来源｜ATD
标题｜The Missing Leadership Competency
我们缺乏领导能力
翻译｜培训江湖（ID:ondemandchina2010）编辑组
声明｜如需转载请注明出处与来源。
我并不喜欢那些很长的领导能力清单，并且清楚地把每一项能力在所有项目中的应用都列出来，如从领导力培训到招聘新员工。
当我去看一张旨在培养优秀领导者的能力清单时，我总觉得不知所措。这世上能有人掌握所有的这些能力？这些能力都跟领导相关吗？这清单看起来像是某种愿望单，而非那种实际可用的能培养或选拔优秀领导者的方法。
一般来说，能力指的是个人能够有效融入工作、角色、功能、任务或职责中需要展现出来的素质。
这些素质包括了与工作相关的行为（个人说的内容或做的事能够导致绩效的优劣），动力（个人对工作、组织或地理位置的感觉）及技术知识/技巧（个人了解某些实况、科学技术、职业、流程、某工作、某组织等的相关知识）。能力是通过对工作或角色的研究来确定的。
—哈佛大学能力词典
然而，似乎所有关于领导力的书籍、领导力的咨询以及领导力培养项目都有着自己的能力清单。
很明显，没有人能够完全掌握清单上所有的能力，也并不是组织内部所有层级的领导角色都需要同等程度的所有领导能力。还有，如果是处于压力的状态下，我们要怎样要求领导能力呢？比如说在组织进行周转紧迫、大规模合并及国际化扩张的时候？
即时的业务环境决定其所需的领导力技术。不管你在业务环境中担任什么样的角色，你所需要的领导力技术的重要性肯定是不一样的。事实上，我们能很明显地看出来有一些领导能力地位要优于其他的。但问题时，哪些能力是优先的呢？
根据Daniel Goleman在《哈佛商业评论》中发表的文章“必需领导力技巧”所说，情商要优先于其他所有的领导力技能 — 正如他所追求的，就是要成为情商大师。
IBM 最近对来自64个国家的1700名CEO做了调查研究，结果表明他们希望掌握的领导力能力都是跟其重点执行业务相关的能力。领导力中最重要的三个能力分别是，关注客户需求的能力、与同事合作的能力以及激励他人的能力。
我可以背诵许多不同的“关键领导能力”清单。但每一次当我看到那些长长的能力清单时，我都觉得缺了些什么。实际上，有一个最为关键的能力是其他所有能力的基本前提，那就是：勇气。
但是你在《哈佛大学能力词典》中是找不到勇气一词的，更为不幸的是，在如今的商业世界我们也很难找到有勇气的人了。在这里我所说的勇气，特别是领导力的勇气，具体是指人们要有意愿、有魄力做到：
为了良好业务关系的目的和原则挺身而出。指出显而易见的问题所在（房间里的大象），打开艰难的谈话局面。做正确的事，不妥协、不取巧。
● 大声指出不良行为，不忽略问题。
● 挑战错误的决策和不良的领导，不冷眼旁观。为受到主管或经理欺负的员工讨回公道。
解雇那些通过欺压来管理的管理者
● 鼓励员工说出坏消息，倾听员工说出的坏消息管理保护那些不良现象的举报者，避免他们受到打击报复。
● 即便有可能会季度性回溯，仍然鼓励可持续的发展和创新。
● 推荐最适合某个岗位的人员，而是不最“正确”的人员。
● 把客户放在第一位，华尔街分析之类的放最后。
● 没有勇气，其他的领导能力产生的影响微乎其微。
如何培养更有勇气的领导者
领导力培养项目及工作坊是把勇气列入领导能力中理想的出发点。但比起用那些满是重点的PPT演示稿和激励性的语录来鼓励学员，我们还可以选择应用切实有效的真实业务场景模拟工具来让学员进行体验式学习，从而了解勇气领导力。
第一步是确定在你的组织内部，现任的及未来的领导者可能要面临哪些需要勇气的真实困境。判定并开发这些情境非常关键。与组织内部的高级领导者谈话可以帮助你准确判定这些情境。一般来说，此类情境中大部分都涉及某些道德问题、无误选项的选择问题或是与主流团队及员工共识相悖的问题。
我们必须以书面的形式来开发所有的情境，以此形成案例研究，让每一位学员都能够在情境中用自己的行动进行不同的应对。情境模拟后续的成果讨论必须对在模拟过程中阻碍领导者做出有勇气领导行为的文化压力及同事压力进行梳理，因为这些是可能在现实工作中真正碰到的压力。
如果做的好的话，应用情境模拟的领导力培养项目能够高效地鼓励领导者更有勇气地去接洽业务、应对客户及管理员工。
2016-11-09 星期三
John R. Childress
以下是源文档：
The Missing Leadership Competency
I am not a fan of long lists of leadership competencies and their use in everything from leadership training to executive recruiting. When I look at a list of competencies that supposedly make a good leader, I feel totally overwhelmed. Could any one person have all these? Are they all relevant? It's more like a wish list than a useful way to develop or find good leaders.
Competencies, in the most general terms, are “things” that an individual must demonstrate to be effective in a job, role, function, task, or duty. These “things” include job-relevant behavior (what a person says or does that results in good or poor performance), motivation (how a person feels about a job, organization, or geographic location), and technical knowledge/skills (what a person knows/demonstrates regarding facts, technologies, a profession, procedures, a job, an organization, etc.). Competencies are identified through the study of jobs and roles.
—Harvard University Competency Dictionary
And yet it seems as though every leadership book, leadership consultancy, and leadership development program has a unique competency list.
Obviously, no one fulfills all these competencies, and not every leadership role in an organization calls for these traits in the same proportions. And what about leadership competencies under stressful situations, such as during a turnaround, megamerger, or global expansion?
The current business context determines the leadership skills required. Whatever the role or business context, they certainly all can't have the same level of importance. In fact, it should be obvious that some traits matter more than others. But which ones?
According to Daniel Goleman in the Harvard Business Review article “The Must-Have Leadership Skill,” emotional intelligence trumps all the other skills—as he would, being the guru of EQ. IBM recently surveyed 1,700 CEOs from 64 countries about the leadership traits they want in their key executives. The three leadership traits that mattered most were the ability to focus intensely on customer needs, the ability to collaborate with colleagues, and the ability to inspire.
I could go on and on reciting list after list of 'critical leadership traits.' But every time I read a long list of competencies, something seems to be missing. Indeed, there is one critical trait that gives meaning to all the rest: courage.
You don't find the word courage listed in the Harvard University Competency Dictionary, and unfortunately, courage is hard to find in business these days. What I mean by courage, particularly leadership courage, is the willingness and the moxie to:
● Stand up for the purpose and principles of good business.
● Expose the 'elephant in the room' and open up difficult conversations.
● Do what's right and not what's expedient or easy.
● Call out bad behavior rather than ignore it.
● Challenge poor decisions or poor leadership instead of turning a blind eye.
● Defend employees who are being bullied by supervisors or managers.
● Fire those who use bullying as a management tactic.
● Encourage and listen to bad news.
● Protect whistle-blowers from retaliation by management.
● Encourage sustainability and innovation, even at the expense of quarterly returns.
● Promote the best person for the job, not the 'right' person.
● Put the customer first and Wall Street analysts last.
● Without courage, all the other leadership traits will have very little impact.
How to Help Develop More Courage in Your Leaders
Leadership development programs and workshops are ideal places to begin the process of developing courage as a leadership competency. But rather than using PowerPoint slides full of bullet points and motivational quotations, the use of real business scenarios is an effective tool for experiential learning around the concept of leadership courage.
The first step is to find within your organization real examples of dilemmas involving the use of courage that current and emerging leaders might face. Identifying and developing these scenarios is critical. Speaking with senior leaders in the organization will typically bring some of these scenarios to light. More often than not they revolve around ethical issues, the choice between two right options, or issues that go against the majority of the team or the commonly accepted way of doing things.
Each scenario must be developed in written form, as a case study, and in a manner in which participants can act out the various parts. The resulting discussions following the scenario experiences must tease out the cultural and peer pressures that keep leaders from taking a courageous stand, as these are often the real workplace pressures.
Done well, leadership development programs with such scenarios at their core are highly effective in helping develop greater courage for the betterment of the business, customers, and employees.
Wednesday, November 09, 2016
by John R. Childress
联系客服
