Idea In Brief
Sometimes leaders stop developing as they advance
As you progress in your career, your development pathways are not always clear to you, or to your supervisor, either.
Shocks can be a useful learning experience
You can expect a lot of shocks in your career. These can provide positive learning and development opportunities for senior leaders.
Shocks can be manufactured and used intentionally
Great leaders take time to create frameworks for their people, allowing them to prepare for shocks and to learn from them in a structured way.
A highly accomplished academic leader has recently taken up the role of Dean in their faculty. With a strong background in research and unsurpassed technical expertise, they are well-prepared for the academic aspects of their role. But they have never held a leadership role like this before. They soon face a complex challenge requiring skills beyond their academic experience.
The Dean has proposed several reforms and believes they have established the right forums and taken the right governance steps to pull them off. But despite their meticulous planning and logical rationale, they find that their proposals aren’t resonating with students. Indeed, if anything, there has been a backlash. This unexpected response has come as a shock, leading our Dean to question their leadership abilities.
The Dean confides in their direct supervisor, the Provost, and looks for guidance on how to work through this backlash. The Provost makes time and holds space for the Dean, listening to their challenges and advises on next steps. The Dean feels they have a handle on these and works to put the discussed plan into place.
Sounds great in theory, doesn’t it?
This interaction follows a familiar pattern: an issue arises, support is provided, an outcome is achieved. Many senior leaders in higher education will recognise its contours immediately. By senior leaders here, we mean leaders at all levels: the Dean who leads their faculty, the Provost who supports the Dean, and the Provost who answers to the President and more.
But what might be the downside of this business-as-usual approach? Has the Dean internalised any lessons that can be generalised into new and different contexts? Have they reflected on what they might do differently next time? Has the Provost done all that they can to actively help the Dean use this situation to support their longer-term professional growth and development? We argue the answer is no.
What if we were to look at this situation another way, as a productive shock for the leader, considering the roles of both Dean and Provost in a different way? What if we were to consider the shock an opportunity for growth? With the right support from their leader, the Dean could transform this experience from a moment to be managed to a powerful opportunity for leadership development. And, if they can do so, there is an argument to be made that shocks like these are necessary and productive for senior leader development. Smart shocks can and should be generated and harnessed for the express purpose of providing important growth and development to already seasoned leaders.
The challenges of senior leadership development
Every time you supervise someone, you have, or should have, a roadmap for their development. However, as leaders advance in their careers and their responsibilities expand, it can become easy for their direct supervisors to focus on simply holding space and providing advice to them, rather than proactively intervening in their development. Senior leaders often manage multi-level organisations and deal with complex issues without clear playbooks, making it challenging to find time for their own growth.
There is often a gap in the investment and prioritisation of upskilling senior leaders, particularly in higher education. A complex interplay of factors – lack of clarity about what good leadership looks like in an academic setting, cultural forces, and an emphasis on technical skills or disciplinary expertise – work against these efforts. Leadership development for senior executives must differ from traditional programs, too, accounting for their experience and time constraints. Instead of following predetermined programs with theoretical content, leadership development should in our view focus on collaborative and immersive experiences that emphasise active "doing" rather than passive learning.
Despite these contextual realities and challenges, most senior leaders are eager to continue their development, but may not know how to go about it effectively. Developing senior leaders thus requires an intentional and strategic approach. By intentionally creating or leveraging productive “smart shocks” or stretch experiences in partnership with their own supervisors, leaders can be pushed into zones of discomfort that foster growth and development.
The productive zone of disequilibrium
The shock experienced by our hypothetical Dean was naturally occurring and of her own making. There are always going to be shocks like these, unforeseen and discombobulating. However, there is a scenario and opportunity where leaders and supervisors can be deliberate about courting this sort of discomfort.
Welcome to what Ronald Heifetz, the co-developer of the Adaptive Leadership Framework, called “the Productive Zone of Disequilibrium”. He defined this zone as the optimal range of distress within which urgency, rather than cause people to lose their heads, instead motivates them to engage in high-quality, adaptive work. Disequilibrium is what drives innovation, creativity, and resourcefulness, which in turn drives successful institutions and, ultimately, great leaders. The trick is to find balance within the instability and ensure that the stress stays at a level where its effects on productivity and learning are positive rather than debilitating. There also needs to be an adaptation to the environment and contextual realities of the leader.
Shock doctrine
It is one thing to ask how we should act when we find ourselves in this zone. It is another, perhaps more interesting thing to ask how we might actively push ourselves or others into it.
As in the case of our Dean, sometimes we enter the zone of disequilibrium in real time, without any external intervention. But it is possible to “manufacture” shocks, too. Manufactured shocks, or what we have termed “smart shocks” are intentional, managed, and strategic. They are interventions that leaders know are going to push them towards disequilibrium, rather than protect them from it. However, to actively turn shocks into valuable development experiences, to make them “smart”, it is important to situate them within a process.
Phase 1: Pre-shock
Natural shocks will obviously be unforeseen. But even in the case of manufactured shocks, leaders may not realise that they are in the pre-shock phase at all. For direct supervisors planning manufactured shocks, it’s important to assess the individual leaders’ capability and capacity, as well as the contexts within which those leaders are working.
Moreover, the supervisor needs to be aware of the developmental and outcome goals they have identified for their direct reports, and which type of shocks would best support those objectives. Taking time to strategically assess and understand the developmental needs of the leaders you supervise is as important with senior leaders as it is with more junior leaders. Inattention to the growth of senior leaders creates undue risk for organizations and prevents them from seizing opportunities and effectively navigating ambiguous and complex circumstances necessary for the future success of institutions. These shocks are useful as a growth tool for critical leaders in your organizations.
For our Dean, their shock was natural, so an effective ‘pre-shock’ stage would reflect regular conversations between the Dean and the Provost about their development goals, alignment of organizational needs and current skills, and desired career trajectory.
Phase 2: The smart shock
Fostering learning and growth, smart shocks can vary in intensity, potential risk and form. For example, they might take the form of strategic rethinks or planned disruptions, business model improvements or high-stakes projects. It is important to match the risk and intensity level of the shock to the leader’s professional development needs.
The table below provides potential examples for our Dean and the types of experiences will differ for different leaders.
Low risk | Medium risk | High risk |
---|---|---|
Chairing a strategic institutional committee | Managing internal or external crisis situations | Representing their discipline or the sector or cross-jurisdiction task force |
Leading innovation sprints or cross-functional projects | Leading performance turnarounds | Leading new market entry or whole of sector industry engagement |
Leading corporate social responsibility initiatives | Leading high stakes cross-departmental projects | Taking on whole of institution strategic assignments or committees for the Board or Executive |
Leading university community engagements | Leading key negotiations with major community partners, suppliers, or government | Handling highly challenging or disgruntled communities |
Implementing business model improvements |
While this table compares the relative risk or intensity of shocks, it is important to remember that they should all provide a higher level of risk and intensity than regular on-the-job learning opportunities. While shocks may look similar to regular and intentional growth opportunities, of a kind you would give any leader as they progress, the difference is that a shock is designed to foster a greater degree of disequilibrium in order to accelerate growth through a productive tension and discomfort. Success in the case of an intentional shock is not just about whether or not the outcome of the initiative is achieved but whether through the course of the shock the leader has gained growth and development better positioning them to deliver in the future.
Phase 3: Post-shock
The senior leaders’ supervisor must play a key role during this phase, and it should be more than simply holding space to debrief or offer coaching support. Rather, it should be about bringing a consciousness to the impact and opportunity presented by the shock, prompting active and deep reflection for the leader who has experienced it and then identifying what lessons it offers and how to harness them. Recall, a shock differs from a learning opportunity because it is more intentional about creating and harnessing discomfort and disequilibrium through active participation in the shock by both the leader and supervisor.
Intentional debriefing, after allowing the leader to experience a period of disequilibrium (don’t rush in with the learning right away), can be useful here, pausing either during or immediately after the moment of shock and discussing how the experience functioned for the leader. What was their role in the situation? What outcome did they have in mind initially and where did they end up? How would they perceive this situation from the perspectives of others involved or from an outsider's view?
The shock should be explored on three levels and delivered with care and curiosity without judgement:
- What did they learn about how they showed up as a leader?
- What did they learn about how they lead others?
- What was the broader impact on the institution?
- What skill(s) would you have liked to feel more confident about to manage the situation with less stress?
It is imperative that the supervisor come to the table to help identify where they observed gaps themselves, as well as where the leader felt them. The shock can offer opportunities to learn and grow in both technical and qualitative ways.
Maximising the benefits of a smart shock
It is crucial to maximise the benefits of shocks, and to support those who are going to be experiencing them, by engaging preparatory activities, targeted learning, and other development processes. Post-shock debriefing and reflection are essential to help leaders see their experiences as learning opportunities rather than something to merely survive. If a supervisor is transparent and supportive about navigating a shock, it helps ensure the event is a learning and growth opportunity and not a distress that could impede the ability of the leader to take any learning away from the situation.
To deepen the learning experience, leaders might also consider sharing their reflections by inviting their teams into the conversation. Peer intervention can play a vital role, allowing leaders to benefit from their networks and share problem-solving techniques. Leaders at this level possess significant authority to put training into practice, making practical learning imperative. Effective leadership development should be integrated into their executive teams, fostering cohesion and collective strategy execution. The supervisor or mentor guiding this debrief needs to create a psychologically safe environment to share observations and insights, helping the leader maximize the opportunity for feedback and collaborative problem solving.
Leadership development requires multiple approaches
Leadership is a crucial enabler of success in higher education institutions. Strong leaders can craft compelling visions, inspire academic and administrative staff, and cultivate cultures of innovation. The impact of adept leadership extends to improving learning environments, enhancing student outcomes, attracting and retaining talent, and bolstering the institution's reputation.
As institutions increasingly come to recognise the importance of strong and adaptive leadership, investing in innovative and integrated development programs will become integral to fostering a culture of continuous growth and excellence. Smart shocks, paired with supportive and intentional learning, can play an important role in such programs. Fostering opportunities to leverage the growth offered by “the Productive Zone of Disequilibrium” is an essential way to help senior leaders further develop while managing the realities and pressures on their time.
This approach can help senior leaders become better prepared to lead their organisations with confidence, resilience, and a strategic vision for the future. It can also help those who supervise these leaders to find meaningful ways to support leadership development and the institutions they serve.
Get in touch to discuss how we can help you use shocks and other development strategies to build leadership capability in your university.
Connect with Tessa Dehring and University of Alberta Deputy Provost (Students and Enrolment) Melissa Padfield on LinkedIn.
Curious to learn more? Join us for our upcoming webinar: A shock to the system: using smart shocking to develop leaders in higher education where Tessa and Melissa share real-life examples and discuss practical strategies and frameworks for designing and leveraging “smart shocks” to build resilience and enhance leadership development. Learn how to better prepare for and learn from these shocks, and discover ways to strengthen resilience and refine leadership skills in the process.
A Shock to the System Webinar: 4 March, 11:30 AM EDT (Northern Hemisphere) – Register here.
A Shock to the System Webinar: 8 April, 10:00 AM AEST (Southern Hemisphere) – Register here.