Like it or not, many senior leaders in the organization are kept in a very operational space due to rapidly changing priorities. The existence of uncertainties and ambiguities keep them permanently in a status of searching and solving current problems rather than in a longer-term thinking space of adaptation and transformation of their organization.

There is a big difference between being a strategic leader and an operational leader. Both are important but have different functions and require a different mindset and mindset. Knowing the difference between the two and what each entails is important for any leader who wants to grow their organization to be able to navigate between the two. It would not make sense to bring arguments for and against each type of leadership, well rather I invite you to look at the challenges of those who lead from board teams to approach a strategic rather than an operational mindset and to delegate in a greater proportion of operational management to the middle of the organization.

What keeps us out of the strategic space?

The need for utility

Operations management, which covers the coordination of daily business processes, produces immediate results that you can observe in efficiency, quality, delivery of products or services, and which seems to solve the inconveniences of dysfunctions created by people's behavior, lack of resources, lack of understanding of priorities , the attitude of those involved or the ability of the teams to collaborate. The illusion of saving the organization, the sense of responsibility and usefulness that most leaders have when they jump in with solutions or interventions to solve, because they know and because people react faster to the authority of their position, are some of the causes that more frequent which practically steals these people's time. This time could be better spent developing middle managers and preparing for the future to cope with this often chaotic pace. It's just that the latter require a type of work and perseverance for which business people don't always feel prepared and the results are harder to define and measure and take much longer. A vicious circle that only leaders who work consistently and consciously with themselves can break...

Because business management is not the sole responsibility of those at the highest levels of the hierarchy, it is an activity that anyone interested in the success of an organization can take part in and involving employees in management is an effective way to contribute to increased success and morale of a company. This requires both skills that can be learned such as delegation but above all it requires trust in the potential of people which means a certain type of mentality.

The need for competence

Every human being has this need to know that he is competent, that he does what he does well. That's why there's so much need for validation. It somehow becomes implicit at the top of organizations that people get to fill those positions because they know and understand the risks, constraints and challenges better, and consequently it is assumed that they should also have the solutions. It is a type of pressure that arises from certain beliefs that the position of senior leader is more strongly justified if those who occupy it can generate solutions to absolutely anything. "Good, he should know that's why he's a director!" or, in the mirror, "Of course I get involved, people expect me to give them a solution!" Another vicious circle that keeps the people at the top of the organization with the deepest training and understanding of the business in an area where they are over-competent or, conversely, in an area where by not doing the day-to-day work they are no longer at all competent on technical matters.

At the top of the organization the need for competence changes dramatically towards the development of the ability to abstract and conceptualize, to observe organizational patterns, in people's behaviors, in decision making, in resolving tensions or addressing risks and challenges. Aspects that cannot be seen from the level of those involved in the middle of the organization or at its base. As, at the level of the top management team, leaders are not always aware of their patterns of functioning and are moving away from effectiveness. And here comes the need to work with someone from the outside, a team coach prepared to play this role of independent observer.

The need for control

Regarding the need for control, I don't think it is more present at the level of top management teams than operational managers or those in the middle of the organization. We are human and the management of any company involves assuming responsibilities that turn into personal stakes: related to personally assumed objectives, self-image, benefits and rewards, potential career path. Maybe others.

If we look at the most common types of operational management areas, they can include:

Inventory Management: Tracking and managing inventory levels, ordering new supplies, raw materials or spare parts, and coordinating with suppliers.

Supplying products or services: Ensuring on-time delivery, managing logistics and monitoring the quality of products or services.

Financial management: budget execution, accounting, invoicing and financial reporting to maintain fiscal accountability and transparency.

Production management: production planning, quality control, process optimization and supervision of production or service provision.

Quality assurance: implementing quality control measures, monitoring standards and taking corrective action if necessary.

Compliance and risk management: ensuring compliance of business operations with legal, regulatory and ethical standards and managing potential risks.

Management of information technology and digitization: supervision of the technological infrastructure, maintenance of systems and implementation of new software or hardware, if necessary., automations.

Strategic planning and execution: aligning daily activities with organizational goals, monitoring progress and making necessary adjustments.

Sales and supplier coordination: managing the sales team and supplier relationships, negotiating contracts and ensuring that goods and services are received on schedule.

Data analysis and reporting: collecting, analyzing and presenting data to help make decisions, monitor performance and achieve business objectives.

Only by looking at this list do we immediately perceive the complexity and multiplicity of sources of potential problems that managers at the top of the organization tend to deal with, thus taking their entire attention to an area that is more about repairing the past and managing the present , leaving almost no time and attention left for thinking about the future. In any case, not of the long-term future and possibly of a future that boils down to what is somewhat intelligible, i.e. the next two or three years. Moreover, through their competence and possible speed in solving, they compete with the competences of their teams, thus reducing their chance to be exposed and develop, reducing the level of delegation absolutely necessary to free up strategic time and energy to tackle some issues of greater importance and complexity than operational ones.

How do we get back and stay in the strategic space?

In a well-functioning organization, both operational and strategic leadership are essential. Operational leaders make sure the organization runs smoothly every day, while strategic leaders make sure the organization is headed in the right direction for long-term success.

The two perspectives of leadership are often combined. For effectiveness, however, they must be kept separate in the moments of conception and long-term strategy thinking. That is, it takes time and space dedicated to thinking about the future and transforming the organization.

To use a metaphor, imagine that you and a group of friends set out to climb Kilimanjaro. You also have the intention and ambition to make it to the top, you have somehow acquired the resources necessary for such an initiative, you have the group of friends you can go on this journey with and rely on. That is, all the ingredients of a success. Many times, we put off this trip because we are simply too busy getting the resources we imagine we absolutely need, and we don't make time to train for the trip: physical and mental fitness, maintaining positive emotion and enthusiasm in relation to the purpose.

The parallel we can make is that, together with the top management team, a leader can envision this journey of the organization towards a goal that is both ambitious and that brings well-being and pleasure to people, in the effort to achieve those results.

But without the recurrent and rigorous exercise of returning to checking the status (without going into details) and maintaining focus on the vision, the perceived effort becomes greater than the attractiveness of the goal. Our mind begins to process obstacles and lack of resources rather than evaluating the progress we can make each day and stops channeling energy. We break away from the original vision and find our usefulness, justifying our competence In unnecessary interventions and feed our need for control, in everyday work.

The key to staying in a strategic space is to designate it and visit this space rigorously: for the pace of current changes a strategic meeting every 2 months becomes a training discipline. In more stable times, good practices allowed a biannual or quarterly meeting, but the acceleration of changes and much stronger influences from the external environment make the time required for strategic exercises to increase.

What can this strategic space include?

This strategic space includes not only the initial definition of the overall vision and mission of an organization or the alignment of the local vision with that of the group, but also the recurring validation, at least once a year, that everything that happens outside the company and in its interior enables the organization to keep its path towards its defined purpose.

In general, the vision is an abstract formulation and even the managers at the top of the organization need more concreteness to channelize the efforts of the business lines they coordinate, therefore a healthy strategic exercise is to define an executive vision for 3 to 5 years from which the top management team can develop strategies, systems and structures to achieve the agreed vision and mission. But also social systems that integrate effectively and meet the needs of both customers and employees. The latter usually involve changing the organizational culture, which takes time, being directly related to the revision of values ​​and norms of social interaction, to the training of some social or digital skills.

What is overlooked in this strategic space, or taken for granted, is the team's purpose which, more often than not, is in the shadow of the organization's purpose, and strategic team members drift away, forget, or lack clarity about their purpose.

Defining the team's purpose is essential for channeling its energy into important periods, or over relevant time intervals. The purpose of a strategic team is usually to maintain a helicopter thinking, assess the complexity of risks and potential unintended consequences that would affect the long-term strategy or the relationship with important stakeholders, the purpose of this team is to make decisions that the echelons from the middle of the organization, in the absence of the overall vision, they have no way to take them, to decide on the business development opportunities, the approach to other markets, the moment of launching new products or services, the purchase or sale of companies, policies related to people, remuneration, financial decisions affecting the entire organization, what and how is communicated outside the organization.

To learn this ability to stay in a strategic space, you can choose to use the services of a professional team coach. His intervention can be a mix of facilitating the dialogue, offering observations about the way the team works and manages to channel their ideas towards finding an effective way of working, maintaining a collaborative space through a balanced presence, valuing the team's strengths and the modeling of behaviors that can later be useful for the way of working in this strategic space.,

Find out more about how you can grow and develop your team, develop your organization and its people by reading the other Executive Coaching articles we have published that outline better for those who have not had such experience , the benefits and opportunities that the partnership brings through coaching both at the individual and team level.

Both operational and strategic leadership are important to ensure that an organization achieves its goals. Operational leaders provide the day-to-day guidance and direction needed to keep the organization running smoothly. Strategic leaders provide the long-term vision and guidance needed to ensure the organization remains competitive and successful.

The main differences between operational leadership and strategic leadership

There are key differences between operational leadership and strategic leadership. Operational leadership focuses on the day-to-day management of the organization and its resources, while strategic leadership focuses on the long-term planning and direction of the organization. Strategic leaders must be able to see the big picture and make decisions that will help the organization achieve its goals, while operational leaders must be able to execute the plans and strategies created by strategic leaders.

Typically, operational leadership is more concerned with short-term results, while strategic leadership is more concerned with long-term results. Operational leaders often have direct control over their subordinates, while strategic leaders typically do not. Strategic leaders must be able to influence others without having direct authority over them.

published on  PRWave