Focused, Strategic and Tactical Leaderhip

By Richard Russey

One of the world’s preeminent anthropologists, Margaret Meade, said:

“What people say, what people do, and what people say they do are entirely different things.”

Those words of keen insight, observance, and wisdom speak to assessing the competencies of leadership explored here. Do we as leaders speak and act with consistency? Are we as leaders focused on saying and doing things that are in concert with one another, indeed serve as two aspects of the same goal?

Too often, we say one thing publicly, and without negative purpose or malice end up acting in a way that doesn’t match our words. That is because, I think, it is likely easier to put our words out into the world than to follow those words with actions that are consistent with those words and that embody those words, making them real and measurable.

Focused Leadership
One way to bring our statements (what we say) and our actions (what we do) into alignment is an energy of focus brought to our leadership style. Focus can and should be an outgrowth of vision and mission (explored in the previous posting on leadership). This is where an established vision and mission gets actualized on a daily, moment-to-moment basis. Without appropriate focus we allow ourselves as leaders to be pulled in many directions simultaneously without accomplishing the specifics of our original vision and mission. Certainly, multi-tasking and the ability to keep a lot of balls in the air at once is one of the hallmarks of effective leadership. But, all those tasks and balls in the air ought to be focused on the original vision and mission that a leader is charged to bring to fruition.

It helpful and meaningful to engage in regular, frequent self-checks (self-assessments, if you will) as a leader, or indeed as a person at any level serving to contribute to an organizational endeavor. A few self-check questions to ask: Am I, as a leader, speaking and acting in alignment with my organization’s vision and mission? Are my words and actions consistent and supportive of each other? Does the outside world see a leader that represents their organization with clarity, convergence, and a sense of centeredness?

How is this accomplished? Examine the words used during your public pronouncements, speeches, and presentations. Look at your memos and other writings; be they simple email communications, or lengthy content-based articles. Then review your actions over a specific measure of time, whether it be moment-to-moment, daily, or weekly. What is the desired outcome of this self-examination? It is that on average, or more desirable even better than average, your words and your actions are in alignment. As Margaret Meade might hope to conclude: what you say you do, and what you do are in concert, seamlessly integrated into a consistent message to your board, team (staff), constituency, audience, and the broader world that is likely to be looking on and drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of your leadership based in part on your ability to focus; that is, to do what you say you do.

Strategic Leadership
Effective leaders are astute about their strategic approach to their endeavors. The ability to be strategic in ways that positively impact one’s organization involves a complex set of considerations, observations, behaviors, and actions. As I’ve acknowledged in previous postings on leadership, volumes have been written on the subject of strategic leadership alone. I’ll focus on what my years of experience have taught me, which will likely be familiar given they millions of words that have been devoted to the subject by many authors over time.

One of the first aspects of strategic leadership that must be looked at is the ability of a leader to be willing to examine with honesty the strengths and weaknesses of their organization. Many aspects must come under scrutiny, not the least of which is the leader of the organization and his or her style and approach. But, it is much more than that. There are, at the bottom line, really only three major categories of resources that we as leaders have to work with. They are time, money, and personnel. Think of your work, in terms of your ability to accomplish the established vision and mission of your organization. Is there anything there in terms of resource that does not fall into one of those categories? Remember, I’m speaking of resources to get the job done effectively; the job you were hired to accomplish. This does not discount the rich content (meaning) of your organization, the sum and substance of your work; but content expertise largely falls into the personnel category, whether it exists with full-time staff, or is brought into the organization through consultants, advisers, board members, your constituency at large, or even vendors.

Are the resources at your disposal adequate to the tasks established by your vision and mission? More than likely you will find, upon honest assessment, that there is lack in one or more of the resource categories over which you have some influence. Do you have enough time to meet your goals? If not, what needs to be adjusted in the objectives or strategic plan of your organization? Prioritization may be necessary if time seems to be the squeeze, unless you have an abundance of money and/or personnel to apply to the tasks to ameliorate any negative factor related to time. It is not a surprise, particularly in our current economic climate, that more often than not sufficient money to realize the vision and mission of our organization is an influencing factor. If that is true (and I haven’t learned of an organization yet where it is not) then the other two elements you have control over may need adjusting. That is, perhaps the time issue needs to be considered, or the staffing issue may need reworking. This all speaks to the need to develop realistic objectives based on the vision and mission of the organization. Otherwise, the strategic plan of the organization will be a set-up for failure, which is a completely unnecessary and unwanted outcome.

Strategic leadership involves much more, of course. Paramount among additional considerations is an analysis framework that is not of my creation … but has been around for a long time. Yet, it must be engaged in assiduously and with a sincerity that may seem breath-taking. I’m referring, of course, to the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that both define and challenge your organization.

An effective leader is constantly scoping the environment in which he/she operates – looking for those strengths and opportunities that may serve to deliver effectively on established goals, and indeed lead to growth. At the same time an effective leader is on the lookout for weaknesses and threats (internal and external) that could cause major damage to the organization if not met head-on. An important point here is that while I named the leader of the organization as the person primarily responsible for these tasks of scanning the internal and external environments for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, it should be the ongoing task of the board and the staff as well. When all stake holders in an organization are involved the result is a far less threatening approach and environment. With just one of those parties holding the responsibility of examining the internal and external factors that may be strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats, you will have at least two other parties that are feeling uncomfortable at the least, and “under the gun” at worst.

I believe in inclusive leadership that utilizes the human resources at hand, leaving no one out in the cold. Any important “meeting of minds” within an organization should include everyone that has vested their time and energy with that organization. Everyone on staff, and I mean everyone, has value and has something to contribute. To that end, I’ve always found it somewhat abhorrent to refer to “senior staff” as opposed to “junior staff.” This does not discount that in some organizations a necessary hierarchy exists. But, even the most rigid hierarchical structure does not mean that individuals at all levels of the organization should not be included in discussions around the welfare, direction, and purpose of the organization. In my experience, it is amazing what happens when everyone is brought to the table together when meetings are conducted that are specifically looking at strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats – and the resources available to address them.

Tactical Leadership
Finally, as a conclusion to this posting, we get down to the real nitty-gritty – sort of where the rubber hits the road to use a well-worn analogy. Tactical leadership includes the working concepts of engaging in intentional, deliberate, calculated, and planned activity. It is also oriented to the bottom-line (again, think of the resources available to you as a leader: time, money, and personnel). Tactical leadership utilizes data available, or seeks to establish a pool of data if it doesn’t already exist that will help with decisions about the direction forward. The thing about data, however it is gathered, is that is constantly needs updating. So, the endeavor of data collection, of fact-finding, of budget crunching, of identifying the consumers of your mission’s purpose (audience, constituency) is in need of constantly being brought current and reexamined. This brings us back to the purpose of the organization, where all the data collection and analysis, budget projections vs. actual expenditures, and other fact-finding will either support that purpose or serve as a red flag of warning that adjustments need to be made. Tactical leadership takes all these factors into account as a bottom-line means of measuring whether or not established outcomes are being reached, fulfilled, and satisfied.

Tactical leadership happens, again, by utilizing all the personnel available that have vested interest in the success of your organization’s mission. Board members, all staff, consultants, vendors, and importantly the audience or consumers of your organization’s mission should be included in both the data gathering and analyzing of that data. Similarly, representatives of all those subgroups should assist with budget development and analysis.

We often think of tactics in military terms … that is, secret for the purpose of engaging an enemy. Let’s redefine tactics with a more benign and “civilian” mind-set as a set of actions, based on facts, figures, data, and research that is openly and inclusively considered as a means to support the success of our organizations.

Effective leaders embrace openness and transparency as a hallmark of their leadership style, and understand the value of leadership behavior that is openly focused, strategic, and tactical.