In these posts we have addressed several key roles that organizations require in order to operate successfully. When played well, these roles lead to successful business and individual outcomes that make our businesses thrive. So far, we have addressed the roles of “leader” and of “individual.” But these are not the only roles we need.
In order to be successful, every organization needs people to play specific roles and meet important expectations. The Stages of Impact™ is a model that Emerge Leadership Group uses to describe these needed organizational roles and how people filling them should approach the work.
Stage 1 defines the role where people seek to establish their capability. The approach taken is very tactical and the value of the contribution is limited to what they can do themselves.
In the Stage 2 role people must approach their work in tactical ways. In this Stage there is more autonomy and complexity to their work than in Stage 1, as people demonstrate and apply their expertise. Although the approach taken is tactical, the value of the contribution rises and may include the impact work has on other people.
Stage 3 describes the leadership role. People who truly act like leaders take the Stage 3 approach their work. People in Stage 3 may or may not have management responsibilities. People in this Stage are much more strategic than in Stage 2. While perhaps continuing to do some hands-on work, they focus their contribution on the things that can be done with and through others.
The Advanced Stage 3 role is leading others too, but doing so at a much higher level. In this Stage, people must learn to think even more strategically and to act “at arm’s length” from the day-to-day work.
In the Stage 4 role, people have the “broadest” view and the longest time-horizon of anyone in the organization. Their purpose is no longer about the specifics of how to get things done; rather they create systems and processes, allocating resources so that others can get things done. People in this Stage position the organization within the marketplace and do all they can for the longevity of the organization.
A careful consideration of this model leads us to understand that not only do organizations need each of these roles to be present, but also if we are truly going to thrive, the expectations of each of these roles must be met. For example, if we have people in Stage 1, but those people are not engaged in appropriate learning and helping activities, the need for Stage 1 will not be met and our organization will not thrive. People in Stage 2 who do not consistently and appropriately apply their skills and expertise with minimal supervision, then organizations suffer with inefficiency and poor quality. When people should be in Stage 3, or Advanced Stage 3, or even in Stage 4 do not focus on the leadership requirements of their work, but instead act as if they are the only ones who can actually do the work, then the entire enterprise is at risk.
When organizational leaders take deliberate and careful efforts to identify the Stage roles within their organizations, and then plan on filling those roles based upon the expectations of the roles, they stand a much greater likelihood of success. However, it is often the case that organizational leaders staff positions based upon how well someone met the expectations of the previous Stage, not on what is required of the desired Stage role. For example, how many people are promoted to management, not because they are truly good (potential) leaders, but because they were outstanding at their individual contributor role?
Each of the roles described by the Stages of Impact can be seen as some level of leadership: from learning how to “lead self” all the way to learning how to “lead the organization.” When cast in this light, the resultant “leadership field” provides us with a way to look at and staff our organizations. Once staffed, we also have a clearer picture of development needs within the roles; you develop people based upon what is expected of their current role, not the previous roles they may have filled. Organizations will do well to take the time required to consider how they staff and develop their people in the roles those people are expected to fill. When organizations take this time and effort, our data shows that these organizations tend to out perform their counterparts by a significant margin.