| |
Ethos Issue 7, Jan 2010
In Search of the
New Public Leader
Claudio Fernández-Aráoz
THE NEW LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES
Like Portugal at the time of Henry the Navigator, the world (and Singapore along with it) is once again entering an era of unchartered waters, with many major
challenges ahead.
While Singapore’s traditional form of "dynamic governance" will be even more essential in an environment of greater
uncertainty, the flow of outstanding
talent into its public sector will be much
harder to sustain.
The traditional source of talent for
public leaders—under the scholarship
system—will no longer be as reliable as in
the past. Ironically, Singapore’s success
at wealth creation has made its people
so affluent that scholarships no longer
represent the unique opportunities
they once were. Talented individuals are
now much more able to afford a good
education overseas, while maintaining
the freedom to work either for the public
or the private sector.
Furthermore, evidence suggests that
an unprecedented war for talent will
take place in Asia for at least the next two
decades.4 The public sector in Singapore
will increasingly be competing for talent
with the private sector both in its home
country and abroad. Indirectly, other
governments in the world will also be
competing for some of the best talent
in the private sector, generating in turn
an additional demand over the potential
leaders that the Singapore public sector
will need.
TOWARDS THE NEW PUBLIC
LEADERSHIP: FIVE PRIORITIES
Looking ahead, I see five priorities
in enhancing Singapore’s capacity
to find and develop the next wave of
public leadership:
1. Adjust the screening process
Singapore has been uniquely
disciplined and effective at bringing
in top talent to its public sector.
However, I believe that Singapore’s
screening process is still too biased
towards academic criteria and
indirectly IQ, while not giving enough
weight to emotional intelligencebased
competencies related to
our ability to manage ourselves,
and our relationships with others.
The problem with the screening
process involves two types of errors.
First, there is the risk of hiring
the wrong managers who, despite
their academic brilliance, do not
demonstrate the required leadership
abilities. This "type I" error, hiring
or promoting the wrong candidate, is
obviously to be avoided. However
in today’s world, where talent is
becoming increasingly scarce, the
"type II" error should also be avoided,
which is the probability of rejecting the right candidate for the wrong
reasons. I believe that, by adjusting
the screening process, Singapore
will not only be able to avoid hiring
or appointing the wrong candidates,
but also able to attract a larger
number of highly effective (and in some cases even more capable)
public leaders.
2. Source more openly
As in the case
of Henry the Navigator, Singapore
should realise that some of its best
potential public leaders may not
necessarily come from internal
promotion, but might also be brought
in from outside. Sources may include
the private sector within Singapore,
repatriated Singaporeans and,
eventually for some roles, perhaps
even foreign nationals. This practice
will not only allow for better
appointments (since research clearly
shows that considering a wide pool
of internal and external candidates
significantly increases the chances
of successful selection), but may even
become a necessity if, as I believe,
the traditional scholarship process
becomes an insufficient or much less
reliable source of talent.
3. Avoid becoming mechanical
Singapore has led the way in
implementing advanced and
disciplined people management
systems, including the early
measurement of potential. At the
same time, as Singapore maintains
its discipline in these processes
and constantly updates them, care
should also be taken to avoid the
risk of becoming too mechanical
in implementation. Singapore has
benefited from two generations
of dynamic leadership who have
demonstrated high levels of purpose
and passion. It should now avoid
falling into the same trap as some
organisations, which fill themselves
with brilliant people who carry
impressive double degrees yet
lack the soul and passion of the
foundational leaders. No Human
Resource process will work if those at
the top lack the highest motivation
for making great people decisions.
Vision, courage, determination and
passion are more important for
building human capital than the
most clinical, advanced model of
best practice.
4. Make better appointments
While Singapore is a prime example of what capable leadership can achieve, I believe that the public sector may be better at developing people in their initial career steps than at making great appointments at more senior levels, taking into account the specific challenges of each job and the required fit in terms of competence. Whenever we make an appointment, we need to make a trade-off between the immediate performance needs (for which a very significant degree of competence for the specific job is paramount) and the development of the individual (in which case the challenge becomes more important, which implies that there will be a competency gap). Investing too much in the development of individuals at the expense of not making the right appointments in terms of competence has a large opportunity cost, especially at senior levels.
I |
|
