Organizations work hard to identify those team members who possess high potential. In the collective eyes of the organization, these are people who display a special talent. This X-factor distinction presumes a favorable pathway forward and those with the label are typically given more opportunity to shine.
It feels like they want everyone that gets promoted beyond PM to be a leader. I work in construction management. My argument is some managers are excellent managers of construction and can manage a successful project, but they are not effective leaders. We don’t have a distinction in our company. If you are promoted to Project Executive you are expected to be good at leadership. I think we need an alternative position for managers to grow into a Project Director position that is more project focused where that person can excel. they still need some leadership capabilities to manage their team, but it is at a different level.
To directly answer your question I don’t know what they need to see to understand this distinction between manager and leader. When discussed they seem to understand, but unwilling to make that tactical change.
Re: Spaces conversation - What companies are doing a good job at this? I've heard Pepsi is good at this. I worked for an HR Leader (Pete Leddy) who came up through the ranks there. I remember he made a comment about Indra Nooyi's succession to CEO at a conference several years back. He said she was on 'the list' as a potential candidate going back 10 or 15 years. Allan Church leads their Pepsi's Talent Management function and is a highly respected person within the I/O community.
Great post. I have made a similar argument for a while where I work. It has been difficult to get leadership here to see it.
What do you think they need to see it, Douglas? A different approach to building a team?
It feels like they want everyone that gets promoted beyond PM to be a leader. I work in construction management. My argument is some managers are excellent managers of construction and can manage a successful project, but they are not effective leaders. We don’t have a distinction in our company. If you are promoted to Project Executive you are expected to be good at leadership. I think we need an alternative position for managers to grow into a Project Director position that is more project focused where that person can excel. they still need some leadership capabilities to manage their team, but it is at a different level.
To directly answer your question I don’t know what they need to see to understand this distinction between manager and leader. When discussed they seem to understand, but unwilling to make that tactical change.
We used your comment in our discussion this morning, Douglas.
https://twitter.com/AdmiredLeaders/status/1660989500468649986
Thanks for breaking it down like this - fine example of what we are discussing.
Join us at 11AM ET as we unpack today's Field Notes entry.
Set a reminder here: https://twitter.com/AdmiredLeaders/status/1660989500468649986
Re: Spaces conversation - What companies are doing a good job at this? I've heard Pepsi is good at this. I worked for an HR Leader (Pete Leddy) who came up through the ranks there. I remember he made a comment about Indra Nooyi's succession to CEO at a conference several years back. He said she was on 'the list' as a potential candidate going back 10 or 15 years. Allan Church leads their Pepsi's Talent Management function and is a highly respected person within the I/O community.