Blog by Chris Gurney, former Head of Strategy and Research and Experienced Leader Clore Social Fellow

This week sees the launch of Talking Leadership, a new report of qualitative research into leadership development in the social sector. For the research, we interviewed 58 chief executives and senior leaders about leadership development - and I was fortunate to talk to 45 of them. It was a real privilege to spend time with such a wide range of social leaders and I am immensely grateful to those who joined us for the conversations and whose ideas enabled us to create this report.

In particular, I was struck by how those facing the demands of executive and senior leadership were generous in making the time to talk about leadership development. Several expressed a commitment to leadership development that went beyond their organisations and spoke about a responsibility for the wider sector. Such generosity towards others was deeply affirming - and a stark contrast to depictions of the sector as downtrodden, under pressure and lacking capacity to improve.

"Such generosity towards others was deeply affirming - and a stark contrast to depictions of the sector as lacking capacity to improve." 

We gained a tremendous amount of insight into this fascinating topic which Shaks Ghosh summarises here. Three additional reflections emerged for me from these conversations. These relate to understanding, impact and collaboration.

Our conversations highlighted diverse understandings of leadership and leadership development. Too often our understanding of leadership development is something done in externally (or internally) provided courses. Such an understanding significantly limits our ability to create opportunities to learn about and experiment with new leadership behaviours in our daily lives. Research on adult learning and development points to the importance of frequent and regular ‘micro-experiments’ for developing and embedding new habits and behaviours. Whilst external courses have an important role to play in improving leadership behaviours, these micro-experiments must also be pursued for learning to be developed and embedded. For us to really make a difference to improving our own leadership, and that of others, we all need to identify and harness such daily opportunities for development.

Our discussions about leadership identified a sense of its value, to individuals, organisations and wider society. At the same time, they also surfaced concerns that these benefits are not well understood or communicated at present. A review of publicly available information from leadership development providers indicates a weakness in terms of the evidence relating to the effects it has for its intended beneficiaries. And practice lags behind that from the private, education and healthcare sectors. Our interviewees discussed a small number of highly regarded leadership development providers, who attract participants largely by word of mouth. Such strong personal recommendations suggest that something must be going right in terms of the quality of provision. However, the limited availability of evidence of impact makes it harder for those seeking to make the case for investment in leadership development (whether to their line manager, Trustees or to a funder). If we are going to create more opportunities for leadership development, particularly paid for programmes, then providers need to be at the forefront of building and communicating the evidence base for impact.

This is work that providers can do together. And this points to my final reflection about the importance of collaboration. Responsibility for leadership development is diffuse and sits with many stakeholders within the system (e.g. individuals, their bosses, the leaders of their organisations, funders etc.). In this complexity, there is no shared understanding of the roles and responsibilities for leadership development.

Our conversations also surfaced insight about untapped potential within the system and opportunities for improving leadership development that can only be harnessed by working collaboratively. The work of creating system-wide alignment and of harnessing this potential is beyond the scope of any one organisation working in isolation. But the opportunity is there for a sector-wide movement to create innovative, multi-stakeholder leadership development solutions. This will rely on organisations working together to mobilise cross-sector responses - and it will require generosity from leaders across the sector to engage with and contribute to what emerges.

This points to a tension that kept surfacing in the conversations: the sector needs more generous leadership to improve leadership development. At the same time, it needs better leadership development to support more generous leadership.

It is exciting to see that Clore Social will be kicking off an ‘innovation lab’ to explore these issues over the coming months. Creating the space where evidence on leadership development can be brought together with voices from across the sector to design and test new solutions will be of tremendous benefit to the sector. Clore Social can play a vital role in facilitating system-wide challenge and to help mobilise the generosity of others to create the leadership our sector needs. I am delighted to have played a role in kick-starting the debate through this report.

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

1. A grand vision, and a willingness to ask difficult questions. The Alliance’s Ten Year Plan challenged perceived wisdom and triggered a cultural shift in the sector. The Bush and Obama Administrations built on the success of the revolutionary campaign, creating a Federal Strategy for Ending Homelessness, thus embracing the movement and accelerating progress.
2. Collective commitment. A shared sense of commitment and collaboration is key and often wanting in the UK. At the Alliance’s annual conference in Washington DC a couple of weeks ago, Shaun Donovan - who until recently was Obama's Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - compared the fight to end homelessness to the moon landing:

‘Together we launched out on moonshot on homelessness. And look how far we’ve come - nearly 30 cities and states have ended veteran homelessness. … Now many of you may say we still have a long way to go. And you’re right. But let’s not forget that we didn’t get to the moon overnight. That journey took three presidents and 21 space flights. Back then the New York Times described the moon landing as ‘the realisation of centuries of dreams, the fulfilment of a decade of striving, a triumph of modern technology and personal courage, the most dramatic demonstration of what we can do if we apply our minds and resources with single-minded determination. And that’s why everyone in this room is so vital to our effort: your dreams, your striving, your courage, your determination’.

1. Measurable outcomes. From the start the Obama Administration in particular has focused on unlocking data and evidence to identify and implement effective strategies, so they could do more of what works and less of what does not. The problem at stake also needs to be well defined and the role of the homelessness sector within it. So for instance a more comprehensive view of homelessness prevention should place the onus of keeping people housed on mainstream services tasked with taking care of vulnerable groups. This requires better engagement with the education, social care, criminal justice, and health and mental health systems to prevent people being supported by them becoming homeless. Crucially, the homelessness sector to try to fill in the gaps as it could do more harm than good.
   
2. Invest in solutions that have been proven to work. The George W. Bush Administration revolutionised how homelessness was dealt with the US - whatever the cause of homelessness, the solution is… a home. The idea was pioneered by New York University psychiatrist Sam Tsemberis: ‘Housing First’ turned conventional wisdom on its head. Despite the sceptics evidence prevailed - Housing First worked from the start and it worked fast. Ever since the early 2000s efforts have increasingly shifted to a focus on permanent housing solutions, such as permanent supportive housing and rapid re-housing. Since 2007 permanent supportive housing capacity has grown 69 percent.
3. Broadening leadership. A plan or data is only good as the people that drive it forward. The turn towards a Housing First approach during the Bush Administration might not have happened had it not been for the then homelessness czar, Philip Mangano, who doggedly pursued the idea despite initial resistance and sector interests (the new approach threatened jobs and budgets across the country). In 2003, the US Conference of Mayors adopted a resolution in response to a call from Mangano - then at the helm of the US Interagency Council on Homelessness - who challenged 100 cities to initiate ten year plans to end chronic homelessness. By 2004, about 100 had initiated planning efforts and, by 2006, ninety ten-year plans to end homelessness were complete. Strong leadership is however needed at all levels, from front line work, managers and chief executive and trustees level.

The CLG report is right to call for a new Government strategy, and to call for a change in legislation to prevent homelessness, but the lessons from the US point us towards much higher ambitions. It is time for UK politicians to step up to their example.

This blog was originally posted on the Crisis website. You can apply for the 2017 Fellowship here - deadline 5 September 2016.