This document discusses the key traits that differentiate good "Leader-Managers" from average ones. It identifies 12 traits of good Leader-Managers, including having high self-awareness, treating employees as organizational assets, being proactive, having people management knowledge, prioritizing clear communication, and viewing their management role as a privilege rather than a right. Average managers are more likely to have limitations in these areas, such as treating employees as their own resource and being reactive rather than proactive. The document emphasizes that ensuring all Leader-Managers exhibit these traits is important for optimizing employee engagement.

1. Leveraging
Employee
Engagement:
The 12 key differentiators
of Leader-Managers
Nicholas J Higgins, DrHCMI MSc Fin (LBS) MBA (OBS) MCMI
CEO, VaLUENTiS Ltd & Dean, International
School of Human Capital Management (‘ISHCM’)

2.  As organisations continue to grapple with the means to
optimise employee engagement on a daily basis – one of their
biggest assets (or liabilities) is the ‘Leader-Manager’.
 To shortcut the leadership/management debate I use Drucker’s
dictum:
“Management is doing things right;
leadership is doing the right things.”
 Thus my interpretation here is that Leadership and
management are two sides of the same ‘Leader-Manager’ coin.
 Any individual who finds himself/herself ‘in charge’ of people
and wants to be successful, needs to be good at both. Period.
2

3.  Having spent the last thirty years successfully managing
teams, being part of teams and latterly consulting on
successful team/organisation performance projects with regard
to employee engagement and talent management, I’ve
shortlisted a number of defining ‘traits’ that differentiate good
‘Leader-Managers’ from the rest.
 If organisations are to demand, and get, the best from
employees in their organisation on a daily basis – then
ensuring that their cadre of Leader-Managers are ‘highperforming’ in engaging their staff is paramount.
 This of course extends to ensuring that these LeaderManagers, themselves, are highly engaged. And we’re not just
talking about frontline Leader-Managers here – they are at all
levels starting with the CEO, continuing ‘downwards’. So what
are these ‘differentiators’ with regard to employee
engagement?
3

4. 1
Good Leader-Managers have good
self-awareness and score well on
any emotionally intelligent test.
This basic requirement feeds into
a number of the differentiators.
Many may observe that this is
common sense – but how many
current Leader-Managers pass this
basic requirement?
4

5. 2
Good Leader-Managers treat those
in their charge as organisation
assets and not their ‘own’.
That is – decisions made about
individuals are done from an
organisational perspective not the
individual manager’s perspective
(in terms of benefit).
It is important to recognise that
highly politicised environments
quite often work against this
‘good’ trait.
5

6. 3
Good Leader-Managers are more
pro-active (as opposed to good
‘fire-fighters’), forward-looking
and confident in dealing with dayto-day staff/operational matters.
However, many organisations
mistakenly associate good ‘firefighters’ as good ‘LeaderManagers’.
Having good ‘firefighters’ doesn’t
necessarily equate to high
employee engagement.
6

7. 4
Good Leader-Managers have a
good working understanding of
managing people and how to
optimise employee engagement getting the best out of people with
regard to performance.
This comes with both access to
requisite knowledge through
learning and gaining the right
experience.
Note, experience alone is not
enough.
7

8. 5
Good Leader-Managers understand
the importance of clear and
consistent one-to-one and one-tomany communication, particularly
around performance and decisions.
They also understand the good
and bad impact of the various
aspects of social media when it
comes to productivity.
8

9. 6
Good Leader-Managers get results
but not at the expense of overrelying on their best performers,
nor generating higher than needed
attrition whether it is absenteeism
or turnover.
Understanding the related positive
and negative aspects of employee
engagement in relation to
attaining targets, measures,
objectives and values is crucial.
9

10. 7
Good Leader-Managers always
make the tough calls for the
benefit of the team.
The collective employee
engagement will always be higher.
This is in marked contrast to
Leader-Managers who defer
decisions, using cover excuses or
who make politically expedient
decisions.
10

11. 8
Good Leader-Managers don’t
procrastinate or postpone issues
important to an individual team
member.
Cancelled appraisals are an
obvious and common example as
are delays in granting holiday
times and so on.
The Good Leader-Manager always
asks: Would I be happy being on
the receiving end? (And even if
they are from their own boss it is
no excuse to repeat the practice.)
11

12. 9
Good Leader-Managers understand
that making and explaining
decisions are all about team
equity.
It is one of the most underrecognised elements in employee
engagement.
Perceived fairness is paramount.
This is way beyond just ‘equality’
or ‘diversity’ issues.
12

13. 10
Good Leader-Managers pursue a
natural interest in the
development and success (and of
course safety) of the people in
their charge.
They don’t just do the tick-box
requirement.
13

14. 11
Good Leader-Managers continue to
challenge their team performance
in different ways given any work
constraints that may be operating.
Applying timely fresh approaches
or changes are all part of the
‘toolkit’.
14

15. 12
Good Leader-Managers recognise
that to be put ‘in charge’ of people
is a privilege that not everybody
receives.
Thus they recognise the
opportunity for what it is rather
than view it as a right due to
length of service or ‘loyalty’ or
reward for political correctness.
15

16. 1-page Summary
Good Leader-Managers vs. Average Leader-Managers.....
...Good managers
...Average/poor managers
High probability of:
1. Being self-aware (score well on EI)
2. Treating staff as the organisation’s ,not their own
‘little army’
3. Being pro-active, forward looking and confident no
matter the situation
4. Being knowledgeable of (successful) peoplemanagement approaches
5. Understanding the importance of clear one-to-one
communication and being consistent
6. Getting results but not at the expense (or overreliance on good performers)
7. Making tough calls when required for the benefit of
the team
8. Don’t postpone/move important events such as
individual reviews/appraisals etc
9. Understanding that most managerial decision-making
is about equity in people situations/issues
10. Taking a natural interest in people development
above the mandatory level
11. Challenging team performance in different ways
12. View management role as a ‘privilege’, not a right
High probability/tendency of:
1. Limited self-awareness
2. Treating staff as their own resource rather than
organisation’s
3. Being reactive, backward-looking and/or display
uncertainty on too many occasions
4. Being limited in their understanding of people
management
5. Their communication too often being seen as vague or
inconsistent when interacting with staff
6. Get results but tend to have higher absenteeism or
turnover of staff
7. Deferring tough calls, preferring to political expediency
even at the expense of others
8. History of postponing or procrastinating on individual
events such as individual reviews/appraisals
9. Limited awareness of or disregard the equity principle
when making managerial decisions
10. Show little interest in individual development save for
mandatory skill requirements
11. See team management as a ‘chore’
12. View management role as a ‘right’, not a privilege

17. The common default mental model for senior
managers and OD/HR practitioners…
‘Challenged’
People
Manager
‘Good’
Operating
Manager
‘Challenged’
Operating
Manager
‘Good’
People
Manager

18. Should be…
‘Good’
Manager

19. Analogy of The ‘Broken Windows’ hypothesis
with employee engagement and LeaderManagers
The ‘Broken Windows theory’ states that monitoring and maintaining
urban environments in a well-ordered condition may stop further
vandalism as well as an escalation into more serious crime.
Applied to engagement…
The ‘theory’ states that monitoring and maintaining work
environments in a well-ordered management condition may stop
further engagement erosion as well as an escalation into more
serious disengagement issues.
19

20. A reminder that not all Leader-Managers are
highly engaged themselves. This is often
overlooked in organisations.
The impact of this should be obvious. Our
research showed the distribution of differing
scores across a random sample of LeaderManagers from our database (overleaf):
20

21. 910
‘Leader-Management’
engagement score by
percentile
860
813
790
760
“Often overlooked:
Impaired manager engagement…
And its impact…”
Source: VaLUENTiS Engagement database
Management client cadre sample 2010-11
Sample size: 1400 managers representing 20,000 employees
Score range 200-1000

22. ‘Line Management’ engagement scores ‘bell curve’
“Same data as previous slide – different
graphic format…
Looking outside ‘norms’ that’s one in
seven line managers posing serious
concern…”
Management client cadre sample 2010-11
Sample size: 1400 managers
(employee population: 20,000)
Score range 200-1000
14.5% below one
standard deviation
200
Source: VaLUENTiS Engagement database
13.9% above one
standard deviation
738
1000

23. And lastly, embedding good employee engagement
practice:
‘Mapping the management reality’ example:
Against embedding
(Status quo OK)
Let it happen
(Ambivalent/
non-committal)
Help it happen
(qualified
supportive)
Individual Board members
Senior managers
Middle managers
Line managers
Supervisors/Team leaders
What’s your organisation reality map?
Make it happen
(Actively
championing)

24. End
24

25. Employee Engagement Solutions
Evidenced based definition,
understanding and application
Global
reach
Measurement wisdom
and expertise
Senior management
feedback sessions
Performance
link
Line of
sight
Reward
(equity)
‘License to
manage’
programmes
Work
environment
On-line tools
and analytics
Development
Operating
culture
Frontline
blended group
coaching
Survey design
expertise
Actioning
strategies and
tactics
THE
EE
PLAYBOOK
Project
management
expertise
‘Ten years of
innovation’

26. M
anagement
P
athfinder®
Think Human
Capital.

27. Smart. Smarter. Smartest...
Professional Services
www.valuentis.com
‘The leading human capital
management specialists’
‘PEOPLE SCIENCE®’
Organisation Intelligence
to
improve organisation performance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SOLUTIONS
Human Capital Management Evaluation
Employee Engagement
Talent Management
Workforce Productivity & Performance
Predictive Analytics
HC Forensics & Risk
HR Function ROI Analysis
Organisation Measurement
Management Education
Organisation Strategy

28. …+
2nd Floor, Berkeley Square House,
Berkeley Square, London W1J 6BD
Tel: +44 (0)207 887 6121
Fax: +44 (0)207 887 6100
enquiries@ISHCM.com
www.ISHCM.com
Think HR. Think Human Capital.™
Human Capital
Management.
Only one place to learn
Being human is unique. Attaining an M Sc in HCM is even more so.

29. Nicholas J Higgins
nicholas.higgins@valuentis.com
VaLUENTiS Ltd, 2nd Floor, Berkeley Square House,
Berkeley Square, London W1J 6BD
HO: +44 (0)207 887 6108
M: +44 (0)7811 404713
www.valuentis.com
www.ISHCM.com
www.NicholasJHiggins.com
www.HCglobal.blogspot.com

30. Please e-mail nicholas.higgins@valuentis.com regarding any matters of reproduction/
organisational distribution.
VaLUENTiS © 2014