What kind of leader does the UK need now?

As the UK faces further uncertainty, we need to rethink political leadership. What attributes does the next prime minister need?

Theresa May has officially handed in her notice and candidates are lining up for the role of Conservative Party leader and UK prime minister. May famously promised ‘“strong and stable leadership” but ultimately expressed deep regret that she had not been able to deliver Brexit.

May will probably be remembered for her resilience and stoicism, continuing to push through her Brexit deal with dogged determination. However, her failure to inspire others with her Brexit vision resulted in low levels of support. Her efforts at collaboration across parliament came too little, too late.  Rather, she relied on a small group of advisors to negotiate a detailed deal with the EU which the majority of parliamentary colleagues – and UK voters – simply didn’t buy into.

While Brexit remains the biggest issue in this leadership election, it is part of a general climate of uncertainty. Recent political upheaval demonstrates that we need to rethink the kind of leadership the UK needs.

Of the candidates who have put themselves forward so far, Boris Johnson is the current favourite. However, his success is by no means guaranteed. With so many candidates to choose from, what are the leadership attributes that the new prime minister most needs to demonstrate?

Vision

In these uncertain times, the prime minister needs to provide clarity of vision and direction for the UK going forward as a nation, with a sense of purpose in the world about our contribution and the type of society we want to be.

Values

With trust in political leaders at an all-time low, the UK needs an authentic leader who will tell the truth and hold others to account for honesty, respect all people as equal before the law, and uphold the universal declaration of human rights.

Empowerment

Rather than adopting a command-and-control stance, the UK needs an empowering leader to build confidence in others to make decisions and support people to assume responsibility as leaders in their communities. To drive the UK forward, an empowering approach can also support our endemic entrepreneurship and drive innovation.

Collaboration

The UK needs a collaborative leader to unite diverse groups of people across society, especially given the deep schisms following the Brexit vote. We need someone who can rebuild shared ways of working across communities, encouraging people to focus on mutual benefit rather than difference. In the face of multiple geopolitical challenges, the UK also needs a prime minister who can work with other nations to help build a more peaceful and sustainable world.

Agility

The new prime minister needs to be agile, keen to listen, to learn (if only May had learned from her initial mistake of not engaging with parliament), and to recognise the value of others’ views. The UK needs a leader who is driven by a desire to serve rather than by an ego - humble, adaptable, and in tune with the needs of others.

What politics can learn from business

In the fast-moving world of modern business, many of the most successful leaders have worked hard to develop the attributes above. Although the world of politics is experiencing seismic change, the style of political leadership in the UK is still firmly rooted in old-fashioned combat rather than modern collaboration. A new prime minister presents us with a new opportunity. Is it an opportunity any of the candidates can seize?

What does the UK stand for?

It’s time to re-examine our values as a society

Since the EU referendum, there has been a noticeable absence of discussion of what the UK stands for as a country. What does Britain mean to the world? Where is the articulation of what makes us a nation of people with strong principles that we believe in, that we will fight to protect, such as freedom, respect for every individual, personal and collective responsibility for each other, and a deep compassion for people of every race as we seek to create a better world?

Speaking at Tuesday’s Brexit debate in parliament, veteran Tory MP Ken Clarke questioned where populism and extremism will take the UK next. We need to explain what we stand for and articulate our role in the world, so that the space we want to inhabit is clear. We need a vision for how we live, how we work with each other and with people from other countries. What can others rely on the British for? Should they, for example, be confident that we will always stand up against bullies and tyrants? Should they believe we will protect the rights of people to be free, to think and speak independently, and to live in safety from oppression and harm? Should they assume we believe in scientific progress for the benefit of humankind?

The alternative, if we cannot explain what we stand for, is for others to see us as confused - torn between the ‘glories’ of the past and possible riches through realpolitik. Will the UK be marginalised as a nation locked in the past, a country without principles, open to the highest bidder in order to maintain a certain level of prosperity?

The Queen, who maintains a neutral stance on politics, recently highlighted the importance of “coming together to seek out the common ground”. Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May have finally met in private for what has been described as a ‘serious and engaged’ discussion. It’s not too late for our political leaders to steer us away from confusion and towards compassion and collective responsibility.

What is the UK’s future vision?

A lack of leadership is resulting in a lack of purpose

MPs are gathering in the UK parliament today to debate and vote on Brexit Plan B. As we watch the lack of leadership in the UK parliament play out in practice, it’s difficult to see the sense of vision or purpose in this ongoing debate.

Where is the sense of why we are a great country, what we are most proud of, how we can play our part in the world in the most effective and responsible way? Where is the vision for a nation that contributes to the 21^st century world by being a hotbed for innovation, improving life for people across the globe?

Reporting from Davos in The Times, Callum Jones wrote that, ‘Angela Merkel has urged world leaders to defy populism and save the established order, calling in nations to “hold together” and halt the fragmentation of the multilateral system’. Merkel added: “A global architecture will only be successful if we’re open to compromise.”

If our political leaders spent time working to understand and articulate the side of the British spirit of which we can be most proud, we could perhaps unite around a vision which others would respect and want to be associated with. Our sense of why we exist as a nation could be based on a new purpose in the world, as we move on from our history of empire, domination and cruelty. We could reinvent ourselves as a nation that other nations want to work with, a nation of collaboration and mutual respect – one that focuses energy and resources on creating better solutions to problems like energy, food, water, and peace.

We need visionary political leadership right now. Leadership that can recreate our sense of purpose in the world. Leadership that builds connections, not partitions.

The appetite for agility

It has been four months since my second book, The Agile Leader, was published. It has been busy, with book launch events and conferences speeches demonstrating how the desire to be more agile is on the minds of so many leaders. Whether it’s hundreds of leaders across a global bank on a webinar, a group of finance directors in London, the top 200 leaders in a major insurer, or mixed academic and business groups at universities in Manchester and Melbourne, the interest is there.

Why is this? We know from our research with Ipsos MORI that becoming more agile was a concern of CEOs as far back as 2014, and this book was written, at least in part, to provide some answers. It describes the barriers to being more agile and offers some examples of how organisations around the world have over come them. It offers some leadership attributes which are often evident in more agile organisations. And it gives some examples of how some of the organisations we researched as part of the book project are mobilising more agile ways of working.

But the book is also an extension of the research and work on Connected Leadership, which is still the overarching framework for becoming more agile and customer-centric. It delves deeper into how organisations can reduce cycles, increase outputs, engage their people and drive exceptional performance.

As I fly to Australia to speak at a conference at Melbourne University, I am reflecting on how this is not easy, how the realities of each organisation’s context, history and culture make becoming agile a non-trivial task. As with most changes to complex human systems, it would be easier to start afresh. Changing an existing organisation, whether it’s a university, a commercial operation, or a public body, is difficult, messy, and not as predicable as we would like. I think that’s why I enjoy research, writing and consulting so much – it is such a challenge, such an interesting journey. And when it goes well, it is so rewarding to see people adopting new ways of working, new behaviours, new priorities, in the shared interest of being more relevant to the customers or patients or citizens or students they serve.

Can Sainsbury’s and Asda merge to become a larger yet more agile business?

The news that Sainsbury's plans to merge with Asda, which has been confirmed today, has come as quite a shock. It is a striking example of two major retailers taking a very bold move to address the ongoing challenges of an intensely competitive industry.

If the merger goes ahead, the combined group will be led by Sainsbury's chief executive Mike Coupe, who has said that this is a “transformational opportunity to create a new force in UK retail, which will be more competitive and give customers more of what they want now and in the future.”  

This statement addresses the major challenges of competition and customer focus. Coupe has also recognised the need to create a business that is “more dynamic, more adaptable, more resilient” - better able to respond to its ever-changing, fast-moving marketplace.

Combining two well-established retailers will be a challenge.  Coupe and the new leadership team will need to manage the paradox of agile leadership: creating a new, connected organisation while at the same time disrupting that new organisation sufficiently to reinvent it in a way that can compete on a sustainable basis with competitors. What does this require? A major shift towards agile ways of working, with greater emphasis on simplicity, shorter planning cycles, ruthless prioritisation focused on what customers want, and embracing digital opportunities.

Couple has also said that the two supermarkets are "the best possible fit" and there is a widespread view from industry analysts that the two have complementary strengths on which they could collaborate. So, for example Sainsbury’s is stronger in e-commerce and convenience stores, Asda is more competitive on pricing and has a stronger clothing offer in George. 

The supermarket industry is notoriously cut-throat and has undergone great change in recent years as market leader Tesco has lost market share while discounters Aldi and Lidl have increased theirs. Industry disruption has become the norm, but in supermarket retailing that disruption has been coming from discounters or from Amazon’s recent foray into the grocery market. We are less used to disruption from large, long-established corporates.

If the merger goes ahead, can Sainsbury’s and Asda merge and become both bigger and more agile? It will be a monumental challenge, and will require a very strong leadership community in the new business, willing to embrace new ways of thinking, leading and working. The alternative is that the merger ends up being a defensive reaction to new market entrants with a different business model, which may delay but not stop their ongoing disruption of the sector.

Wenger leaves Arsenal with a lasting legacy rather than a leadership void

Arsene Wenger is to leave Arsenal after 22 years, three Premier League titles and seven FA Cups. 

Wenger introduced structure, rigour and discipline to a team once renowned for its drinking culture. He also instilled a great sense of loyalty and pride. In the modern world of football, there is often a focus on short-term results (and a tendency to sack managers pretty swiftly if they don’t achieve them). Although he has been criticised over the years for some of his decisions, Wenger always maintained a very clear sense of purpose and an unwavering long-term focus. 

Often when a longstanding leader leaves an organisation, it can leave a void which is difficult to fill. However, in Wenger’s case, the story has always been much more about the club than about him. Frequently described as a man of integrity, he leaves a lasting legacy which is much more about transforming Arsenal into a widely-admired, professional club than about any personal heroics of his own.

When Herbert Chapman managed Arsenal from 1925-1934 he became known as ‘The Great Innovator’ because he was concerned not only with winning trophies, but also with always looking for new ways to improve performance. Wenger helped to refocus Arsenal on this performance goal. He showed great commitment to the club and inspired others to do the same. His parting comment, "To all the Arsenal lovers, take care of the values of the club," demonstrates his desire for others to maintain this commitment.  

The legacy of Martin Luther King

Fifty years ago, Dr Martin Luther King was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee. Since then we have seen some progress in terms of civil rights, with, for example, Barack Obama as the first black President of the United States, but we also see continued tensions, violence and oppression, not just in the USA, but elsewhere as well.

What I believe Dr King did manage to do was to create a stronger sense of the possibility of equality, of connection between black and white supported by the will to change the past. His dream gave people a deeper sense of shared purpose, which in turn drove more action, more challenge to the status quo, more change. His dream has yet to be fully realised, but 50 years on we can recognise and applaud his courage in making a stand and inspiring others to do the same.

What do you think? Please tweet @SimonJHayward and let me know.

Why does authentic leadership matter?

When it comes to leadership, authenticity has become a highly prized attribute.  Described by Harvard Business Review as ‘the gold standard for leadership’, authenticity demands a high degree of self-awareness and can be difficult to attain.

Why does authenticity matter? Well, employees and customers expect transparency and they value leaders who are open, honest and genuine. We want our leaders to act with integrity. This has become increasingly important in recent years as the pace of change increases in our unpredictable world.

When I was researching my Connected Leadership book, which explores how to create more agile, customer-driven organisations that are equipped to meet complex challenges, I identified authenticity as a key factor in becoming more connected.

Much of the focus on leadership development over the last two decades has been on developing inspirational or transformational leaders.  Authentic leadership represents a more inclusive and less individualistic style of leadership than transformational leadership: more in keeping with a shared process of connected leadership.

So, how can we create a more authentic, values-led culture in our organisations? I will explore this during a lunchtime webinar on Thursday 25 January. Drawing on research into authentic leadership that has been conducted over the last fifteen years, I’ll highlight the characteristics of an authentic organisation and talk through the four key attributes of an authentic leader. If you’d like to know more, please join us. You’ll have the opportunity to post your questions and comments during the webinar, and I look forward to some interesting interaction.

Sign up for the webinar on Thursday 25 January: How to Develop Authentic Leadership.

Further reading:

Authenticity, values, andconnected leadership: Thoughts from me in Alliance Manchester Business School’s Network magazine.

How can you become a moreauthentic leader? Thoughts from me in Business First Australia magazine.

Connected negotiations would help Brexit progress

Theresa May and EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker have agreed to ‘accelerate’ Brexit negotiations - but there is still no sign of a breakthrough.

Like most people in business, I have been involved in my fair share of negotiations over the years, some lasting just a few weeks and some an entire year. Some have gone very well, some quite well, and occasionally there has been a poor outcome for both sides.  The priority in negotiation, in my humble view, is recognising what is important to all parties (as there are often more than two parties involved), and working out how to ensure they all get what is really important to them.  I have not been involved in a significant negotiation where these have been utterly incompatible, and normally they can be aligned, once they are understood.  But this requires a mindset of seeking a shared outcome that is good for all parties, what has famously been called a ‘win/win outcome’.

Brexit negotiators are currently deadlocked on issues relating to the UK’s ‘divorce bill’ and with serious issues remaining over the Irish border and citizens’ rights.  We see turmoil around the UK government cabinet table, with Home Secretary Amber Rudd describing the prospect of Brexit happeningwithout a deal being reached between the UK and the EU as ‘unthinkable’ while Brexit Secretary David Davis is committed to keeping the ‘no deal’ option open. It is a slow-moving and uncooperative approach to negotiations from the UK team.  I am a little embarrassed to be British right now, as I watch our politicians seek to ‘win’ the negotiations with Europe, to play a clever game where the UK gets what it wants at the expense of the European Union. 

I believe that if the UK government took a more win/win approach, seeking to work with their European counterparts to explore how to achieve what each side needs, we would see accelerated progress.  The Prime Minister’s speech in Florence last week set a more conciliatory tone, but it lacked substance about such matters as the scale of the ‘divorce bill’ that the UK would find acceptable, and a deep recognition of the concerns of the European Union nations.  As the UK continues with this disconnected approach I fear that progress will continue to be slow and that the outcome will in the end be a lose/lose, with neither party getting a really satisfying outcome.  The pragmatist in me thinks that we will get over it, and that economic interests will eventually cause reasonable trading and migration policies to be adopted, but it feels like a sub-optimal approach and one that does not reflect well on the UK government or the UK nation. 

What do you think? Please tweet @SimonJHayward and let me know.

Getting connected through running

This weekend I find myself looking at two runs in quick succession, which perhaps doesn’t say much for my planning skills.  

The first is a 10k Cirrus team run in the Peak District, BackBefore Dark, which involves some hills and head torches, but will hopefully conclude with a beer in the evening. The second is the Macclesfield Half Marathon, which Cirrus is sponsoring, so I felt I ought to take part.  It is also hilly, I am told, which may mean that my time is not exactly a personal best.  But it will be great to be running around the town where I live. 

The first run is about being connected to colleagues and the second is about being connected with our local community.  Both via the medium of running, which normally involves sweat, occasional tears and blood only when I fall over! It will be great to be out there with lots of other people doing the same thing, going through our individual challenges (mostly mental, but also physical) and having a laugh together. 

Here’s the link to leadership. Running is a bit like leadership in that it's a very solitary activity a lot of the time and yet it's really about people getting together with a shared challenge (as well as being a great way to raise money). I remember when we set up the 505050 Challenge when I turned 50 (believe it or not) and I was overwhelmed by the response of so many people who took part, either individually or in teams, to raise money for The Christie and East Cheshire Hospice.  It was an amazing show of unity and raised way over its fundraising target.  It was also a great demonstration of shared leadership, with people stepping forward, taking responsibility, and making what for many were significant personal sacrifices to deliver the event.  It was both awesome and humbling, and demonstrated the collective power of people with a shared purpose to make a difference. 

So I look forward to running with colleagues and neighbours this weekend, safe in the knowledge that the shared experience will bring us closer together. Connected through running. 

Connected Leadership goes global

Over the last few weeks we have seen an amazing increase in the way Connected Leadership is going global. 

ConnectedLeadership, my first book, was published in December 2015. The concept of Connected Leadership is central to much of the work Cirrus does with our clients, and over the past two years companies around the world have adopted Connected Leadership as their core framework for leadership identity and development, from the Americas to Asia.  Now three pieces of news take Connected Leadership to a different level of global relevance. 

Firstly, I have had a chapter on Connected Leadership in Asia published in the prestigious Palgrave Handbook ofLeadership in Transforming Asia, edited by Nuttawuth Muenjohn and Adela McMurray, both professors at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology’s School of Management. I wrote it with Cirrus colleagues Barry Freeman and Alison Tickner, based on my original research into Connected Leadership and additional research into leadership practices across key markets in Asia. 

Secondly, Connected Leadership is being translated into Chinese, to enable it to be distributed more widely in the Chinese market.  And thirdly, I have just heard that it is also going to be translated into Arabic, taking the Connected Leadership message to a vast new territory. 

These developments give me great confidence that the new leadership approach suggested by Connected Leadership can travel globally, and that the need for more agile and customer driven ways of working are relevant across so many varied cultures around the world. People are becoming connected more and more through social media and technology. This trend is only going to accelerate with the changes we are beginning to see with artificial intelligence, ubiquitous connectivity through the internet, and mixed reality. Connected Leadership is a framework to help leaders engage their people, create more agile ways of working, and drive innovation across the enterprise.  It is relevant and it is easy to use. I am excited about its future.  

Brexit reality check: Why leaders need to be able to admit mistakes

Some of the most difficult decisions I have had to make, both at work and personally, are when I've had to reverse a decision to which I was committed. Whether it's stopping a pet project in marketing, or acknowledging that a new product investment was flawed, it's not easy to say, 'I was wrong, we should stop now'. 

However, this is just what we in the UK need to do now, in my opinion, given the way we are advancing towards an economic disaster as we exit the European Union. As talks resume this week in Brussels, we see only exasperation on both sides. The prospect of any breakthrough is unlikely. 

It's never easy to admit that we were wrong, or that circumstances have now changed and our decision won't work. But one of the lessons I've learned through bitter experience is that it can be worse to persist, doggedly trying to make an erroneous decision work, holding onto the original vision that led to the decision in the first place, even if it was wrong.

In the boom years of the early noughties I remember an elearning project we were working on which I believed would become massive.  It was in line with the analysts’ predictions, and it had some great early adopters involved.  I was determined, but I was not tuned in strongly enough to our wider customer base and the market place as a whole - I wanted to believe the hype and was not sufficiently close to what was going on around us. I was too stubborn, and we would have been much better off to have adapted our approach to be more in line with what clients were actually seeking at that time.  In the end, it was a partial success. However, we wasted a lot of time and effort with an enormous opportunity cost. 

I suspect the politicians who are locked onto a Brexit timetable will look back with the same sense of regret that they didn't listen to what was happening around them. The UK government, even after the abortive snap election earlier this year, is acting as though it has only a forward gear. Like James Dean's opponent in Rebel Without a Cause’s famous ‘chickie run’ scene, it is driving quickly towards the cliff, unable to escape the inevitable crash below.

Back in 2001 I needed to have had more humility, more willingness to listen to the advice of others and to acknowledge when my decision was, at least in part, wrong. I needed to slow down, to talk to customers, and to adapt to changing market demand. I wish I had been more connected to our customers and my colleagues, and able to put my hands up and accept that my initial decision was not right.  

Steering our young people away from extremism and towards tolerance

Watching the One Love concert in Manchester on television last Sunday evening while the news of Saturday's terrorist attack in London's Borough Market was still being broadcast, it felt like the extremes of love and hate were being demonstrated in parallel.  

People sang in Manchester in a display of unity and peace.  In London, stories of bravery and human support were recounted as names of the victims were announced.  In both cities people stood connected in defiance of the ideology of hatred which drove men to kill indiscriminately. 

But as the news reporters pack up their cameras and the concert stage is dismantled, we need to turn our attention to the lines of division within our society.  These divisions are accentuated by extremists who believe there is only one truth, and that this truth requires them to become extreme in their beliefs.  We have seen through the history of mankind that those who educate the young can influence their beliefs and behaviour when they grow up. If we allow our children’s education and other activities to be segregated along faith lines we are creating the roots of division and the potential for extremism in our society. 

If however we bring our children up in a society whose philosophy reflects our national values of respect, honesty, democracy and freedom, we can expect different results.  If we educate our young people to be tolerant and kind, we can hope that they grow up with these characteristics in their hearts.  If we embrace all beliefs and traditions in the spirit of being one community, we can create connections across faiths that gives our society hope of a way forward from bombers and murderers to people living together in harmony. 

Fundamentalist religious views, in my experience, are premised on the notion of being right, of being the chosen ones, of polarisation.  I held fundamentalist Christian views in my teens, and believed that we were right and others therefore were wrong.  That God had chosen us – and by implication, that He had not chosen others.  I now have no religious beliefs, and cannot see how any god could watch the hatred and suffering in so many parts of the world and be described as righteous.  But my experience as a zealous teenager taught me that such polarised beliefs are both seductive and a powerful influence on one’s behaviour. They dominate one’s life, one’s judgements about what is right and wrong, and one’s actions as a result.  No doubt the murderers in Manchester and London believed their actions were justified.  Such beliefs are promoted through a complex array of websites, social media, peer groups and others.  It’s up to all of us to build on the most positive and inclusive elements of our society, to facilitate better quality conversations about beliefs and values, and to strengthen the connections between different communities rather than drive division.

We need to go back into our schools, and help our young people to think for themselves, to challenge myths, and to be exposed to many different views of religion.  Our schools should create space for debate, encouraging students to challenge and appraise the views of others, both face-to-face and online. We owe it to them to give them a view of a society where people respect those who are different, whom they don’t understand, and whose views they disagree with.  Our schools, our community groups, our churches, mosques, temples and synagogues, are the battleground for our society’s future. We cannot let them be taken over by the voices of bigotry and the ideology of fundamentalism of any sort. 

Mike’s story: Sometimes what we're searching for is right in front of us

Here is a lovely story from a friend of mine who was recently on a yoga retreat.  I hope you don’t mind me sharing it with you.

Mike’s story

One morning, whilst on retreat in the forests of Western Portugal, I decided to take a walk. I chose my direction and set off on my journey to the top of my chosen mountain with the intention of seeing all below.

The path was tough and quite steep and I came across several forks. I always chose the path that looked like it would take me straight to the top. Each corner I turned I expected to see the grand vista, but instead came across another fork; left, right or straight on. Each time I chose the path I thought would take me to the top.

After an hour of walking I reached the top and turned to find that the view was blocked by the trees.  After all that effort I was left disappointed with the results.

I now had another decision to make - I could take the route left down the hill, right down the hill, or back the way I had come. 

Lunch time was approaching, so I decided to head directly back.

The path was the same, but this time it was different. I was no longer looking for something but I could see – I saw white, yellow, and purple flowers and every colour of green. I heard the wind in the trees, the bees, the birds singing. I smelt the sweet fragrance of the pines. I felt the sun on my face. I could see the path ahead and the view I had been searching for was there right in front of me.