorporation, routinization, or institutionalization”

The challenges of

change encourage the

development of a new

kind of leader who

understands that change

is complex and brings

about uncertainty—but

is the cornerstone of growth

and improvement.

36 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin

(Fullan, 2007, p. 65), is where the change either becomes part of the system or is discarded.
To make such a decision, change-agent leaders need to use a combination of closely
monitored data and a normative belief that the change will help the organization improve
over time. The leader must use judgment to determine whether the individuals in the
organization will continue to grow while the change is sustained. At this phase, the leader
needs to articulate professional development, resources, and a reasonable timetable that
builds a critical mass of implementers who are not totally dependent on the change-agent
leader alone.

Making the Commitment
One cannot be a change agent without being a leader. Likewise, a leader without a vision
for change will be ineffective and short-lived. Together, leadership and change are needed
for the future of schools, classrooms, and systems that strive to improve. Being committed
to creating a plan that relies on the strength of an organization and the individuals within
that organization will require the leader to have knowledge and skills related to the change
process. The challenges of change encourage the development of a new kind of leader who
understands that change is complex and brings about uncertainty—but is the cornerstone
of growth and improvement. Facing this challenge and reflecting on the necessary steps to
becoming a change agent will improve the performance of all current and future leaders.

References

Evans, R. (1996). T7)e human side of school change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Evans, R. (2010). Seven secrets of the savvy school leader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, M. (2004). Leading in a culture of change personal action guide and workbook. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, M. (2007). Tbc new meaning of educational change (4* ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (2008). ITje six secrets of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2006). Implementing change (2″” ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Lampert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 37-40.

Reeves, D. (2009). Leading change in your school. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Senge, P. ( 1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

W
as Julius Caesar a successful leader? What
about Ghenghis Khan? Simon Bolivar? Or
Napoleon? Because we tend to think of

these as military leaders, the answers look pretty
straightforward. Each achieved major military
successes. But then Napoleon was ultimately
defeated – does that make him a failure? After all, he
won a lot of battles before Waterloo, and his sweeping
political and legal reforms have been the basis of
French administrative life for nearly 200 years.

Now let’s move to the politicians. How do you feel
about describing Bill Clinton as a successful leader?
George W. Bush? Tony Blair? Vladimir Putin? This is
altogether more difficult ground. Some of you will
have already decided; those of you who have not
made up your minds could argue that it is too early
to say. The historic verdict on Bush and Blair will
probably depend on what happens to Iraq over the
next 20 years. Those better informed about Russia
than I am can make up their own minds about Putin.

Moving next to business territory, with a few
exceptions – say Bill Gates, Herb Kelleher
(Southwest Airlines) and Jack Welch – leaders
generally have to be dead to be considered
successful. No problems with Henry Ford and Alfred
P. Sloan then. But with current CEOs, successful
leadership is work in progress. Judgements are
particularly hazardous in mid-flight – Bear Stearns
and Northern Rock were hailed as run by highly
successful leaders before the credit crunch.

For those who want to check on their own
leadership success, for those who appoint leaders
and for outsiders (including analysts and
competitors) assessing the quality of leadership,
checklists of traits are not enough. Nor are
comparisons with Welch, Gates or even Ghenghis
Khan. What’s needed is to know the problems of
measuring success and how to overcome them.

A number of preliminary steps are necessary to
make sure that measurement is going to be robust.

Preliminary step 1: Agree what we’re measuring
Do you, like Warren Bennis, feel that leadership is
hard to define, but you know it when you see it? The
trouble is that, if you do, there’s a danger of talking
at cross-purposes about what makes leadership
successful.

The danger is illustrated by looking at the huge
variety of ways of defining leadership. Stuart Crainer
identified nine strands in leadership theories: the
Great Man, trait, power and influence, behaviourist,
situational, contingency, transactional, attribution
and transformational. Leading authorities provide a
variety of approaches. My London Business School
colleagues Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones have
emphasized authenticity and skill; Jim Collins
suggests humility is critical. Abraham Zaleznik has
the focus on personality, John Adair on the working
of the team and on meeting the needs of the
individual, James MacGregor Burns on the

→

Boardrooms and business school classrooms are equally preoccupied
with leadership, and success is often assumed to be about profit or
Total Shareholder Return. It’s neither. For leaders wanting to measure
their own success, for those who appoint leaders to know what they
are aiming at and for outsiders assessing the quality of leadership,
Andrew Likierman shows how to do it.

Th
in

ki
ng

Successful
leadership –
how would you know?

transformational qualities of charismatic leaders,
and John Kotter on establishing direction, aligning
people, motivating and inspiring.

So getting an agreed definition is an essential
starting point in measuring success, because it
avoids problems later. But note that this is the
beginning, not the end of the story. Just being
a leader is not the same as being successful,
any more than getting into the driving seat makes
one a good driver.

Preliminary step 2: Focus on outcomes, not inputs
Because much of the literature on leadership
focuses on the attributes or qualities a person needs

to become a successful leader, it’s usually assumed
that exhibiting those qualities or attributes will be
translated into success.

But success can’t be about having skills
(strategic, operating etc.) or personal qualities
(drive, inspirational, openness etc.). A leader can
tick off all the lists and still not succeed, since
skills and personal qualities may be necessary but
not sufficient conditions of success. Success is
about results, not characteristics. It’s no use
defining yourself as a successful leader because
you have charisma if the shareholders see you
leading charismatically in the wrong direction.
The high turnover of CEOs is testimony to how
much success is seen as being about results, not
style or characteristics. Bob Ayling, CEO of British
Airways, and Clive Thompson, CEO of Rentokil,
were two high-profile British CEOs previously held
up as model managers but who were ousted
because they failed to deliver. That’s true even of
founders, as with Anita and Gordon Roddick at
Body Shop.

Preliminary step 3: Make sure the data is as robust
as possible It’s one of the big practical issues of
performance measurement: just how robust is the
data being used? Say you wanted to compare
yourself as a leader to others. The others –
especially competitors – might not be ready to
reveal as much as you’d like, particularly plans
that they made that didn’t come off. So it could
be very difficult to get as much data for others as
you have for yourself. Realism is necessary here
and a judgement will have to be made on the
information available.

Leaders are not always the best judges of their
own success. Many are better at rationalizing their
mistakes than admitting to failure, which is why
leaders’ judgements about themselves are usually
taken with a pinch of salt.

For outsiders, there’s another, more sensitive
aspect to the integrity of the data. As Stalin cynically
noted, “It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts
the votes.” Leaders generally have a big influence
on the way data is collected and presented, not just
because the PR function reports to them, but
because there’s an understandable hesitancy to
question what a leader is saying, especially an
apparently successful one. Only at a time of crisis

does the issue of whether what’s being reported is
right come under serious scrutiny, as with Jeff
Skilling at Enron or the dominant Tanzi family at
Parmalat. Any claims of success that can’t be
independently verified need to be treated with
caution, not taken at face value.

Having sorted out the preliminary steps above,
it’s much easier to tackle the challenges of
measuring.

Step 1: Set up the framework.
Agree objectives Once there’s a definition of
leadership, more precise objectives need to be
sorted out. Is the job to transform the organization
or to make one that is already doing pretty well
operate leaner, meaner and faster? In the jargon,
is it transformational or transactional? Is it about
team building or bringing on future leaders?
Is it about acquisitions, consolidation or just
ensuring survival?

In larger organizations, setting objectives should
be part of the formal annual appraisal process. In
smaller ones, the process may be less formal, but
it’s still important to make them clear and, if
possible, put them in writing. For those who are
looking to appoint leaders to run an organization,
defining objectives is crucial in making informed
choices about the kind of person they want.

But the outcomes of a transactional leader, such
as greater efficiency of operations, better morale or
a better talent management programme, are more
difficult to track, particularly for those outside the
organization, than those of transformational leaders
pursuing an acquisition or diversification strategy.
For example, it’s easy to identify the leadership

→

A successful leader is successful in comparative, not
absolute, terms and the starting point has to be against
objectives.

Th
in

ki
ng

impact of Lakashmi Mittal or Rupert Murdoch. It’s
not too difficult to identify the leadership success of
Anders Moberg in taking over from Cees van der
Hoeven to clean up the Dutch supermarket giant
Ahold or Dieter Zetchke coming in at Daimler after
Jurgen Schremmp to get the company back on track
after the failure of the Chrysler merger.

More problematic is the assessment of the
leadership of the “hidden champions” – world-class
German Mittelstand (medium-sized) companies
identified by Hermann Simon. (See related article
on page 38.) Their leaders are rarely well known,
not only because the companies are unquoted, but
also because they are often led by transactional
leaders, whose steady efforts to maintain the
companies are less public than those of CEOs
whose changes are more easily measurable. So
objectives for transactional leaders need to be
framed in terms of identifiable sub-tasks to trace
the leadership element in meeting objectives.

Find the right comparisons A successful leader is
successful in comparative, not absolute terms, and
the starting point has to be against objectives.
These will have to be set out beforehand (making
them up afterwards is definitely not acceptable),
may need to be changed over time to respond to
changing circumstances and do not all need to be
fulfilled. But the degree to which a leader meets his

or her stated objectives will be a key factor in
judging success. John Browne’s ambition to take BP
into the league of world oil majors was realized
through a series of huge takeovers. It was one of the
reasons why he was judged to be such a successful
leader in the early years of the 21st century. On the
other hand, failure to achieve his objectives is just
one of the grounds on which Hitler can be judged to
be an unsuccessful leader.

But meeting objectives is not enough, any more
than is defining leadership. The level at which
objectives are set is a function of many factors, one
of which is often a desire to meet them by aiming
low, so comparisons also have to be against a
relevant peer group. The share price may be
tanking, but if it’s tanking less than the others
(some of whom are going bust), this may well be a
signal of successful leadership. Similarly if the

share price is going up significantly less fast than
competitors, it may be that poor leadership is seen
as a factor by the markets.

Assess handling of opportunities As well as
comparisons with objectives and a relevant peer
group, a third comparison is with what might have
been, including whether possible opportunities have
been taken or foregone. One of the things that
differentiates a good manager from a good leader is
that the former is more focused on existing plans
and objectives, the latter on additional opportunities
as well as current plans. These opportunities are not
easy to measure. The counterfactual (what might
have been) and opportunities missed may take a
long time to become clear. Arnold Weinstock was
lauded as a great industrial leader to the end of his
tenure as CEO of (the British) General Electric
Company. But with the benefit of hindsight, it is
clear that in his last years he failed to take crucial
opportunities.

Grasping opportunities cannot be on the basis of
a plan, so an internal comparison isn’t relevant.
What’s needed is a basis of comparison with others
in the sector or the industry, using judgement to see
how others have taken the opportunities offered or
not taken up. One example is Jorma Ollila, who led
Nokia from being a local Finnish company to one
that took on the long-established competition,

including such industry giants as Ericcson and
Motorola. Another is Ingvar Kamprad, the founder of
the retailing phenomenon that is IKEA.

Step 2: Use judgement to interpret.
Comparisons with stated objectives, a relevant peer
group and opportunities are rarely straightforward.
The world’s major banks or utilities, for example,
have very different regulatory environments. They,
engineering and pharmaceutical giants operate in
many different kinds of markets and provide a
different mix of products. So deciding who is
a successful leader in banking, or any other
industry, will always be a matter of judgement.
This is one reason why those arguments about
who is the best CEO (or general, prime minister
or president) of the 20th century are so
unsatisfactory.

→

Successful leadership is about a successful outcome
against stated objectives combined with comparisons
against a relevant peer group and the way in which
opportunities are handled.

Th
in
ki
ng

Another key element in interpretation is the
effect of lags. When someone who is seen as a
successful leader steps down, it is usually to the
accompaniment of toasts to their achievements and
statements of undying conviction that they can
never be replaced. Within weeks, however, doubts
often set in and questions are raised. Was that
acquisition really so successful? Did we really need
to go into that market? In part, this is about
adjustment to the new regime; but the more
fundamental questions usually relate to the lagged
effects of actions taken during, or even before, the
leader’s years in office.

The effects of lags are evident in recent credit
crunch victims, whose problems can be seen to be
rooted in decisions about exposure to financial
instruments taken many years before, as with AIG’s
decision to hire a group of derivatives specialists
from Drexel Burnham Lambert. Conclusions are all
very well in retrospect, but judgement is necessary
on the effect of such lags before the consequences
become clear. Is an expensive hedge on oil prices to
the end of 2009 at $50 a stroke of genius or a
costly error?

Few leaders escape the effects of lags unscathed,
even the managerially saintly Jack Welch. He, rather
than his successor Jeff Immelt, has increasingly
been criticized for the poor performance of the GE
share price since he left. The company, it has been
argued, should have been left in a better position to
continue to grow. The effect of lags is probably the
toughest of all the challenges in measuring the
success of someone currently leading an
organization. This is why rushing to judgement on
today’s CEOs is such a hazardous business and
recognizing this as a problem is essential in
measuring success.

Finally, care is needed to separate having the
good fortune to be in the right place at the right
time from successful leadership, just as we need to
separate failure from being in the wrong place at
the wrong time. “A rising tide lifts all boats” – as
the aphorism goes. Successful leaders are not
linked automatically to profits, or indeed to Total
Shareholder Return, cash generation or economic
profit. Successful leaders in the property industry

need to lead through the regular cyclical downturns
in the industry, not just when all property prices are
rising. The trouble is that a halo effect surrounds
company success and judgement is needed to make
sure that it is separated from leadership.

Step 3: As far as possible, reconcile the
needs of different stakeholders.
You probably wouldn’t describe someone as a
successful leader if they’d just fired you. Or join in
acclaiming the CEO as a great leader if you knew
that increases in profits were being gained by
exploiting child labour in Bangladesh. There’s not
necessarily going to be unanimity about what
successful leadership means to every stakeholder,
and, even if the objectives are set out clearly,
success won’t mean the same to everyone. Your
extra profit could be my redundancy. Or it could be
everyone else’s excessive carbon footprint.

So it’s possible that the views of different
stakeholders won’t be reconcilable, any more than
the views of some trades union leaders or some
environmental campaigners are reconcilable with
the actions of some managements. If that’s so, the
measurement of success has to recognize a
multiplicity of views. This also applies to outside
comment. In public opinion polls, Sir Richard
Branson is regarded as a highly successful business
leader, but readers of Tom Bower’s biography of
Branson are treated to a scathing analysis of the
man and his – according to Bower – lack of
achievement. As an outside comment, the book can
be taken as fiercely unbiased and independent or as
an outrageously partial hatchet job. But unless
Virgin goes bust, it’s unlikely there will be a single
view of his success.

Successful leadership
Successful leadership isn’t what leaders do or who
they are. It isn’t just what the organizations they
lead manage to achieve, which may be down to very
many other factors. Successful leadership is about a
successful outcome against stated objectives
combined with comparisons against a relevant peer
group and the way in which opportunities are
handled.

→

Successful

Leadership

Effective Leadership

What they achieve

Leadership

What people do
or who they are

=
Comparison to stated objectives

+
Comparison to relevant peers

+
Handling of opportunities

Th
in
ki
ng

It’s also important to remember that leadership is
not just about those at the top. The examples given in
this article are mainly well-known CEOs to illustrate
the points. But it’s important to measure leadership
at any level. For those who want to measure their
own success as leader, the essentials follow:

● Make sure you set out your objectives (in terms of
outcomes, not inputs) so that others know what
they are, particularly those who will be assessing
your performance.

● Find relevant comparators.

● Have an awareness of how opportunities are
handled – both those taken and those missed.

● In interpreting the information, recognize the
measurement problems and take steps to mitigate
them. If you are a transactional leader, make sure
you have definable objectives. If lags are a
problem, establish milestones.

● Recognize that the result is a matter of
judgement; if you don’t trust your own, ask
someone independent to do it for you.

For those who want to measure leadership in others
or choose someone for their leadership qualities,
the same essential elements are required. The
element of judgement for those outside the
organization will obviously be far greater, since
the objectives and information on handling
opportunities (including all those bad deals turned
down) will probably not be known. By contrast,
for someone inside the organization measuring the
leadership of a colleague (as when a chairman is
assessing the CEO’s performance), the relevant
comparators and the basis for making judgements
should be agreed.

In measuring your own leadership or that of
colleagues, it’s not really the conclusions that matter
as much as the benefit of having to define objectives,
find comparators and be aware of the importance of
handling of opportunities. It’s also about finding
that gold mine, the candid friend. For outsiders, it’s
about turning a vague impression into an informed
judgement. Successful leadership is an elusive
quality. It’s worth a better class of measurement. ■

Resources
John Adair, The Best of Adair on Leadership and
Management, Thorogood, 2008.

Warren Bennis and Robert J. Thomas, Leading for a
Lifetime, Harvard Business School Press, 2007.

Tom Bower, Branson, HarperPerennial, 2008.

James MacGregor Burns, Leadership,
HarperPerennial, 1982.

Jim Collins, Good to Great, Random House, 2001.

Stuart Crainer, Key Management Ideas: Thinkers
that Changed the Management World, FT/Prentice
Hall, 1998.

Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones, Why Should Anyone Be
Led by You? Harvard Business School Press, 2006.

John P. Kotter, John P. Kotter on What Leaders
Really Do, Harvard Business School Press, 1999.

Hermann Simon, Hidden Champions: Lessons from
500 of the World’s Best Unknown Companies,
Leads Press, 2008.

John Van Maurik, Writers on Leadership, Penguin,
2001.

Abraham Zaleznik, The Managerial Mystique,
HarperCollins, 1990.

Sir Andrew Likierman (alikierman@london.edu) is Dean and Professor of Management Practice at
London Business School. His non-executive roles include chairman of an AIM-listed technology
incubator and director of Barclays plc and the Bank of England.

Th
in
ki
ng

London Business School
Regent’s Park
London NW1 4SA
United Kingdom
Tel +44 (0)20 7000 7000
Fax +44 (0)20 7000 7001
www.london.edu
A Graduate School of the University of London

Managing Employee Assets

G eneration matters
Surprisingly (to me), many of the
people I spoke with indicated there
are real generational differences
between the skills, values, work
ethics, and needs of workers born
in different eras. While using
stereotypes and generalizations
can be very dangerous, some of
the following may help you deal
with each generation in your w ork
force. Ignoring the trends repre
sented by generations of workers
who grew up in differing environ
ments can be a mistake. The time
periods and attributes are just
approximate guides, but some gen
eralizations can be informative.

TRADITIONALISTS

Born about 1927 to 1945
These workers were influenced by
the Great Depression and directly
impacted by World War II.

Essentially all of them are out of
the workforce by now. They are
typically your current employee’s
parents, grandparents, or older, but
they may have left a lasting imprint
on many of the older firms and
some of their typical characteris
tics are worth knowing.

They value hard w ork and thrift,
are loyal employees and many
have worked for a single firm over
their entire career. They are team
players and prefer face-to-face
communications. For Traditionalists,
telephones were the high tech of
their formative years. They may be
slow to adapt to, or are uncomfort
able with, technology. Tweeting,
SMS, IM and blogs w ill mean little
or nothing to them.

Characteristics/interests:
Discipline, conformity, respect

for authority
Communication: Face-to-face,

written memos
Fiscal Philosophy: Save, avoid

credit, pay cash

5E JPCL March 2015 /

B A B Y BOOMERS

Born about 1946 to 1964
These w orkers grew up in an
America that was booming; infra
structure in the form of new fre e
ways, near universal e le ctrifica
tion, telephone service, television
and the space program. These
w orkers remember the protests
against the Vietnam W ar and
Nixon’s resignation. At this stage
in th e ir career, they probably
expect you to be confident in their
abilities, with a hands-off
approach. Listening to their con
cerns and comments seriously,
and a bit of a bonus or personal
“thank you” when things go well,
are powerful motivators.

Baby Boomers are currently
senior and mid-level managers in
most firms. They tend to live for
their jobs and w ill jump in w hen
ever and w herever needed.
Phones and email are their pre
ferred form of communication.
They have seen big changes over
their careers and w ere strong
idealists in their youth. They may
be somewhat cynical or disillu
sioned by now that they haven’t
changed the world. “Show me the
money” and “Give me the title
and the authority” describe the
attitudes of many. They tend to be
competitive and expect bosses to
let them do their jobs w ith a mini
mum of interference. They know
their place in the chain of com
mand and still aspire to move up.

Characteristics/interests:
Involvement, dedication to the

job, work hard/play hard
Communication: Meetings, email,

phone
Fiscal Philosophy: Buy what you

want, charge it please

paintsquare■com

GENERATION X

Born about 1965 to 1980
(although some make a distinction

of 1978 to 1982 as the
“MTV Generation”)

“Change” is probably the single
word that best describes the Gen
Xer’s philosophy. If we think we live
in turbulent times, consider that this
generation grew up with man land
ing on the moon, the end of the Cold
War and the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Gen Xers lived through the 1973 oil
crisis, 1979 Iran Hostage situation
and energy crisis, stagflation (stag
nation and inflation), savings and
loan failures, AIDS and the
Challenger explosion; not to mention
the rise of personal computers,
videogames and the dot-com bub
ble. The U.S. was mostly at peace
during their formative years and
they have little use for politics and
government leaders. Gen Xers tend
to be quick studies, but are impa
tient with rigid guidelines, produc
tion quotas and authority in general.

They tend not to w ant to be in
positions of authority. They are
ambitious and hard working but
mostly as individuals and entrepre
neurs. Gen Xers value diversity, cre
ativity and personal challenge. They
are more likely to prioritize home
and family life. Being constantly on
the road is not attractive. Gen Xers
generally want the freedom to figure
out their own methods rather than
being mentored and are very willing
to change employers if they think it
makes sense for them. They have no
patience with endless meetings and
are attached to their cell phones
(not just for calls, but for emails and
texts). They w ant to be able to leave
the job at the office or worksite
when they go home. They are the
first generation who tends to earn
less (in constant dollars) than their
parents.

Characteristics/interests: Flexibility,
skepticism, independence

Communication: Immediate and
direct, email, cellphone, text

Fiscal Philosophy:
Cautious and
conservative

GENERATION Y

OR MILLENNIALS

Bom about 1980 to the early 2000s
Gen Y is fully immersed in technolo
gy. It may be hard to peel them
away from Facebook on their
iPhones. If you w ant to get their
attention, a text may be more effec
tive than talking to them directly.
This generation has never known a
world w ithout ubiquitous comput
ing, satellite TV and internet. Social
status is critically important. Work
tends not to be their highest priori
ty, their diverse interests, short
attention span and focus on social
ization make building them into your
team tougher. Their job is not their
identity or prime focus. They work
to live, rather than live to work. On
the other hand, they may be much
more receptive to the attention
and mentoring of management.
Knowing that the owner, or a simi
lar person of high status, is paying
attention to and investing in them
will increase their own status and
can be very effective. Most
Millennials know they are just start
ing their careers and don’t have an
“I already know it all” mentality, but
they see w ork as an entitlement,
rather than the other way around,
and are constantly evaluating
w hether their current employment
provides w hat they w ant — the
proper environment, career
enhancement, and satisfaction. If
not, they’ll be looking to move on.

Characteristics/interests:
Social interaction, technological
“early adopters,” confidence
Communication: Texts, tweets,

Facebook, FaceTime, Instagram
Fiscal Philosophy: Make money to

spend it

Copyright of Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings is the property of Technology
Publishing Network and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Critical Thinking ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Still stressed with your coursework?

Get quality coursework help from an expert!

Order now