Managers and Leaders often talk to me about growing capabilities, scaling capabilities, deploying capabilities and sustaining capabilities. They want advice on how to build a competent team.
It helps to break down the word capability and be sure we’re deploying the correct initiatives to achieve our ultimate goal; to have people capable of delivering value to our customers and our organisation now, and in the future. Oh yes, and enriching the workplace in the process.
Many people use the word “capability” too loosely. Some use it to describe services that are offered, or to describe skills and competencies, and some as a catch-all term for what the team is capable of (we’ll come on to why that’s a bad approach in a minute).
As such, in this post I will break down how I use the words “capable” and “capability” and offer some ideas and strategies to grow people’s ability to get the job at hand done.
I won’t be specific about the “job” as it varies so much in every organisation, but I will provide a potential learning approach for growing the abilities of a team.
And people is the important word there - we’ll get to that.
Seeing people grow - and then leave!
This topic of personal growth is hugely important to me personally, and to the work I do through Cultivated Management.
There are few experiences more rewarding than seeing people grow and develop in your team.
As they grow in their ability to do their current, and future, work with more competency, they also make themselves more employable, more experienced and more capable of adding more value to an organisation.
It’s actually the best thing a manager could hope for; that people are developing under your supervision. It’s good for business, and it’s good for employees. You could say you’ve built a learning org at this point. Well, partly, maybe.
When people leave your team or company, you can be proud of the fact they take their abilities to other companies too - they are more employable and better versions of themselves - and that should be a good thing.
Before we jump into some of the ideas, or steps I use when coaching leaders and managers, let’s first get clear about the word capability.
I think people use it without much consideration, and too loosely - and are probably conflating at least two different ideas when they do.
Capable versus Capability
The most important step you can do as a manager is to instil in your mind who is already capable of doing the work you need done, and who has the ability to become capable (capability).
You can already see a difference here - and this is what most managers conflate when they use the word capability to talk about multiple aspects of competency.
The origin of the word capability comes from the mid 1500’s and broadly means:
"quality of becoming capable, ability to receive or power to do, undeveloped faculty or property"
Capability is about someone’s ability to become capable, not that they are already capable.
As in, someone cannot do “the work” just yet, but there is a quality or ability that has yet to be developed. They may not be capable just yet, but they have the ability to get there; to become capable.
That’s not how many people use the term in business, we’ll come to some examples in a little while.
Capable - can already do the “work”
Capability - has potential to be capable to do the “work”
Being clear about the words we use allows us to ensure the initiatives we spend time and money on, are actually effective.
This is super important. One is that we can already do it. The other is that we have people who could do it (with some time, energy and attention).
It’s likely you have both in your team; some people who are already capable of doing Y work, some who are working towards being capable of doing Y work - at a standard that you set (we’ll cover that later too).
This may seem subtle (and pedantic) but I see managers and leaders using the word capability to mean everything, from people who can do the work, to services they offer, to a catch all term for specific abilities, to a group wide claim of competency.
There are also some people who may never be able to do the work - and we’ll come on to that in a minute. They lack the capability.
Let’s bring it to life.
Bob is a very capable marketing manager.
Nish has the capability to become a very capable marketing manager.
As a manager, or leader, it’s important to make this subtle difference clear in your mind, as it will guide how you grow the abilities and competency of the team.
The reason I am pedantic about the correct use of the word, is because it helps you to grow the collective ability in a company if we get crystal clear about what we can currently do (WHO is capable) and what we could do in the future if we invested time, energy and attention (WHO has capability).
And let’s be even clearer here, we are not talking about some abstract group wide catch-all when we use these words as a manager, we are talking about people; individuals, not groups.
We have individuals who are capable, and individuals who possess the ability to become capable, and maybe some who never could become capable.
An example - selling capabilities
For example, I worked with a leader who ran a consultancy company. She stated to the sales team that “we have the capability to create amazing strategies for clients”. She was kind of right.
However, it didn’t quite play out that way.
The sales people went and sold strategy consulting as a new service offering. Nice. Turns out a lot of companies need help with that.
When the leader said that we have strategy building capability, what sat below the surface was a slightly different picture.
She had one person, in a team of 50, who was capable of doing this type of work to a very high standard (we’ll come on to standards in a minute). One person. A single point of failure. A problem for the business as the sales team has started selling lots of strategy work to existing clients.
Out of the remaining 49 people, with some discovery, we identified a further 5 people who had the capability, within a reasonable time frame, to become capable, at a billable level, in this sort of work.
Here’s the kicker, the training of these 5 people would need to come from the single person who was already capable, thereby removing this person from delivering on commitments to the customers.
Instead of understanding the difference between capable and capability, and being clear in her communication, the leader sold “strategy capability” as a team wide ability. This was not true - it was just one person. But leaders and managers do this all the time.
The sales team ran with her statement of “capability” assuming it was a new service offering, and created a lot of problems.
Due to this “capability” being sold, the leaders had to put people into these client engagements who were not yet “capable”.
The 5 people who had the ability to become capable, were thrown into a highly skilled and challenging space of strategy work. One of them was able to rise to the occasion. One left the company due to the stress this created for them, one went on long-term sick, and the others tried but didn’t deliver.
This is an example of using the term capability to describe something that only some individuals can do - and in this example, just the one. It cost the company a lot of money, good will, time, energy, attention - and someone was off long-term sick because of it. It was a sad time.
We must be clear about what people are capable of, and design learning programmes that bring forth an individual’s capability; their ability to become capable.
To grow your team's ability to get the right work done, you need to be clear in your mind who can currently do the work (capable), and who has the ability and inclination to do the work (capability), and who doesn’t have the capability.
I heard a leader say we’re going to deploy our capability. What does that mean?
Are they deploying people who can already do the job (capable)? Or people who have the ability to potentially do the job (capability)? Or both?
I hear leaders say we’re growing our capability. What does that mean? Are we developing more people who CAN do the job (capable)? Or merely more people who MIGHT be capable of doing the “job” (capability).
Capable means they can do the job right now, capability means they have the ability to become capable.
This distinction is important because it will help you devise a solid learning plan for the business, your team’s effectiveness and more importantly, the individual.
It’s important to work at an individual level and understand who can do the job (capable or ability), who could develop to do the job (capability) and who will never want, need or be able to.
You don’t manage a team
A major reason for breaking apart the word capability and looking at the two sides, one being currently capable, and the other possessing the ability to be capable, is to direct your focus and effectiveness towards individuals.
I think a lot of the challenges managers and leaders face, when it comes to learning programmes, and business abilities, is that many managers view the “team”, rather than individuals.
If we have some people who are currently capable, and some who could be capable, and some who may not, then we get the essence of good management (and coaching); you manage individuals.
You don’t manage a team.
The word “team” is a collective noun used to describe a group of people coming together to do some work (or win a trophy). A team doesn’t really exist but groups of individuals do. Effective managers focus on individuals.
Individuals will have different needs, competencies, behaviours, skills, motivations and goals in life. They will have different potentials to become capable at different aspects of work.
If you’re trying to improve your team’s ability to do the work of the now, or the work of the future, you need to understand who, at an individual level, is capable, could be capable or would be better off doing something else.
This requires that you know the individual.
We don’t train teams, we train individuals. We don’t manage teams, we manage individuals. We don’t coach teams, we coach individuals.
So, if you’re trying to grow your ability to do more work, or do new work, or scale, or whatever, you need to identify individuals who are capable of doing “this work” AND individuals who have the ability to become capable. And many people get this wrong.
It’s therefore essential that you identify those who have the capability and design learning initiatives to take them from having the ability to be capable (capability) to capable. And this is always at an individual level.
HR teams and managers make this mistake all the time. They provide plausible sounding global training that anyone can sit.
They measure the "capability"of the company by how many courses people took, what courses are available and who took them.
If 75% of people went on a strategic planning training course, then our ability to do this work is now 75% of the business. Not true.
In many companies, ability is typically boiled down to a number that can be put on a scorecard somewhere, or a competency matrix or some other broadly unhelpful chart.
“We trained 75% of the organisation in this skill” therefore we have this “capability” (using the term too loosely).
But often the skill isn’t being used, or the behaviours aren’t changing, or performance is not improving at a company level. But we trained them so we must be able to do this thing!
Can you guess that this topic would be one of those I critiqued heavily in my HR CIPD training?
As a side note, it’s my belief (having led HR teams) that HR should provide the training, or at least access to it, but the training should be steered and informed by managers who are working with individuals.
What do individuals need? How many of these individuals require similar training (for scale and cost benefits)? How will you measure the effectiveness of the training? Not a number, surely?
Coaching / Learning for the individual and their role in the team
John Wooden in his excellent book, “Wooden on leadership”, includes some photographs in the book, of index cards he created for each specific player.
Each player was studied and observed, and had individual coaching needs identified.
He’s coaching individuals who come together as a team.
There would likely be team-wide “training” and “practice” around working/playing together as a collective, but each individual had a unique, specific and targeted training programme relevant to their role in the team, and the training they needed to become more able.
It’s no different in an organisation; individuals coming together to achieve something bigger than any of them could do on their own. That is the basis of why we employ people into an organisation, as it’s no longer possible for an individual to get all of the work done.
John Wooden’s cards are about individuals and what is required for that individual to become more capable in their role, relevant to their place in the team. We should adopt the same strategy in business.
In order to build a capable team, we must focus on building capable individuals, for their role, based around the work that needs to be done.
We do this by getting to know them, studying and observing, and spotting strengths and weaknesses. We are then in a good place to see what they are currently capable of - and what they could be capable of (capability) - always aligning this to the needs of the business.
Getting to know the individual
Our organisations, teams and departments, are made up of individuals.
When you look at an individual in isolation; as a person, as somebody who is to be respected, and valued, and trusted, and looked after as best you can, you realise they are multidimensional.
There is a job frame (albeit one I think we should break down often) that says they do this job.
As in, they have a job description (JD), some accountabilities, some responsibilities - all the necessary legal stuff that we all have. This frame tells everyone what they are there to do. But a JD is only a small fraction of the reality of being an individual in a company.
When managers talk about “capability” they are usually considering the behaviours, skills and experience needed to do the job, as defined in the JD. It’s a frame. Helpful but woefully incomplete.
It’s often made up of plausible sounding skills, no real descriptions of behaviours and typically heavily sided towards the kind of “hard skills” that are much easier to quantify and measure. (Sales, coding, running digital marketing campaigns, tools, etc).
But, an individual will also have “soft skills”. A terrible name, but most people will know what I mean by this. Communication skills, commercial awareness, ability to get on with others, customer focused, integrity, honesty, commitment etc. Often paid lip service to in a JD but rarely complete, if it is even mentioned.
But this is pretty one dimensional.
We each have another side to us also. Our seasons of life, motivations, values, personal goals, pillars of life, out of work activities, drivers, emotional state, wellbeing, behaviours.
We also have a vast array of abilities that reside outside of our job description and work life too. Abilities that absolutely could be brought into the workplace too - if we were inclined.
We have hobbies, passions, interests, knowledge and maybe side projects that we may wish to keep private, or weave into the very fabric of who we are at work.
We are complex and that’s why managers must get to know individuals to find out what they want, who they are and what role they wish to play in the company.
Just like John Wooden’s cards - we need to work with people to study and understand them and help them to get what they need and want from the organisation (within reason).
Good managers get to know people. They deeply understand the work they are in charge of. They know who is capable of doing the variety of work. They know who has the ability to become capable.
They know each individual and what they want. And they fill in the gaps with support, coaching, training (on the job if possible) and access to work that will nurture the individual’s growth.
It’s not easy. It’s not efficient either. But it is effective.
Let me bring this to life with an example.
I had someone in my team who was one of the best graphic designers I have ever seen, but he didn’t use this ability in his job - his job was as a Business Analyst. His job had nothing at all to do with graphic design.
He was very capable in many aspects of his job, but he had more to offer - and he wanted to offer more.
He did graphic design in his spare time. He actually wanted to create a business of graphic design and he was very very good at it. These elements were not codified in a job description as a business analyst.
I got to know him as his new manager, and he showed me some of the graphics he’d been building. I knew right away that this was an ability that was not being brought into the workplace - and it was a gap we had.
We were launching a new strategy and needed to take some dry facts, and put them into a visual. The visuals needed to look good but also convey the messages clearly - we needed infographics, diagrams and a memorable design.
I asked this individual if he would help - and he said yes. It aligned to his values, his abilities (outside of work) and it would help him learn more about strategy also.
It would give him commercial experience and expose his work to high levels of senior leadership. He was more than happy to bring this competency into the workplace.
It would benefit the organisation, and was a good use of investment, ensuring we would land the strategy as well as we could.
This wasn’t something we could codify in a job description of Business Analyst, it also wasn’t an unreasonable request on him to do this work as it would help the organisation thrive. It also aligned to his deep passions - something I would not have discovered had I not spent time truly getting to know him.
Many people in our companies are so talented and so skilled, and they’ve got so much to offer yet most managers and leaders squander it. They don’t take the time to truly get to know people.
They put people in boxes because it’s easier. They only look at hard skills and a little at soft skills, often ignoring the other side to the individuals they are working with.
We’re all multidimensional and have lots to offer - effective managers get to know people and unleash it.
Managers are typically looking at the easier to measure dimensions. What should they be able to do for their role? What is the business need? What are the soft skills?
“How can I align this person’s competencies, skills, values, motivations, interests, strengths and energy to the problems we have in our business?
Paul Hawken talks about this in his book, Growing a Business. He said :
You don’t hire for the role, you hire for the individual.
So true.
Summarising so far before we get to key tactics.
There is a difference between people who are already capable (capable, ability, able) and people who show the potential to be capable (capability).
We must identify those who have the capability and - aligning with the needs of the business and the individual - train, coach and teach so they become capable.
We may also, if the individual wishes, unleash the side of them that is not described in a job description.
We don’t manage teams, we manage individuals.
A manager’s job is to find business gaps and align people’s strengths, interests, abilities, capabilities, values and experience. You can only do this by getting to know the individual.
Learning to play the flute
Let’s bring this topic to life with a simple example, with each of the tactics I would recommend playing with.
Let’s say I am learning to play the flute.
I’m not currently capable of playing the flute. I’m not competent or able to play this instrument.
I am not capable. I don’t have the ability right now.
However, I do have the capability to play the flute. I have the ability to become capable of playing the flute. I can play the guitar well enough, I’m pretty decent on the triangle too, and can just about play some simple chords on the piano.
So, it seems likely that I have the capability to become capable of playing the flute. Decent start.
My goal therefore is to learn to play the flute.
But hang on, that’s a rubbish goal. There are no measures, and no timelines and no standards. We need deadlines otherwise I could spend four years learning to play the flute.
My goal therefore, after much consideration, is to be able to play the flute at an upcoming party in 3 months time. Better, but play what?
Ok, the goal is now to play Fur Elise by Beethoven on 15th November at the party.
Good.
Now we need to set some standards.
In order to measure how capable I am at playing the flute, I need to define some sort of standard. As part of this learning and growth activity, am I expected to be playing Fur Elise to orchestra quality renditions. Nope.
But it is important that we set the standard, otherwise I could claim I am capable if I can play Fur Elise with 100 mistakes, or out of tune, or by missing some notes.
So, we set standards to meet. In this example, I’d like to be able to play Beethoven’s Für Elise without any mistakes, in the right tone on 15th November at the party.
Right. So, we’ve established I am not currently capable of playing the flute. But, I do have the capability to meet the standard. We have some parameters and a standard to measure against.
Right - now I need to learn.
I could spend two months reading every single book on how to play the flute. This is information acquisition.
Or, I could pick up the flute and just play it. This is task acquisition.
Or, I could do a combination of the two, using information as a guide, and putting it into action. This is a good learning approach.
Even better though, would be to find someone who is already capable of playing the flute to the standard - and I could get them to teach me. I could play the flute under their guidance and supervision.
After finding this person, the chances are they will assess me as to my current ability to play the flute. And no doubt would want to be sure I do actually have the capability to learn it. They would then, if they’re good, ask me what my goals are - and whether I have a deadline in mind - and what my standard of playing needs to be.
And then we would begin.
I would play, practice, get feedback, read some information, watch some videos and get on-the-job training and teaching from someone who already has the ability to play the flute.
A capable person teaching someone with capability to learn the flute. Sounds pretty good.
I would also expect that we’re not doing these lessons in a group, or if we are, I’d hope everyone would have the same learning goals. If I am learning in a group, and we all have different goals, the chances are I’ll be held back by those who are struggling. Or, maybe everyone is already better than me and I’m the one holding the group back. Or they don’t wait for me to catch up and I feel out of my depth and give up.
In each lesson we would measure, maybe not scientifically, how we were progressing.
We could make decisions from this too. Should we continue? Do we need to do something differently? Are we on track with our learning goals? Do I really have the capability to meet the standard? Should I be investing my time and energy in something else? Am I getting better at playing the flute?
At the end of the training and learning process I deliver my Fur Elise rendition. It may not go to plan but the chances are, if I’ve been doing effective training, I will be pretty close to the standard, probably even above it.
It’s pretty much the same in business.
Let’s go.
The Process
- Goals / Strategy
- Set standards
- Get to know people
- Face reality - Identify capable people & people with capability
- Set coaching plans
- On the job training
- Measure
Goals and Strategy
The first, and most logical step, is to work out what you’re trying to achieve in business.
This is in both for now, and the future. Are you supposed to be doing some work, or delivering value, or performing some aspect of the work that you currently cannot do through the individuals in your team?
- Do you have growing demand for abilities that only a few people have?
- How is your demand, or work, changing and will you be ready for it?
- What are you trying to achieve and why?
Without this it’s a little like randomly learning any musical instrument because you want to. There’s absolute merit in that from a personal growth perspective and life challenge, but in work, well, there needs to be some reason why we’re investing time, energy and attention into something.
If we do one thing, we can’t do something else. If we train people in X and it’s not needed, or used, that is waste.
So, where is the business going and what abilities do you need to meet the needs of the business?
What is the purpose of your business, or team, or department? Once you know this, you’ll know the kinds of abilities you need to get the job done.
Set standards
Once you know what competencies, skills and behaviours you will need for your team or business, you now need to set some standards against these abilities for individuals.
What is the lowest standard you need? What is the highest?
With the flute example, my standard is reasonably low. But, if I was trying to build an orchestra, I’d need a much higher standard. And high standards for all of the other roles in the orchestra too.
Do you have senior and junior roles also? It’s madness to expect the same output, standards and abilities from both juniors and seniors. So what are those standards?
Write them down and be sure to describe them as behaviours.
Competency matrices and skills logs are a waste of time. People will never rate themselves accurately and frankly, it’s not about building a catalog of listed competencies, it’s about using them in work and getting work done.
Yes, managers, peers and the like could review people against competency matrices etc but in order to do so, you need to break these down to a behavioural level….so start there.
Go ahead and try it.
Discuss with someone what level, on a 1-5 scale, they are at a specific ability in your job domain.
Let’s say it’s about something simple like “running an effective meeting”. The other person may rate themselves as a 5, but you think they’re a 3.
After much back and forth you may ask “why do you think you’re a 5?”. And they may respond by saying “Well, I always send an agenda, I ensure everyone gets a voice, I am very good at sticking to time and I’m always on time myself”. These are behaviours. Not a number.
So, when you’re setting standards you should be setting them as behaviours.
I hold the flute correctly, I play the notes in the right order, I keep pace, when I make a mistake I don’t give in, I practice 3 hours a day. Behaviours.
If you start with behaviours you avoid the charade of bubbling up abilities as single numbers that don’t mean anything - you avoid the competency matrix saying your team are all awesome at something, yet that something is not getting done.
And be sure to set these standards for all of the roles, and levels.
Get to know people
To understand the multiple dimensions of people, their strengths and weaknesses, motivation, goals and career aspirations, you need to get to know them.
To truly understand the full capabilities and ability of someone, you need to know who they are and what they currently do.
How do they exhibit these behaviours in the workplace? What could they do better? Are they meeting the standards? Do they even know what the standards are? (I’ll save that for another post, as most people have never been told what’s expected of them).
But also, what’s their experience?
What do they do above and beyond the job? What gets them fired up about work? What are they passionate about? What do they want from work? What interests them? What can you do to help them succeed in work?
This requires getting to know them.
The single best way to do that is to simply have regular 1:2:1 with them, where you don’t just talk about work. Get to know them as a human being - as an individual. Develop a trusting professional relationship.
How are they being overlooked? What experience and abilities do they feel would be relevant to the workplace, that they’re not currently able to demonstrate? Are they working using their strengths?
The better you know someone at a professional level, the better positioned you are to help them with their career, and find work that aligns to their strengths and natural energy for doing good work.
The better you know someone, the better placed you are to know what they are already capable of doing, and what they possess the capability to do. This is super important - and you’ll only find that out from getting to know them.
Face reality
If you know what work you’re supposed to be doing for now, and in the future, and you have some standards set against these skills and behaviours, then now you need to clearly face reality.
- Do you have people who are already capable? And to what standard? How many? Who?
- Do you have people who have the capability to meet the standards?
- Do you have people who are not capable and don’t have the capability?
This is one of the hardest parts of being a manager, you have to lean into the reality of individual performance here.
By getting to know people, understanding the work and setting the standards, you will now know who can become capable; who has the capability.
And now it’s time to help them on this learning journey.
Do you have capable people? Do you have people who have the capability to become capable? Do you need to hire? Do you need to do better performance management? Should you be buying-in capable people to bridge a gap?
Set coaching plans
For those that do have the capability, you’ll need coaching plans. Remember the flute example? Well, this is about setting out a plan for how they will grow, learn and move from having capability to being capable.
Timescales, resources, measures etc - all in a simple coaching plan.
What resources will they need? What opportunities are you opening up for them to learn? Who will support them? What information acquisition sources are available?
But more importantly, you need to build a plan that brings together information acquisition and task acquisition to increase behavioural performance. A good model is the Activity Theory Triangle. I use that.
And this leads me to the next point - pair them on real work, with someone who is already capable.
On the job training
The single best way to learn something is to do the activity under the guidance, support and mentorship of someone who is already capable.
Apprenticeships, after school and college, are growing in England. And there’s a reason. Sure, it’s expensive as hell to go to University now, but people are also realising that you can develop a great skill by doing the work, under the supervision of someone who is already very good at it.
This is the essence of the Cultivated Management coaching service. We actively coach with you during your actual work. Not theory thrown at you, not coaching from the back of the room - but with you. This is on the job training.
This is the same as John Wooden stood at the sideline making notes then coaching his players. This is the same as the Flute teacher seeing me play, and then giving feedback and drills to do. We learn a lot when we’re guided by people who are already excellent at the ability we’re trying to develop.
Sure, we could throw some theory in there, and some reading, and some listening to podcasts - but at some point we have to do the actual work.
We have to develop the behaviours that move us towards the standards - and it’s a lot easier to meet the standards if we have someone helping us, who’s already surpassed the standards.
I believe on-the-job training should be your de facto approach to move someone from having the capability to being capable.
Not only is it an effective way to learn but you’re also going to increase the number of individuals who can then do the same for others.
Those who are excellent and already capable will also develop mentoring and teaching skills. It’s a win win.
Measure
We need to be able to measure progress. Not for leadership dashboards, or performance conversations, or boiling a competency down to a single number, but for insights into how we’re getting on.
Are we getting better? Are we closing in on our learning goals? Do we need to pivot?
Are behaviours changing and abilities improving? Are people moving from having the ability to be capable, to being capable?
Are we able to do the work in front of us to a better standard? Can we get more done? Are individuals growing?
Numbers about training won’t tell you this, you will need to study and observe.
Are you delivering better business results due to the increase in ability? These numbers ARE important.
Your goal is not to build a team with more people who have capability, but to build a team with more people who are capable of doing the work.
You’ll know how to measure this - business results and the right behaviours to build a culture of getting things done and enriching the lives of all who work in the business also.
--
I’m always very careful of using the word “capability”. It gets banded around too loosely. We need to be specific - and at an individual level. Who is capable of X. Who could become capable of X.
And remember, every single person in our organisation is way more than simply a set of abilities.
They are unique, the engine of a businesses success and possess much more than could ever be codified in a job description.
