In this blog, I suggest we start digging deeper to question whether leadership (and our development sector more broadly) are walking the talk on issues such as gender parity or compassion in leadership.
A few years into my career, I realised that I was thriving or miserable in my work places based on one significant (albeit not sole) factor: whether I had a good boss.
I define “good” as a person who has a clear goal, knows how to motivate and rally staff, and treats staff as human beings with needs, also outside of the workplace (i.e. compassion).
I also realised that not only my direct line manager (e.g. middle management) played a significant role, but also top leadership of the organisation.
A line manager can try but is always constrained in defining a vision or goals (an impossible task if top leadership is not clear, or constantly pivoting). They are also limited in how much they can buffer e.g. if top leadership cultivates or tolerates a toxic or brutally competitive work culture. And they are usually risk averse to defying work place policies set by top leadership, such as flexibility on working hours or location.
I started treating interviews for jobs as a two-way decision. From my perspective, would I have room to deliver, grow, and stay a balanced person? It took some trial-and-error to realise that both my line manager and top leadership were relevant, and even if my line manager (usually the person in the interview) promised the world to suit my needs, I’d end up miserable if top leadership made it near impossible for them to deliver on their promises.
Talk vs walk
The problem is that, in an interview situation, neither side provides complete information. Every boss will try to appear clear, flexible and compassionate, although some (perhaps helpfully) don’t even try, and others set alarm bells ringing with what they say, how they react, or how they behave.
But all in all, most people want to appear competent and nice, especially if they are interested in recruiting a candidate.
I’ve therefore found myself in an interview where a line manager and organisational leader have both been clear with their vision, motivating, and compassionate. And proven to be so in practice too.
And I’ve found myself in an interview where the same appeared to be the case in the interview, and in practice everything was – I can’t put it any other way – horrible and painful chaos. The talk was the absolute opposite of the walk.
I’ve drawn some further lessons from these experiences, which I’ll summarise later below.
The example of gender parity
Another good example of talk vs walk is gender parity. I can’t think of many development organisations or leaders that are not flying the flag of gender parity, also for their internal structures.
But if you look at how many top women leaders there are heading international development organisations, the situation looks rather dire. For example, in 2021, out of 201 global health organisations, 70% are led by men, and 61% have male-dominated governing bodies, and 66% of new leadership and governing positions have gone to men. And in social impact organisations, a man is still three times as likely to rise to a leadership position than a woman.
The rhetoric of “I support gender parity in leadership”, voiced by (primarily male) leaders – some of who have held their positions for several terms – therefore rings quite hollow.
Integrity at stake
Some people may argue that it’s a positive development that leadership is even speaking about, or committing to compassion or gender parity. The hope is that leadership will compete to make increasingly bold commitments, and accountability – and somewhere along the line progress – will follow.
But from a (male) leader’s point of view, there’s little incentive to change things down the line. After this leadership position, unless they are planning on retiring, that same male leader will want another leadership position. We can turn blue holding our breath before a male leader steps back from his own leadership position to walk the talk on gender parity in leadership (challenge to prove me wrong, anyone?).
The same holds true for compassionate leadership. It’s easier to speak in compassionate talking points than to change one’s own leadership style. The prior will be bought by most external people, the latter will only be known by a small minority of (unfortunate, and usually disillusioned, sooner than later former) staff.
A leader’s integrity may be at stake, but there’s rarely an external price to pay. Which explains why so many leaders continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk. The result is that change doesn’t happen, or happens at a snail pace.
Lessons
There are many similar examples to the above that apply to all of us working in development, where actions do not match words. I have written about some of these in my previous blog, using the case of vaccine equity, fair taxation, and climate change.
I’d love to hear and learn about more “solutions” to this dilemma from others, but so far, based on my own personal experiences and thinking, I’d suggest we all try the following:
- Speak out. Reflect on – and more importantly speak out and act – if what we see and also personally are pushed to do runs fully counter to our moral compass of what feels right. Don’t only walk away with your feet and feel helpless when the walk doesn’t match the talk, but keep (or if forced to remain silent due to contract clauses or pressure: start) speaking out even after you leave. No-one other than the “talker” will continue to benefit from great talking points and rankings if they run counter to reality.
- Ask explicit questions. In a recruitment situation, explicitly ask about work culture and strategic challenges. You’ll sometimes be amazed at what you hear (and run away with good reason!). Also reach out informally to one or two current staff, and (a mistake I’ve definitely learned from the hard way) the former staff who held the position you are applying for.
- Don’t assume talk is the same as walk. Remember that many development organisations have large communications, marketing and recruitment teams and budgets. They are paid to lure great applicants, and make things look good – also because donors expect this.
- Be the change, at every stage in your career. Perhaps most importantly – and this applies to any stage of your career – don’t wait for the change, but be the change. Don’t use slogans such as “pay it forward”, “shine the light”, “lean out”, “step back”, “diversity”, “gender parity”, or “compassion” because they help you rise to or stay in power. Walk the talk to make that change happen, not from a place of power to say good, but from a place of service where you can do good.
Katri Bertram 