JANUARY 2011 THEME – Wisdom as a Leadership Competence
What is contained in this ‘corner’ will be a series of publications on various topics which as the executive of our company saw as being of interest to our clients and interested parties. Being involved with various organisations, we have realised the importance and need for our clients to understand the concept of ‘competence’, especially as it relates to processes such as ‘performance management’. In this month’s theme we deal with ‘wisdom’ as a leadership competence and we welcome views from our readers to contribute to our News Letter through a link provided in our home page.
The study of competence and especially leadership competence, owes much of its origin to the work of McBer, a consultant for the American Management Association in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The aim of McBer’s work was to explain some of the differences in distinguishing between poor and superior performances which may occur across specific jobs and organisations as a result of certain competencies which leaders may possess. There is a proposition of an interesting and enlightening definition of effective performance by Boyatzis (1982) where he describes effective performance of a job as the attainment of specific results or outcomes required by the job through specific actions while maintaining or being consistent with policies, procedures and conditions of the organisational environment.
A closer examination of the above contention suggests that effective job performance depends on three elements. There must be a good fit with individual competencies, the job demands and the organisational environment. In his definition of a competency, Boyatzis asserts that a job competency is an underlying characteristic of a person which results in effective or superior performance in a job. These characteristics, he contends, may be a motive, trait, skill, aspect of oneself, social role or knowledge. The possession of these characteristics may or may not be known to the person.
In line with our theme, the question is therefore, ‘…how does wisdom fit with Boyatzis’ view of competence?’ Gaudiani (1998) describes wisdom as the available store of thought, collected over thousands of years, that calls for living in ways that sustain well-being for others. Wisdom guides one towards what he or she should do and who he or she should be. Numerous theorists attach various meanings to wisdom. Some describe wisdom to include such characteristics as the ability of the leader to judge facts morally and soundly, and the power to frame questions as well as answers. From the descriptions of leadership wisdom thus examined, it can be deduced that wisdom is not one competence, but a multi-dimensional construct of ‘better-than’ ordinary ways of being, living and dealing with the world around us. It entails seeing things clearly and as they are, acting in prudent and effective ways, acting with the well-being of the whole in mind, knowing when to act and when not to, being able to handle whatever arises with peace of mind and an effective, compassionate, holistic response and being able to anticipate potential problems and avoid them.
The above attributes help clarify some aspect of leadership wisdom but none portrays the whole picture. Wise leaders live their daily lives in accordance with wise perspectives and wise values. Their actions make the world around them a better place. They resolve conflicts and so maximise harmony and general well-being. Wisdom is the ability to make sound choices and good decisions. It is intelligence shaped by experience.
Meeker (2004) sums wisdom up as ‘a state of the human mind characterised by profound understanding and deep insight. It is often, but not necessarily, accompanied by extensive formal knowledge. Unschooled people can acquire wisdom, and wise people can be found among carpenters, fishermen, or housewives. Wherever it exists, wisdom shows itself as a perception of the relativity and relationships among things. It is an awareness of wholeness that does not lose sight of particularity or concreteness, or of the intricacies of interrelationships. It is where the left and right brain come together in a union of logic and poetry and sensation, and where self-awareness is no longer at odds with awareness of the otherness of the world. Wisdom cannot be confined to a specialised field, nor is it an academic discipline; it is the consciousness of wholeness and integrity that transcends both. Wisdom is complexity understood and relationships accepted.’
Finally, according to Reid (2002) there are many criteria that could be used to judge whether or not decisions made are wise, and he suggests that wise decisions are more likely to emanate from consultative decision-making as wise decision-making involves deep and equal consideration of a range of perspectives. This can only happen where there are structures and processes that enable all voices to be genuinely heard and considered and where it is the power of the argument and not the position of the person putting it that carries the weight. Wisdom can only happen in circumstances that are ethically and socially just. Kane (2003) holds that wise leaders look at things clearly and do not allow their judgement to be clouded by their own personal biases. They base their decisions and actions on the truth.
The task of leading and sustaining follower confidence is a daunting one and is likely to be accomplished only through actions that arise from wisdom. There is a need for deep understanding in which broadly-based contextual knowledge is integrated with introspectively acquired self-knowledge. According to Maslow (1971), wisdom begins with a deep and complete understanding of the current reality. Maslow asserts that, when leaders understand the present reality with great clarity and depth, they will also sense the kind of action that is needed. In order to understand reality in that deep way, they need relevant and totally convincing facts. The value messages that are inherent in those facts must be approached with a receptive and patient mind. This intentional pursuit of intellectual and self-knowledge calls for leaders who have a capacity and are willing to learn.
Zandi Dweba PhD