Many leaders have their plate full with the BAU stuff, you know the simple things like running the company, so it is hardly a surprise that this monopolises a leaders thoughts and thus a teams focus. In my role as an executive coach and leadership developer I have come to witness the leaders that are able to focus on the centre (BAU), whilst at the same time keeping an eye to the outer regions, the edges of the company.

I don’t mean the geographical edge, but the edge of peoples thoughts and thinking, the stuff that people think is not ’board room’ compatible, and thus in that moment many great ideas get lost and nullified, I agree that not everything needs to be a presentation to the board, but the proposition I put to you is:

• Scenario
  Presume that there are a huge amount of great ideas out there, that are lost in the ‘filtering’ that occurs to get to your heady heights.
• Challenge
  What are you go to do to find the one that you should know about?

I am a great believer in the hidden talent that never gets spotted, forget the 9 box talent grid in this context, still use it, but what about the people that never make it onto the grid, the ones that perhaps have been there a little too long, have lost the faith, the ones that if approached could ‘tell you how things really are’, the ones that if given a new line manager would flourish…..How are you going to find them? Or are you only after the talent that can make it up in the template. Nothing wrong with that, there is much excellence there.

But I wonder if there are enough weirdo’s in your company? Not trouble makers, but the people that might see the next curve, the ones that have a sense of the market and it’s direction from a perspective that you might never see in the often ‘soften and rounded’ data that is presented to you.

A few years ago I was facilitating an away day for a very successful company that had a strong focus on direct mail and cold calling and had built a very successful business. They had a researcher come in from a well known organisations that went onto the explain that if people kept signing up to Telephone Preference (I centralised site that makes it illegal to call that number), then within 6-8 years the pool of people to call would be minuscule.

The reaction, “well there wasn’t one, it was ignored completely”, what became apparent very quickly was that there was no room for ‘left of centre’ thinking, one person actually said, “why did we get someone in that doesn’t understand our model” (I don’t have to explain the blinkers on that statement do I?). Of course as you then looked at their Talent Process, it existed, but it only found and developed people that “understood their model”.

So what is the thinking? For me as an Executive Coach, it is to challenge the habits that we get into, the fact that we put in the process to find the talent and then years later we are in a ‘happy rut’. Sir John Harvey Jones was reported as having listened to his HRD on the topic of talent management, Sir Harvey (with his only qualification being a ‘signalling’ qualification from when he was in the Navy), asked (paraphrased), “would this programme have found me, if I was applying now”…..apparently not! So that was the end of that!

More importantly when you look to the fringe of peoples thinking and ideas, as a leader you are seen as being a very different animal to the ones that don’t (which will be nearly everyone else!)

Look to the edge!

Conflict exists! And it is pretty well everywhere. Max Lucado the prodigious author (some 50+ books) said that, “Conflict is inevitable, combat is optional” and that’s a pretty good place to start, especially as a leader. It’s a farce to presume that we should all be at one with the universe, as most of us are (when I last checked) pretty well struggling with being human.

People irate people and that is a fact. Let’s face it, if I introduced you to 10 people at a party, how many would you like? Then what if I told you that regardless of your thoughts, you were now going to know then for then next 5 years and have to have them in your life for around  7 hours a day, sound familiar? Well if not welcome to the workplace and generally its a lot more than 10 people.

As an executive coach I get to work with people who are constantly trying to navigate the emotional map that is ‘other people’, I get asked how do I manage my relationship with X or Y? And over the years I have come to understand that of course there are processes to managing a relationship, you could do a lot worse than the Covey approach of the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People in understanding the habit of ‘Seek first to understand, before you seek to be understood’ and the philosophy of ‘win/win’ outcomes; these are googleable and easily accessible.

However there is something that sits in front of the process of managing the ‘situation’ or the ‘person’ that is identified with the conflict and that is in asking your self this simple question: “In handling this conflict, how much of what I am doing is focused on the other person and not on me?”. It’s an important point, for as a leader you are not just judged by the size of the stick you brought to the party, or simply the way you ‘soughted’ the situation, I’d say that generally you are judged, after the fact, on reflection about the ‘experience of you’ whilst you were handling it.

As you approach conflict situations, consider the following:

• When this is done, what do I want the commentary from others to be?
• If I was able to watch myself on a TV documentary, handling this situation, what would I be shouting at the screen?
• If the people involved were my own children (even if you don’t have any) how would I approach this?
• How much of what I am doing is to ‘sort this in the short term’ or ‘healing it for the long term?”
• Is your presence relieving those in conflict of their responsibility to own the answer and way forward?

• Leadership is the act of doing something in a finite time period and it might be task specific.
• Leader is the act of being (being a leader), it’s not time bound, it’s a state of permanence.

Often as a coach as I listen to people talk, I can hear the difference between the act of leadership and the on going  behaviour of being a leader. This isn’t just a play on words, this is a key intellectual position that signifies the true understanding a person has over their own actions and behaviours.

You may well have a task that requires you to take the lead on a project, or a situation arises where those around you are looking to you for direction, in this scenario you are doing the act of leadership. Being a leader is the way you are as a state of being, it’s permanent.

Let’s bring this to life a little through the example of ‘friendship and friend’, in terms of the workplace I may well approach someone I am not overly enthused with, but to facilitate getting something done I perform acts of ‘friendship’, that are recognised actions (get them a cup of tea, smile, engage in conversation); however in terms of being someones ‘friend’ , then I AM their friend at all times, even when I am not present with them (My best friend Gary lives in Kent, I’m not with him now doing anything that demonstrates friendship, but he is still my friend).

As an emerging leader or senior manager it is paramount that you grasp the idea that if you are moving around your business performing the act of leadership, then this will never have the level of personal authenticity and impact that you are no doubt looking for.

As yourself this simple question: Do I consider my self a leader?

If you do then, this means you acknowledge, position on an organisation chart is an indicator of only that: position, which may hold leadership responsibilities, but only your decision to BE a leader makes it so.