Author Archive

« Older Entries

The Cohort Experiment: Critical Variables in Program Design

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

At the beginning of The Cohort Experiment, we posted what we regard as the seven variables defining a “real cohort.” To test our thinking, we asked other fellows which of the variables from our list they considered indispensable in shaping a cohort experience for leadership development.  The general answer was “all of them”! This answer signaled we were on the right track.

Upon further probing, fellows selected a few “indispensable” variables from the list but with no identifiable trend. Variables that were deemed as core to some of the programs were considered less relevant in others. This lack of commonality in answers makes sense given that all the programs are quite different in their design (See our previous posts: Inward and Outward Approach; Full Time vs Incremental).

However, at least three of the seven fellows we interviewed identified the following variables as critical to shaping the cohort experience for leadership development:

  1. Common purpose as the basis for collaboration (part of Variable #1). As Blair explained in her last post, success in bonding of the cohort for “full-time” programs is highly dependent on the shared vision of the group.
  2. Balance of individual and group development (Variable #2) with special emphasis on the importance of incorporating tools and spaces for processing individual progress and group interaction (Variable #6).“People assume that by putting individuals together they will have a conversation about how to improve interactions. Unless you formally set up a time for analysis and discussion, this will not happen.” - Dileepan Siva (Coro Fellow)
  3. Having a dedicated mediator/skilled facilitator (Variable #7) to assist the group in activities and processing its progress. In many cases, this role is played by the program manager.

In addition, a fellow suggested that we add one more variable to our list: “balance between process and content.” In brief, he refers to the idea that people gain understanding in different ways. “Some people are driven more by the process by which learning takes place whereas others feel motivated by the outcome.” Consequently, in this fellow’s opinion, programs should aim at incorporating learning opportunities that are both process- and content-based.

Finally, we identified a common concern among the fellows interviewed: how to build a sense of common purpose and connectedness across “classes” of fellows. In other words, how to build a strong alumni network to allow for continued interaction and learning. This will be the theme of next week’s blog where you will have to chance to learn from programs that are further ahead in their effort to build a strong alumni network and the challenges they had to overcome.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Acumen News | No Comments

The Cohort Experiment, part 6: The Cohort Value-Add

Friday, October 2nd, 2009

One of the premises of our experiment is the idea that cohorts are not only a structure (a group of people) but also the holding environment for learning and interaction among members. To test this hypothesis we asked fellows from other programs whether they felt that their cohort peers had played a role in their learning process and development as individuals. The unanimous answer was yes. Below we present what the fellows shared as ways in which the cohort environment added value to their fellowship experience.

First, by coming closer to people from other fields that share a common purpose and are doing similar things fellows became more aware of themselves as leaders and entrepreneurs.

“Meeting the other fellows in my group allowed me to become more aware of what happens in the outside world and what others are doing. It is a humbling experience that obliges you to reflect on what you are doing and challenges you to think about how you can do better.”- Kamal Mouzawak, Synergos Arab World Social Innovator

Fellows from other programs agree with Kamal and add that by sharing experiences with their cohort they gained a better understanding of the common challenges faced by the group. Whether this realization will spark to develop collaboration or new ideas is another matter shares Derek Ellerman, an Ashoka Fellow. “You need time to build the trust that will lower the barriers to natural collaboration” says Derek.

Derek’s comment is related to the third value added of the cohort environment: a safe space to talk openly about personal challenges. Last week we talked about this “safe space” as a characteristic of programs that follow an “inward” approach to leadership development. As some of the fellows interviewed pointed out, a cohort does not translate into a collaborative environment. Initial structured activities focused on interpersonal relationships and peers getting to know each other are critical to building trust and creating a “safe space” for sharing personal experiences. Once this is achieved the possibilities for learning and collaboration are endless!

Fellows concur that a fourth way in which their cohort peers shaped their leadership development experience was by challenging them and providing feedback. Elizabeth Edwards, a participant of GE’s Experienced Commercial Leadership Program (ECLP), explains how the program incorporates many structured occasions for peer to peer feedback. In addition, because participants of the program truly care to see each other succeed, they also find opportunities to exchange feedback more informally. This has made a real difference in her personal leadership development process.

Finally, fellows talked about the value of peer learning to understand their own individual motivation and moral center and using this to encourage action. Dileepan Siva, a Coro Fellow, refers to this as the process of doing away with “walking wounded”. In Dileepan’s words:

“There are many leaders out there that are walking wounded. Amazing individuals outwardly but internally they have not worked through understanding what is walking them into their work. One of the true values of having cohorts is creating the space where one can explore the connection between personal motivation, background and why you do what you do in the world.”

These are the five major value-added qualities of cohort environments in the process of leadership development that we found from the interviews. If you have ever participated in a cohort program for leadership development and have an additional experience to share, we would like to hear about it!

Stay tuned for next week’s post when Blair will talk about some new considerations to cohort program design that we discovered from the interviews and their effect in program objectives and group dynamics.

Tags: , ,
Posted in AF Fellows | 1 Comment

Cohort Experiment Part 5: Talking to other Fellows

Friday, September 25th, 2009

Last week Blair and I interviewed current and previous participants of seven different fellowship programs. The process was very exciting — thank you to everyone who participated in the interviews!

One thing that became evident from our conversations is that programs approach leadership development in very different ways. Some programs are more “outward” focused, exposing individuals to a network of leaders with whom they can have conversations about their personal leadership experience. With this approach, the regularity with which participants access the network and whether they involve the cohort in processing the lessons learned is highly dependent on individual motivation. Programs like Ashoka, White House Fellows and Synergos Arab World Social Innovators, which use the “outward” approach, are great at connecting individuals and building large networks of program supporters.

“The strength of the White House Fellows program is the ability to give people the opportunity to get access to powerful people in government making important decisions on so many different dimensions and gain a sense of what it takes to create change”- Sunil Garg, White House Fellow

A second approach to leadership is what we are calling an “inward” approach where discussions about leadership happen mostly within the cohort. This type of program combines a number of activities and experiences asking the participants to spend time reflecting on their own leadership style, assessing their role as leaders in the world and obtaining feedback from their peers. Examples of this category of fellowship programs are Acumen Fund, Henry Crown and Coro. Some characteristics that make the “inward” approach programs unique are:

Length and intensity of interaction: Program duration is of a year or less if full-time and up to two years if fellowship is incremental. In either case, participants come together as a cohort frequently. For example, Acumen Fund Fellows come together as a cohort for 6-8 weeks at the beginning of the one-year program, two more times during their 10-month international field placement and three weeks at the end of the program. Of shorter duration but similar intensity are the four-day seminars where Henry Crown Fellows come together from across the country to engage in discussions and feedback sessions about leadership.
Experiential and peer learning- Participants learn about leadership from reflecting with their peers on their own experiences at their work setting or temporary placements. Coro Fellows interact with their cohort on a weekly basis during full-day seminars where participants share their experience in their placements and debrief collectively.

“This is the only experience set up to learn from your peers. The primary purpose is to understand what are the principles and values under which good team work happens and the role of leadership within that”- Dileepan Siva, Coro Fellow

Creation of a safe space: Interviewees agree that one of the most powerful experiences for personal growth and for becoming more self-aware leaders is the opportunity to speak openly about personal challenges and receive feedback from peers. They find that to engage in this rewarding exercise they need to reach a level of comfort. This is achieved only when they feel they are in a “safe space” where they can share their experiences with people they trust and where they will not be judged or measured. Most of the interviewees have found this rare and valuable space only with their cohort of fellows.

“When you talk about leadership it is kind of a personal thing therefore to seek out and be open to feedback it is important to have a good bond with people, feel protected and safe.”- Chris Walker, Acumen Fund Fellow

Interestingly, most of the interviewees shared that they have found this rare and valuable “safe space” only with their cohort of fellows.

Next week we will share with you insights as to how the cohort experience has impacted the leadership development journey of our interviewees.

In the meantime, what do you think of these two leadership development approaches?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Talent | No Comments

Back to basics: What is a cohort? (Part 2)

Tuesday, September 8th, 2009

In last week’s post, Blair and I started a discussion about the definition of a cohort. We first presented the idea of a cohort being more than just a structure for curriculum delivery. This week, I will share what we found, both from literature and practice, are the seven variables that define a “real” cohort in the context of leadership development. To illustrate some of the variables, I will refer to the Acumen Fund Fellows program. And of course, we would love to hear other examples from you!

Seven variables defining a “real” cohort

#1  Form/structure of a cohort

  • Size: Not too big, not too small. Generally 12-25 participants.
  • Shared experience
  • Common purpose as the basis for collaboration: For example, in the case of the AF Fellowship, the common purpose is to understand the challenges of social enterprises in addressing the problems of the poor.
  • Encouragement of critical reflection.
  • Knowledge construction that is “problem based and participant centered.”

This first variable and its subparts are quite general and apply to a broad number of cohort programs. But don’t stop here. Keep reading! The next few variables are more specific to leadership development cohorts.

#2  Balance of individual and group development

The Cohort experience is about groups empowering individuals and individuals empowering groups. Most importantly to our discussion, the authors conclude that a direct parallel can be drawn between self-understanding and leadership.

#3   “Hold Well”

This variable refers to the ability of cohort members to form a cohesive, collaborative group accepting of the individual. Initial experiences focused on community building, co-learning, building collegial and interpersonal relationships, as well as modeling expectations on how the cohort will function, are key in ensuring that the cohort “holds well.”

Note to Practitioners: do not take this stage for granted! As a participant of a cohort I can tell you that the time we spent in getting to know each other was critical to building a support network based on trust and collaboration.

# 4   “Let go”

The cohort must “let go” of the individuals by challenging them to allow them to develop. In our case as AF Fellows, we were sent to work in different countries with different organizations. As a result, each fellow’s challenges and lessons learned were unique.

# 5   “Stick around”

At the same time, the cohort must “stick around” to provide continuity, stability and availability to the individual undergoing growth and development.  Finding this balance is tough.

#6     Processing of group interaction is incorporated in the program

Time is regularly set aside for processing group interaction and a variety of group processing strategies are incorporated (e.g., feedback tools, journals, meetings, etc.)

#7    Cohort has a mediator/skilled facilitator

The mediator should have the talent to assist the group in processing its progress.

Now it’s your turn. What do you think of these variables? Is there something missing in this definition?

Tags: , ,
Posted in AF Fellows | 1 Comment

Back to basics: What is a cohort?

Tuesday, September 1st, 2009

The first step towards exploring the role of cohorts in leadership development is to define the concept of cohorts. A quick Google search directed Blair and me to Dictionary.com, which offered the following common definitions:

Co-hort [koh-hawrt]
–noun
1.    a group or company
2.    a companion or associate.

Synonyms:
2.  Friend, comrade, fellow, chum, pal, buddy.

Expected…but is there more to the concept of cohorts in the context of leadership development programs?

Instead of reinventing the wheel, I volunteered to spend a few good hours searching through business and academic journals to see if others had already developed a definition suitable for our purpose (something I believe we don’t do often enough). To my surprise, I found not only several definitions but a great number of journals and books studying different aspect of cohorts!

From the works of these scholars, two major themes emerged which I found interesting and relevant to our experiment: First, the idea of a cohort being more than just a structure and second, the variables that characterize a “real” cohort. This week I will tell you more about the first theme.

Cohort: Structure and Holding Environment

In the context of adult learning and leadership development, cohorts are not only a structure (a group of people) but also the holding environment for learning and interaction.

What does this mean?  Think back to your college experience, for example.  In this scenario, your cohort (group, companions, comrades, fellows… as per the common definition) was your class. Together with the members of your class you assisted to similar courses and seminars as required to complete your degree and, if all went well, you graduated in the same year.

How many activities were integrated in the curriculum for you and your class to reflect on your development as individuals and as a group? Was it expected that the members of the class supported each other in matters other than academic performance? Implicitly, perhaps…as part of the explicit program structure, most probably not.

In essence, grouping people together to go through a specific curriculum does not guarantee that individuals will support each other in the process of learning and be concerned about each other’s development.  Therefore, for learning and leadership development to take place, “cohorts must be structured as environments in which individuals experience growth and development supported and challenged by the group”-Imel (2002)

So, why is this concept of a cohort as “holding environment” important?

For present or future participants of a leadership development cohort:
It is important to understand what your fellows will expect from you. Accepting to be part of a cohort is a commitment to advance a common purpose but also it is also a very, very personal journey. What I learned this year as an Acumen Fund Fellow, is that if you really want to grow as a leader in a cohort you have to get personal…be vulnerable, be open to talk as much about your strengths as your weaknesses, challenge others but also accept to be challenged, be humble and learn to fail. If you do this, you get to know yourself better, gain confidence, emerge as a better leader and hence are better positioned to give back to the group as well as the cause of the cohort. (For an illustration of the personal aspect of a cohort experience, read this blog post).

For practitioners of leadership development:
In designing a cohort program for leadership development, selecting the right people, the number of participants and deciding the curriculum (i.e., the structure of the cohort) is a very important part of the process. However, make sure you dedicate equal amount of resources to exploring the second part: how to develop the “holding environment” for individual and group development to take place. Later on, my colleague Blair will share with you her experience in this subject.

Next week: Seven variables that define a “real” cohort.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Acumen News | 1 Comment

« Older Entries