This Grist to the Mill contribution is intended to be somewhat controversial and I’m sure will challenge individual views and values of the 21st Century mind-set. For this, I make no apologies and seek merely to be an agent provocateur in the growing maelstrom of the vertical learning debate.
My contention is that the language and frameworks for describing vertical learning and its place in leadership development is rooted in learning theory and philosophy dating back thousands of years in many different cultures and spiritual traditions. The language of “character development” featured in such texts and in the early part of my career working on personal development programmes with police officers, the term character development was used with freedom. What else would you call personal development in the context of organisational development?
Current cultural and political mores do of course shape our attitudes towards such matters. This begs the question to what extent do our current views on learning and leadership development reflect “mere politics, fashion or political correctness” rather than a true exploration of the innate capacity of humanity to learn, grow and develop in the service of organisation, community and self?
The received wisdom is that there are many and varied leadership styles and philosophies, from situational leadership to transformational leadership to authentic leadership…..and beyond. Goleman introduces us to the six leadership styles demonstrated by the emotionally intelligent leader in “The New Leaders”.
Revered institutions have come into existence in order to train or develop leaders. Many such institutions such as Sandhurst are now ingrained in the cultural fabric of the UK, the former commonwealth countries and beyond.
I had the fortune to hold a senior role at Brathay for several years, founded on the vision of a wealthy benefactor to “build the character of the young apprentices of the cotton mill towns of Lancashire through personal and social development”. (A mission still pursued by this most fabulous organisation with a current focus on the disaffected young people of post-industrial, social media savvy Britain) Brathay ignited much post-war leadership and personal development thinking and methodology, being influential in the spawning of John Adair’s Action Centred Leadership and Meredith Belbin’s team roles.
So whether it’s Sandhurst, Brathay, the traditional public schools, or the ancient spiritual traditions, character development seems germane to leadership development, despite that such a label seems entirely unfashionable today carrying heavy connotations of the playing fields of Eton.
What has this got to do with vertical learning?
Each vertical learning guru is working to put their spin on the idea to create for themselves their own USP in a crowded market. So rather than add another take on it, I refer to what is already out there as “received wisdom”
Vertical learning is:
- A means by which the individual moves away from ego to appreciate other, bigger, less constrained ways of thinking and perspectives through self-awareness.
- A process by which we become more aware of and responsive to the practical and emotional needs of others.
- How we come to be more able to put others needs first in the spirit of “Leaders Eat Last” (Sinek)
- Learning that enables us to pay attention to our own sustainability and resilience under pressure while still having an eye out for the needs and care of others.
- Learning to build emotional intelligence to enable us to connect with ourselves and others in more meaningful, productive ways.
- Becoming more skilful and purposeful in co-creation and collaboration, more ably equipping us to work with and resolve the complex problems of today and into the future.
- Having the personal space and capacity to be a part of, rather than apart from the macro and micro environment that sustains us as an individual and a species.
In thinking about vertical learning, leadership development and character development, the ancient sages again offer the perspective of the long view:
“Those who understand others are intelligent.
Those who understand themselves are enlightened.
Those who overcome others have strength.
Those who overcome themselves are powerful.
Those who know contentment are wealthy.
Those who proceed vigorously have will power.
Those who do not lose their base endure.”
—Lao Tzu (Trans. Derek Lin)
So I return to my contention; that vertical learning is what, in an earlier epoch of personal and leadership development, would without embarrassment or being subject to pointing fingers of derision, be shamelessly referred to as character development.
Beyond politics, fashion and political correctness, what’s wrong with that?
Brian Woodall
True North Partnership