April 2021

Featured

Question of the Month
Why do managers in organisations generally not hold their people accountable?
Legitimate Leadership Presents To The British Army
Legitimate Leadership in the UK last month took up an invitation to address the Headquarters, Home Command, of the British Army.
An Empowerment Model For Cleaning The Lab
In a major chemical plant, an ongoing problem was that its testing laboratory, which operated 24×7, was old and dirty, and the small team of analysts who staffed it were resistant to cleaning it properly.
Reducing Control To Cultivate Accountability
“To be granted legitimate power in the workplace there needs to be a preparedness by the leader to let go of her need to control the outcome,” I pronounce. The faces of 16 senior executives stare back at me in silent disbelief.
I Like You – Who Cares?
When you say “I like” someone or something, you are expressing a positive feeling. It may dispose you to behave in a positive way, to engage in conversation with that person, or buy his latest book (if he is an author whose previous books you have liked).
When Leading Remotely, Don’t Miss The Opportunity To Commit To Your Values
The role that organisational values play in defining the way people behave in modern organisations is frequently overstated. It’s not that values shouldn’t play a leading role (we certainly believe they should), it’s simply that in most organisations they don’t.
Building Trust When Working Remotely
Take it from someone who has run a virtual company for over a decade: trying to build trust without any kind of human contact is way more difficult. A big mistake that a lot of organizations have made is that because they’ve adapted reasonably well to teleworking they have missed the fact that many of the relationships pre-existed – they know these people.

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail  events@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lamboure, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: Why do managers in organisations generally not hold their people accountable?
Answer: When I have asked this question of managers, they have typically given me a list of reasons which fall into the categories of Willing (the leader lacks the courage or is conflict-averse or wants to be liked too much, or he doesn’t care enough and is prepared to tolerate less than the best especially if the results are good); Able (he lacks the knowledge/training to diagnose performance issues, or has not been taught how to have the “tough conversation”); and Allowed (the environment is not conducive to the leader doing so – there not enough time, he is too busy pursuing the result, he lacks the authority to discipline or reward, the procedures are too complex, or there is a lack of support up the line).
But a reason which is not given, and which I have observed over the years is actually the primary reason why managers do not hold their people accountable, is… Read the full answer by clicking here
 To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

EVENT: LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP PRESENTS TO THE BRITISH ARMY
Legitimate Leadership in the UK last month took up an invitation to address the Headquarters, Home Command, of the British Army.
Legitimate Leadership had been asked to address a virtual internal conference of the headquarters on leadership and change. Wendy Lambourne and David Harding, both of Legitimate Leadership, gave their presentation the title “Serve To Lead” because that is the name of a handbook used by officers at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.
The presentation and questions, which lasted for an hour, was held on 2 March 2021, and was attended by about 50 military personnel and 30 civilians.
READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE

VIGNETTE CASE STUDY: AN EMPOWERMENT MODEL FOR CLEANING THE LAB
In a major chemical plant, an ongoing problem was that its testing laboratory, which operated 24×7, was old and dirty, and the small team of analysts who staffed it were resistant to cleaning it properly. They variously said it was “just old” and would “just get dirty again”, and that “cleaning it would be like polishing a turd”.
Checklists which had been drawn up for cleaning were too long and were not adhered to. Not surprisingly, the dirtiness of the laboratory negatively affected the analysts’ morale.
Management did not have the will to change this and did not hold the analysts to account for their failure to clean – especially at night and on weekends, when no managers were present anyway.
But then things changed:
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: REDUCING CONTROL TO CULTIVATE ACCOUNTABILITY
By Angela Donnelly, Director, Legitimate Leadership Canada.
“To be granted legitimate power in the workplace there needs to be a preparedness by the leader to let go of her need to control the outcome,” I pronounce. The faces of 16 senior executives stare back at me in silent disbelief.
But this is a pivotal moment for me to slay some inherent leadership convictions of contemporary corporate culture. So I take a deep breath and jump right in.
This awkward moment follows a morning of exploring a leadership challenge: why some people seem to work because they have to and others because they want to. At least participants do agree that the latter is preferable.
But the corporate world is navigating the consequences of the prevalent profit-above-people approach to leadership.
Many companies respond to the thorny issue of attracting and retaining employees by plying them with “nice things”. And of course it is nice to provide award-winning workplaces. But when I saunter back to my desk after a game of foosball, smoothie in hand, Rufus bounding at my heels, to do some serious work ahead of my desk-side foot massage, yet my boss is still an asshole – then, let’s face it, all the nice stuff is for nothing!
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: I LIKE YOU – WHO CARES?
By Maureen Collins, founder, Straight Talk.
COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Care, from a Legitimate Leadership viewpoint, is a matter of intent or motive. For those in authority at work, care is about whose interests are being served. Leaders who care are in the relationship to “give” to their people not to “get” something out of them. Whether leaders care about their people is evidenced in where they spend their time and what they give their attention to. When leaders don’t give time and attention to their people, their people will conclude that something is more important to the leaders then them. Care should not be confused with being “nice”. Leaders can be anything but “nice” as long as their tough behaviour is in their people’s best interests. Care, in other words, is definitely not a soft and fluffy thing.
THE ARTICLE: There is a world of difference between liking someone and caring about them.
When you say “I like” someone or something, you are expressing a positive feeling. It may dispose you to behave in a positive way, to engage in conversation with that person, or buy his latest book (if he is an author whose previous books you have liked).
Or it may not. We have Facebook to thank for making ‘like’ probably the most over-used verb in the world today. Online likes have become a metric by which popularity is measured. They may be used to guide a sales campaign, to which you, one of possibly millions who clicked “Like”, will be asked to respond.
Liking carries no commitment. There are many people you like, but make no effort to approach, think about, or spend time with. And unless you get to know them, and care about them, you won’t be there for them if they need help.
Care is an action verb. The dictionary definition is ‘to provide what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance, and protection of someone or something’.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: WHEN LEADING REMOTELY, DON’T MISS THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMIT TO YOUR VALUES
By Ian Munro, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
The role that organisational values play in defining the way people behave in modern organisations is frequently overstated. It’s not that values shouldn’t play a leading role (we certainly believe they should), it’s simply that in most organisations they don’t. There’s no doubt that aligning organisation behaviours and practices with a set of aspirational values is hard and most organisations fail to get it right.
While today’s typical organisation probably does have a set of values on the wall behind reception for people to read on the way in, what actually happens on the floor is far too often (and occasionally radically) misaligned. Both leaders and team members have grown fatigued by hearing one thing and experiencing another. Yet, the move to remote leadership as the “new normal” for many leaders might be precisely the catalyst that organisations need to get their values off the reception wall and into the day-to-day behaviours and practices of their people on the ground.
There are three opportunities.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: BUILDING TRUST WHEN WORKING REMOTELY
By Simon Sinek, American author on leadership, and motivational speaker.
COMMENT BY IAN MUNRO, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP, ON THIS VIDEO: In this video Simon Sinek suggests that building trust in virtual organisations, especially where new people have joined the team, is far more difficult than in traditional companies. One of the reasons for this is the reduced opportunity to connect interpersonally between meetings – the so-called water cooler conversations. The Legitimate Leadership Model reasons that trust is built primarily in four ways – getting to know people, giving people time and attention, passing the intent test, and handing over control. The first three in particular are sincere demonstrations of care, which in turn set out the conditions for the fourth – an increased propensity to extend trust, or hand over control. We are, therefore, in strong agreement with the video’s recommendation that leaders proactively seek and create opportunities to connect at a personal level with their people. Good managers have respectful, professional relationships with their people. Good leaders go about building sincere, personal relationships. Another point of strong agreement is the assertion that workplaces are likely to become increasingly flexible in their remote working policies. An investigation carried out by Legitimate Leadership last year found that one of the most important expectations people have of the future of work is increased flexibility – particularly in supporting employees who see value in spending some or possibly all of their time working from home.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: Take it from someone who has run a virtual company for over a decade: trying to build trust without any kind of human contact is way more difficult. A big mistake that a lot of organizations have made is that because they’ve adapted reasonably well to teleworking they have missed the fact that many of the relationships pre-existed – they know these people.
But good luck building trust with somebody who’s entirely new to the team and has never physically met anyone.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE

March 2021

Featured

Question of the Month
An employee finds out that he is earning 5% less than his peers, and assumes that the organisation and the management are unfair. This demotivates him and he considers finding another job. What should be done?
Legitimate Leadership Launches New Website On Its Seventh Birthday
Legitimate Leadership launched its new website (www.legitimateleadership.com) and celebrated its seventh birthday at a dinner held in Johannesburg on 4 March 2021.
Enabling The Shift From Taking To Giving In An Organisation
You may coach people to be contributors, but if the system/department/organisation they are in does not change, those people are likely to eventually revert back to what they were before.
‘Us And Them’ Became Just ‘Us’
A Legitimate Leadership intervention in a major industrial company in South Africa identified a problem of victimhood throughout the organisation.
Are Anonymous Callout Channels A Good Way To Deal With Abuse?
Bullying and abuse have been prominent in news reports about, among others, Priti Patel (the UK’s Home Secretary), Julie Payette (Canada’s Governor General), and Meghan Markle (the Duchess of Sussex). One question these cases prompt is: are anonymous callout channels a good way to deal with abuse?
Ceo Secrets – ‘My Billion Pound Company Has No Hr Department’
Greg Jackson is the founder and CEO of Octopus Energy, a UK start-up valued at more than £1.4bn ($2bn), selling green energy. Despite now having more than 1,200 employees, he says he has no interest in traditional things like human resources (HR) and inf ormation technology (IT) departments.

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail  events@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Ian Munro, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: An employee finds out that he is earning 5% less than his peers, and assumes that the organisation and the management are unfair. This demotivates him and he considers finding another job. What should be done?
Answer: This question arose in a recent Legitimate Leadership webinar – see our report on this below. Before, this employee was a net contributor – in other words, he was not withholding. Then he withdrew his willingness due to a sense of grievance and grudge.
The problem is that he is falling into a victim’s state of mind.
His manager should challenge him not to have a victim mindset and to focus on what he can control. Strong people focus on what they can control, not on what the world does to them. In other words, the manager here can help the employee to restore his sense of accountability.
The manager should enable the person to see what is happening to him in the situation. the question is how he is going to respond to the fact that life is sometimes unfair. The manager should challenge him to promote growth, rather than encourage him to rail against the system.
The employee/manager may also simultaneously try to solve the unfairness issue – but it should not be the primary focus.
But wait … what if the unfairness is more than just a small salary differential? What if it is a matter, for instance, of ingrained gender/race bias? See our webinar report below for comment on this.
 To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

EVENT: LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP LAUNCHES NEW WEBSITE ON ITS SEVENTH BIRTHDAY
Legitimate Leadership launched its new website (www.legitimateleadership.com) and celebrated its seventh birthday at a dinner held in Johannesburg on 4 March 2021.
Legitimate Leadership has grown from a one-person (Wendy Lambourne) business at its inception in March 2014 to a company embracing 24 staff members, associates and licensees.
The function in Johannesburg was physically attended by 20 people; a further 16 people attended the function virtually from other parts of South Africa and from England, Scotland, Belgium, Germany and Canada.
Legitimate Leadership now has operational centres in South Africa and England, and licensees in Europe and Canada.

WEBINAR: ENABLING THE SHIFT FROM TAKING TO GIVING IN AN ORGANISATION
You may coach people to be contributors, but if the system/department/organisation they are in does not change, those people are likely to eventually revert back to what they were before.
In past Legitimate Leadership webinars, the focus was generally on leadership. In this webinar, the focus was shifted to how leaders can assist people in their teams to shift from taking to giving.
In other words, in this webinar it was assumed that the leader is performing well and that she is fundamentally giving rather than taking.
This webinar, on 11 February 2021, was presented by three Legitimate Leadership consultants: Ian Munro, Peter Jordan and Stefaan van den Heever. It was attended by 68 people from various countries.
The three presenters commented on questions arising from vignettes which were drawn from their own experiences and from questions from attendees.
VIGNETTE 1:
An employee finds out that he is earning 5% less than his peers. He assumes immediately that the organisation and the management are unfair. This demotivates him and he considers finding another job.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: ARE ANONYMOUS CALLOUT CHANNELS A GOOD WAY TO DEAL WITH ABUSE?
By Angela Donnelly, Director, Legitimate Leadership Canada.
Bullying and abuse have been prominent in news reports about, among others, Priti Patel (the UK’s Home Secretary), Julie Payette (Canada’s Governor General), and Meghan Markle (the Duchess of Sussex). One question these cases prompt is: are anonymous callout channels a good way to deal with abuse?
I recently weighed in on an article in the Harvard Business Review, Time’s Up for Toxic Workplaces. The article suggested that companies should incorporate or strengthen anonymous feedback channels for employees to voice concerns and report abusive experiences without fear of retribution. Peer managers, superiors or HR could deliver the relevant feedback to managers, making it clear that the organisation does not tolerate this kind of behavior. Knowing that others disapprove may lead the perpetrators to self-correct, the article said.
I commented that legitimacy in the manager-employee relationship is at stake here. Focusing on empowerment of employees and simultaneously creating a leadership culture that places people and excellence at the core of the business will foster the conditions where civility and maturity thrive. Anonymous callout channels are damaging and cowardly ideas; one should rather be deliberately building courage and generosity in the system, to produce masters rather than perpetuate victims.
As I expected, there wasn’t overwhelming support for my viewpoint.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: CEO SECRETS – ‘MY BILLION POUND COMPANY HAS NO HR DEPARTMENT’
By Dougal Shaw, business reporter, BBC News.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is a role for support functions in companies big enough to afford them. But they need to perform an enabling rather than a controlling or policing role. The HR function’s role is not to do the “care and growth” job for line managers but rather to enable and support them in doing so.
I love the story with the receptionist. She taught Greg a lesson which in a single instant helped him to “grow up”. Leadership requires a level of personal maturity that takes time to develop. In the process of leading others, the leader is the ultimate beneficiary – he or she grows as a human being.
THE ARTICLE: Greg Jackson is the founder and CEO of Octopus Energy, a UK start-up valued at more than £1.4bn ($2bn), selling green energy. Despite now having more than 1,200 employees, he says he has no interest in traditional things like human resources (HR) and information technology (IT) departments.
There is a tendency for large companies to “infantilise” their employees and “drown creative people in process and bureaucracy”, says Jackson.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

February 2021

Featured

Question of the Month
What should a Legitimate Leadership intervention deliver?
Leading Remotely? Stay Connected By Being Sincere, Deliberate And Courageous
For many managers remote working has highlighted the transactional nature of the relationships they have with their people. It is entirely possible to work next to, or even with, somebody every day for years without ever really getting to know him or developing a genuine concern for his welfare.
What Leaders Should Do About Targets And Standards In A Crisis
Leaders can choose to make targets or make standards what they focus on and prioritise in a crisis. They can also elect to change (raise or lower) the targets and/or standards, or leave them unchanged.
The Purpose Of A Company Is Not To Make Money
Legitimate Leadership believes that goals/targets/metrics are important, but as a means not an end. Firstly, they provide the context within which to define the contributions that need to be made – if you…

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: What should a Legitimate Leadership intervention deliver?
Answer: Our standard answer is that it should deliver an organization characterised by legitimacy, trust, contribution and accountability – all of which then impacts on the results.
However here are two more developed characterisations:
That those in leadership roles will be able to answer ‘yes’ to the following:
  • Should the leader move on would his/her direct reports like (which doesn’t mean they will in fact) to go with him/her because of the benefits in terms of care and growth that they have experienced in their reporting relationship with him/her?
  • Should the person move on, is there is a successor from within (or as someone expressed it when they were promoted into their ex-manager’s role ‘he made me’).
That those in the frontline of the business will be able to answer ‘yes’ to the following:
  • They are able to articulate what they are willing and able to deliver which is of value-add and for which they would like to be held accountable.
  • They are asking their manager to come and view what they have delivered because they are proud of the quality of their work.
 To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

ARTICLE: LEADING REMOTELY? STAY CONNECTED BY BEING SINCERE, DELIBERATE AND COURAGEOUS
By Ian Munro, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
“How do I stay connected to my people when they’re working remotely?”
“How can I show people that I care without seeming like I’m prying?”
These are questions that have been raised repeatedly by managers grappling with remote leadership for the first time. The answer to neither question is simple – relationships are, after all, complex by their nature. But the following points are worth bearing in mind as we work to build and maintain our own relationships with our direct reports remotely:
  1. It’s not only possible to maintain relationships at a distance but many people have, in fact, reported improving their relationships while their teams have been working remotely.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: LEADING REMOTELY? STAY CONNECTED BY BEING SINCERE, DELIBERATE AND COURAGEOUS
By Wendy Lambourne, Director, Legitimate Leadership.
Leaders can choose to make targets or make standards what they focus on and prioritise in a crisis. They can also elect to change (raise or lower) the targets and/or standards, or leave them unchanged. The choices they make are important because they have a significant bearing on whether those they lead thrive or not in difficult times.
Leaders should focus on standards, not targets, in a crisis. They should raise standards, not targets, in difficult times.
CHOICE ONE: WHAT TO FOCUS ON AND PRIORITISE IN A CRISIS
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: THE PURPOSE OF A COMPANY IS NOT TO MAKE MONEY
By Simon Sinek, American author on leadership, and motivational speaker.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Legitimate Leadership believes that goals/targets/metrics are important, but as a means not an end. Firstly, they provide the context within which to define the contributions that need to be made – if you don’t know where you want to get to, any place will do. Secondly, the scoreboard is useful in terms of feedback – are you making enough of a contribution, or the right contributions, to achieve the results? If the results are not eventuating, do something different!
The purpose of a company is to add value to the customer, not to increase returns on investment for the shareholders. When companies succeed in serving the customer, there is a place in the sun for everyone, including the shareholders. Profits provide the means which allow a company to serve. Like the results, they are a means, not an end.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: We are tangibly-driven animals. Metrics and targets and goals are important to us. That is a good thing. Abstract is not good – it doesn’t let you know if it hasn’t worked. You can’t run a marathon with no mile markers. We need to know and be able to measure progress.
But we have to understand the role that metrics play. Metrics help us understand speed and distance, but they’re not absolutes.
The problem is when they become absolutes – for example when somebody gives us a goal and says, ‘If you hit this target you will get a bonus.’
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO CLICK HERE

January 2021

Featured

Question of the Month
I believe a lot of the reason we fall into the traditional way of working is that we have been institutionalised as a society, taught to fear and obey authority (rather than see it as an enabler), and we sit within a hierarchy from school age (learnt behaviours). But I sense a change in this with each generation. Is the framework easier to apply in organisations with a higher ratio of younger people?
Leading Remotely – It’s Still All About Intent
Leading remotely isn’t new. Managers, especially senior managers in distributed organisations, have been leading remotely for decades…
What Baby Boomers Can Learn From Millennials At Work – And Vice Versa
A new kind of elder is emerging in the workplace. The alchemy of algorithm and people wisdom gained with age (high-tech meets high-touch) can greatly benefit millennials who are in managerial roles but have no formal leadership training.

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: I believe a lot of the reason we fall into the traditional way of working is that we have been institutionalised as a society, taught to fear and obey authority (rather than see it as an enabler), and we sit within a hierarchy from school age (learnt behaviours). But I sense a change in this with each generation. Is the framework easier to apply in organisations with a higher ratio of younger people?
Answer: In one sense, once people are adults, intent is not a function of age. There are “givers” at work from the beginning of their careers and “takers” who have entirely been there to take. What Legitimate Leadership tries to do over time is change the ratio of “takers” to “givers” at work. There is a view that in fact the change is harder to effect with so called millennials. The view is that both parents and teachers are not doing as good a job as before at care and growth. Hence millennials enter the workplace entitled, expecting instant rewards. In the words of Simon Sinek this leaves managers to do the “parenting” that should have been done before they entered the workplace. It is an issue worthy of debate.
 To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

ARTICLE: LEADING REMOTELY – IT’S STILL ALL ABOUT INTENT
By Ian Munro, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Leading remotely isn’t new. Managers, especially senior managers in distributed organisations, have been leading remotely for decades. Remote leadership has, however, been pushed to front and centre by the events of the last 12 months.
Remote leadership in 2021 differs from the past in three important ways:
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: WHAT BABY BOOMERS CAN LEARN FROM MILLENNIALS AT WORK – AND VICE VERSA 
By Chip Conley, an American hotelier, hospitality entrepreneur, author and speaker.
COMMENT BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP, ON THIS VIDEO: We agree with Chip Conley on all counts. Firstly, that diverse teams outperform ones that are less diverse. Secondly, that diversity should include age. Thirdly, that relationship competence/leadership competence takes time to develop. This is because leading people in a way consistent with the Legitimate Leadership criteria requires a level of personal maturity which takes time to develop and which is rare in people under 35 years of age – “you can’t microwave emotional intelligence”. Finally, that enabling leadership maturity in younger leaders is a contribution which older leaders who have acquired “relationship wisdom” can make. It is a value-added “give” which should be expected and rewarded in those with more chronological age in the workplace.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: There’s ample evidence that gender- and ethnically-diverse companies are more effective. But what about age?
A new kind of elder is emerging in the workplace. The alchemy of algorithm and people wisdom gained with age (high-tech meets high-touch) can greatly benefit millennials who are in managerial roles but have no formal leadership training.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO CLICK HERE

December 2020

Featured

Question of the Month
How long does it takes to recognise change in individuals, teams and organisations when applying the Legitimate Leadership Model? I expect there could be some fairly rapid change on a one-to-one basis, but wider change would presumably require consistency of approach and be subject to many other influencing factors.
Insights From Within An Organisation That Keeps Getting It Right
Africa Tikkun, one of South Africa’s largest non-profit organisations, assists many thousands of people in that country’s townships. But seven years ago, this extraordinary organisation set out, with Legitimate Leadership, to increase its employees’ level of engagement by showing employees that they also really mattered.

Building Cultures Where Givers Succeed

As an organizational psychologist, I (Adam Grant) spend a lot of time in workplaces, and I find paranoia everywhere. Paranoia is caused by people that I call “takers.” Takers are self-serving in their interactions. It’s all about “What can you do for me?”
The opposite is a giver. It’s somebody who approaches most interactions by asking, “What can I do for you?”

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: How long does it takes to recognise change in individuals, teams and organisations when applying the Legitimate Leadership Model? I expect there could be some fairly rapid change on a one-to-one basis, but wider change would presumably require consistency of approach and be subject to many other influencing factors.
Answer: At an individual level, the one thing that can change in an instant is intent. I have seen this many times. For sustainable changes in behavior and practice our experience is that at least 12–15 months is needed. This is why our process for a group of leaders is of that duration. But embedding the Legitimate Leadership principles and practices so that they have real organizational impact is not a quick process. For big, complex organizations employing thousands of people it can take 3–5 years.
 To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

WEBINAR: INSIGHTS FROM WITHIN AN ORGANISATION THAT KEEPS GETTING IT RIGHT
Africa Tikkun, one of South Africa’s largest non-profit organisations, assists many thousands of people in that country’s townships. But seven years ago, this extraordinary organisation set out, with Legitimate Leadership, to increase its employees’ level of engagement by showing employees that they also really mattered. The results of that exercise were dramatic and were part of a major turnaround in the organisation.
Then earlier this year, Africa Tikkun pivoted again: in response to the Covid 19 pandemic it changed direction from being an organisation which supported centre-registered families, to doing emergency mass distribution of food parcels to the broader community.
How Africa Tikkun achieved these changes, and the part that Legitimate Leadership played, was the subject of this webinar, which was held on 12 November and was attended by 111 people.
READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR CLICK HERE

VIDEO: BUILDING CULTURES WHERE GIVERS SUCCEED
By Adam Grant, author of Give and Take, of Wharton University, USA.
COMMENT BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP, ON THIS VIDEO: Adam Grant’s research indicates that 19% of people are “takers”, 56% are “matchers”, and 25% are “givers”. In Legitimate Leadership’s view, “matchers” (that is, those who give to get) are still takers but the giving they do is in order to get. So in fact 25% are givers and 75% are takers. This is our experience as well: in any group between 15-30% are there to give and 70-85% are there to take. So there are currently more givers than takers at work. We also agree with Adam Grant on the following: that the most successful people in the world are givers; that while there is a problem with taking, there is nothing wrong with receiving; and that you should recruit givers not takers; and that takers need to be dealt with.
However we don’t agree with Adam Grant on two matters. Firstly, Adam Grant’s type of giving is only one form of giving: generosity. There are in fact two forms of giving: generosity and courage. With generosity, you risk losing things associated with yourself; with courage, you are putting yourself on the line. Secondly, Adam Grant says that the most unsuccessful people in the world are also givers. We believe that why they are not successful is not because they are givers but because they give inappropriately. Giving is not about being nice, about burning out or allowing others to take advantage. Successful givers give either generosity or courage, whichever of the two is appropriate in the situation.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: As an organizational psychologist, I (Adam Grant) spend a lot of time in workplaces, and I find paranoia everywhere. Paranoia is caused by people that I call “takers.” Takers are self-serving in their interactions. It’s all about “What can you do for me?”
The opposite is a giver. It’s somebody who approaches most interactions by asking, “What can I do for you?”
I wanted to give you a chance to think about your own style. We all have moments of giving and taking. Your style is how you treat most of the people most of the time, your default.
I have a short test you can take to figure out if you’re more of a giver or a taker, and you can take it right now (see third illustration above).
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO CLICK HERE

November 2020

Featured

Question of the Month
Are there people who prefer to be managed rather than led?
Different Scenarios For Learning On The Job
“Finding quality time to spend with staff is vitally important, particularly if they are inexperienced and need training to be able to carry out their role. “
Lessons Learned From Doing Leadership Diagnostics
Experience over the years working with leaders in the mining, manufacturing, banking and hospitality industries has produced the following insights on Legitimate Leadership’s Leadership Diagnostics methodology.
The Most Important Characteristic Of A Leader
The problem with leadership work (care and growth) is that it is vitally important but rarely urgent. Because of this it can be put off for another day – and typically that is what happens.

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: Are there people who prefer to be managed rather than led?
Answer: The universal answer to the question “who would you work for willingly?” is “a giver, not a taker” – that is, “someone who is in the relationship to care for and grow me”. So in the sense that caring and growing people is leadership, not management, generally people want to be led not managed.
But there are two caveats to that statement. Firstly, while all people want the person they respect to have a genuine concern for their wellbeing, to care for them as a human being not as a human resource, not everyone wants “tough love”. They may want the “nice” part of care but not the kind of care which enables them to stand on their own two feet and take responsibility for the situations that they are in. They prefer to remain “looked after”, dependent and needy rather than being supported to become strong and self-reliant.
Secondly, there are people who don’t want to be empowered.   Read full answer by clicking here.
To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

VIGNETTE CASE STUDY: DIFFERENT SCENARIOS FOR LEARNING ON THE JOB
In a written feedback about Legitimate Leadership’s Module 1 (Building Strong People), and in particular about a prescribed article for that module, Your Diary Never Lies, a manager who had started his career as an apprentice said that at a personal level, his own career had benefitted from working with managers who took time to help him over the years and “just watching how they performed in the work place was a learning experience itself”.
“Finding quality time to spend with staff is vitally important, particularly if they are inexperienced and need training to be able to carry out their role. Delegation of tasks becomes much easier with an experienced team. This is something I learned 10 years ago when working as a programme manager. The job was easy when I had inherited a team of experienced schedulers, who knew exactly what they were doing and delivered everything that was asked of them. None of them were victims, they were a pleasure to work with and easy to manage.
“This period gave me a false sense of security, thinking that management was easy.
READ THE FULL CASE STUDY CLICKING HERE

Legitimate Leadership ProfileARTICLE: LESSONS LEARNED FROM DOING LEADERSHIP DIAGNOSTICS
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Experience over the years working with leaders in the mining, manufacturing, banking and hospitality industries has produced the following insights on Legitimate Leadership’s Leadership Diagnostics methodology: do it with benevolent intent; do on both positive and negative exceptions; use with a specific purpose in mind; apply the tool to a specific incident or result; diagnose by ‘watching the game’; ask ‘why?’ all the way up the line; remedial action needs to be owned and driven by the line; be wary of excuses – invalid means and ability claims; the improvement timeframe will be shorter when means and accountability, rather than ability, are at issue; and do both reactive and proactive diagnostics.
1. Do it with benevolent intent
READ THE FULL ARTICLE CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTIC OF A LEADER
By Simon Sinek, American author on leadership, and motivational speaker.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, DIRECTOR, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: The problem with leadership work (care and growth) is that it is vitally important but rarely urgent. Because of this it can be put off for another day – and typically that is what happens. Leaders are not here to produce outcomes, they are here to produce the people to produce outcomes. This will only happen when they are courageous enough to focus their time and attention on the care and growth of their people, when they schedule time for the leadership work and stick to the plan. What gives leaders the courage to do this is simply the conviction that people matter and that, as those in charge of others, their job is to “give” to them not to “get” results out of them.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: I (Simon Sinek) am often asked what the most important characteristics of leadership are – vision, charisma, etc. I know plenty of incredible leaders that aren’t Steve Jobs visionaries. And I know some fantastic leaders who do not have charisma – they’re quiet and super-introverted, not that exciting to talk to or spend time with.
When I say charisma I mean the traditional definition which is more about energy. But I believe that charisma is undying belief in something – and they have that in spades.
But I think courage is the one thing that all great leaders have to have because we are surrounded by overwhelming forces every day pushing us to play the finite game. The pressures are overwhelming.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

October 2020

Featured

Question of the Month
Is Legitimate Leadership crafted purely with the business world in mind or does it hold that effective leadership is the same no matter the environment?
Working Remotely And Leading Remotely Are Decidedly Different
Many organisations are now adopting a “wait and see” approach regarding the future of remote working, while others are saying “we will never go back to the office”.
The Single Most Important Leadership Trait In Setting Your Company Culture
As I approached retirement after 42 years of working in the shipbuilding and chemical industries, I was reflecting on the different bosses I have had and what makes the most difference…
Who You Should Do Business With
The Legitimate Leadership framework is being applied by pioneers, brave men and woman who believe that there is a better option than the conventional command and control approach…

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: Is Legitimate Leadership crafted purely with the business world in mind or does it hold that effective leadership is the same no matter the environment? For example, in the military, could it not be argued that the control approach is more appropriate given the exigencies?
Answer: The framework is relevant in all contexts and in all power relationships: parenting, teaching, sports coaching, government and the military. In the military there are officers that the troops will lay down their lives for and those for whom they will follow orders to the letter. In this regard an excellent book is Leaders Eat Last by Simon Sinek. Our framework was for instance introduced to senior officers in the Pakistani army many years ago.
This is not about replacing an autocratic/directive style with a democratic one. Both are not only possible but appropriate in a legitimate relationship of power. When the leader is being commanding, his command will be accepted as long as what he is doing is in his people’s best interest. In other words, control is absolutely appropriate as long as it is subordinate to the intention to empower. Holding a child’s hand (an autocratic imposition of control) is appropriate if the child is not yet ready to walk independently. Insisting on holding the child’s hand into perpetuity is not appropriate and the child will never learn to walk!
To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

ARTICLE: WORKING REMOTELY AND LEADING REMOTELY ARE DECIDEDLY DIFFERENT
By Dave Stevens, associate, Legitimate Leadership.
Covid has unceremoniously dumped society into a new way of life that seems to have irretrievably blurred the distinction between our personal and professional lives. Many organisations are now adopting a “wait and see” approach regarding the future of remote working, while others are saying “we will never go back to the office”.
In all this however one thing is certain: working remotely and leading remotely are not the same thing.
Working remotely is largely about tangible things like laptops, internet connections, noisy kids, home-schooling, and separation of personal and professional time. These things are well understood and should be regulated by defined “rules of engagement” or “behavioral standards”.
Leading remotely, on the other hand, requires empathy, trust and a deliberate increase in time and attention devoted to our people. Leaders who do not spend one-on-one time with their teams and are not “watching the game”, for whatever reason, are unlikely to be perceived by their people as having a sincere and genuine interest in them.
If leadership is about cultivating exceptional human beings, we need to get to grips with what it means to lead from a distance.
Legitimate Leadership recently ran a diagnostic exercise with 16 of its clients and nearly 300 individuals (managers and non-managers) to understand, among other topics, their experiences of working remotely in the past six months.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT LEADERSHIP TRAIT IN SETTING YOUR COMPANY CULTURE
By Tony Flannigan, talent and development director, Johnson Matthey.
As I approached retirement after 42 years of working in the shipbuilding and chemical industries, I was reflecting on the different bosses I have had and what makes the most difference. In thinking about this there are many words that come to mind such as Authenticity, Honesty, Trust, etc, etc.
But one word above all others captures what truly great leaders have that distinguishes them from others: Courage.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: WHO YOU SHOULD DO BUSINESS WITH
By Simon Sinek, American author on leadership, and motivational speaker.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, DIRECTOR, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Legitimate Leadership provides a leadership perspective that is the opposite to the conventional view – that is, the view held and practised by the vast majority of organisations today. I once met an MD who said to me, “I have run my business very successfully for 30 years through micromanagement and I intend to continue to do so”. I replied, “We are definitely not for you”, shook his hand and wished him well. The Legitimate Leadership framework is being applied by pioneers, brave men and woman who believe that there is a better option than the conventional command and control approach. I feel grateful to be working with these people. I am convinced that what is still the exception will one day become the norm.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: My (Simon Sinek’s) goal is to not do business with everybody that needs what I have; my goal is to do business with people who believe what I believe.
People say, “That may be nice emotionally, but practically, can I really be that picky in business? Is it that easy that I can just do business with people that believe what I believe?”
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

September 2020

 

Question of the Month
Why does Legitimate Leadership regard courage at work as so important?
How 16 Legitimate Leadership Clients Performed During The Crisis
The results of the Leading in Crisis diagnostic survey showed that leaders delivered admirably on the care criterion, but did not deliver on the growth…
The Accountability Thief
The assumption that people know what is expected of them, or that expectations between parties is both clear and aligned, is a common problem…
Financial Times Article: You Don’t Have To Sell Change To People Who Designed It
At a time when business outcomes can no longer be predicted or guaranteed, when forecasting has become more difficult and uncertainty endemic, it is essential that organisations stay attuned to early warning signals and cultivate the capacity to accelerate…

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month
By Josh Hayman, associate, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: Why does Legitimate Leadership regard courage at work as so important?
Answer: If a person (like a leader) is in a relationship to give, the conventional view is that giving is about generosity. But in the Legitimate Leadership Model the often less-talked-about way of giving is about courage.
We find that courage is by far the rarer form of giving, which is partly why Legitimate Leadership emphasizes it.
Of the two (generosity and courage), courage is also the harder to get right. This is because being generous involves rising above a loss of things – the price we pay for being generous is generally not high.
Being courageous involves much more risk as there is usually an issue at play which presents the possibility of real and serious consequences. What the person stands to lose makes acting courageously difficult, and for some, impossible.
Courage is critical in the workplace because the absence of it leads people to give in to their fears, rather than rising above them.
In leadership, acting with courage means much more than disciplining your people. Caring about your people may require courage in making yourself vulnerable. Providing the means for your people may require courage to challenge policies and standards, or your manager or your colleagues. Cultivating ability may require the courage to coach others to the point where you are replaceable. Praising and rewarding people may require the courage to spend money on doing so when it is unpopular to do so. Being prepared to single out exceptional performers for reward instead of just rewarding the “herd” will require courage.
The good news is that courage is not a matter of ability or skill, it is a matter of the will, and exercising it gets easier with practice.
To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

WEBINAR REPORT: HOW 16 LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP CLIENTS PERFORMED DURING THE CRISIS
In a survey of the performance of leaders in 16 Legitimate Leadership client companies and organisations during the first months of the coronavirus crisis, the results showed that their leaders were more successful in demonstrating care and compassion than they were in using the crisis to empower and bring out the best in their people.
Legitimate Leadership says there are two criteria for legitimate power: care and growth.
The results of the Leading in Crisis diagnostic survey showed that leaders delivered admirably on the care criterion, but did not deliver on the growth criterion to the same extent. They did not capitalise on the opportunity the crisis offered to empower people and enable them to be the best that they could be.
READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE

ARTICLE: THE ACCOUNTABILITY THIEF
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
When managers in organisations are asked why they do not hold their people accountable, they typically provide a list of reasons which fall neatly into the categories of Willing; Able; and Allowed. But the reason which is not given, which is actually the primary reason why managers do not hold their people accountable, is that managers have not clarified and agreed what each person is accountable for in the first place.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE CLICKING HERE

FINANCIAL TIMES ARTICLE: YOU DON’T HAVE TO SELL CHANGE TO PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED IT
COMMENT BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP, ON THE ARTICLE BELOW: The Leading in Crisis diagnostic survey recently conducted across 16 Legitimate Leadership client organisations (see webinar report, above) provides affirmation of what Cath Bishop and Margaret Heffernan suggest below. Leaders in Legitimate Leadership client organisations put their people’s safety first and demonstrate a genuine concern for their people. Trust in the leadership as well as productivity increased as a result. Remote working facilitated increased empowerment concomitant with decreases in multiple checks and reporting. For the increase trust to be sustained however requires that leaders do not revert to a focus on results and micromanagement of people. Continuing and doing even more caring for and growing their people, as the authors say, “makes companies fit for the future, whatever it may bring”.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS ARTICLE: In this recent Financial Times article in its Rebooting the Workplace series, business authors Cath Bishop and Margaret Heffernan wrote that the future of work requires a new social contract. At a time when business outcomes can no longer be predicted or guaranteed, when forecasting has become more difficult and uncertainty endemic, it is essential that organisations stay attuned to early warning signals and cultivate the capacity to accelerate change when clarity emerges, they wrote. Which means that leadership and decision-making cannot stay at the top.
A highly networked organisation, in which information and insight travels fast and without impediments, is the only coherent response to a world where business conditions can change overnight. We can learn from the improvisatory genius of world-class sporting teams, in which players have the freedom and skill for on-the-spot decision-making, according to the authors.
Glimmers of this approach were seen early in the pandemic. Across public and private sectors, leaders from line managers to chief executives went to exceptional lengths to look after their people, wherever they were. To their surprise, caring about people made productivity go up, not down.
At the same time, much work shifted from the centre to smaller, often ad hoc, teams. Devolving decision-making to the frontline and increasing localisation forced leaders to trust their people to know what to do.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

August 2020

Featured

Question of the Month
When something goes wrong, surely it’s very important – and part of the accountability process – to find out who is to blame, and then to correctly blame that person?
Legitimate Leadership Concepts About Leading In A Crisis
What people choose to do is a function of the intent of their leadership: if historically leadership has been in the relationship with those they lead to give, those people in turn will…
An Example Of Leading In A Crisis In A Legitimate Leadership Way
Miles Crisp, CEO of Tarsus Technology Group of South Africa, said his group has been working on its leadership structure for six years……
What Value Is – The Total Value Of Everything
Most people will agree that there is an ethical dimension to value. This becomes clear when examining the word in its plural. Values are important ideals relating to what is good…
Kindness In Leadership
The Legitimate Leadership Model is based on the proposition that the best way to achieve your own interests is to pursue the other person’s self-interest.

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By  Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: When something goes wrong, surely it’s very important – and part of the accountability process – to find out who is to blame, and then to correctly blame that person?
Answer: For many of us the first thing we want to do when something goes wrong is blame someone, to know whose fault it is. Blame is really discharging of discomfort and pain and it has an inverse relationship with accountability. Those who blame a lot seldom have the tenacity and courage to actually hold people accountable.
Of course it is important to find out why something went wrong – a correct diagnosis allows the appropriate medicine to be applied.
There are only ever three whys: a “means” why (provide the means), an “ability” why (trainer/coach), or an “accountability” why (hold the person accountable for their carelessness or deliberate malevolence).
Blaming others is one of the distinctive characteristics of a victim. Part of the leader’s job is to deal with victims wherever they are and whenever they arise. Legitimate Leadership has developed a powerful tool for leaders to deal with victims called the Gripe to Goal process (refer to the book Legitimate Leadership (2012), pages 216-231).
To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

WEBINAR REPORT 1: LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP CONCEPTS ABOUT LEADING IN A CRISIS
This report and the next report (respectively on the Concept and Practice of leading in crisis in organisations) are from a Legitimate Leadership webinar held on 30 July 2020. The presenters were Wendy Lambourne of Legitimate Leadership (this report) and Miles Crisp of Tarsus Technology Group of South Africa (next report). Ian Munro of Legitimate Leadership was the moderator. The webinar had 99 attendees.
In a crisis the chickens come home to roost: people rally or scatter.
What people choose to do is a function of the intent of their leadership: if historically leadership has been in the relationship with those they lead to give, those people in turn will, in a crisis, come to the fore and do whatever they can for the survival of the organisation. If the leadership has been there to take, the opposite will occur: they will do little if anything and maybe they will jump ship.
What leaders do in a crisis may be forgiven but it will not be forgotten. Leaders come under increased scrutiny from their people. A crisis creates lingering memories.
READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR CLICK HERE

 

WEBINAR REPORT 2: AN EXAMPLE OF LEADING IN A CRISIS IN A LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP WAY
Miles Crisp, CEO of Tarsus Technology Group of South Africa, said his group has been working on its leadership structure for six years.
“Six years ago, we started a complete overhaul of the organisation. We adopted a legitimate leadership framework and did workshops across the entire organisation for about 18 months. They were about what intent we wanted. Accountability was also important – we involved people in the whole framework around means, ability and accountability.
“You never really know in a measurable way how this is impacting. Over the period we gradually reduced numbers in the organisation and became more focused in what we do. We became a much leaner organisation.
“Then Covid came. We made a decision 10 days before South Africa entered full lockdown in March 2020 to move a large number of our people to work at home.
READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR CLICK HERE

ARTICLE: WHAT VALUE IS – THE TOTAL VALUE OF EVERYTHING
By Peter Jordan, associate, Legitimate Leadership.
A Google search of “the total value of everything” will reveal articles relating to “how much is the world worth”? (in dollar denomination); “how to calculate the value of your estate”; and a definition of gross domestic product.
Value is often automatically assumed to be monetary, but we all know instinctively that that what we value is multi-dimensional and diverse.
Most people will agree that there is an ethical dimension to value. This becomes clear when examining the word in its plural. Values are important ideals relating to what is good or bad. Often such values will be culturally determined and as such are not objective.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE

VIDEO: KINDNESS IN LEADERSHIP
By Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
The Legitimate Leadership Model is based on the proposition that the best way to achieve your own interests is to pursue the other person’s self-interest. Because when you do that, that person’s natural response is to give back.
Conventionally, if managers or leaders are asked what their job is, they will reply that it is to get results out of their people (because that is what they are measured on).
But you don’t elicit willingness from people by being a taker. We say you elicit willingness as a leader when you are a giver.
But that giving is of two specific types: the gift of care, and the gift of growing people.
So Legitimate Leadership argues for a change of intent, a change of heart in leaders.
READ THE FULL SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE

July 2020

Featured

Question of the Month
In the Legitimate Leadership Model, what is the difference between leaders and professional managers?
Courage In Organisations 
How have leaders reacted to the situation? Who just chased the money; who really cared for their people; who acted with courage?
Courage In Organisations – In Concept 
We feel afraid or uncomfortable in these situations because of physical pain, uncertainty, intimidation or the risk of material or non-material loss. When courage is involved there is always a real risk of losing something valuable of ourselves. Courage is what is required in order to overcome that fear…
Courage in Organisations – In Practice
Jim wagged his finger at me and said he would see to it that no people would lose their jobs and that there would be no change. But Steve and I had agreed that there would be change no matter what, so we took on NUMSA. You could call it courageous or foolhardy, but we did it because it was the right thing to do.
The Shiny Eyes Definition Of Success
If people are not realising their full potential, the leader needs to look at himself and ask, “What do I need to give this personal which will enable her to excel?”

For more information regarding the above, please
E-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

Question of the Month 
By  Wendy Lambourne, director, Legitimate Leadership.
Question: In the Legitimate Leadership Model, what is the difference between leaders and professional managers?
Answer: In organisations today there are a lot of professional managers but very few leaders. The difference between the two is a matter of intent.
Professional managers give, but in order to get. A true leader (who may be called ‘manager’) is genuinely there to give.
Professional managers do have relationships with their people built on mutual trust and respect. They do an adequate job of enabling contributions by their people. But their people are still a means to an end. The end is the result. The result comes first and the people second.
Great leaders have it the other way round. Their people come first, before the results. Their people come first in good times and in bad – always. This is because leaders care about their people absolutely.
To submit your question, e-mail info@legitimateleadership.com

EVENT: COURAGE IN ORGANISATIONS
This report and the following two reports (respectively on the Concept and Practice of courage in organisations) are from a Legitimate Leadership webinar held on 18 June 2020. The presenters were Josh Hayman, Ian Munro (moderator) and Jimmy Furstenburg. Josh and Ian are Legitimate Leadership consultants; Jimmy is an organisational turnaround practitioner. The webinar had 37 attendees.
In the current pandemic people are very insecure. Organisations have to make very tough decisions. Leaders should be frank, upfront and honest with employees.
How have leaders reacted to the situation? Who just chased the money; who really cared for their people; who acted with courage?
Handled correctly, the Covid experience has been an important development opportunity to create a greater sense of shared purpose between employees, leaders and shareholders in organisations.
Courage is not something that organisations are typically not good at. But observation (for instance, https://thriveglobal.com/stories/whats-courage-have-to-do-with-leadership/) indicates that courage in an organisation has huge benefits: it builds accountability; the ability to handle conflict; integrity and moral strength; collaboration and teamwork; capacity for risk-taking; and an engaged, dynamic and inspired work culture.
Said Jimmy Furstenburg, in the webinar: “In the end, you cannot run an organisation successfully without the trust of your people. But when you create an environment of trust you can do amazing things. How do they learn to trust you? A key element is you, the leader, being courageous. How are you courageous? It is not a mystery: by being yourself warts-and-all, by being frank and honest and having integrity and authenticity.”
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR  CLICKING HERE

EVENT REPORT 1: COURAGE IN ORGANISATIONS, IN CONCEPT
Although this webinar is about Legitimate Leadership’s view of courage in organisations we start by referring to the bestselling book by Adam Grant, Give and Take. Grant explored which of two strategies in organisations would tend to be more successful, drawing on research from across the United States.
One conclusion he drew was that some of the most successful people in organisations are givers. We at Legitimate Leadership were pleased because this conclusion is very supportive of our framework.
But there was a fly in the ointment: Grant also concluded that some of the least successful people in organisations were givers.
What then accounts for why some givers are successful and others are not successful? Grant concluded that the answer had a lot to do with the choices that givers made about who to give to or what to give. We agree with this conclusion – we believe the givers of generosity who are less successful find it difficult to make choices about what kind of generosity is appropriate in situations that they face.
But we believe that Grant did not ask the essential question – namely, what the appropriate give is in a particular situation. Grant’s book talked only about generosity, but we say there are two kinds of giving. One of them absolutely is generosity; but the other is courage.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR CLICK HERE

EVENT REPORT 2: COURAGE IN ORGANISATIONS, IN PRACTICE 
Jimmy Furstenberg’s first job was as a labour relations officer in what is today Bridgestone Firestone South Africa. At the time, the 1980s, the labour relations environment in South Africa was a virtual war zone because the workplace was the only legal arena for the expression of black aspirations during apartheid. Then Bridgestone International bought Firestone International. A condition of the deal was that Firestone International’s Port Elizabeth factory would be closed if it wasn’t turned around within six months.
Appointed as manufacturing director, Jimmy led the turnaround process, applying legitimate leadership principles.
Jimmy recalls that at the start of the turnaround process, “My MD, Steve Shiller, and I did a trip around the world to benchmark our factory against similar factories. The Port Elizabeth factory had been built in 1938 as part of the World War II effort, so it was an old dog and there was a lot we had to do. We were in a lift in Rome and Steve and I said to each that we would fix the factory no matter what we needed to do. We shook hands on it. We resolved that because it was the right thing to do.
“In December 1994 we faced Irvin Jim (general secretary of NUMSA union and probably South Africa’s most militant union leader then and today – editor). Jim wagged his finger at me and said he would see to it that no people would lose their jobs and that there would be no change. But Steve and I had agreed that there would be change no matter what, so we took on NUMSA. You could call it courageous or foolhardy, but we did it because it was the right thing to do.
“That is the most important thing – somehow it’s easier being courageous when you are driven by a purpose.
But we believe that Grant did not ask the essential question – namely, what the appropriate give is in a particular situation. Grant’s book talked only about generosity, but we say there are two kinds of giving. One of them absolutely is generosity; but the other is courage.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE
TO VIEW THE VIDEO OF THIS WEBINAR CLICK HERE

VIDEO: THE SHINY EYES DEFINITION OF SUCCESS
By Benjamin Zander, 81, a British conductor who is the musical director of the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra and the Boston Philharmonic Youth Orchestra.
COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO BY WENDY LAMBOURNE, LEGITIMATE LEADERSHIP: Well put, Benjamin Zander! The job of the leader is to make those in his charge “big”; to enable others to become the best that they can be. If people are not realising their full potential, the leader needs to look at himself and ask, “What do I need to give this personal which will enable her to excel?” Only when the leader changes do the people change. The ultimate beneficiary is the leader, he grows.
OUR SUMMARY OF THIS VIDEO: The conductor of an orchestra doesn’t make a sound. His picture appears on the front of the CD but he doesn’t make a sound. He depends for his power on his ability to make other people powerful.
That realisation changed everything for me – it was totally life-changing. People in my orchestra came up to me and said, “Ben what happened?”
What happened is I realised my job was to awaken possibility in other people.
And of course I wanted to know whether I was actually doing that. And you know how you find out? You look at their eyes. If their eyes are shiny you know you’re doing it.
If their eyes are not shiny, ask this question, “Who am I being that my players’ eyes are not shining?”
I have a definition of success. For me it’s very simple, and it’s not about wealth and fame and power. It’s about how many shiny eyes I have around.
TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLICK HERE