Sylvania No Comments

August 2019

Featured

Question of the Month:  In a growing and living organisation, how do you ensure that Legitimate Leadership is maintained?
Rolling out Legitimate Leadership in an organisation usually begins with a two-day introduction followed by a set of application modules, to the leadership …
Vignette Case Study: It Is Not About Behaviour, It Is About Intent
Whether trust is granted to a manager, or withheld, by employees is not a function of behaviour but of the manager’s intent …
Article: What Managers Who Care Actually Do
Care is what one person does for another. In the context of legitimate relationships of power at work, it is what managers do for those …
Video: Most Leaders Don’t Even Know The Game They Are In
Leaders are so often so concerned about their status or their position in the organization that they actually forget their real job …

E-mail [email protected] for more information

Question of the Month 
By Leonie van Tonder 
Question: In a growing and living organisation, how do you ensure that Legitimate Leadership is maintained?
Answer: Rolling out Legitimate Leadership in an organisation usually begins with a two-day introduction followed by a set of application modules, to the leadership group. In bigger organisations roll-out is normally done in layers of reporting structures, going downwards. This may take 18 months to two years.
In a growing and living organisation, a number of resignations and appointments will happen during this time. To create a positive continuation of roll-out and application of the Legitimate Leadership Model, you need all on board.
The challenge is to keep new staff in the loop of the Legitimate Leadership Model and to replace the people lost and roles they played Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail [email protected]

VIGNETTE CASE STUDY: IT IS NOT ABOUT BEHAVIOUR, IT IS ABOUT INTENT
By Josh Hayman, associate, Legitimate Leadership.
Whether trust is granted to a manager, or withheld, by employees is not a function of behaviour but of the manager’s intent. In other words, “what” managers do to their people in terms of behaviour is not nearly as important as “why” they do it.
The above is central to the Legitimate Leadership Model.
Conceptually, it sounds sensible. Practically, there is a counter argument to this: surely there is a level of “hard behaviour” (think disrespectful language / shouting / verbally abusive behaviour) that would never be tolerated regardless of the intent behind it?
Intent is all well and good, but if you don’t talk to people respectfully, intent doesn’t matter … right? In my early consulting work, I subscribed to this argument.
But in 2013 I learned the truth of the Legitimate Leadership proposition in the tough environs of the South African platinum mining industry.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: WHAT MANAGERS WHO CARE ACTUALLY DO
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Care is what one person does for another. In the context of legitimate relationships of power at work, it is what managers do for those in their charge. To Care for someone essentially means to have their best interests at heart. It is about serving the needs of the other person before one’s own.
Good parents instinctively put the child’s interests first because they care unconditionally. Good managers similarly put their employees’ interests first.
For most managers, unlike parents however, this is not an instinctive choice. Rather, it is a deliberate choice that they make repeatedly over time. Care is something, in other words, which managers foster over the course of the reporting relationship they have with those in their charge.
Care moreover is definitely not a “soft and fluffy thing”. Care in the heart is evidenced in both “soft” and “hard” behaviours.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: MOST LEADERS DON’T EVEN KNOW THE GAME THEY ARE IN
By Simon Sinek, American author on leadership and motivational speaker.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE OF LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Leaders should be judged on the calibre of their people, not business results, because their job is not to produce results but to cultivate people. As Simon Sinek says, the real job of a leader is to take care of (and grow, according to Legitimate Leadership) those in his/her charge. Not all people want to lead but those who do can absolutely learn the behaviours and leadership practices which are aligned to the care and the growth role. From our experience it typically takes 12-18 months for leaders to develop competence and confidence in leading others. This investment in time and money is well worth it. Companies do not put people in charge of expensive technology without training them. So why put people in charge of other people’s lives without preparing them to succeed at doing so?
OUR EXCERPT FROM THIS VIDEO: There are two things that great leaders need to have: empathy and perspective. These things are very often forgotten.
Leaders are so often so concerned about their status or their position in the organization that they actually forget their real job.
The real job of a leader is not about being in charge, it’s about taking care of those in our charge.
I don’t think people realize this and I don’t think people train for this.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

Sylvania No Comments

July 2019

Featured

Question of the Month: How much time will caring for and growing my people demand of me?
Caring for and growing people does not cost money, but it does require a considerable amount of time. Caring and growing people cannot be …
Vignette Case Study: Three Things I Learned When I Agreed Mid-Year Deliverables With My Team
In the Legitimate Leadership business, every 120 days we go through a process designed to generate clarity, focus, alignment, and growth …
Article: The Role Of The Leader When It Comes To Pay
As a generalisation, people in the corporate world seem to find it difficult to admit to being “happy” with their pay. A classic comment …
Video: Why Employees Are Disengaged – And Learning By Talking About How To Do Things Wrong
Polls consistently show that about two-thirds of us are disengaged at work. But about 20% of us are actively disengaged which means we hate what we do …

E-mail [email protected] for more information

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: How much time will caring for and growing my people demand of me?
Answer:  Caring for and growing people does not cost money, but it does require a considerable amount of time. Caring and growing people cannot be done by email because it is, by definition, a face-to-face activity.
Care and growth gets done, as opposed to talked about, in three contexts: one-on-one discussions, team meetings, and in the ‘field’ where direct reports are getting the work done.
The starting point therefore is for leaders to spend sufficient time with their people. This often requires leaders to radically change how they are spending their time and what they are giving their attention to.
Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail [email protected]

VIGNETTE CASE STUDY: THREE THINGS I LEARNED WHEN I AGREED MID-YEAR DELIVERABLES WITH MY TEAM
By Ian Munro, director, Legitimate Leadership.
In the Legitimate Leadership business, every 120 days we go through a process designed to generate clarity, focus, alignment, and growth for our people. We call this process clarifying contribution and we believe it has clear benefits for our team members (specifically, the aforementioned clarity, focus, alignment and growth).
It has obvious benefits for our organisation as well, especially as each step in the process must be aligned with the organisation’s goals and strategy. What is perhaps less obvious is how valuable this process has been for me. Every 120 days I learn something.
In the most recent cycle – mid-year 2019 – I learned three things.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: THE ROLE OF THE LEADER WHEN IT COMES TO PAY
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
As a generalisation, people in the corporate world seem to find it difficult to admit to being “happy” with their pay. A classic comment which illustrates this point came from an individual who said “I am not unhappy with my pay, at the moment”. The implication being that at any moment now he would regress from “not unhappy” to “unhappy” almost as a default position.
Given the above, we at Legitimate Leadership have struggled with the wording in our Leadership Profiles pertaining to satisfaction with pay. We have settled with the proposition “My current level of remuneration positively acknowledges my contribution”, to which there are the following responses: Strongly Agree/Agree/Don’t Know/Disagree/Strongly Disagree.
The combined responses are reflected on a 21 point scale from +10 (everyone strongly agrees with the statement) to -10 (everyone strongly disagrees that their current level of remuneration positively acknowledges their contribution).
What we have found is that in any group of leaders the scores on this item very considerably. Why, one wonders, would this be the case if all respondents are subject to the same reward system?
One possible explanation is that in some areas in the company people are being paid fairly and in others they are not. If this is the case, leadership legitimacy requires that the inequities are addressed. It is only right that this is so.
My belief, however, is that in most instances, the variation in score reflects not so much the actual situation with respect to pay, but the individual leader.
Weak leaders are themselves unhappy with their pay and see themselves as fellow victims of the system. Their discontent is picked up and then shared by their people. The dissatisfaction at the top is then amplified down the hierarchy such that the negative score at the top becomes a negative score to the power of 10 lower down in the organisation.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: WHY EMPLOYEES ARE DISENGAGED – AND LEARNING BY TALKING ABOUT HOW TO DO THINGS WRONG
By Jeff Havens, an American keynote speaker and corporate trainer.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE OF LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: We believe that people only go above and beyond and are truly engaged when: they are given a meaningful purpose or reason for going the extra mile; they report to a person who cares and grows them; and they are passionate about the work that they do. All three are leadership issues and need to be addressed. Successful leadership is about widening the leadership practices aligned to the care and growth criteria (a relationship issue) and leading change (realising a vision).
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: This is about employee engagement or the relative lack of it.
Polls consistently show that about two-thirds of us are disengaged at work. But about 20% of us are actively disengaged which means we hate what we do and that 20% costs (the US) over half a trillion dollars a year in lost productivity.
Now interestingly polls also show that most of us are satisfied with our jobs.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

Sylvania No Comments

June 2019

Featured

Question of the Month: What are the main determinants for a successful Legitimate Leadership implementation?
A Legitimate Leadership intervention is applicable in any organisation (no matter what its business or where it is located) …
Legitimate Leadership Europe Launched
Legitimate Leadership has grown exponentially internationally in the past five years, particularly in Britain and Europe …
Case Study: Fuelling Performance In Fashion Retail Through Legitimate Leadership
Fashion retail is a notoriously demanding industry as more and more brands compete for an ever-shrinking consumer purse …
Video: The Anti-Ceo Playbook
Hamdi Ulukaya has understood and implemented both care and growth at Chobani. CARE is clearly evidenced by his appreciation …

E-mail [email protected] for more information

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: What are the main determinants for a successful Legitimate Leadership implementation?
Answer:  A Legitimate Leadership intervention is applicable in any organisation (no matter what its business or where it is located) where employee contribution makes a difference to the excellence in the organisation. Experience over the past two decades indicates that factors determine its success are: ownership by line management; positioning as an integral part of an organisation’s transformation agenda; initial and ongoing assessment; integration with organisational priorities; and accountability or consequence … Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail [email protected]

EVENT: LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP EUROPE LAUNCHED
By Teigue Payne, Legitimate Leadership.
Legitimate Leadership has grown exponentially internationally in the past five years, particularly in Britain and Europe.
On Friday 21 June, Legitimate Leadership Europe was launched at a half-day event in Belgium. 35 senior executives in a diversity of companies, both European and global, were introduced to the principles and practices of Legitimate Leadership in a highly interactive session.
The event was hosted by Legitimate Leadership colleagues Hilde Lemmens and Carina Vignigni who have an impressive track record in enabling organisational transformation in their clients across a diverse range of companies and industries.
Wendy Lambourne, founder and director of Legitimate Leadership, provided insights into this unique leadership perspective and its application over 25 years in diverse contexts in 27 countries and five continents.
Jean–Pierre Filippini, managing director of Carglass Germany, shared his company’s experiences with implementing the Legitimate Leadership model over the past three years – and what Carglass Germany has achieved as a result, both in leadership and organisational performance. He said (our translation from Flemish): “It is the first sustainable leadership training that I have come across. It provides a simple and clear framework and results – not only for better leadership but also for heightened accountability in the organisation. Our results have also been positively influenced by it.”
Feedback from attendees was that this was truly inspiring. Most expressed interest in learning more, and many have signed up to attend a 2-Day Introductory Workshop near Genk, Belgium, in September.

CASE STUDY: FUELLING PERFORMANCE IN FASHION RETAIL THROUGH LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Fashion retail is a notoriously demanding industry as more and more brands compete for an ever-shrinking consumer purse. Converting ‘window shoppers’ into customers who fill their baskets rather than buy a single item, and come back again and again, is what it is all about.
Two well-known South African fashion brands embraced the Legitimate Leadership principles and practices to effect a step-change in the calibre of their leaders at three levels in their operations. Their focus on enabling those in the front line in their stores countrywide has impacted positively, not only on turnover but on all of their performance indicators. The intervention showed conclusively that you don’t have to trade off between people and results. You can have both.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: THE ANTI-CEO PLAYBOOK
By Hamdi Ulukaya, a Turkish-Kurdish businessman, entrepreneur, investor, and philanthropist, based in the United States. Ulukaya is the owner, founder, chairman, and CEO of Chobani, the top-selling strained yogurt brand in the US.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY IAN MUNRO OF LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Legitimacy in leadership is enabled by two simple criteria: CARE (a genuine concern for the human being behind the human resource) and GROWTH (enabling the very best in people).
Hamdi Ulukaya has understood and implemented both care and growth at Chobani. CARE is clearly evidenced by his appreciation of the 55 employees who were going to lose their livelihoods, and how he felt for them – complete strangers at the time. For evidence of his belief in “the very best in people”, consider his complete confidence that the same people who saw the factory fail around them, given the opportunity to give their best, could make it not only succeed, but thrive.
Hamdi Ulukaya also shares Legitimate Leadership’s belief that companies do not exist to serve shareholders, but rather have a primary duty to serve their customers. Customers may not always be right, but they do come first. Without them, there is no business.
Which leaves us with a question: how can one person, even one as capable and visionary as Hamdi Ulukaya, personally serve enough customers for his business to become the top-selling strained yoghurt brand in the US?
The answer: one person can’t. But a great team can. And great leaders understand that the greatest service they can do for customers is to build a great team. One where every member is held in the highest regard by both the leader and other team members, one where only the best is imagined and expected, and one where anything less isn’t an option.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: The new anti-CEO playbook is about gratitude. Today’s business book says: business exists to maximize profit for the shareholders. I think that’s the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard in my life. In reality, business should take care of their employees first.
The new way of business is communities. Go search for communities that you can be part of. Ask for permission and be with them, open the walls and succeed together.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

Sylvania No Comments

May 2019

Featured

Question of the Month: Does Legitimate Leadership say we need to move from being a results-driven business to being a people-driven business?”
Many people think that Legitimate Leadership says that in order to succeed a business needs to move from being results-driven to being people-driven …
Your Diary Never Lies
More than perhaps at any other time, a leader’s sincerity is put to the test …
The Hard Data On Being On Being A Nice Boss
A leading business expert is warning that male narcissists perform well in job interviews but make disastrous leaders …

E-mail [email protected] for more information

Question of the Month 
By Ian Munro, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: Does Legitimate Leadership say we need to move from being a results-driven business to being a people-driven business?”
Answer:  Many people think that Legitimate Leadership says that in order to succeed a business needs to move from being results-driven to being people-driven.
But we do not say this. Sustained success isn’t about committing to results or to people; it’s about committing to excellence.
The standard defence of a single-minded focus on results is, “We aren’t here to make friends. This is business. We’re here to deliver. And delivering means getting results.”
All of this seems true, but it doesn’t work because it doesn’t deliver excellence and value-add to the customer, and therefore is not sustainable … Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail [email protected] 

ARTICLE: YOUR DIARY NEVER LIES
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Caring for and growing people does not cost money, but it does require time – in fact, a considerable amount of time. Further to this, caring and growing people cannot meaningfully be done by email because it is, by definition, a face to face activity.
More specifically care and growth gets done, as opposed to talked about, in three contexts: one-on-one discussions, team meetings, and out in the ‘field’ where direct reports are ‘playing the game’ or getting the work done.
The starting point for leaders to translate the Legitimate Leadership principles into practice, therefore, is for them to spend sufficient time with their people. Typically, this requires leaders to change, sometimes radically change, how they are spending their time and what they are giving their attention to.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: DON’T HIRE THE CONFIDENT ONE – HE’LL BECOME A BULLYING MANAGER
By Emma Seppälä, author of The Happiness Track; also co-director of the Yale College Emotional Intelligence Project and Faculty Director of the Women’s Leadership Program at the Yale School of Management; and Science Director of Stanford University’s Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education.
COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, DIRECTOR, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: We agree with Emma Seppälä that more than anything else, what determines employee engagement is the nature of the relationship between each employee and his/her immediate manager. However we do not agree that leaders should be “nice” or “tough”; we say they should be both. The universal answer to the question “who would you work for willingly/be your ideal boss?” is “a person who has a sincere and genuine interest in me as an individual and enables me to realise the best in myself”. A person, in other words who cares for AND grows me. Leaders need to evidence “tough love” for those in their charge. Of the two criteria, however, care is primary. This is because care is what gives leaders the licence to grow their people. Leaders can be anything other than “nice” just as long as they are acting with their people’s highest self interest in mind. The core criterion for success as a leader is not behaviour but intent.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS ARTICLE, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED IN HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW: An age-old question is: Is it better to be a “nice” leader to get your staff to like you, or to be tough as nails to inspire respect and hard work?
Most people still assume the latter is best. The traditional paradigm seems safer: be firm and a little distant from your employees. They should respect you, but not feel so familiar with you that they might forget who’s in charge. A little dog-eat-dog, tough-it-out, sink-or-swim culture seems to yield time-tested results … right?
New developments in organizational research are providing some surprising answers to these questions.
What putting pressure on employees to increase performance does is increase stress—and research has shown that high levels of stress carry a number of costs to employers and employees alike.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE
Sylvania No Comments

April 2019

Featured

Clarifying Expectations and Watching The Game – The Antidote For Dangerous Assumptions 
“When a manager engages a new-start he or she will inevitably have expectations. Many of these are likely to be legitimate …
What ‘Care’ Requires Of Leaders When Their People Have Personal Problems
More than perhaps at any other time, a leader’s sincerity is put to the test …
Don’t Hire The Confident One – He’ll Become a Bullying Manager
A leading business expert is warning that male narcissists perform well in job interviews but make disastrous leaders …

E-mail [email protected] for more information

Question of the Month 
By Ian Munro, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: How do you implement care and growth if the company’s existing reward system is tightly coupled to results?
Answer: The Legitimate Leadership Model says people should be held accountable for their contribution. Not how hard they tried or how much effort they put in, and not whether the result was achieved or not, but their actual contribution against an agreed standard.
The leader then needs to determine whether the contribution made was on, above, or below the standard; understand why this was the case; and then reward, recognize, censure or discipline appropriately …Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail [email protected] 

VIGNETTE CASE STUDY: CLARIFYING EXPECTATIONS AND WATCHING THE GAME – THE ANTIDOTE FOR DANGEROUS ASSUMPTIONS 
By Peter Jordan, associate, Legitimate Leadership.
When a manager engages a new-start he or she will inevitably have expectations. Many of these are likely to be legitimate, based on the new recruit’s prior experience, qualifications and other aspects, as explored in the recruitment process.
No recruitment process is however a substitute for a systematic and thorough “watching of the game” during the probation period. This diagnostic will bring to the fore any gaps in ability which may have been undetected during the recruitment process. Perhaps of greater importance, watching the new start’s game will reveal levels of energy and engagement (summarised as “willingness issues”) which are much more difficult to assess via recruitment instruments.
Similarly, the new employee will also have expectations related to his or her new position. The sooner these are made explicit via one-on-one meetings the better.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: WHAT ‘CARE’ REQUIRES OF LEADERS WHEN THEIR PEOPLE HAVE PERSONAL PROBLEMS
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
More than perhaps at any other time, a leader’s sincerity is put to the test when her people have problems of a personal nature. When a genuine personal problem arises – the death of a loved one, a divorce, a serious illness – do leaders notice and do they care?
What a leader should and should not do in these situations is a matter of debate. Should she approach an employee who has a personal problem but doesn’t want to talk about it? When is the best time to broach an issue? How should a sensitive issue be tackled? Is it ever appropriate to speak to someone else about the employee’s problem, especially if he has asked the leader not to?
To none of these questions is there a clear answer. The really critical question in fact relates not so much to the “when”, “where” and “how” of the problem but to the “why”.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: DON’T HIRE THE CONFIDENT ONE – HE’LL BECOME A BULLYING MANAGER
By Rosamund Urwin, British journalist.
COMMENT BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Rosamund Urwin’s article is deliberately provocative and stimulates some useful reflection on leadership.
Legitimate Leadership does not agree with everything that is stated as ‘fact’ in the article. The view that 60–70% of bosses are ‘bad’ is too pessimistic. Our experience suggests a less bleak outlook and that most people in authority can learn, with concerted practice, to lead effectively.
We also do not agree with the cut-and-dried gender bias. Our experience is that there are both men and woman who are good ‘care and growth’ leaders – and the converse.
But we absolutely agree that ‘leadership should be about managing down: turning a bunch of people into a high-performing team’. We also concur that not only appointment but also promotion decisions should be made with consideration of the individual’s leadership behaviour and practice as experienced by those who are on the receiving end of those behaviours and practices – namely, direct reports.
We also agree that ego–driven people in leadership roles are a problem. This is because the job of the leader is too make others, not themselves, big.
There are however other personal attributes which, if they are features of the leader, can undermine their capacity to lead. These are outlined in the article ‘Can anyone Lead?’ by Wendy Lambourne. In addition to being ego–driven those in authority will also not be effective leaders if they are virtuosos or cannot let go of their preference for the technical stuff; are overly-affiliative; can’t let go and trust others or are micro managers; are trapped in victim mode; and lack compassion/empathy.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS ARTICLE: A leading business expert is warning that male narcissists perform well in job interviews but make disastrous leaders.
Job interviews should be scraped to prevent narcissists — who will go on to mistreat their staff — from being hired as managers, according to the author of a new book by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic.
Chamorro-Premuzic a professor of business psychology, believes that interviews encourage bosses to hire in their own image, rather than on merit.
“They invite us to perpetuate our biases,” he said. “What you need is data-driven assessment: CVs, psychological tests and analysis of past performance.”
He believes that the most self-aggrandising applicants perform better in interviews than their more humble and more understated peers.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE