A changing workplace puts new expectations on leaders, but we often have set ideas of how these people should look. In the final article in a three-part series, Professor Binna Kandola explores how we define leadership, and how this can unwittingly embed complacency and threaten inclusion.
It’s not unusual for organisations to invest significant time and effort into defining what makes a great leader. Leadership competency frameworks are seen as essential tools to ensure consistency, fairness, and clarity in recruitment and development.
Rethinking talent
Part 1: Who was never considered in the first place
Part 2: Culture, ‘micro-incivilities’ and invisible talent
Part 3: Redefining leadership – From competence to inclusion
Yet too often, these models unintentionally reinforce narrow, outdated ideals that don’t reflect the breadth of talent available in today’s workforce.
One organisation I worked with had spent months refining its leadership framework down to five qualities: motivate, decide, deploy, engage, and execute. When asked for my opinion, I replied, “You’re essentially describing a soldier – or to put it another way, you’re looking for a bloke.”
To their credit, they didn’t take offence. They made a strong case for their chosen model. But I encouraged them to think carefully about how even the most thoughtful frameworks can subtly reinforce bias, particularly when the traits selected closely align with stereotypes of male behaviour.
Different perceptions
The issue isn’t the traits themselves. The problem lies in how they’re perceived, judged, and assessed. The qualities above are not the exclusive domain of any group – I know many women, as well as people from minority backgrounds, who display these traits just as readily as men or those from majority groups.
The difficulty arises when the same behaviour is interpreted differently depending on who displays it. When a man or someone from the majority demonstrates assertiveness, it’s likely to be seen as a sign of confidence or leadership potential.
But when these traits are expressed by women or those from underrepresented backgrounds, they’re often perceived as aggression or uncooperativeness.
This inconsistency has real consequences. It shapes who is deemed ready for leadership and who is overlooked. Inclusive leadership, or the ability to create environments where all individuals feel valued, respected, and able to contribute, is rarely given the same weight. Often, it’s treated as an optional add-on to traditional leadership programmes, a single session squeezed in among more “serious” content. This signals that inclusion isn’t integral to leadership; it’s discretionary.
But the world of work has changed. Today’s workforce is more diverse in identity, expectation, and experience than at any point in history. Employees want to work for organisations that reflect their values, treat them fairly, and invest in their wellbeing.
This shift was underway before 2020, but the pandemic accelerated it. According to the CIPD’s 2023 research, inclusion, wellbeing, and employee engagement are now central priorities for HR and that places new expectations on leadership.
Egocentric bias
At Pearn Kandola, we’ve worked with leaders on inclusive behaviours for over two decades. Our data set now includes more than 10,000 individuals, and in our most recent analysis, we found many strengths – particularly in creating environments where people feel they can speak up.
However, we also identified consistent areas for development: recognising unconscious biases, addressing in-group and out-group dynamics, and acting deliberately to ensure all voices are heard.
One major obstacle is egocentric bias, or the belief that we are better than others at something. In one programme I ran for 200 leaders at a global bank, I asked whether they believed they were below average, average, or above average in inclusive leadership.
Every single person selected “above average”. They laughed when they saw the results, but the point was made: without self-awareness, progress is impossible.
This is why personalised feedback is so important. General workshops raise awareness, but change only happens when people are shown where they personally excel and where they can grow.
When they are equipped with tools to observe team dynamics – who is heard, who is ignored, who gets the eye contact – they begin to understand the invisible patterns that shape performance and inclusion.
Reflective leadership
Leadership isn’t about having all the answers. It’s about being reflective, responsive, and willing to grow. The most effective leaders are those who are open about their limitations, willing to acknowledge mistakes, and prepared to model the learning process themselves. Authenticity matters more than polish.
That’s why we must be cautious of surface-level actions. Setting gender targets and instructing executive search firms to produce more diverse shortlists may satisfy audit committees or send the right PR signal.
They may even reassure people within the organisation that progress is being made. But these actions tend to focus on a narrow range of identities (typically gender, and increasingly race) and risk creating the illusion of change without altering the underlying culture.
Personnel Today readers can claim a 25% discount on Binna Kandola’s book, Designing for Diversity, published by Kogan Page, by using the code KOGANPAGE25 – order now
Worse, they can breed complacency: a belief that because something is being done, nothing more needs to be addressed.
True diversity and inclusion require deeper change. It’s not just about who gets hired, but who gets heard, developed, supported, and promoted. It requires leadership behaviours that are fair, open, and aware of the unseen dynamics at play in every team.
This article concludes a three-part series exploring talent management. In the first, we looked at the historical context, how modern organisations were built in ways that excluded large segments of the population from ever being seen as “talent.”
In the second, we explored how subtle, everyday experiences – what I call micro-incivilities – continue to undermine confidence, reduce performance, and prevent capable people from being recognised. This final piece has focused on the role of leadership in either sustaining these patterns or dismantling them.
While overt discrimination has declined, the more subtle forms, such as the interruptions, the dismissals, the underestimation, persist. And they matter. They shape how people feel, how they perform, and how they are perceived.
If we want to build genuinely inclusive workplaces, we need to address not just policy or process, but culture. That starts with leadership. It starts with seeing inclusion not as a side project, but as a defining feature of what great leadership looks like today.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
HR business partner opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more HR business partner jobs
