HR's Definition of Insanity

The definition of ‘insanity’ in disciplines like neuroscience and psychology is technical, filled with medical jargons and condition focused. The discipline of Human Resources, on the other hand, has attempted to define ‘insanity’ from a different perspective, with straightforwardness and precision. HR states ‘insanity’ as:

            “Doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different result”.

The term insanity is widely used among HR managers in the context of elaborating the limitations of leadership development programs. As per the recent reports, in 75% of cases, organizations have expressed dissatisfaction over the ways in which leadership programs are run. However, looking deeper into the issue, it becomes clear that the limitations and sense of monotony has been injected through years of practice and, in most cases, the predecessors were responsible.  They have taught, rather habituated, their ancestors with the principles of traditional leadership that are far from complementing the dynamism that modern enterprises aspire for. The goal, ultimately, is improving and achieving newer horizons. However, with practicing the same leadership development programs, it is a matter of great doubt whether it is at all possible to achieve different results. Conducting newer researches and experimenting with the existing programs is necessary to go beyond the vicious realm of insanity and the stagnancy it creates in an organizational setup.

In order to solve the problems with insanity, every organization should be asking three fundamental questions:

• What are the existing methods to execute the leadership practices and what possible ways can be opted to improve the existing methods?
  
  
• Which methods does the company follow in developing leaders?
  
  
• What skillsets does the company expect from developing leaders?
  
  

The best ways that can be helpful in breaching the stagnancy created by insanity in an organizational structure are:

·         Shift in Organizational Focus: Shifting focus from the rigidity of personal development programs is a great way to recover from the viciousness of insanity. What employees and organizations can do is focus on new possibilities, hopes, and aspirations. By not doing so, employees are actually increasing pressure on themselves and that’s stopping them from flourishing as leaders.

·         Encourage Creativity: Most organizations don’t encourage their employees to go beyond the limits of leadership development models. However, the time has come that such rigidity is kept aside and scopes are created for employees in exercising their creative aspirations. The restructuring should commence urgently as more leaders will start thinking out-of-the-box, an important quality in leading the workforce.

·         Space: Leaders may not have time enough to exercise their creative thinking and implement the results in their professional field thanks to the requirement of active professional participation. However, organizations from now on should allow leaders to have their own space. This detachment can be a positive factor in coming up with newer leadership strategies, contributing to overall organizational advancement.

HR’s definition of insanity reflects the limitations that an organization experiences through professional stringency. This is one of the most stubborn bottlenecks that requires serious planning for removal.  Otherwise, the chance of achieving different results and paving the path for newer organizational achievements, remains only a possibility at the theoretic level.