Crossing the Leadership Chasm
Crossing the Leadership Chasm
Technical prowess will only take you so far.
The notion of “Crossing the Chasm” has been with us since the early 90s. Geoffrey Moore created this model of marketing and technology cycles that have stuck with us and entered our vocabulary. I recently had a conversation with a technical leader that prompted me to think about the hundred or so people I have encountered while mentoring and coaching in the tech world. There is a chasm that exists between the upper end of success in a technical role and becoming a c-level executive responsible for broader parts of the business.
Here is what makes up the chasm to be crossed. At some point, an emerging leader must leave behind what they know, and focus on who they are. Put another way, all the things that came before were the sorting mechanisms that every executive survives - the advanced degrees, the work as a team manager, all of those sifting out the people who can’t operate at strategic levels. The technical prowess that got you to the edge of the chasm will not serve you on the other side.
But what about Chief Technology Officer, I hear you cry. Yes, that is a c-level position. And it might be a transitional position for a broader responsibility, or considered key in a purely technology focused company. I’m sure there are outlier cases. But technology moves too fast for a strategic leader to keep up, and be a good leader. That’s why Chief Technology Officer roles were created in the first place, for strategic leaders to have a technology advisor.
This idea is not just something I dreamed up as blather. It’s based on research. In “Primal Leadership: Learning to Lead with Emotional Intelligence”, Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis & Annie McKee share their research on why emotional intelligence is key to leadership success. In the following I quote heavily from the Appendix of their book on this research.
To publish their conclusions a qualitative research process was followed. First, 500 competence models were created from cross industry examples. This was done to focus on the question, “What drove outstanding performance?” They looked in the areas of technical skills, cognitive abilities, and traits for emotional intelligence. Top performers were sought out and interviewed.
This process resulted in lists of ingredients for highly effective leaders that ranged from a few to 15 or so competencies. Analysis of the data from these competence models was dramatic. To some extent intellect was notable, but “emotional intelligence based competencies played an increasingly important role at higher levels. The higher you get in a company, the more EI emerged as the reason for excellence.”
“Selection pressure for IQ already existed in advanced degrees and at higher levels, differences in technical expertise was negligible. Our rule of thumb holds that EI contributes 80 to 90 percent of the competencies that distinguish outstanding from average leaders. …(consider) partner’s contributions to the profits of a large accounting firm. If the partner had significant strengths in the self-management competencies, he or she added 78% more incremental profit than did partners without those strengths. -and- social skills 110%, self-regulation 390%.”
So emotional intelligence was found to not just be good practice for employee satisfaction, it was found to directly affect the bottom line in dollars.
In my work with founders of startups I have learned that CEOs shift in later stages to spending the majority of their time raising funds and making sure that the company they founded runs smoothly to earn those investments. It is crucial in the early stages that they begin learning the fundamentals of leadership. While a great idea is key for a startup, making the team that develops and sells that idea work well together can mean the difference between life and death for the fledgling company.