Strengths-based leadership: A must for a complex world.

Why do most organizations worldwide have only one leadership pathway?

Why are people with great strategic minds told they are “not leadership material” just because they find small talk draining?

Why are great people managers placed into planning and operations positions that don’t match their social energy?

Why do we punish—or fire—talented people for being “too much” for the jobs they are placed in, instead of placing them into jobs that are a better fit?

When we compare the stories of neurodivergent leaders, it seems obvious that the best way to support the diversity of talent—and organizational success—is to develop multiple growth tracks in organizations. But doing so in practice requires letting go of three intertwined myths that limit opportunities for full-range talent development:

1.?????? The “ideal leader” myth: The first myth is the idea that there is an ideal type of leader endowed with the right set of characteristics. It assumes that all leaders need the same skills, personality traits, and management style. Even people from different functional areas in the same organization are often expected to have the same style and energy.

But if we are honest, nobody fits the ideal. Every leadership appointment decision I’ve ever facilitated or supported involved trade-offs between interpersonal skills, strategic thinking, expertise, and ephemeral, subjective things like “gravitas” and “fit.” Or, if people were honest, one’s pedigree and connections.

Making talent trade-offs means that people in leadership positions often end up spending most of their time doing work that is not aligned with their strengths. The problem for the organization is multiplied if the entire leadership team has the same strengths profile.

Ask yourself: Would you rather work for a company led by clones, or a company that has leaders with different types of strengths, focusing on the work at which each is best?

The “Ideal Leader” myth ignores the wide range of leadership tasks, from dealing with external business pressures to leading research innovation, and from improving internal systems to directly managing people. It is a good thing, then, that people have unique strengths, talents, and perspectives that can be developed and leveraged to create more diverse and effective leadership teams.

A 2017 study by Deloitte showed that people who reached the C-suite were more likely to be big-picture thinkers than the general business population. They were also more competitive, more tolerant of conflict, and more likely to make quick decisions without worrying about the popularity of those choices. The study also indicated that these characteristics did not necessarily produce the best organizational results. Researchers noted that supporting and developing leaders with less flashy but productive styles is likely to bring gains in performance.

The above is a shortened excerpt from Chapter 12, LEADERSHIP PRACTICES: Breaking the Neuroexclusion Ceiling of my book, The Canary Code: A Guide to Neurodiversity, Dignity, and Intersectional Belonging at Work. It is coming out very soon, May 7, 2024 - with the rest of the myths and examples of great neurodivergent leaders! ?? Meanwhile, you might like some of the options in the news items below!

If you like podcasts:

You may want to check out a few recent ones I had the pleasure to record:

Neurodiversity, Dignity, & Intersectional Belonging on “Think Differently” hosted by Dr. Theresa Haskins

How a Small Business Owner Can Do More for Their Employees on Amazon “This is Small Business” hosted by @Andrea Marquez.

Navigating Toxic Workplaces: Conversation on Workplace Bullying with Caroline Stokes, CEC and Ludmila Praslova, PhD on Negotiate Your Career Growth hosted by @Jamie Lee.

If you like live masterminds:

If you want to solve a neuroinclusion problem, either in your organization or in the larger society, consider joining the free pop-up NeuroInclusion Leadership Mastermind with me and executive coach, Caroline Stokes, CEC . The mastermind is not a lecture: although I will speak briefly about change levers discussed in more detail in my book, most of the time will be spent problem-solving in groups, creating action plans, and working with accountability partners to implement these plans. You may or may not be in a management position (you could be an HR generalist, a learning specialist, or an aspiring Employee Resource Group leader), but you must have a desire to tackle a problem that affects a large number of people/to lead from where you are, and you must commit to attending both sessions of the Mastermind: Wed. May 1 and Wed. May 8, 8-9 AM Pacific/11 AM EST, and to complete the action steps you will have identified. If this sounds like a good fit, you can apply to participate here. Space is limited, but if there is more interest than we are able to accommodate, we might develop additional opportunities.