Sam Deeks writes about leadership and congruence. Makes sense to me.

The problem is a preference for avoiding the discomfort of looking at and considering changing our own behaviour. Unsurprisingly many leaders prefer to support other people and groups to change rather than work on themselves; those other people in turn, prefer to help other people change … and so on.

It’s an easy trap to fall into. Sam sees two problems arising from this:

The first is that when they avoid exploring the discomfort of change before asking others to, they miss the opportunity to equip themselves with the kind of skills, empathy and understanding that would be invaluable for supporting change in others. The second is that when they don’t work on their own behaviours, leaders lose the ability to lead by example and are perceived as incongruent.

I would add, and I guess Sam would agree, that we must also avoid the trap of just blaming leaders for ineffective change processes. The challenge to be congruent is for everyone.

1 thought on “Congruence

  1. Stuart Reid

    I think this does apply to all of us, including those of us who work as facilitators, coaches, mediators etc

    This does mean moving away from a model of facilitation where the facilitator is outside the process, to a more challenging one where the facilitator can be changed and affected by what is going on in a more human way. This is not a ‘neutral’ model of facilitation, but responds more to the improv invitation to ‘be changed’.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.