Igniting Performance Leadership
Milan M., Center for Creative Leadership
Most corporations, private companies, institutions and government agencies have huge potential for performance improvement, and some achieve major breakthroughs. The difference? Organizations gain breakthroughs through performance leaders who understand the deliverables and successfully confront their organization with clear expectations that it will be accomplished.
Close examination of organizations reveals that some production, cost, productivity, service and competitiveness renewal strategies put the spotlight on almost everything else but performance. Most fail to execute leadership for results.
Boards, chief executives, managing directors and general managers have two different ways of implementing superior performance: via the "push" model and via the "pull" model. If performance is to be maximized, it's important to know which model to use when.
The Push Model
The push model for performance leadership focuses on pushing changes through the organization via special programs, steering groups, and project teams. This approach relies on people's resourcefulness, empowerment and drive. It can be very effective, especially at first, but if the organization has a weak underlying performance ethic, it's very hard work. Line managers feel imposed upon, people may be unsure how to proceed, and sustainability is hit-or-miss. Often when the special program or steering group is disbanded, the organization may drift back toward the previous status quo. Since the line managers are not the initiators, owners, or heroes, they are not motivated to keep on with the transformation even when they perceive benefits in the short term.
The Pull Model
The "pull" is induced by creating a pervasive, intense performance ethic. This requires mission, aspirations, targets and goals, organizational accountabilities, performance feedback, management of consequences for failure and success that impel line managers to pull projects and performance towards them, not push them away. If these managers are committed to clear aspirations, direction, and goals, striving, stretching and learning to meet these targets will pull them into the future.
Here are some things to think about when deciding which model to apply for performance leadership results. For each question, give examples (how do you know?). If you're not sure, it's time for an in-depth analysis or at least a survey of the workforce.
- How compelling to employees are the organization's mission, aspirations, targets, and goals? How do you know?
- Do the goals and outcomes require people to stretch, innovate, or unleash there hidden talent? How do you know?
- Do people and teams have enough decision space to implement decisions? How do you know?
- Take a read on the transparency of performance feedback systems for units, processes, teams, and individuals? Do they contain clear measures that managers and employees use as outcomes? Examples:
- Do performance breakthroughs and enhancements concentrate on short term gains while learning how to produce long term results? Examples:
- What happens if initiatives fail and succeed? Does the process for analyzing what caused the failure and success include 'lessons learned' for sustaining momentum? Is the performance improvement (global) infrastructure for generating and sharing knowledge and information linked to a governance structure? Examples:
- Are there consequences for success or failure? Do managers and employees see themselves as accountable for results-including safety, production, service and financial outcomes? Examples:
- Are outstanding performers publicly recognized? Are poor performers moved on, held accountable and coached? Who gets selected for promotion? Examples:
- How motivating is the formal, individual mental and social contexts and the core values, job opportunities and recognition programs? How do you know?
- Do leaders from all levels and throughout the organization deploy human transition strategies that flow unambiguously from the company's strategy and performance imperatives? (when 30% critical mass is achieved within 6-9 months or earlier, then the transformation becomes contagious) How do you know?
Most organizations are good in some things and not so good in others. For example, production and financial controls may be in place, but feedback measures are decided behind closed doors and people aren't sure what constitute measures of success. Or health and safety targets are being met, but the organization operates on the hierarchy principle and employees do what they are told, so innovation and idea capability are stifled. Or everyone understands and supports the goals and direction, but progress is impeded because managers are not good at delegating, unleashing the hidden potential talent, or recognizing that individuals and teams are motivated by various organizational psychological and business thinking.
In the majority of cases, both the push and pull models are needed, depending on the circumstances-production outputs, urgency of competitive challenges, resources and time available, leadership. Push and pull performance leadership can be deployed simultaneously in some cases; in others, it is necessary to ensure that the right mission, aspirations, targets and goals, and organization accountabilities, performance feedback and management of consequences for success and failure and systems are in place ("pull") before introducing the performance model (special programs with project teams, steering groups, and tracking systems) and other similar methodologies that depend on a strong work ethic, the resourcefulness, commitment and innovation of individuals and teams ("push").
Related Consulting Services
![[PHOTO] Light streaming through a key hole illuminating an old iron key.](../images/ph_findings.jpg)
