When movement does not happen as it should the blame can and should almost always be placed at the feet of the top leader!
Here is a scenario or case study to consider. You are the group chief executive of a large international business that is at the forefront of remarkable change because the industry itself is undergoing radical change. Under your watch, the South African business unit is simply not performing nor moving fast enough. The group needs a turnaround.
However, looking back a few years, an experienced leader that has been in the business since its beginning was placed in the chief executive position before you took over (maybe you even appointed him when you were chief operating officer?), but was moved to another post by yourself, perhaps because you felt improvement did not happen fast enough.
You replaced him with someone that also knows the business well and has also been there since its inception. A little over a year later you are still not satisfied with the improvement and replace that leader with someone from the group, pulling the replaced chief executive back into the group. One year after this, the newly appointed chief executive suddenly resigns.
Of course as is the case in large listed corporates, we don’t really know the reasons for this – “personal reasons” always seems to be the excuse.
You now have to appoint another chief executive (which has just been concluded several days following the news of the previous chief executive’s departure). Even so, the South African business unit is still under huge pressure on several fronts and underperforming. Only, by now it has had four chief executives in a period of just over seven years – the fifth one has just started.
One of the worst mistakes one can make is to judge from a distance, and of all people I know the challenge top leaders face is often how their context can easily be misunderstood. But, in principle, who is to blame for the underperformance in this case study? Is it not as obvious as daylight that leadership is perhaps the problem? Does the board have to wait for another two or so years before they realise this?
There comes a time when the top leader cannot shift blame any longer; when shuffling leaders around and even “firing” some is no longer an option; when it becomes clear that his approach is not to assist, inspire, guide, advise and support; it becomes obvious that he may be a bad judge of character, or that he is not close enough to the business – he runs it from his office – and therefore is not in tune to its needs at that particular time, which means he is not able to match the right leader with the organisation.
Or, because of his aloof style he doesn’t understand the context within which the market chief executive is trying to shift the business, so he becomes impatient too soon; interferes unnecessarily; does not trust the leader enough to give him the needed space to do the job. In short, he is not leading effectively.
Toxic leadership
It never ceases to amaze me how patient boards can be; or, how lethargic they are when the obvious reason for non-performance of a business stares them in the face – the top guy; the chief executive! But this truth can get lost for a while in a large corporation where a chief executive has place to hide; space to blame downwards and shift individuals sideways.
When too much of this is taking place, a board should sit up and take notice as it may be a sign of weak, outdated or toxic leadership, even when it is done under the so called policy of “rotating leaders”. We all know a large business cannot be turned around to perform sustainably within a year. By now you have probably guessed that the subject of this case study is MTN.
Yes, it seems the real obstacle at MTN may very well be its group chief executive. If so, he can hide for only so long in today’s highly visible world. If not, great! Why do I feel a need to be so bold here? I have met Sifiso Dabengwa – admittedly years ago when he was chief operating officer of MTN I believe – and he is a bright man; an intelligent engineer with all the obvious credentials a leader needs, even an MBA.
However, MTN is a national treasure, a remarkable success story emanating from South Africa. We cannot stand idly by and ignore what may be unfolding as “the obvious”. I implore the board to start looking for the problem from the very top down.
The newly appointed SA chief executive Mteto Nyati has his work cut out for him. He seems to be engaging, with the right credentials. We wish him well! One hopes Dabengwa will give him and his team the needed space and time to do the job; to create the anticipated movement. His first task is resolving a strike that is sapping morale and damaging MTN’s profile .
* Adriaan Groenewald (Adriaan_LP) is the author of Seamless Leadership: Universal Lessons from South Africa (@SeamlessLeader) and presents Cliffcentral Leadership Platform every Monday 12-1pm (@LeadershipPform)
Business Report