DR. AKOLANG TOMBALE PhD CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BOTSWANA MEAT COMMISSION
Let me start by thanking KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES for inviting me to share with you my humble leadership thoughts and experiences, this morning. I have been asked to talk about KEY CHALLENGES FOR LEADERS OF TODAY AND TOMORROW.
In particular I was asked to look at:
Leadership competencies for leaders of today and tomorrow.
Defining leadership stance and translating into leadership brand.
Determining what leadership developments are needed and profile for the future.
Martin Luther King Jr. said on Leadership “A GOOD LEADER IS NOT A SEARCHER OF CONSENSUS BUT A MOLDER OF CONSESUS.” The essence of this quotation is better demonstrated by the role played by the legendary NELSON MANDELA in the Rugby symbol story. Black South Africans or should I say almost all the African National Congress (ANC) members wanted the South African Rugby Team symbol “The Springbok” to be changed as they regarded it a symbol of the apartheid regime, and MADIBA was totally against this change. Those of you who are movie enthusiasts may recall that this was better displayed in a movie in which Morgan Freeman played Mandela. The words, I remember which had the most impact on me or which stuck in mind from that movie is when Madiba said to a room full angry supporters “LET ME LEAD YOU.”
The most important aspect of this story in my view is not so much the argument of Mandela with his African National Congress colleagues about the Rugby symbol but it is about MADIBA using the RUGBY SYMBOL to drive his national agenda or vision forward, “RECONCILIATION”. We know that reconciliation became a central point of Mr. Nelson Mandela’s leadership as the President of the Republic of South Africa. In this particular case, that is the RUGBY SYMBOL debate, the South African public eventually understood where Nelson Madiba wanted to take them to as a nation. One of the most topical issues in leadership circles demonstrated by in this story is “LEADERSHIP VISION” or desired direction.
The question for all of us as leaders here today is are we able as Mr. Nelson Mandela ably demonstrated in this story to carry or more importantly align those we lead to the direction we want them to go, in other words are we ready to lead when called for.
In trying to answer this question I thought I should refer to another quotation on the distinction between Leadership and leaders this time from David Ulrich and Norm Smallwood (2007) who stated that “Long term success, the kind that last generation after generation depends on making a critical distinction between leaders and leadership. A focus on Leaders emphasizes the personal qualities of the individual whereas a focus on leadership emphasizes the methods that secure the ongoing good of the firm.”
LEADERSHIP COMPETENCIES FOR LEADERS OF TODAY AND TOMORROW
Dave Ulrich and Smallwood said that they asked several companies to send to them their organization’s competency models that listed the unique characteristics that they sought in their leaders. They removed the names of companies from each model. During the workshop attended by representatives of the companies that sent the competency models, they asked these representatives to pick their company’s competency model list, but none of the representatives picked their organization’s list.
Their conclusion was that companies rely on competency models that identify a set of generic traits (vision, direction, energy etc.), and then they (companies) try to find and build next generation of leaders that fit the model. Ultich et al. (2007) called these competencies vanilla models that generate vanilla leadership.
In this day and age or should I say today every organization is trying to get the best out of its people especially leaders and as a result we all turn to ready-made competency models from leadership gurus and psychologists and try to fit their leaders into these competency models.
Competency models are generally focused more on behavior than results. Even more important is the fact that most organizations that have competency models have taken the approach of defining each competency in terms of explaining how leaders are expected to behaviorally demonstrate it, but stop short of explaining why demonstrating such a competency has business relevance.
Effective competency models need to be tied to the organization’s future strategy. They need to answer the question “given our future strategy, what knowledge, skills, and abilities should leaders possess”. Some of the generic leadership competencies that apply to both leaders of today and tomorrow are:
Visionary – Good Leaders create the vision, a picture of where they want to take their organization.
Inspirational – Great Leaders inspire everyone to get behind the vision.
Strategic – Strategic Leaders are clear and directly face the strengths, and weaknesses of their organization, as well as their external opportunities and threats.
Tactical – Good Leaders are bottom-line oriented and communicate the results. They thrive on numbers, figures and data.
Focused – Good Leaders achieve what they set out to do before launching new initiatives.
Persuasive – Good Leaders bring others to their point of view using logic, reason, emotion and the force of their personalities. They motivate by persuasion rather than intimidation.
Likeable – Good Leaders are people-centric. They display a high degree of emotional intelligence.
Decisive – Good Leaders can make decision quickly often with incomplete data.
Ethical – Good Leaders are direct and straight forward. They set clear performance expectations and hold people accountable. Principle-based Leadership.
Open-Feedback – Good Leaders are open and dedicated to lifelong learning. They seek direct feedback.
DEFINING LEADERSHIP STANCE AND TRANSLATING INTO LEADERSHIP BRAND
Organizations can strengthen their leadership brand by translating what they stand for in the market place into a set of managerial behaviors. Building a leadership Brand start with a clear brand statement similar to a mission statement that connects what the organization wants to be known for by its best customers with specific leadership skills and behaviors. Just to demonstrate the building of a brand statement of a certain pharmaceutical company, it specified five qualities which are:
Leadership of the market- where they expected leaders to foster innovation by helping the organization collaborate with leading experts around the world and import the best ideas and research into the company.
Global reach-wanted leaders who would combine sensitivity to local culture with global vision to help meet customer demands anywhere in the world.
Building Partnership-they needed leaders who knew how to recruit and develop talent so that customers would view employees of the organization as experts who could help them solve problems Integrity- they wanted leaders who could make sure that employees delivered products and services in time, every time and fulfill promises and meet targets.
Product affordability- wanted their leaders to be proficient at sourcing, and securing the highest possible productivity from the company assets.
DETERMINING WHAT LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENTS ARE NEEDED AND PROFILE FOR THE FUTURE
A successful leadership development model should incorporate all elements of the leadership code (Ulrich and Smallwood, 2007). Leadership code consists of:
Leaders must muster strategy- that is they need to have a point of reference about the future, and be able to position their organization for continued success with customers.
Leaders must be able to execute-meaning that they must be able to build organization’s systems that work, to deliver results, and make change happen.
Leaders must be able to manage today’s talent- that is they must know how to motivate, engage and communicate with employees.
Leaders must able to develop tomorrow’s talent- that is they must groom employees for future leadership.
Leaders must show personal proficiency- that is they must demonstrate ability to learn, act with integrity, exercise social and emotional intelligence, make bold decisions and engender trust.
Companies need develop their executives who demonstrate all perquisites of leadership. Companies must regularly assess the abilities of their high potential managers and challenge their readiness for their next level.
Let me conclude by stating that as companies or organizations we need to develop our leadership competencies and qualities we require our leaders to exhibit on the work place based on our strategic plan or our desired direction. We need to avoid vanilla type competencies since they do not give us a unique advantage over our competitors since they also have access to the same competencies. It is also important to note that as we assess our leaders against the developed competencies that competencies are behavior based and may not necessarily be linked on performance or results.
This was a presentation made by Dr. Akolang Tombale, Chief Executive Officer of the Botswana Meat Commission (BMC) on the 05th March 2015 at the – Leadership Development Conference – held at Cresta Lodge, Gaborone.
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” Carl Sagan
Corruption is a heavy price to pay. The clean ones pay and suffer at the mercy of people who cannot have enough. They always want to eat and eat so selfishly like a bunch of ugly masked shrews. I hope God forgives me for ridiculing his creatures, but that mammal is so greedy. But corruption is not the new kid on the block, because it has always been everywhere.
This of course begs the question, why that is so? The common answer was and still is – abuse and misuse of power by those in power and weak institutions, disempowered to control the leaders. In 1996, the then President of The World Bank, James D. Wolfensohn named the ‘C-Word’ for the first time during an annual meeting of the Bretton Woods Institutions. A global fight against corruption started. Transparency International began its work. Internal and external audits mushroomed; commissions of inquiry followed and ever convoluted public tender procedures have become a bureaucratic nightmare to the private sector, trying to fight red tape.
The result is sobering corruption today is worse than it was 25 years ago. There is no denying that strong institutions help, but how does it come that in the annual Transparency International Ranking the same group of countries tend to be on the top while another group of countries, many African among them, tend to be on the bottom? Before one jumps to simple and seductive conclusions let us step back a moment.
Wolfensohn called corruption a cancer that destroys economies like a cancer destroys a body. A cancer is, simplified, good cells in a body gone bad, taking control of more and more good cells until the entire body is contaminated and eventually dies. So, let us look at the good cells of society first: they are family ties, clan and tribe affiliation, group cohesion, loyalty, empathy, reciprocity.
Most ordinary people like the reader of these lines or myself would claim to share such values. Once we ordinary people must make decisions, these good cells kick in: why should I hire a Mrs. Unknown, if I can hire my niece whose strengths and weaknesses I know? If I hire the niece, she will owe me and support my objectives.
Why should I purchase office furniture from that unknown company if I know that my friend’s business has good quality stuff? If I buy from him, he will make an extra effort to deliver his best and provide quality after sales service? So, why go through a convoluted tender process with uncertain outcome? In the unlikely case my friend does not perform as expected, I have many informal means to make him deliver, rather than going through a lengthy legal proceeding?
This sounds like common sense and natural and our private lives do work mostly that way and mostly quite well.
The problem is scale. Scale of power, scale of potential gains, scale of temptations, scale of risk. And who among us could throw the first stone were we in positions of power and claim not to succumb to the temptations of scale? Like in a body, cancer cells start growing out of proportion.
So, before we call out for new leaders – experience shows they are rarely better than the old ones – we need to look at ourselves first. But how easy is that? If I were the niece who gets the job through nepotism, why should I be overly critical? If I got a big furniture contract from a friend, why should I spill the beans? What right do I have to assume that, if I were a president or a minister or a corporate chief procurement officer I would not be tempted?
This is where we need to learn. What is useful, quick, efficient, and effective within a family or within a clan or a small community can become counterproductive and costly and destructive at larger corporate or national scale. Our empathy with small scale reciprocity easily permeates into complacency and complicity with large scale corruption and into an acquiescence with weak institutions to control it.
Our institutions can only be as strong as we wish them to be.
I was probably around ten years old and have always been that keen enthusiastic child that also liked to sing the favourite line of, ‘the world will become a better place.’ I would literally stand in front of a mirror and use my mom’s torch as a mic and sing along Michael Jackson’s hit song, ‘We are the world.’
Despite my horrible voice, I still believed in the message. Few years later, my annoyance towards the world’s corrupt system wonders whether I was just too naïve. Few years later and I am still in doubt so as to whether I should go on blabbing that same old boring line. ‘The world is going to be a better place.’ The question is, when?
The answer is – as always: now.
This is pessimistic if not fatalistic – I challenge Sagan’s outlook with a paraphrased adage of unknown origin: Some people can be bamboozled all of the time, all people can be bamboozled some of the time, but never will all people be bamboozled all of the time.
We, the people are the only ones who can heal society from the cancer of corruption. We need to understand the temptation of scale and address it. We need to stop seeing ourselves just a victim of a disease that sleeps in all of us. We need to give power to the institutions that we have put in place to control corruption: parliaments, separation of power, the press, the ballot box. And sometimes we need to say as a niece – no, I do not want that job as a favour, I want it because I have proven to be better than other contenders.
It is going to be a struggle, because it will mean sacrifices, but sacrifices that we have chosen, not those imposed on us.
Let us start today.
*Bokani Lisa Motsu is a student at University of Botswana
Parliament, the second arm of State through its parliamentary committees are one of Botswana’s most powerful mechanisms to ensure that government is held accountable at all times. The Accounting Officers are mostly Permanent Secretaries across government Ministries and Chief Executive Officers, Director Generals, Managing Directors of parastatals, state owned enterprises and Civil Society.
So parliament plays its oversight authority via the legislators sitting on a parliamentary committee and Accounting Officers sitting in the hot chair. When left with no proper checks and balances, the Executive is prone to abuse the arrangement and so systematic oversight of the executive is usually carried out by parliamentary committees. They track the work of various government departments and ministries, and conduct scrutiny into important aspects of their policy, direction and administration.
It is not rocket science that effective oversight requires that committees be totally independent and able to set their own agendas and have the power to summon ministers and top civil servants to appear and answer questions. Naturally, Accounting Officers are the highest ranking officials in the government hierarchy apart from cabinet Ministers and as such wield much power and influence in the performance of government. To illustrate further, government performance is largely owed to the strategic and policy direction of top technocrats in various Ministries.
It is disheartening to point out that the recent parliament committees — as has been the case all over the years — has laid bare the incompetency, inadequacy and ineptitude of people bestowed with great responsibilities in public offices. To say that they are ineffective and inefficient sounds as an understatement. Some appear useless and hopeless when it comes to running the government despite the huge responsibility they possess.
If we were uncertain about the degree at which the Accounting Officers are incompetent, the ongoing parliament committees provide a glaring answer. It is not an exaggeration to say that ordinary people on the streets have been held ransom by these technocrats who enjoy their air conditioned offices and relish being chauffeured around in luxurious BX SUV’s while the rest of the citizenry continue to suffer. Because of such high life the Accounting Officers seem to have, with time, they have gotten out of touch with the people they are supposed to serve.
An example; when appearing before the recent Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Office of the President Permanent Secretary, Thuso Ramodimoosi, looked reluctant to admit misuse of public funds. Although it is clear funds were misused, he looked unbothered when committee members grilled him over the P80 million Orapa House building that has since morphed into a white elephant for close to 10 successive years. To him, it seems it did not matter much and PAC members were worried for nothing.
On a separate day, another Accounting officer, Director of Public Service Management (DPSM), Naledi Mosalakatane, was not shy to reveal to PAC upon cross-examination that there exist more than 6 000 vacancies in government. Whatever reasons she gave as an excuse, they were not convincing and the committee looked sceptical too. She was faltering and seemed not to have a sense of urgency over the matter no matter how critical it is to the populace.
Botswana’s unemployment rate hoovers around 18 percent in a country where majority of the population is the youth, and the most affected by unemployment. It is still unclear why DPSM could underplay such a critical matter that may threaten the peace and stability of the country. Accounting Officers clearly appear out of touch with the reality out there – if the PAC examinations are anything to go by.
Ideally the DPSM Director could be dropping the vacancy post digits while sourcing funds and setting timelines for the spaces to be filled as a matter of urgency so that the citizens get employed to feed their families and get out of unemployment and poverty ravaging the country. The country should thank parliamentary committees such as PAC to expose these abnormalities and the behaviour of our leaders when in public office. How can a full Accounting Officer downplay the magnitude of the landless problem in Botswana and fail to come with direct solutions tailor made to provide Batswana with the land they desperately need?
Land is a life and death matter for some citizens, as we would know.
When Bonolo Khumotaka, the Accounting Officer in the Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services, whom as a top official probably with a lucrative pay too appears to be lacking sense of urgency as she is failing on her key mandate of working around the clock to award the citizens with land especially those who need it most like the marginalised. If government purports they need P94 billion to service land to address the land crisis what is plan B for government? Are we going to accept it the way it is?
Government should wake up from its slumber and intervene to avoid the 30 years unnecessary waiting period in State land and 13 years in Tribal land. Accounting Officers are custodians of government policy, they should ensure it is effective and serve its purpose. What we have been doing over the years, has proved that it is not effective, and clearly there is a need for change of direction.
His Excellency Dr Mokgweetsi EK Masisi, the President of the Republic of Botswana found it appropriate to invoke Section 17 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Botswana, using the powers vested in him to declare a State of Public Emergency starting from the 2nd April 2020 at midnight.
The constitutional provision under Section 17 (2b) only provided that such a declaration could be up to a maximum of 21 days. His Excellency further invoked Section 93 (1) to convene an extra- ordinary meeting of Parliament to have the opportunity to consult members of parliament on measures that have been put in place to address the spread and transmission of the virus. At this meeting Members of Parliament passed a resolution on the legal instruments and regulations governing the period of the state of emergency, and extended its duration by six (6) months.
The passing of the State of Emergency is considered as a very crucial step in fighting the near apocalyptic potential of the Novel COVID-19 virus. One of the interesting initiatives that was developed and extended to the business community was a 3-month wage subsidy that came with a condition that no businesses would retrench for the duration of the State of Public Emergency. This has potentially saved many people’s jobs as most companies would have been extremely quick to reduce expenses by downsizing. Self-preservation as some would call it.
Most organisations would have tried to reduce costs by letting go of people, retreated and tried their best to live long enough to fight another day. In my view there is silver lining that we need to look at and consider. The fact that organisations are not allowed to retrench has forced certain companies to look at the people with a long-term view.
Most leaders have probably had to wonder how they are going to ensure that their people are resilient. Do they have team members who innovate and add value to the organisation during these testing times? Do they even have resilient people or are they just waiting for the inevitable end? Can they really train people and make them resilient? How can your team members be part of your recovery plan? What can they do to avoid losing the capabilities they need to operate meaningfully for the duration of the State of Public Emergency and beyond?
The above questions have forced companies to reimagine the future of work. The truth is that no organisation can operate to its full potential without resilient people. In the normal business cycle, new teams come on board; new business streams open, operations or production sites launch or close; new markets develop, and technology is introduced. All of this provides fresh opportunities – and risks.
The best analogy I have seen of people-focused resilience planning reframes employees as your organisation’s immune system, ready and prepared to anticipate risks and ensure they can tackle challenges, fend off illness and bounce back more quickly. So, how do you supercharge your organizational immune system to become resilient?
COVID-19 has helped many organisations realize they were not as prepared as they believed themselves to be. Now is the time to take stock and reset for the future. All the strategies and plans prior to COVID-19 arriving in Botswana need to be thrown out of the window and you need to develop a new plan today. There is no room for tweaking or reframing. Botswana has been disrupted and we need to accept and embrace the change. What we initially anticipated as a disease that would take a short term is turning out to be something we are going to have to live with for a much longer time. It is going to be a marathon and therefore businesses need to have a plan to complete this marathon.
Start planning. Planning for change can help reduce employee stress, anxiety, and overall fear, boosting the confidence of staff and stakeholders. Think about conducting and then regularly refreshing a strategic business impact analysis, look at your employee engagement scores, dig into your customer metrics and explore the way people work alongside your behaviours and culture. This research will help to identify what you really want to protect, the risks that you need to plan for and what you need to survive during disruption. Don’t forget to ask your team members for their input. In many cases they are closest to critical business areas and already have ideas to make processes and systems more robust.
Revisit your organisational purpose. Purpose, values and principles are powerful tools. By putting your organisation’s purpose and values front and center, you provide clear decision-making guidelines for yourself and your organisation. There are very tough and interesting decisions to make which have to be made fast; so having guiding principles on which the business believes in will help and assist all decision makers with sanity checking the choices that are in front of them. One noticeable characteristic of companies that adapt well during change is that they have a strong sense of identity. Leaders and employees have a shared sense of purpose and a common performance culture; they know what the company stands for beyond shareholder value and how to get things done right.
Revisit your purpose and values. Understand if they have been internalised and are proving useful. If so, find ways to increase their use. If not, adapt them as necessities, to help inspire and guide people while immunizing yourself against future disruption. Design your employee experience. The most resilient, adaptive and high performing companies are made up of people who know each other, like each other, and support each other.
Adaptability requires us to teach other, speak up and discuss problems, and have a collective sense of belonging. Listening to your team members is a powerful and disruptive thing to do. It has the potential to transform the way you manage your organisation. Enlisting employees to help shape employee experience, motivates better performance, increases employee retention and helps you spot issues and risks sooner. More importantly, it gives employees a voice so you can get active and constructive suggestions to make your business more robust by adopting an inclusive approach.
Leaders need to show they care. If you want to build resilience, you must build on a basis of trust. And this means leaders should listen, care, and respond. It’s time to build the entire business model around trust and empathy. Many of the employees will be working under extreme pressure due to the looming question around what will happen when companies have to retrench. As a leader of a company transparency and open communication are the most critical aspects that need to be illustrated.
Take your team member into confidence because if you do have to go through the dreaded excise of retrenchment you have to remember that those people the company retains will judge you based on the process you follow. If you illustrate that the business or organization has no regard for loyalty and commitment, they will never commit to the long-term plans of the organisation which will leave you worse off in the end. Its an absolutely delicate balance but it must all be done in good faith. Hopefully, your organization will avoid this!
This is the best time to revisit your identify and train your people to encourage qualities that build strong, empathetic leadership; self-awareness and control, communication, kindness and psychological safety. Resilience is the glue that binds functional silos and integrates partners, improves communications, helps you prepare, listen and understand. Most importantly, people-focused resilience helps individuals and teams to think collectively and with empathy – helping you respond and recover faster.
Article written by Thabo Majola, a brand communications expert with a wealth of experience in the field and is Managing Director of Incepta Communications.