Leadership’s Future: the Past is Not the Future
by Miki Saxon
Dan McCarthy had a terrific post on why choosing leaders is a gamble—be sure to read the comments.
We see the idiocy of assuming that past performance is always a good predictor of the future all the time, but it seems especially true at senior levels.
First, there is the penchant for identifying ‘high potential’ starting in kindergarten and providing lots of extra training and coaching, while ignoring those who may be late bloomers or less obvious (read quieter).
Then there’s the Peter Principle, which is not only alive and well, but functioning even more efficiently today than it was when Laurence J. Peter first described it back in 1970.
We relish looking at the past to predict the future, thus choosing to ignore all extenuating circumstances and surrounding factors that played a role in the person’s performance.
We forget, or ignore, that
- one manager’s star is another manager’s bomb;
- the skills needed to take advantage of an economic expansion are very different from those needed in a downturn; and
- turmoil or an ongoing crisis in a person’s personal life often impacts their performance at work.
Last, but not least, we need to get over our love affair with the idea of the hero-leader who, with a wave of the hand, can part the seas and eliminate obstacles.
Your comments—priceless
Image credit: Valerie Everett on flickr
