You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Been looking at jobs and career development and nearly all of the jobs at the next level require a leadership or management qualification. Looking around the ILM (Institue of leadership and management) or CMI (Chartered management institute) appear to be the most well known and respected (?). Does anyone have any real-life feedback/opinions on either? Looking at level 5 of both.
Any other recommendations for course? My current employer isn't financing, I'm probably going to be leaving at some point, so anything online or located in Bristol (ILM can be done at UWE, CMI is online based).
Unless you like travelling I would rather prefer CMI.
Besides, CMI also covers leadership if I can recall.
ILM ... eerrmm ... don't really know how they can teach someone to be a leader.
I've completed level 3 CMI ( no desire to complete 5 !!). Very broad canvass of learning. If I'm honest I found it pretty dry and I just got my head down and got it done rather than actually enjoyed it. Having said that, I've found it useful professionally.
I've got CMI lvl 7, completed in parallel with my MBA
CMI is a bit more recognised in the UK, but either will work for you.
Main thing i'd suggest is look at cost if you're paying for yourself. The other thing i'd look at is what are the requirements for pulling together an evidence portfolio and getting signed off. CMI can be a PITA to pull together and feel quite repetitive. It's also about applying what you learn through the process.
Chewkw is a bit off the mark - you can teach someone to be a leader. You can teach them to identify and understand their strengths and weaknesses, how they work under pressure, and how that can affect who they work with and works for them.
Chewkw is a bit off the mark – you can teach someone to be a leader. You can teach them to identify and understand their strengths and weaknesses, how they work under pressure, and how that can affect who they work with and works for them.
What leadership are they teaching?
Transactional (bureaucrat) or transformational (populist) or contingency (the in-between)?
You can teach them to recognise factors affecting them internally or externally to them or others but this is just good management.
We run CMI courses and I've also completed a CMI coaching and mentoring course L5. I didn't do a leadership one as I've already got an MA in leadership and management.
The C&M course was online and over a series of days. Employer was good enough to let me have those days off pai., I paid for the course though. I did this with Education Training and Skills in Exeter. They were excellent.
As others have said, the assessment can make it a little repetitive and a pita. As you have to hit key assessment criteria. However the course tutor was excellent. He was an ex Royal Marine and worked with the England football team.
I've found it has made my CV standout a little more and has proved useful in my current role. If you also do the CMI you have access to their resources which can be quite useful. Lots of practical tools to use in your role.
They don't teach to lead in specific ways as that would be moronic. Chew is off the mark here. They look at theories (way more than those chew listed) and tools you can use. If you're someone that is reflective, it will help you.
Hope that helps.
Edit; also look at whether you want to do the award, cert or diploma. Award is usually only one module.
Currently doing ILM level 3, and I recall looking at CMI when I chose a year or so ago. I think I picked based on the optional courses sounding more interesting as the qualification was optional but my employer are paying- may as well make it as interesting as I could!
I’ve not seen a job advert ask for either, but maybe I’m not high enough up the food chain for that. I’ve done mine all online so far, and a day at a time on zoom is a bit wearing, but not detrimental if you are used to working remotely.
I've got level 3 ILM, it's basically like an NVQ, but for small team managers as it's more theory/ethics.
Worth doing as it's cheap and recognised, but maybe doesn't hold much weight, but a 'nice to have'.
Level 5 is for higher level managers....
I found the level 3 really usefull.
As with all these kinda Quals, take what you need from them and apply them to your circumstance. I personally found the level 3 usefull...
They look at theories (way more than those chew listed) and tools you can use.
If you refer to leadership theories they all fall under those 3 categories with No new theoretical discovery. These are the modern terms where everyone can recognised.
What you have just referred to is just the details of those 3 categories or any of them. Some of them can be hair splitting particularly the contingency leadership, which I suspect is what you are referring to, where various factors are being considered to match the particular leadership style to the situation (power, task, relationship, followers etc). Their main emphasis is the fit between all of them.
A genuine question to those who studied leadership or have leadership qualification.
What happen when the leadership does not fit the situation vice versa? i.e. Do you remove the leadership or the situation? (assuming the context of large organisation)
^ well, a few years back I did a course in Situational Leadership, which Google tells me is different to the three you mentiined. (I only registered as it was called SL2 and I thought they might do on a ragga tip)
^ well, a few years back I did a course in Situational Leadership, which Google tells me is different to the three you mentiined. (I only registered as it was called SL2 and I thought they might do on a ragga tip)
Yes, there are many different terms but generally they all fall under that 3 categories. The traditional terms most are familiar with perhaps are the "Great man theory", Behavioral/Style theory; and contingency theory. Then you have various hair splitting theories.
Situational Leadership,
That's contingency theory. I suspect this is what have been taught at higher level. Because the other two cannot make money. LOL!
Put it this way.
"Great man theory" - either you are born with it or you don't.
Behavioural/Style theory - your style is more or less fixed. If you don't match the situation you are screwed.
Contingency/situational - LOL! This one teach you to look out for tale tale signs or factors to adjust.
I do yes. I should know better.
(Just googled it, looks like the internet disagrees with chewkw, but I haven't got the energy to try and argue!)
you do realise this is Chewkw?
One of my friend taught something related leadership for more than 30 years at University until he retired.
One day I asked him what leadership was and he gave me a full lecture on the topic and that's how I learned. (Bloody hell I just wanted a good beer ...LOL!)
Until today he told me he has no clue what it is.
Just googled it, looks like the internet disagrees with chewkw
You learned it from Google? LOL!
My friend told me if the students used Google answer they fail. LOL!
One of my friend taught something related leadership for more than 30 years at University until he retired.
One day I asked him what leadership was and he gave me a full lecture on the topic and that’s how I learned.
Until today he told me he has no clue what it is.
Interesting. So your friend learned nothing, and passed his sage advice on to you? Okayy.
My friend told me
Good to know where your 'expertise' comes from....
Interesting. So your friend learned nothing, and passed his sage advice on to you? Okayy.
He published a lot on Management Journals though and so are other of his friends who were Profs at various Universities. I mean hanging around them and asked them about what they taught was the biggest mistake of my life especially when I wanted to enjoy good beer but didn't know what topic to talk to them about considering their knowledge. LOL!
Yes, I did say that to them too. i.e. they learned nothing. They laughed either at me or the topic but I suspect a bit of both.
published a lot on Management Journals though and so are other of his friends who were Profs at various Universities.
Link me up, I'm sure it will make for interesting reading, what's the big secret?
Link me up, I’m sure it will make for interesting reading, what’s the big secret?
I don't read their publications other than pub conversation but I know they taught at Universities.
Oh ya ... they are all experts in beer (more like ale) drinking and pubs. They seem to have a wealth of drinking knowledge hence I hang around with them. LOL!
If it's required for you to progress within your current co or industry then all good. If you are leaving anyway it is likely that leadership experience will be valued much more highly than a leadership qualification.
I'd take a pay hit to get decent leadership experience at a decent co over spending money on this kind of thing if I didn't already have it. If you have experience don't be put off applying to jobs that are asking for it. It's a non essential wish list item IMO and most will compromise for the right person.
Most of the knowledge can be found in a few Twitter threads, Podcasts or YT videos these days. Your choice is literally listen to your choice of FAANG CEO talk about leadership or some second rate lecturer at an adult education facility.
Your choice is literally listen to your choice of FAANG CEO talk about leadership or some second rate lecturer at an adult education facility.
you are elon musk, and ICM5
One of the intrinsic values of a qualification is for recruitment - when you're skim reading someone's CV or application you can mentally check off leadership and management if you see they have ILM or CMI. If it's buried in the skills or job experience wording, it's more work for me to find it.
It's a mercenary and brutal part of candidate selection that you only have a short time to look at what someone has written.
If it’s buried in the skills or job experience wording, it’s more work for me to find it.
Good to know
Does using key words help?
It’s a mercenary and brutal part of candidate selection that you only have a short time to look at what someone has written.
Do you read the cover letter?
... elon musk ...
I think he fits the "great man"/transformational theory with autocratic style and focus more on task rather than relationship. Power resides in him and followers tend to be able. That's my guess anyway.
Much more complicated if we consider politicians because all of them see themselves as "leader".