How can you become a better leader step by step?

How can you become a better leader step by step?

by

As a leader within your organization, you bear the responsibility for achieving goals and results. In recent years, we have gained a better understanding of what it takes to demonstrate effective leadership and how you can work on your leadership skills as a leader. In this article, I will provide you with practical insights on how to gradually become an even better leader by finding the right balance between different activities and by working on your leadership habits daily.

The Core of Effective Leadership

Insights from various studies, including those conducted by our own HPO Center and various (neuroscientific) researchers, can help you improve your leadership skills. These studies emphasize that effective leadership consists of a harmonious blend of two essential aspects: daring and caring.

The Two Pillars of Good Leadership: Daring and Caring. For detailed information, also see this article: https://www.esthermollema.nl/twee-benen-van-goed-leiderschap

On the one hand, there’s the “daring” aspect of leadership, where you’re responsible for organizing tasks and fostering collaboration to achieve shared goals. Here, you need to be focused and monitor team objectives. It’s crucial to use your position as a leader to create clarity and speed. Decision-making, promoting and supporting collaboration, and providing clarity all play crucial roles.

On the other hand, there’s the “caring” aspect of leadership, which focuses on developing the team and individual team members. It involves inspiring, coaching, and supporting personal growth. Creating an environment where people can thrive, promoting teamwork, learning, and inspiration are all essential. To achieve this, it’s essential to listen to different perspectives within the team to make better decisions.

Striving for Balance

A balanced blend of these two aspects of leadership is crucial. In 2013, neuroscientist Matt Lieberman demonstrated that a one-sided focus on either aspect rarely leads to effective leadership. Leaders who emphasize “daring” have only a 14% chance of becoming outstanding leaders. For leaders who primarily focus on “caring,” this chance is even lower at 12%. The optimal balance between “caring” and “daring” leadership increases the likelihood of becoming an excellent leader to as much as 72%. Only 1% of leaders are highly rated for possessing both qualities, highlighting the rarity of this balance. So, there’s work to be done for many leaders.

The Reality of Leadership

The majority of leaders, therefore, do not meet the expectations of their team members. Worse, a significant portion of employees perceive their managers as the primary source of stress in the workplace. Additionally, 70% of employees indicate that their manager’s influence on their mental health is greater than that of their partner, according to a 2022 study by the Workforce Institute. Despite nine out of ten leaders believing they have a positive impact on their team members’ workplace satisfaction, only five out of ten employees agree. This underscores the discrepancy between perception and reality, unfortunately not in favor of the leader or the employee.

Examples of leadership behaviors that negatively impact workplace satisfaction:

  • Not giving enough attention, not listening, and checking their mobile phone during meetings.
  • Being consistently late without offering an apology.
  • Forgetting agreements or commitments.
  • Lack of transparency on certain matters.
  • Remaining silent during crucial moments when their leadership is required.
  • Sending irritated messages or communications.
  • Making derogatory comments or jokes.
  • Abruptly ending conversations.

Steps to Improved Leadership

Do you want to enhance your leadership skills? The following six steps are effective:

  1. Recognize and Acknowledge: The first and most crucial question is whether you, as a leader, are willing to further improve yourself. This is where, I believe, about 50% of all leaders falter. Some resist change because it requires a lot of time and effort. They might half-heartedly entertain improvement suggestions from their team but quickly revert to old habits. Understand that working on your leadership primarily means working on your habits, and that requires time and commitment from you. So, ask yourself first if you genuinely want to become a better leader.
  2. Collect and Accept Information: Seek feedback about your leadership skills. This can be done through anonymous surveys or in conversations if possible. Ensure that you truly understand what is working well and what needs improvement. Ask about the behaviors that may push your team members away. You’ll often find that when you inquire, your team faces different issues than you might have thought. Don’t dismiss the feedback, don’t downplay what’s said, and don’t treat it as an isolated incident. Instead, carefully document your findings.
  3. Show Vulnerability: Share the received negative feedback and be open about your weaknesses and insecurities with your team. Share what you already knew and also highlight things that surprised you. By sharing, you create an environment open to feedback and discussion. It also encourages others to be vulnerable and seek feedback.
  4. Create an Improvement Plan with Your Team: Ask your team for input on which changes in your behavior as a leader would benefit them the most.
  5. Work on Daily Leadership Habits: Change your behavior by translating the feedback into new daily habits. Don’t take on too much at once but make changes gradually, in small steps that you can sustain. On average, it takes about 66 days to develop a new habit.
  6. Regularly Seek Feedback: Routinely ask your team for feedback on your performance and improvements. This fosters a shared responsibility for growth and development.

These six steps, while seemingly simple, can be challenging in practice. Persistence pays off and brings rewards in the end!

The Impact of Improved Leadership

Investing in improving your leadership skills is highly worthwhile. As a leader, you have a significant impact on the workplace satisfaction of your team members. This isn’t just a nice-to-have; research has shown that even a slight increase in workplace satisfaction can result in a significant boost in productivity. A joint study by Harvard University and Oxford University demonstrated that a 1-point increase in workplace happiness on a scale of 0 to 10 led to an impressive 12% increase in productivity.

In summary, pursuing balanced leadership, showing vulnerability, engaging your team, and continuously improving your daily habits can all contribute to your development as an even better leader—with impact.

“Reflections on 20 Years of Female Leadership Training (2003-2023): The Path to Inclusive Leadership”

“Reflections on 20 Years of Female Leadership Training (2003-2023): The Path to Inclusive Leadership”

by

20 Jaar Female Leadership Training Esther Mollema

After studying and working in Japan, Germany, and the US, I returned to the Netherlands in 1996 for a new job. What immediately stood out was the glaring lack of women in leadership positions. Friends who had started their careers in the Netherlands shared their disappointment about the gap between their ambitions and reality. They had experienced limited opportunities, a difficult balance between work and caregiving, and often encountered a harsh, masculine corporate culture. All of this seemed barely sustainable if you worked part-time, but part-timers were not taken seriously for leadership positions. It was a vicious circle for many women around me. My frustration grew when I saw men I had studied with, who I didn’t consider particularly capable, landing on boards of directors. And so began my search for a way, or how, we could help both women and organizations in their careers. This led to the Female Leadership training. A training that has evolved over the past twenty years with developments in our country.

The First Five Years – Struggle with Slow Emancipation in the Netherlands (2003-2008)

Actor Frank Lammers in Linda (2006) about working women: ‘I have deep respect for my parents who are from another generation and arranged things differently. Just: father works, mother stays at home. In that sense, I think: screw feminism. My mother’s self-aware sacrifice has done me a lot of good. I can’t afford it, and neither can my wife, and I don’t blame her and I don’t blame myself. But I do think it’s necessary that someone stays home for the children.’

Despite the gender equality preached in the Netherlands, the deeply ingrained influences of traditional gender roles are still noticeable during this period. Unconscious outdated gender role patterns still prevail, as mentioned above by Frank Lammers. Many women feel that they should not send their children to daycare too often. Moreover, their partners are often still reluctant to take on caregiving duties. Women who chose a career and thus deviated from traditional expectations faced significant social pressure from both their environment and their supervisors.

The Second Five Years – Insights into Unconscious Biases (2008-2013)

‘In 2010, Esther was invited by a Protestant organization that wanted to examine their unconscious biases. Esther proposed having the participants discuss their potential unconscious biases in small groups, but there was hesitation to speak openly. Esther suggested that participants could anonymously write down their thoughts on notes. These notes were then read aloud to the whole group. This led to shocking statements, such as: “Women are less intelligent,” “Because of menstruation, women cannot hold leadership positions,” and “God did not intend for women to lead.” This left both women and some men in the group astonished. Having an open discussion about this proved impossible.’

This anecdote, documented by a journalist, illustrates how deeply rooted the unconscious biases were in the Netherlands at that time. Between 2008 and 2013, organizations embraced our Female Leadership training, and diversity became a more prominent theme, but it was challenging to convince leaders that diversity requires an effort from all leaders. Many organizations focused on “fixing” women. To make gender diversity a broader dialogue, I sought help from Harvard professor Mahzarin Banaji, who introduced me to the concept of Unconscious Biases. This turned out to be the key to creating a broader and deeper conversation about leadership, inclusion, and diversity with the goal of truly giving diverse talents the same opportunities.

The Third Five Years – The Pleasant Self-Image of the Dutch (2013-2018)

In 2017, Prime Minister Mark Rutte remarked during the formation of his new cabinet, which included remarkably few women: ‘We were faced with the choice of either choosing quality or women in the new cabinet.’

Regarding women in leadership positions, the Netherlands still lags far behind many other countries during these years. Our research from that time shows that the vast majority of senior leaders unconsciously still consider men much more suitable as leaders than women. The Dutch self-image of tolerance and diversity does not seem to align with people’s actual attitudes and behavior. Although Dutch leaders perceive themselves as egalitarian, deeply ingrained biases influence reality. This makes it particularly challenging to address these unconscious biases.

Due to that unjustified pleasant self-image, corrective action is needed in the Netherlands to address unconscious biases. To achieve results in terms of inclusion and diversity. Multiple studies show that sharpening processes around recruitment & selection, evaluations, promotions, and decision-making are essential to reduce unconscious biases. This may be challenging for those who believe they can function well without strict rules. Nevertheless, a stricter approach is needed in our country to truly achieve results in terms of diversity and inclusion. Some organizations have succeeded in taking effective steps in this regard, proving that it is indeed possible. As a result, women and diverse talents advance more quickly within these organizations.

The Fourth Five Years – Focus on Inclusion (2018-2023)

In 2022, Joris Luijendijk remarked: ‘Diversity is very threatening for less talented seven-spotters.’

The societal and organizational dialogue around diversity is changing. The labor market is tightening, and new generations are making their voices heard. Organizations are becoming more flexible towards the wishes of employees, which also benefits women and other diverse talents. Men are gradually becoming more involved in caregiving tasks. The Covid pandemic reinforces these trends, and the Black Lives Matter movement brings privilege and exclusion to the forefront. And that is necessary: the Dutch often show little awareness of the inherent advantages that some people have, which others do not.

Professor Gloria Wekker has addressed this issue in her work ‘White Innocence,’ and Joris Luijendijk brought attention to this topic again with his book ‘The Seven Spots.’ This is slowly starting the dialogue in the Netherlands. The facts speak for themselves: only 3% of the Dutch population possess all seven privileges, yet the vast majority of important positions in organizations, government, and politics are occupied by this group. Is this because they are truly superior, or does having many privileges stem from a kind of courage and self-assuredness that we sometimes confuse with real qualities?

A New Era – Inclusive Leadership (2023 and beyond)

UCLA Professor Matthew Lieberman: ‘Only 1% of leaders have the right combination of leadership qualities that lead to connection and results. For the other 99% of leaders, there is work to be done.’

In 2023, organizations face numerous challenges, from climate change to technological developments and labor shortages. Leaders must confront these challenges with their people. What we already knew from much research is now also evident in organizations: the idea of what good leadership is is shifting. In addition to achieving results, leaders must also be able to connect with their people. The concept of inclusive leadership is becoming more prominent, and some leading organizations are actively engaging with it. Male and female leaders are learning together how to be both daring and caring as leaders.

Our Inclusive Leadership training, which we provide to both female and male leaders, is gaining traction in many organizations instead of the Female Leadership training. Topics include: dealing with power, unconscious biases, ingroups, privileges, exclusion, cultural differences, and psychological safety. Women in the Netherlands, who often had to work harder to be accepted as leaders, are now leading the way towards an inclusive approach to leadership. I look forward to more inclusive leadership training to do justice to all talent and for an even better result.

The future of inclusive leadership looks promising, with women and men collaborating to strike a balance between decisive and caring leadership. Recognizing the value of diversity and actively addressing biases and privileges will pave the way for more inclusion and better organizational outcomes.

The journey of the Female Leadership training illustrates that change is possible, but it requires ongoing commitment. The road to inclusion in most organizations is still long, but the success of the past two decades inspires us to continue striving for fairer and more inclusive leadership so that all talents receive the opportunities they deserve to build impactful organizations.

 
 
 
 
 
Diversity, inclusion, and equality: don’t change the people, improve the processes.

Diversity, inclusion, and equality: don’t change the people, improve the processes.

by

Years ago, the current Chairman of the Executive Board of the University of Twente, Vinod Subramaniam, introduced me to Iris Bohnet’s book, Equality by Design. Bohnet is a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and an expert in gender equality and behavioral sciences. Her book discusses how organizations and systems can be designed to address gender and diversity issues. Bohnet argues that creating awareness about diversity and inclusion is often insufficient and that concrete measures are needed to bring about change: equality by design. By implementing clear agreements and utilizing evidence-based solutions, everyone within an organization can contribute to promoting equality and diversity. Instead of focusing on changing people, the emphasis is placed on improving processes and structures by saying, “This is how we do things from now on.”

In her book, Bohnet provides examples of organizations that have successfully implemented methods such as:

  • Always using standardized questionnaires during job interviews to prevent interviewers from being unconsciously biased toward certain candidates.
  • Offering flexible working hours to all employees as a means to promote diversity. This allows for better alignment between work and personal life, which is particularly beneficial for employees with caregiving responsibilities, such as parents or caregivers. A report by Deloitte (Women@Work 2023) indicates that in the past year, more female respondents have resigned from their jobs than in 2020 and 2021 combined. Lack of flexibility in working hours is one of the most frequently mentioned reasons. If flexibility becomes an “equality by design” measure, it should be applied uniformly to all employees in the organization, and supervisors who resist this change must justify their stance to their superiors. Deloitte states that when these measures become the standard for everyone in the organization, it can expect increased loyalty and higher productivity from all employees.
  • Using inclusive language to create a work environment where everyone feels welcome and valued. This can be achieved, for example, by developing a guide on how to create inclusive job advertisements.
  • Promoting diversity through adjustments in the recruitment process, such as posting job vacancies on various platforms to reach a wider range of candidates.

In Dutch organizations, I have discovered similar best practices that may not necessarily be labeled as equality by design but do follow the mindset of “this is how we do things from now on.” Here are a few examples for inspiration:

  • An international student at a Dutch university questioned why students’ birthplaces were mentioned on official diplomas. The student, born outside of Europe, was concerned that this information could have a negative impact on job applications in the Netherlands. His concern proved valid. Research by Lancee, Thijssen & Coenders (2019) showed that applicants with a Dutch background had a 30% higher chance of receiving a positive response to their job applications compared to applicants with a foreign background. The university acknowledged that mentioning birthplaces on diplomas was an outdated tradition that had undesired effects. After consultation, it was decided to remove the mention of birthplaces from all official documents. This university is now working to address this inequality throughout the Netherlands.
  • An organization had been struggling for years to hire specialized employees. Some job vacancies remained open for up to 18 months, hindering the company’s growth. Furthermore, even when someone was finally hired, they often left quickly. They would frequently be approached with enticing job offers elsewhere and would stay with the organization for less than a year. Exit interviews revealed that the organization used a lot of jargon and abbreviations. While newcomers could be experts in their field, they often struggled to participate in meetings because they didn’t understand the jargon used by long-time employees. When this issue was recognized, efforts were made to make the language more understandable. All employees are committed to minimizing jargon and abbreviations in all aspects of their work. This required significant effort and caused some frustration, but it ultimately resulted in new employees staying much longer and making significant contributions to the company’s innovation.
  • Another organization decided to address labor shortages by recruiting internationally, resulting in colleagues from various parts of the world with different cultures and customs. Although the new employees were invited to all social activities of the organization, they often attended only once and then stopped coming. These events were primarily focused on Dutch culture and often involved alcohol. It proved challenging to organize enjoyable events that were suitable for all employees. Eventually, a committee was formed with representatives from all cultures, religions, and traditions. Together, they developed social events that were enjoyable for everyone. While it took some trial and error, this approach worked excellently.
  • The last example is intriguing, and I cannot fully explain it yet, but it worked. A company set a strict KPI for hiring new talent within a department: 50% of the new hires had to be women, even though the department primarily consisted of men. Recruiters were at a loss as to how to meet this requirement. By chance, they discovered that when a job vacancy remained open for a longer period, more women applied. Men tended to respond more quickly because women took more time to research whether the company and the job were an improvement compared to their current position. They first evaluated whether the work and expectations aligned with their work-life balance and what requirements the job did and didn’t meet. Many women I spoke with about this example could relate to it. Once recruiters realized that the number of female applicants increased when job vacancies remained open longer, the procedure was adjusted, resulting in excellent outcomes.

What process and structural changes has your organization made to support diversity and inclusion? I would be very interested to know. Please share your insights with me at mollema@dir.nl.

Inclusive leadership: what stage are you at?

Inclusive leadership: what stage are you at?

by

To get straight to the point: are you a good manager for all your people, or especially for those who are very similar to you?

As one of the founders of the HPO Center and Direction, I have been researching the characteristics of high-performing teams and organizations for twenty years. I use this knowledge and decades of experience to help leaders optimize their approach.

In practice, I see that leaders have different views on the usefulness and necessity of connecting/inclusive leadership, and thus act differently. To be able to explain the different opinions and approaches, I present a simple four-step model. Such a simple model can never capture all nuances, but it does provide insight.

Description of the 4 steps to connecting and inclusive leadership (freely adapted from Jennifer Brown's model).

Description of the 4 steps to connecting and inclusive leadership (freely adapted from Jennifer Brown’s model).)

Phase 1: The Passive Leader

In phase 1, you find leaders who are against change because it makes them feel insecure and anxious. They feel more secure in their current constellation. It’s recognizable to everyone that change can sometimes be difficult. Even if your current situation is not good and you recognize that, it proves difficult for a large group of people to actively seek a better alternative and let go of the old familiar. Often, it’s not even the change itself that causes discomfort, but the uncertainty about where it is headed.

Leaders in this phase often hinder progress. They prefer to stay in their ‘bubble’ and resist improvement plans. Sometimes they do so loudly and negatively. (Un)consciously, they aim to slow down and disrupt things. They hope that as little as possible changes because it makes them feel insecure or uncomfortable.

On average, one in five people within organizations is in this phase, both leaders and other employees. It’s important not to let this group determine the necessary pace of improvement too much. Of course, we must listen carefully to their motives, but it’s better not to linger with them too long because this group often keeps saying the same thing: ‘I don’t believe this is going to work’ or ‘I think it’s complete nonsense’ are their catchphrases. What we should try to do is find out where their fear or insecurity lies so that we can help them with it. It’s better to do this one-on-one than in a group. I regularly hear that people are afraid they won’t be able to keep up in a changed organization, that they fear reputation loss, or losing their job. To get these leaders on board, individual attention and help are important. But beware; do not let this group determine the speed of organizational improvement. That happens too often.

There was no escaping it: 2022 was the year when employees made their voices heard loud and clear. Awakened by COVID, The Voice, and DWD, the increasingly diverse employee population made their voices heard. They left their employers in large numbers due to the lack of social safety, flexibility, attention, or recognition. Unfair situations such as structural exclusion, discrimination, and gender pay gap were addressed and investigated, thus finding their way to many a boardroom. This should not be surprising. Thanks to Glass, we have known since 2010 that 55% of employees find their manager to be the main source of stress at work. And research by Hay management (2013) showed that a similar percentage of managers too often ignore a poor working climate. Leaders who are in phase 1 will contribute a lot to this dissatisfaction.

Many people in this phase are very vocal in the media and public debate. Because they are so firm and angular and do not mince their words, they have a lot of influence. Yet, we also hear the counter-voice more often: Kim Putters, chairman of the Socio-Economic Council (SER) and the most influential director in the Netherlands, invites us to listen more to the middle voices because that’s where the solutions lie. He advocates for more dialogue and a different model of governance. The new governance model that organizations must comply with also pays a lot of attention to other perspectives, dialogue, and inclusion. For example, Mark Rutte shared during the recent apology of the government about the slavery past about his move from phase 1 to 2: “I have also personally undergone this change in thinking – I want to be open about that. For a long time, I actually thought: the slavery past is history that lies behind us. But I was wrong. Because centuries of oppression and exploitation continue to affect the here and now. In racist stereotypes. In discriminatory patterns of exclusion. In social inequality. And to break this, we must also face the past openly and honestly.”

It will probably remain uncomfortable within organizations for quite some time because there are still quite a few leaders in that first phase, but it is slowly becoming more restless in ‘section 1’.

Voorbeeld fase 1

During a session on inclusive leadership that I facilitated, I referred to the caring and daring model of leadership (see www.esthermollema.nl/two-legs-of-good-leadership). Someone from the audience exclaimed, annoyed, that it was all nonsense. The speaker had been leading for twenty years and argued that it was mainly the new, overly sensitive generation of employees who were the problem: “In the past, you could just say what you thought and make a good joke. I despise an organization where you have to watch what you say all day long. I despise the polarization these people cause. In our organization and in our society. I liked it much better in the past.” It seemed to me a clear case of a manager in phase 1. The organization of this manager was increasingly hiring diverse talent to fill the many vacancies. The work simply needs to be done, and: it’s good for the organization’s results. Leaders are now asked to motivate these diverse teams to achieve optimal results. What do you think, would the speaker I just quoted succeed?

Realizing that you can no longer play the lost innocence (“it was just a joke”) in situations that are uncomfortable for some managers and employees is quite hard to accept. Know that High Performance Teams are by definition articulate and constantly look for opportunities for improvement. Responding to things that disturb a good team dynamic, including to the manager, is part of teams that want to achieve the maximum. This is not linked to generations, but to ambition. In these teams, it does matter if the leader makes a joke that perhaps makes team members feel uncomfortable or talks for 40 minutes of the hour during a brainstorm. The leader who was addressed on this indicated that he did not intend to offend anyone with the joke and that speaking a lot was a combination of experience and enthusiasm. But the team did not accept that. They acknowledged that the intention might have been okay but pointed out the negative impact it had on the group. This leader had never been addressed on his behavior before and had to take a hard swallow.

​

 

Phase 2: The Reactive Leader

In phase 2, you increasingly understand that building a good team requires effort, time, and attention. You start to make yourself more vulnerable as a leader and you try to guide and coach all the people in the team effectively. It is difficult to consistently do this well and to make enough time for it. In this phase, you realize that you still too often compensate for the lack of individual attention with an occasional team afternoon, an outing, or a facilitated meeting. You still lack the courage to set different priorities in order to truly embody inclusive and caring leadership. You do act when something happens in your team, such as an unsafe situation or when a good team member suddenly leaves. But afterwards, you revert to the old ways.

Voorbeeld fase 2

In a team, everything seemed to be going well. The employee satisfaction score of the team was at the average of the organization, and for a long time, employees had been saying that they wanted more recognition and attention for their personal development. Unfortunately, the leader always had too little time for this. When three people from the team unexpectedly quit their jobs within two months, the leader was shocked. Without these people, the expected results could not be met, so the leader sprang into action. What to do? The leader put a lot of pressure on the recruiter to fill the vacancies as quickly as possible and informed the organization’s management that they would urgently investigate the sudden departure and take action. External exit interviews were conducted, and based on these, action points were formulated. Six months later, the exit interviews were completed. The leader skimmed through the report and took no action. No time. And the recruiters had already found new people by then.

 

Phase 3: The Proactive Leader

The biggest difference between a leader in phase 2 and phase 3 is not that the leader has become more skilled in inclusive leadership, but that they show the courage to really delve into it and want to and do act accordingly. It takes courage to be this leader because you accept that in this transition, you will make mistakes due to not understanding something well, your intention is good, but the impact can sometimes be quite different. Your focus is on getting a little better and more competent every day. You slowly but surely notice differences in meetings, selections, evaluations, and decision-making. You teach yourself and your team new habits that are more inclusive, and you watch over the inclusive agreements the team makes. Examples of such team agreements in phase 3 are:

  • Our team works together on a strong team spirit and each other’s success.
  • We have clear agreements on how to counter micro-aggressions, such as repeated interruptions during meetings.
  • We correct someone who seeks recognition for ideas that were conceived by someone else.
  • We actively invite colleagues (e.g., introverted people) to share their opinions.
  • We assign high-value and visible tasks to everyone in the team equally.
  • We distribute the non-visible tasks equally within the team.
  • We immediately correct those who exclude other team members or make others feel uncomfortable or inferior.
  • We encourage humor that does not hurt.
  • We ensure that we are equally accessible to everyone.
  • We organize (social) activities where everyone feels welcome and can be themselves.

In this team, everyone feels supported by you as a leader, whether they are calling out others on a team rule or you as the leader. They accept that they all might unconsciously do something that could make the other uncomfortable or evoke a feeling of exclusion. They correct each other quickly and move on. In such teams, inclusion might still go wrong occasionally, but because they learn together, it doesn’t keep happening in the same points and ways. Everyone feels heard and feels the freedom to discuss matters. In these teams, you notice that team members easily discuss issues with each other and don’t keep them to themselves. They also easily approach you, their leader, who is eager to think along.

Employees emulate their leaders, as we know from much research. As a leader in phase 3, you will notice that people come to work with more energy, can be themselves, and are encouraged to discuss difficult matters. Team members learn from each other and inspire each other. This contributes to a better result of the teamwork: there is a high level of engagement in the team, collaboration works better, learning ability increases, the quality of work continuously improves, and there is more innovation.

As a level 3 leader, you also pay great attention to processes and structures. Guarding over inclusion in behavior and interactions is very important, but you also ensure that people’s unconscious biases no longer influence the outcome of processes and structures. By making strict agreements about “this is how we do things here” (also called equality by design), you create rules in phase 3 that increase the diversity of the team. This leads to more perspectives, inspiration, growth within the team, and better decisions. Not the good intentions of team members but clear agreements are leading. The big advantage of this approach alongside ‘inclusion rules’ in teams is that they do not disappear when you as a leader move on to other tasks at some point. You know it: the art of a leader in phase 3 is not to come to too many strict process agreements but only to choose those that have a significant impact on more diversity and inclusion.

Voorbeelden fase 3

Here are several examples of processes that leaders in phase 3 redesigned. There are many different examples, but all had the same goal: to increase inclusion and diversity and make the organization even better.

  • A large organization had set itself the goal of hiring at least 50% women for IT roles in the coming years to significantly increase the percentage of women in these positions. After some experimentation, recruiters discovered that leaving an IT vacancy open longer attracted many more women. Apparently, women needed more time to decide to apply. A new rule, equal for everyone, was implemented to extend the response time for IT roles by 50%. This rule remained in place even when shortages were acute.
  • At a bank, it was often possible to form very diverse teams, but unfortunately, this did not last when there were changes within the team. A rule was established that no team or level could consist of more than 50% of people of the same age, gender, and origin. No exceptions were made for any team. This helped teams at this bank to strategically assemble their teams and adhere to the long-term goal of greater diversity.
  • At a university, they observed that gender and nationalities influenced the evaluations employees received for their work. Everyone agreed that evaluations could differ at an individual level but not when comparing large groups of people. Men and people without a migration background received higher evaluations and, therefore, more career opportunities. The university decided to apply a new distribution key to the evaluations so that there were no more differences in evaluations between groups, thereby equalizing opportunities for all groups.
  • A software company decided to conduct an annual pay-gap analysis and correction between men and women to prevent men from unconsciously earning more for the same work. The company realized that a one-time correction was not sufficient because unconscious biases, despite all good intentions, still influenced the pay differences between genders.

Phase 4: The Leader as Champion

In this phase, you as a leader transcend your own team. You feel the responsibility to organize equality and connection across the organization. Looking through the system lens, you search for challenges around inclusion and diversity within the organization and make the real reasons for differences and inequality a topic of conversation. These are often difficult conversations because they touch on the undercurrent within the organization, and leaders in phases 1 and 2 often find this very uncomfortable. The driving force for you as a leader in phase 4 is often equality for all people in the organization. You maintain a focus on performing well in the long term without losing sight of the short term.

Because of the discomfort, being a leader in phase 4 is often an uncomfortable task. You cause discomfort, and the people with whom you engage in dialogue often do not have the skill to deal with this discomfort. There is a good chance that you will not be seen as the great innovator and improver but as someone with extreme views. Especially in the Netherlands, this group of leaders is often attacked for their style of communication and labeled as woke or problematic, in the hope that they will give up and conform to the group.

Remember that what is first seen as absurd often turns out to be true later. The discomfort these people bring makes others want them to stop.

Een paar voorbeelden over de eeuwen heen:

  • After Galileo demonstrated that the sun is the center of the universe, he was no longer allowed to teach.
  • The right to vote for women was considered an absurd idea for centuries, and those who advocated for it were depicted as ugly and reckless.
  • The doctor who suggested preventing puerperal fever by washing hands more often was ridiculed; there were threats to remove him from his profession.
  • Smoking was long touted as very excellent for your figure, against asthma, and stress. People who reacted against this were dismissed as crazy.

The most important realization for organizations is that leaders and employees who are critical (level 4) are often very engaged, usually more so than leaders and employees at levels 1 and 2. In an interesting article in Harvard Business Review in November 2022, Praslova, Carucci, and Stokes wrote that the people who attack (often level 1) are themselves often mediocre performers who like to take credit for the work of others. These are people driven by self-interest, often not in the interest and sometimes even at the expense of organizations.

Leaders in phase 4 work closely with leaders in phase 3, and together they promote more diversity, inclusion, and equality in the organization, as well as a better long-term perspective for their organization compared to leaders who remain stuck in phases 1 and 2.

Change of Era

Jan Rotmans, a professor at Erasmus University, says: “We are not living in an era of change, but in a change of era.” Many of my clients recognize themselves in this statement. Almost all organizations feel the pressure to accelerate their innovation capacity, are dealing with the energy transition, climate challenges, or major staff shortages. Organizations must improve more quickly to still be allowed to participate. Recently, someone asked me to respond to the statement that adding much more diversity and different perspectives to current teams can sometimes feel very uncomfortable for certain people. The question was how to prevent that. My answer was that in a change of era, you can’t really avoid it. The group of leaders (phases 1 and 2) who previously felt very comfortable are being pressured more to set different priorities, to seek discomfort more, and to be braver. At this point, we cannot let the speed of change be determined by leaders who find change uncomfortable and would prefer to keep everything as it is or as it was for a long time. Pull each other through this difficult time by complimenting and helping the leaders who show courage and accelerate. The future of your team, organization, and our society depends on it.