More than ever, in our fast-changing and interconnected world, organizations feel the need for better more effective leadership. As a result, managers get a lot of advice (and training) on how to become more effective leaders. Such as; articulate a clear vision, engage your employees, develop talent, have a global mindset, think strategically, create win-win solutions, leverage diversity, communicate effectively, hold people accountable, be an agile learner etc. On one level, all of this advice makes great sense. Who could argue against it? At another level, it can be overwhelming. First, the lists of leader characteristics and behaviours seem endless, I have seen over 150 leadership models with more coming as academic scholars write more books. It’s as if we’ve taken every positive human quality and made it into a requirement for effective leaders. Second, some of the advice can seem contradictory at times. Managers are told to take charge and to empower others, to be politically savvy and authentic, to be flexible and steadfast.
But what is meant when we say making leadership happen? Leadership happens in the interactions and exchanges among people with shared work; leaders influence people to act; influence a team to work towards a goal. Leadership can be happening within teams, workgroups, task forces, divisions, communities, and whole organizations. Leadership can be happening across teams, levels, and functions.
THE (inevitable) LEADERSHIP MODEL
Regardless of which, for leadership to happen, the interactions and exchanges among people have to yield three things Direction, Alignment and Commitment DAC, this is my preferred very simple leadership model:
- Direction- ahead of the problem
Direction is agreement in the group on overall goals — what the group is trying to achieve together. To become successful a leader must be AHEAD of the Problem, and hence lead the direction.
- In groups with strong direction: Members have a shared understanding of what group success looks like and agree on what they’re aiming to accomplish.T hey clearly understand the questions they need to ask to identify the direction to go in
- In groups with weak direction: Members are uncertain about what they should accomplish together, or they feel pulled in different directions by competing goals.
- Alignment- behind the solution
Alignment is coordinated work within the group and integration of the different aspects of the work so that it fits together in service of the shared direction. Leaders enable teams to align behind an agreed solution.
- In groups with strong alignment: Members with different tasks, roles, or sets of expertise coordinate their work, they trust each other to contribute, and create then support the best solution to their problems.
- In groups with weak alignment: Members work more in isolation, unclear about how their tasks fit into the larger work of the group, and are in danger of working at cross-purposes, duplicating efforts, or having important work fall through the cracks.
- Commitment – determined to act’
Commitment is mutual responsibility for the group, when people are making the success of the collective (not just their individual success) a personal priority. They are determined to put their solution into action despite the environment they work within.
- In groups with strong commitment: Members feel responsible for the success and well-being of the group, and they know that other group members feel the same. They trust each other and will stick with the group through difficult times.
- In groups with weak commitment: Members put their own interests ahead of the group’s interests and contribute to the group only when it’s easy to do so or when they have something to gain.
PUTTING THIS INTO ACTION
What does DAC look like in action? How can you recognize DAC? Here’s a quick summary of how to recognize whether direction, alignment, and commitment are happening in your organization.
1. First, assess current levels of DAC in your group.
The best way to do this is to get input from everyone involved. If you rely on just your own perspective, you’re probably missing key information. Complete the assessment at the end, with your team. Or engage in wide discussions with reports and peers to gauge the degree to which people agree on statements such as:
- We know and agree on what we should be aiming to accomplish together.
- We have group priorities that help us focus on the most important work.
- The work of each individual is well coordinated with the work of others.
- People are clear about how their tasks fit into the work of the group.
- We make the success of the group — not just our individual success — a priority.
2. If you find that the group has low levels of direction, alignment, or commitment, dig a bit deeper.
Some factors that contribute to weak DAC include:
- Direction hasn’t been articulated or talked about.
- We jump into tasks and projects without a plan or without connecting the plan to others’ work.
- We don’t bring in others with relevant expertise or manage work assignments effectively.
- Resources aren’t appropriately allocated.
- We’re unclear about who is responsible for what tasks or who has the authority to make what decisions.
- We see duplication of effort or gaps where aspects of the work fall through the cracks.
- Group members don’t see themselves as having the ability or influence to address problems.
- Individuals don’t feel like they get the credit they deserve for their contributions to the group.
3. Identify changes that could improve the levels of direction, alignment, or commitment.
There are countless ways to address the problems you find — but this is where your group can tailor efforts specifically to what matters most. You’ll want to engage the insights and creativity of the group to come up with changes to address key issues.
Keep in mind that direction, alignment, and commitment are group-level outcomes. Any aspect of the group can impact them. To enhance DAC, you might need to change things such as:
- The quality or frequency of interactions among group members.
- The relationships among particular members.
- The formal or informal processes for making decisions or getting work accomplished.
- The skills of individual group members.
- Shared assumptions and cultural beliefs of the group as a whole.
HOW CAN YOU IMPROVE YOUR LEADERSHIP
Pay attention to whether leadership is happening.
Start looking for evidence of DAC. By paying attention to outcomes, you’ll not only begin to discern where more is needed, but you’ll also start to see the kinds of processes and interactions that are producing the desired levels of direction, alignment, and commitment. Use the questionnaire at the end of this piece to have a discussion within your team or with your peers.
Make more leadership happen.
When you notice that there aren’t many leadership processes in place, create them. When there are useful leadership processes in place, make sure people have the skills to participate in them effectively. And when existing leadership processes no longer seem to be producing the needed direction, alignment, and commitment, explore new ones. For example, consider:
- To create more Direction:
- Does a more diverse group of people need to be involved?
- To create more Alignment:
- When a new strategic initiative is being launched, does your staff have the skills to analyze its implication for their own work?
- Do you need to meet more regularly with your peers to prioritize work?
- Are clearer accountability structures needed?
- To create more Commitment:
- Are more honest conversations about proposed changes needed?
- Can you match members of your staff with projects that they are most enthusiastic about, while still assuring that all the projects are adequately resourced?
Improve your own ability to participate in cultivating leadership.
It’s useful to continually deepen and broaden your individual skills and abilities. With a broader repertoire of capabilities, you’ll be able to participate more effectively in a wide range of processes.
If you’re wondering where to focus your development efforts, consider that one lens for examining this question is the DAC model:
- If there’s one place in your organization where you would desperately like to see more DAC, where would that be?
- What would you need to get better at doing so more leadership happens in that setting?
Attached Appendix – DAC questionnaire for teams or groups of teams to use as a basis for discussion where teams are performing and where there are potential gaps to fill.
Dr. Les Buckley 2018 2024
References
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016) The Dynamic Componential Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations; Research in Organizational Behavior.
Blanchard, K. H., & Hersey, P. (1985) Leadership and the One Minute Manager: A Situational Approach to Managing People, William Morrow.
Blanchard, K. H., et al. (2013) Situational Leadership II: The System That Transforms Managers into Leaders, Blanchard Training and Development.
Chevallier, Arnaud, Frédéric Dalsace, Jean-Louis Barsoux (2024) The Art of Asking Smarter Questions HBR
Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014) Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: A Meta-Analytic Review on Their Relative Effects on Performance; Perspectives on Psychological Science.
Deloitte Development (2019) Why good strategies fail Addressing the three critical strategic tensions, online access via website
Heather McLeod Grant, Chris Block, Lance Fors, (2016) “I/We/It: Leadership for Social Change”, https://www.openimpact.io/insights2/,
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969) Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, Prentice Hall.
Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009) The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World, Harvard Business Press.
Herzberg, F. (1966) Work and the Nature of Man; World Publishing Company.
Kloppenborg TJ and LJ Laning (2014) Achieving Success in Nonprofit Organizations
Linsky, M., & Heifetz, R. (2002) Leadership on the Line: Staying Alive Through the Dangers of Change, Harvard Business Review Press.
McCauley, C., (2020) Making Leadership Happen. Centre for Creative Leadership Moore, M. H. (2013). Recognizing Public Value.
McCauley C and Cooper (2024) DAC Centre for Creative leaderhsip
Obolensky, N. (2014) Complex Adaptive Leadership: Embracing Paradox and Uncertainty, Gower Publishing.Reeves, Martin &
Ravitch, S., & Herzog, L. (2020) Leadership Mindsets for Adaptive Change, Rowman & Littlefield
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being; American Psychologist.