Last time, we discussed the first two elements of the ITE grid: Individual and Team Development. The third element is Executive Development, which is represented in the diagram below as the size of the bubbles.
In the model to the left, the first four organizations—represented as Company A, Company B, and so on—are assumed to have invested heavily in executive team leadership development. Company A has invested resources—including tangible resources, such as time and financial resources, as well as intangible resources, such as energy and emotion—in both individual and team development as well. The result is that the team will flourish; the leader will excel; team and organizational goals will not only be met, but surpassed.
Company B, on the other hand, is high on team development but low on individual development. It is up to the team leader to acquire and devote sufficient resources to develop individuals on his or her team. As a highly trained team leader with sufficient capabilities, the leader should be able to persuade organizational leaders to devote the necessary resources.
Company C lacks team development but is high on individual development. The team leader must work to build trust, mutual accountability, and team cohesiveness.
And Company D is low on team development and low on individual development. The team leader’s role here is a difficult one. Individuals are likely to be simply maintainers, unwilling or unable to work toward common goals. The team leader must work to build both individual and team capacities.
Again, each of the four proposed scenarios is high on executive team leadership development, as represented by the large bubbles.
Company E is presented as relatively high on individual and team development, but severely lacking in executive team leadership development. In such a circumstance, the team will flail and flounder. In the best of circumstances, it may see a team member rise to be a latent or covert team leader without the title of team leader. Unless this occurs, the team will deteriorate into a group of highly skilled individuals without group direction and cohesion; it will likely fall into the Lone Rangers quadrant.
Company F has high team development, yet lacks in individual development. Furthermore, its executive development is even worse than that of Company E’s. Because its executive does not undergo regular development, the team will soon underperform. With poorly developed and ill-equipped team members, the group will dwindle into a group of maintainers: individuals willing to maintain the status quo, unwilling and perhaps even unable to work together to achieve a common vision.
So, it’s pretty clear that all three types of development must occur, and they must occur simultaneously. Without strong and adequate individual, team, and executive development, your organization will not be the best that it can be.
Next time we’ll discuss individual development in more detail.