Author: toolstolead

The quote below is from Launching a Leadership Revolution by Chris Brady and Orrin Woodward:

“A critical pre-supposition all leaders must realize is that followers buy into the leader before anything else. The vision may be compelling, but is the leader worth following? The rewards may be inspiring, but can the leader be trusted? The environment may be inviting but does the leader care about his or her people? The resources may be enormous, but does the leader know what he or she is doing? These are the qualifying questions followers ask subconsciously before giving permission to be led. Leadership is not a position or title; it is a condition of permission given by followers once they buy into the leader. (bold and italics are mine) Leadership influence, like trust, must be earned and earned continually.” (p. 186,187)

WOW! Do you see the bones underneath this? Note the key points from the quote above:

Can the leader be trusted?
Is the leader worth following?
Does the leader care about his or her people?
Does the leader know what he or she is doing?

It all boils down to the leader. Assuming there is a compelling vision, with inspiring rewards, a great environment, and tremendous resources, it is still the Leader who is the key. Do you believe the leader can realize the vision and fulfill the promises inherent in that vision?

The last two words of that quote are the downfall of many who have talent, charisma, and knowledge; trust must be earned continually!!! All of life can be reduced to relationships. It is in the quality of our relationships that trust is developed and credibility established. In our relationships that we gauge the passion and commitment of our leaders to their vision and measure ourselves against those goals.

If this is true, and I believe it is, then all of our behaviors have some kind of reward attached. In most cases that reward is the comfort of pattern, i.e. we’ve always done it that way and see no reason why we should change – it is comfortable – it is a rut. Now being in a rut is not always a bad thing. Have you ever tried to change how you brush your teeth? Try switching to the opposite hand and brush your teeth and you will experience in a small way the challenge of change, and the comfort of a rut.

As a leader, identifying the ruts which are conducive to accomplishing the mission, and those which are not, is part of the job. Someone has said that efficiency is doing things right and effectiveness is doing the right things. In other words, you can be doing things right, but those things may not contribute toward the fulfillment of the mission. The old forest and trees syndrome. Too many times the leader becomes focused on the trees and forgets the bigger picture . . . and then wonders why the mission never seems to get accomplished, even though huge amounts of time and energy are being poured out.

The benefit of understanding the GMP (what is being done is what is being rewarded) at the level of leadership, is to see which behaviors are effective, i.e. “right” in the sense of mission fulfillment. Once behaviors are identified as being “off-track,” the leader can strategize what the correct behavior needs to be AND THEN HOW TO PUT REWARDS INTO PLACE TO MOVE TOWARD THAT NEW BEHAVIOR. 

It is a 3 step process

1. Observe the current behavior and try to understand what is “rewarding” that behavior.
2. Identify the desired behavior and strategize how to “reward” the new behavior in a way that will overcome the old “reward” structure.
3. Implement the “reward” system and STICK TO it until the change is embedded in the culture.

This can and should include the process described in earlier posts regarding change principles – yet those principles, when augmented with this understanding have an even greater chance of success. Leaders have to be big-picture people.

Another way to understand the GMP is this: What gets rewarded is what gets done OR (and this is a crucial understanding) what is being done is what is being rewarded. If this is true, then all of our behaviors have some kind of reward attached. In most cases that reward is the comfort of pattern, i.e. we’ve always done it that way and see no reason why we should change – it is comfortable – it is a rut. Now being in a rut is not always a bad thing. Have you ever tried to change how you brush your teeth? Try switching to the opposite hand to hold and brush your teeth and you will experience in a small way the challenge of change, and the comfort of a rut.

As a leader, identifying the ruts which are conducive to accomplishing the mission, and those which are not, is part of the job. Someone has said that efficiency is doing things right and effectiveness is doing the right things. In other words, you can be doing things right, but those things may not contribute toward the fulfillment of the mission. The old forest and trees syndrome. Too many times the leader becomes focused on the trees and forgets the bigger picture . . . and then wonders why the mission never seems to get accomplished, even though huge amounts of time and energy are being poured out.

The benefit of understanding the GMP at the level of leadership is to see which behaviors are effective, i.e. “right” in the sense of mission fulfillment. Once behaviors or ministries are identified as being “off-track,” the leader can strategize what the correct behavior needs to be AND THEN HOW TO PUT REWARDS INTO PLACE TO MOVE TOWARD THAT NEW BEHAVIOR. Daniel Pink’s book Drive is a good place to start.

This can and should include the process described in earlier posts regarding change principles – yet those principles, when augmented with this understanding have an even greater chance of success. Leaders have to be big-picture people.

If you read a lot of leadership material/books you will rarely find this topic mentioned. Provocation, usually by written or verbal communication, but sometimes by posture or positioning of assets, is more often found in the realm of the negotiator. The skilled negotiator knows that if the provocation is strategically conceived and tactically applied with a deft touch, that the result can be frustration or anger so great as to confuse, obfuscate, or, ideally, cause mistakes to be made and concessions won.

Provocation as a leadership strategy has come into full view with the election of a President who is a master negotiator.  His ability to use this strategy in his leadership has had tremendous results in both national and international arenas. His use of this technique is at the level of mastery so that each comment, tweet, and even expression are all part of a larger strategy. So far it appears that strategy has been to make America great, although how that is being achieved is strongly debated.

Others, with much less skill and little strategy other than disruption and a seeming anti-American focus, spew forth their own provocative communications. In their case, the effect is embraced by the disaffected who can’t or don’t reason through the rhetoric to the core. Perhaps that is the strategy, to distract and disrupt instead of leading meaningful non-partisan action to meet the challenges America faces. To protest what is instead of offering realistic and relevant solutions.

There are benefits from this clash of perspectives, as we saw through similar clashes in the 1960s and 1970s. But, there are also pitfalls, most notably the loss of respect and decency due each other as created in the image of God. Instead, it is replaced with vitriol and even hatred that denies that humanity. When this happens, regardless of right and wrong we all lose.

The Greatest Management Principle (GMP) is simply this – that behavior is directly connected to perceived benefit – put another way: we typically want to know what’s in it for us before we act. How does that fit into the Christian worldview? 

The Christian worldview says that we should love others before self and sacrifice so that others might be saved. The standard is Love, but not just Love. Rather a Love which is God designed and God empowered. With this love in our hearts, the reality of the Christian worldview is possible, without it, NOT. Jesus exemplified this Love completely. His entire life was motivated by a Love which sought the Father’s will and our salvation. There are notable examples of others who have also met this standard, as well as examples not so notable in every local church in America. 

Yet, one would have to admit that even though these examples exist, i.e. that there are genuinely holy people among us, most of us, even in the church, fall in the sphere where the GMP applies in our lives. Those who understand this are more likely to be able to influence and lead better than those who do not. The Holy among us do what is right for right’s sake. Most of us have to be persuaded that the right has a benefit for us or our families before we will expend the energy. 

Therefore, we see two different approaches to leadership: One which understands the Christian worldview and those few who live in it (unfortunately most of preaching assumes, incorrectly, that all Christians live in holiness, or are even seeking it. Again, NOT). Second is an approach which deals with the un-transformed nature. I really believe this may be what Jesus referred to when he talked about being as clever as serpents and as gentle as doves.

If we are holy and live by the principles of Love it doesn’t preclude us from understanding the world as it is for most – and using the GMP to influence people toward the path that leads to holiness – indeed to do otherwise is a practice in ignorance or pomposity. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the GMP and how it applies to effective leadership. After all, most people live under its influence. Practice the use of the GMP for the end of God’s Kingdom. But live in the midst of Love.

I would define leadership as: ” the expressed guidance, decision, or action which is compelled by nature in the face of need, to accomplish a desired end.” I know there are those who say that leadership demands that there also be followers, but I would disagree. I believe that we either choose to lead ourselves or fail to do so, resulting in unfulfilled potential. While leadership can be broadly understood to apply to groups of any size, it starts within the individual. 

The old saying is that “nature abhors a vacuum,” meaning that when there is the absence of air, nature itself will do everything in its power to fill that void. I truly see this in relation to leadership. In every situation, there is a need for leadership . . . and in every situation someone always chooses to express guidance, make a decision, or take action, (demonstrate leadership) however badly they may do so. It is not always good leadership which steps to the front – but there will always be some kind of leadership. It is a part of how God has designed the world and us.

Further, although it is nature which compels the void to be filled, it is our education and experiences which equip us to effectively provide leadership. We can learn the principles of leading and become adept at exercising those skills for effective leadership. So, even though a leadership void will be filled, by preparing ourselves, we can do so in a way that produces better results. Which is not just leadership, but leadership at higher levels.

It may be that we choose to allow others to lead in group situations but we cannot ignore the need in our own life to take responsibility and initiative (the major components of leadership). Even when we allow others to lead, there comes a time and a place where we have to add our influence to the process and thereby express leadership. Because of this, it behooves us, even if all we lead is ourselves, to improve our ability to lead effectively; to develop the tools of leadership and equip ourselves to become the best we can be.

In my previous post, I wrote: “Let’s think about leadership in terms of an accumulation of skill sets. The acquisition of those skill sets will enhance the ability of the leader to move the organization toward the goal. Instead, then, of concentrating on moving to a different level of leadership, a better path to effective leadership might be to identify the skill sets needed to be effective, and to acquire those skill sets (which might also include bringing individuals around you who can supplement your weaknesses if the skill set is beyond your ability or would require excessive time to acquire).”

Let’s suppose this is true. Then one of the key characteristics of a leader would have to be the ability to be able to “see the big picture.” To see situations and problems in a larger context AND to then to know which skill sets apply (intuitively), and either pull those out of their accumulated kit (acquired through knowledge and experience) or pull in those who have the necessary skill set. Leadership then would have less to do with influence and more to do with a kind of disassociation. By that I mean the ability to disassociate oneself from the immediate and step back to see the greater good, keeping in mind the mission and strategic planning. Now let’s add another big word – integration. The best leaders are those who can disassociate WHILE remaining integrated with the human side of the context.

As we develop this thought it is interesting that we are actually constructing a new leadership model which truly allows the possibility of becoming a leader in actuality rather than just theory. Learning to see things globally, while difficult, can be learned. Acquiring the various leadership skill sets can be difficult, but can be accomplished by most. Like learning a new language, learning the pieces (nouns, verbs, conjugations, etc.) comes before fluency and fluency in enhanced by the ability to actually think in the new language. Leadership is like that, what seems mechanical and awkward at first with practice becomes intuitive and reflexive. Let me tell you a secret which is the starting point – stop talking and listen.

In chapter 5 of Good to Great, Collins talks about the “hedgehog concept.” He states: “Hedgehogs, on the other hand simplify a complex world into a single organizing idea, a basic principle or concept that unifies and guides everything.” (91) Although he avoids using the word “Mission” or “Vision,” the essential concept is the same. What is unique, however, is the three circles, “…a Hedgehog Concept is a simple, crystalline concept that flows from deep understanding about the intersection of the following three circles: 1. What you can be the best in the world at…. 2. What drives your economic engine…. 3. What are you deeply passionate about.” (95,96)

According to Collins the overlap of these three circles is the “Hedgehog Concept.” Whether these should be seen as circles that overlap or not, the important thing is that these three questions provide a sound starting point for discussion between those “on the bus.”  Let’s take a brief look at each circle and the overlap.

Circle 1: “What can you be the best at in the world?” Collins writes, “Just because something is your core business–just because you’ve been doing it for years or perhaps even decades–does not necessarily mean that you can be the best in the world at it. And if you cannot be the best in the world at your core business, then your core business cannot form the basis of your hedgehog Concept.” (99) Being the best in the world is a lofty goal. Applying this circle and focus is fundamental to any business, organization or non-profit because it narrows your focus, which can allow you to bring the greatest resources to bear. But this alone is not enough to become great.

Circle 2:”What drives your economic engine?” “…every good-to-great company attained the notion of a single ‘economic denominator.'” (104) This one is harder but boils down to this: What single thing within the organization determines success, and if improved, would show even more success. When combined with Circle 1, this concept opens up the opportunity to move along a track instead of haphazardly across a field.

Circle 3: “What are you deeply passionate about?” “You can’t manufacture passion or ‘motivate’ people to feel passionate. You can only discover what ignites your passion and the passion of those around you.” (109). Collins’ opinion is that a better use of energy is to focus on what you are passionate about – because that is where you will generate the most energy and interest, and do the best job.

As I stated at the first, I think these three questions, if honestly discussed and the brutal facts of the current reality are kept in mind, should provide a solid foundation for a mission statement and focus, which if followed will produce significant results.