Entry Level Expectations

Some leaders don’t want executive roles and we should appreciate them more.

Recent conversations with multiple clients have touched on a pattern I had never really noticed that I think might be quite common, and a little concerning:

We prioritize developing people who have the highest leadership potential.

I’ve spent decades in leadership development and this has always been the standard. We look for people who have the raw ability and aspiration to reach the highest levels of leadership and invest in them. We design and deliver special programs, match them with mentors, and offer training and project opportunities to expose them to senior level thinking and skills.

That’s the common wisdom for good reason; it’s a good approach.

But I wonder if we’re missing out on something that may actually be even more strategic.

In our efforts to identify the people who can sit at the executive table someday are we failing to properly support those who will contentedly and effectively spend years (decades?) in management roles closer to the front lines?

Operational stability, particularly in larger organizations, relies on those people who oversee programs and staff at the service delivery level. You can probably think of someone who has stayed in a crucial, but not highly prestigious, position for many years of effective service while others have leapfrogged them on the way to higher paid and esteemed roles. Those long term leaders provide confidence, core knowledge, and a sense of continuity that make the lives of senior leaders so much easier.

We need to honour these faithful managers.

But more than that, we may need to adjust the way we identify and develop people so we don’t miss out on or discourage these linchpin leaders. We can’t thrive without them, but we undervalue them too often.

I think I might know why.

There’s a natural tendency for leaders to look for people who match our own ambition and aspirations. If we can’t imagine ourselves being content in a “smaller” role for years upon years it is probably difficult for us to properly appreciate those who would do so happily. So we just don’t see them the way we should.

I’ve had the joy of being the first to identify the enormous potential in a few young leaders and provide some of the early encouragement and investment that contributed to some remarkable later achievements. My ego likes that.

But most organizations actually need more managers than senior leaders. When we over-invest in people we don’t have places for we understandably lose them to other opportunities. I truly believe that is a good thing in the broad sense. But it shouldn’t come at the cost of not providing enough for those who will stay in the trenches with us much longer if they feel seen, supported, and appreciated in roles that are somewhat dismissively referred to as “entry-level” leadership.

So, while we continue to look for the highest potential people let’s also be more deliberate about investing in those who might never move more than one step up the org chart. Let’s figure out how to keep those people engaged and understood. And let’s commit to honouring them often, not just when we offer amazed appreciation when they reach a milestone employment anniversary.