When Life Happens – It is Still Leadership Development: An Overview of Career Coaching/Mentoring Needs

hard questions 2Life Happens and Not Always with Kindness
“I feel lost,” the words belied a crisis.  This is a guy who has charged through is career successfully running over barriers, obstacles and inherited mistakes with fun, gusto and obnoxious jubilation. He is contagious, obvious, loud and a lover of people.

“I don’t know where I am going, my life seems shrouded with a cloud” he continued.  His lament stems from a series of losses he has recently experienced. He is my age (we are approaching our 40th high school reunion). He owns a thriving business he intends to give his sons and has a clear succession plan.  The big loss that anchors his grief and redefinition of himself is a back injury that prohibits him from playing basketball and being as active as he has been. Activity has been central to his ability to stay emotionally centered and to work through stress.  He struggles with some of the decisions his children have made. He struggles with redefining his marriage through the emergence of empty nest. He is surprised that these things have affected him at all.

“Listen,” I responded after a moment of taking in the full weight of his situation, “this may not be of too much comfort but what you describe is a normal process in development for men and women our age.”

We sat in silence for a long moment after that.  Then he finally spoke, “Well Ray, it is comforting.”  The conversation meandered after that as we reflected on the reality of being baby boomers. Baby boomers now face the full brunt of life.  Suicide rates among boomers shot up between 1999 and 2010 with the highest increases among men in their 50s, whose rate went up by nearly 50 percent to 30 per 100,000.  The suicide rate among women in their early 60s rose by nearly 60 percent.[1]  Why?  Barry Jacobs, director of behavioral sciences at the Crozer-Keystone Family Medicine Residency Program in Pennsylvania makes this observation.

“There was an illusion of choice — where people thought they’d be able to re-create themselves again and again,” he said. “These people feel a greater sense of disappointment because their expectations of leading glorious lives didn’t come to fruition.”[2]

Like my friend many boomers face loss and face the prospect of finding a new sense of purpose or falling endlessly into despair.  This is an important leadership issue. The need for experienced leaders to mentor emerging generations is often touted. However, these experienced leaders often feel displaced and under used or under valued. I remember a leadership coach once reminded me to prepare for the fact that I would have to redefine myself six to eight times during my career because of the changing social demographic and rapid technological shift. I thought he had fallen prey to hyperbole when he said this in the mid 1980s.  Now I think he was being conservative.  The need to redefine myself arose not only because technology shifted but also because my expectations about what I would accomplish in life fell short. There are multiple forces at work that force a reassessment of self. Now more than ever leadership development needs an exercise of intimacy like that between my friend and I described above. What does this mean for organizations?

Is Your Organization a Safe Place?

Can an organization be a platform for healthy, deliberate and open development of people?  The question is not derived solely from my theology which presumes and expects an answer in the affirmative.  It derives from experience that often finds organizational leaders lacking attentiveness to personal development.  Keagan’s assessment and synthesis on meaning making and development in human experience captures how people experience organizations;

Some head and definers of organizations would probably agree that their institutions are not particularly well suited to the development of the capacity for genuine intimacy in adulthood.  I image they would also be relatively unperturbed in this self-assessment, feeling that the workplace is not intended to serve such a function.  Possibly they might even feel that intimacy flies in the very face of the smooth exercises of the organization…If the notion that most workplaces are not well suited to the development of genuine intimacy is unperturbing to those who shape them, perhaps the notion that the workplace works against a person’s growth in general might be more so.[3]

I posit that the development of genuine intimacy is the center of organizational interaction and is a prerequisite to manifest personal development of any type.  The absence of intimacy is often at the center of employee complaints and disengagement at every level of the organization.  By intimacy I mean a sense of sharing who I am with another without fear of loosing or devaluing a sense of self. I mean a mutually beneficial discovery of uniqueness and similarity, of shared existence and meaning. My conversations in coaching and research persistently orbit intimacy which has a sense of value, personal recognition and a clear contribution.  These concerns are not framed by people as a demand for organizational role. They are framed from the context of a desire for appreciation and interpersonal interaction that can help make sense out of a sometimes senseless world.

Because of my background in pastoral ministry I am often reminded that a congregation possesses a different kind of organizational charter and characteristic from a business.  I find this assertion is duplicitous and contradictory.  Organizations of any kind are people working and living together. While congregations do have a different organizational charter they do not differ at all from businesses in the fact they involve people.

The reality is that every organization lives in a polarity of being a structure and an organism.  This reality points to a need for rethinking development as a out working of intimacy even more than program or training. Think for a moment about your own professional development and I bet you will think of a mentor with whom you shared many intimate encounters – some uncomfortable as your self view or assumptions were pointedly challenged.  The point is that every organization needs to deliberately develop its sense of being an organism as well as being an organization if it is to consistently thrive. (See Table 1)

Table 1: A Polarity of Expectations for Organizational Interaction

Interaction as an Organism
(the personal experience & expectation)
Interaction as an Organization
(the public entity & expectation)
Mutual Responsible
Spontaneous Structured
Respectful Efficient
Open Defined
Intimate Regulated, safe
Developmental Professional
Spiritual Reliable
Vibrant Disciplined
Forgiving Arbitrating
Loving Differentiating

The polarity of expectations outlined in Table 1 however are not mutually exclusive in themselves they are a complimentary set of characteristics that live symbiotically within a healthy or safe organizational system.  The two sets of characteristics in Table 1 must coexist in order to experience a healthy structure and consistent developmental outcomes.

So how does this impact the discussion leadership development or of helping boomers rethink their role? The way people work in their daily existence already bifurcate the personal and the public and continues exerting a perceptual influence into the experience of the organization as a tension between the spiritual and the practical or the personal and the public or the valuable and the measurable.  A person’s public experience in the organization limits behavior deemed more appropriate to the private or the personal. As a result intimacy suffers atrophy in interpersonal interactions.

Further, if we view interaction with organizational life from a developmental perspective, then it may best be described as a consistent renegotiation of the public and private perceptions that roughly equate to the dynamic interaction and renegotiation that occurs in developing people between subject and object.  That is people grow through a continuously more complex understanding of themselves uniquely and their identity relative to their integration with or relationship to others.

This means that how an individual perceives the organization, specifically the relationship between the organization as organism and the organization as structure is a function of the process of their internal negotiation between self and others.  Individual perceptions of the value and meaning of organizational relationships evolve through various stages of understanding that essentially shift from vilifying the organization to reassert the self and then to a reintegration of the self as a member of the organization.

If stage development theories can applied to describe the relationship people have to organizations and how they perceive organizations then such theories may show (1) expected times of rejection or withdrawal from organizational life and (2) the point at which development has stalled and embedded itself in a view of organization and self that is no longer functional for the person.  If the latter is true then the tensions involved may explain the personal trauma and eventual social disengagement that results in isolation and disillusionment of they type described above among boomers like my friend.

Understanding Stage Development Helps Negotiate New Life Experience

Three different perspectives, each of which uses a form of stage development as either an overt explanation of human behavior and development or as an assumed model which influenced perspectives on leadership development within an organizational environment are helpful in thinking about establishing intimacy in organizations.

Erickson’s Psychosocial Development.  Making sense out of unexpected situations, the unknown in human experience, is part of what a stage development model attempts.  By looking at usual human development Erikson identified favorable and unfavorable outcomes to developmental challenges that show the relative success of an individual in adjusting to a new sense of self along the development continuum.  The unfavorable outcomes of Erikson’s Stage Theory of “Physchosocial Crises” illustrate the need for breaking down negative choices in favor of positive ones. [4]  Erikson views the life cycle of development, from cradle to grave, as passing through eight stages.  Each stage brings new social experiences and new crises — which, if surmounted successfully, lead to constant growth and a steadily enriched personality.  The potential for an unfavorable outcome in any stage illustrates the impact and potential for the person to adopt mis-beliefs as true.  The use of Erikson’s model in the context of developing people in organizations recognizes that concepts defining intimacy, meaning and relevance are often rooted in personal and familial interactions. People interpose these interactions onto the organization and not the other way around.  People define respect, meaning, friendship etc., first by personal experience and not by theological or strategic reflection.  As a result personal reflection is strongly influenced by familial experience both past and present.

A leadership development perspective.  J. Robert Clinton’s work on leadership emergence attempted to offer a theological insight into how a Christian leader develops in light of God’s historical working.  By investigating the growth patterns evident in leaders Clinton posits a series of stages in spiritual development or maturity and identifies processes that show God’s formation activity in the life of the leader.[5]  While Clinton did not have Erikson in mind in the development of his model (he approached his work from a theological and not a psychological foundation) there are parallels in Clinton’s outcomes to the goals inherent in Erikson’s favorable outcomes.  The use of Clinton’s model seeks to define how God’s activity may interact to the familial and social influences an individual brings to organizational participation that at times produces dissonance to personal perspective.  However the dissonance that results from an engagement with God’s actual activity serves to further the individual’s growth as a person hence it may reflect social and workplace developmental dynamics.

A mentoring perspective.  Kathy Kram’s work on mentoring in the work place identifies developmental tasks associated with successive career stages.[6]   These are particularly helpful in identifying the workplace mentoring needed to ensure healthy development.  First, the workplace is the primary culture in which values and identity are often shaped.  Second, activities in social groups is a subset of workplace activity for the majority of people and either benefits or defeats developmental outcomes.  The average person approaches the organization from the context of their social grid learned not the values of the workplace perse.  By social grid I mean the meaning making and interpretive clues that cause help an individual define meaning, significance and relationship.  This heightens the need for rethinking the development of intimacy in organizations as a means of helping individuals engage their real selves in workplace relationships.

The following tables synthesize these three views and suggest directions organizations can take to make sure their talent develops without being derailed by what life throws at them.

Table 2: The Adolescent Engagement

Stage & Crisis Favorable Outcome Unfavorable Outcome Spiritual Goals
as Defined by Clinton
Transition Years Surrender where the person or the would-be leader aspires to spend a lifetime that counts for God.
Adolescence
Identity versus confusion Seeing oneself as a unique and integrated person Confusion over who and what one really is Ministry perspective.Flexibility and openness to new ideas.Kindling a sense of destiny and identity that encapsulates a sense of personal value and missionBroadening through exposure to others.Owning and developing personal convictions from the Scriptures.

Guidance, decision-making and input are tested one against the other to find a balance.

Pre Career — Wheeler Competence: In what ways can my life demonstrate a role competence?  Experimentation with social roles and interpersonal roles that provide foundational experience for defining the basis of personal competence.Identify: What abilities and strengths make me unique, give me a reason to contribute or to participate in groups actively?  What aspirations emerge from these early experiences?Commitment: How does involvement and commitment threaten my sense of identity or advance it?  What does it mean to be involved and committed?  How is involvement and commitment differentiated from enmeshment and being taken for granted or being taken advantage of i.e., a loss of personal value?Advancement: Can I advance?  Can I advance without compromising a sense of self and my important values?Relationships:  Can I establish relationships of reciprocity, respect and trust?

Family Role Definition: Who am I within a family unit?  Is familial identify and social identity mutually exclusive or complimentary?  What defines a satisfying personal life?  What kind of lifestyle do I want to establish?

Self/Family Conflict: Do I have an identity independent of family identity?

Table 3: Early Adulthood

Stage & Crisis Favorable Outcome Unfavorable Outcome Spiritual Goals
as Defined by Clinton
Entering Adulthood Discovery that competence (ministry) flows from being and not doing.
Intimacy versus isolation Development of interdependent, accountable friendships that confirm a sense of personal purpose and meaning. Loss of personal confidence and tendency to insulate from meaningful personal friendships. Demonstrate the character of God.Understand the purposes of God.Experience the faithfulness of God.Know the power of God.See the sovereignty of God.

Form Christ-like character.

Early Career — Kram Competence: Can I be effective in the managerial/professional role?  Can I be effective in the role of spouse and/or parent?Identify: Who am I as a manager/professional?  What are my skills and aspirations?Commitment: How involved and committed to the organization do I want to become?  Or do I want to seriously explore other options?Advancement: Do I want to advance?  Can I advance without compromising important values?Relationships:  How can I establish effective relationships with peers and supervisors?

Family Role Definition: How can I establish a satisfying personal life?  What kind of lifestyle do I want to establish?

Work/Family Conflict: How can I effectively manage work and family commitments?  How can I spend time with my family without jeopardizing my career advancement?

Table 4: Middle Age

Stage & Crisis Favorable Outcome Unfavorable Outcome Spiritual Goals
as Defined by Clinton
Generativity versus self-absorption Concern for family and society in general Concern only for self — one’s own well-being and prosperity Recognize that God’s guidance comes through establishing ministry priorities by discerning one’s gifts.A clear vision for the people of God.Clear reflection of the character of God.Maximization of the growth process and investment in the gifts and abilities of others.Consistent defeat of the strategies of the enemy.

Joy of relationship (with God and with others)

Middle Career — Kram Competence: How do I compare with my peers, with my subordinates, and with my own standards and expectations?Identify: Who am I now that I am no longer a novice?  What does it mean to be a “senior” adult?Commitment:  Do I still want to invest as heavily in my career as I did in previous years?  What can I commit myself to if the goal of advancement no longer exists?Advancement:  Will I have the opportunity to advance?  How can I feel productive if I am going to advance further?Relationships: How can I work effectively with whom I am in direct competition?  How can I work effectively with subordinates who may surpass me?

Family Role Definition: What is my role in the family now that my children are grown?

Work/Family Conflict: How can I make up for the time away from my family when I was launching my career as a novice?

Table 5: Aging Years

Stage & Crisis Favorable Outcome Unfavorable Outcome Spiritual Goals
as Defined by Clinton
Integrity versus despair A sense of integrity and fulfillment; willingness to face death Dissatisfaction with life; despair over the prospect of death Extended influence through reflection on life lessons, acquired skills, insights and relationships.
Late Career — Kram Competence: Can I be effective in a more consultative and less central role, still having influence as the time to leave the organization gets closer?Identify: What will I leave behind of value that will symbolize my contributions during my career?  Who am I apart from a manager/professional and how will it feel to be without that role?Commitment:  What can I commit myself to outside of my career that will provide meaning and a sense of involvement?  How can I let go of my involvement in my work role after so many years?Advancement: Given that my next move is likely to be out of the organization, how do I feel about my final level of advancement?  Am I satisfied with what I have achieved?Relationships: How can I maintain positive relationships with my boss, peers and subordinates as I get ready to disengage from this setting?  Can I continue to mentor and sponsor as my career ends?  What will happen to significant work relationships when I leave?

Family Role Definition: What will my role in the family be when I am no longer involved in a career?  How will my significant relationships with spouse and/or children change?

Work/Family Conflict: Will family and leisure activities suffice, or will I want to begin a new career?

Conclusion – We Need Leaders Who Exercise Intimacy

Many of the organizations and congregations I work with have yet to accept the significance of building intimate relationships that also leverage what is known about human development. Congregations tend to reject these models as “secular” and unrelated to church growth.  Businesses tend to reject these models as a distraction from efficiency and profit generation.  However, it is time for leaders to reconsider such stands.  Building a safe environment in which intimacy contributes to development is not an option it is an imperative to organizational health, relevance and profit (growth).

Use the models above to help your leaders or team members or colleagues define their experience in the context of a developmental process. This recognition sets the stage for people to exercise the power of personal choice.  The fact is that whether one emerges from crisis healthy or as a victim is not dependent on the circumstance they face but the way they decide to respond to that circumstance. These models help show both the choices available and outcomes that are reasonable to expect.

So what about the friend I talked about above?  Like other leaders he is working through his experience in three different phases.

Retrospection. My friend started here. As we talked I asked questions that helped him define his pathos and the trigger event or crisis.  He had to honestly face his own bitterness and resentment and choose to believe something good might result if he looked and choose for forgive the people who contributed to his angst.  Theologically we talk about being broken i.e., recognizing that we do not exist independently but interdependently. In a theological sense it is this stage that help people find their need for God – which often rises out of the wreckage of their own self-absorption.

Future shift. As we moved together through his choice to see his situation from a new perspective (the developmental stages helped with this) and as he chose to forgive those who had hurt him along the way an internal shift from depression to hope emerged.  He saw a potential for something other than disaster and disappointment. He began making plans on how to exercise the future he now sees as possible. Theology describes this as hope. An encounter with the ability and presence of God offers a different view-point to life and a sense of meaning where meaning was lost.

Decision making.  Finally he decided to act on his new perspectives versus remaining a passive victim. He is not done processing his loss yet however, he is on the right track. We will probably traverse this ground a couple more times before the new course is set. Again theologically we call this repentance i.e., a change of course.

I am confident my friend will emerge from his Mid-life crisis with a renewed sense of purpose and a larger idea of what his contribution is in the lives of those around him. My confidence comes from my own experience wrestling with the same kinds of issues.  I have good friends with whom I can share my experience in intimate detail. Further, I have begun to reassess how I relate to others at the various places I work – I am committed to building intimate relationships (read honest, vulnerable, loving and safe) in every environment.  I see the profoundly positive impact this commitment has on others across every generation and on me. How about you?  Will you lead your organization to be a safe place?


[2] Ibid.

[3] Robert Kegan. The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development (Harvard: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 248.

[4] Jerome Kagan and Ernest Havemann, ed.s.  Psychology: An Introduction 4th ed.  (San Diego: Harcout Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1980), 505.

[5] Clinton, J. Robert.  The Making of a Leader.  Colorado Springs: Navpress, 1988.

[6] Kram, Kathy E.  Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life. New York: University Press of America, 1988.

Coaching – A Craze or a Value Add?

What is Coaching?  

DSC01787A friend of mine just endured an awful hour of interaction with a coach.  The coach apparently listened for a moment and proceeded to offer a solution to my friend’s situation. Have you every noticed that when people give advice (1) it is rarely listened to and (2) it almost always fails.  My friend’s coach must be new or worse, someone untrained in coaching and unemployed who decided to surf the trend and hang out a shingle as a coach.  

There are some great coaches out there, my friend did not find one of them.  What is coaching?  Coaching is an intentional and facilitated conversation. It encourages rigor in the way leaders organize thinking, envisioning, planning and expectations. Coaching challenges the limits of competence and learning horizons. 

Good coaches know how to pull out the best from their clients.  Good coaches know how to get their clients to see their situation from another perspective so that they have “aha” moments that generate new approaches.

Understanding coaching is often understanding how it is different from other business or professional interactions.  For example: coaching is not therapy i.e., healing pain, dysfunction and conflict within an person or in relationships. Coaching is not training which relies on a linear learning path that coincides with established curriculum. Coaching is not mentoring which typically relies on the wisdom and guidance of expert experience. Coaching is not consulting – a consultant diagnoses problems and prescribes and, sometimes, carry out solutions.

Why Do Leaders Look for Coaching?

Leaders sometimes need to energize confidence. Coaching helps a person concentrate on what’s truly important in their business, their relationships and/or their life. Coaching asks the kinds of questions that help define core values and work from them with integrity. Because coaching helps a person interrogate their reality and many see that coaching reduces the chances of  making damaging blunders.

Leaders in new situations or change situations often need to empower relationships to succeed. One result of spending time with a coach is that people learn to engage new listening and communication skills that enhance confidence in and consideration of your relationships and build co-operation with the competencies, skills and insights of others on their team.

Leaders sometimes need to simply check in and reassess accomplishment. Coaching helps clarify, prioritize and manage immediately the most pressing issues.  The questions asked by a coach expose a person’s best thinking thereby unleashing creativity and reducing the number of issues subconsciously vying for their attention – less time taken for anxiety means more energy every day.

Why does Coaching Work?

Coaching works because it meets you in the here and now, it enters your situation with insight and consideration. It’s collaboration between you, your knowledge, your experience and your coach. Coaching accelerates the process of definition and clarifies what steps will take you to your goal. Coaching is work.

The coaching process often helps people name their own self-imposed obstacles to success. Internal obstacles to leadership action are often more daunting than the external ones. What keeps a person from meeting their goals?  Managing the risk of pain or failure in past experiences often results in risk avoidance that limits possibilities. Coaching helps a person define themselves by their dreams for the future and not their past. Coaching helps people embrace weaknesses as learning points.

Coaching creates a safe and supportive environment to expose hindrances to growth and development. A safe environment provides the impetus needed to push beyond self-doubt and grow and make concrete progress toward that to which  a person aspires.

How Do I Find a Good Coach?

Who do you know that uses a coach? Have you asked for referrals? How have you searched for a coach? What kind of coach do you think would help you? What are their personality traits? What would led you to respect a coach? What would led you to loose respect? Have you spent 15  to 30 minutes talking with a potential coach about what you hope to accomplish?  How did you leave that conversation? Did you wonder how the potential coach got you to think more deeply about your question?  Did you realize something you had not seen or admitted before? May I suggest that if you leave the conversation with advice…that you keep looking?  Of course you may get lucky and happened on an expert who just dropped the key insight you needed for your operation.

What kinds of experiences have you had with coaching?  I am interested in hearing from you so leave a reply.  Thank you.

Get Real to Succeed – vulnerability, love, and clarity

Growth chartI am accustom to encountering friendly (sometimes intense) competitive posturing when entering a new situation. A little verbal sparing sets the tone for who is stronger in position and perspective. Once the first probe of potential strengths and weakness passes the conversation gets down to business.  It is like a hazing designed to determine the level of competence and connection.
So, imagine my surprise when entering a tense conversation when the CEO started with, “Your perspective (referring to an email) hurt me.  I don’t think it captured my intent or characterized my actions well.”

I sat back in my chair, grasped for a new sense of orientation to the meeting and responded with, “Fair enough, help me understand.  I thought you made clear in our last conversation that you were quite agitated with the course we decided to take. Was I wrong?”

Feelings change the “rules of engagement” in interactions. They can introduce vulnerability instead of competitiveness in communication in a way that accelerates clarity.  I don’t often see this kind of vulnerability in organizations.  Communication is more often a muddle of dishonesty and irritation punctuated with rare moments of personal honesty that infrequently slips out from the edges.  This “usual pattern” is horribly inefficient.

This CEO was in the middle of a deliberate culture change.  He had inherited a corporate culture permeated with a cover your backside attitude, pettiness, excuse making, blame shifting poorly performing company.  He wanted to move it toward a responsible, accountable, vision casting quest for excellence. There are still burps of regression along the way but wow, a little honesty about feelings seems to have gone a long way in getting at clear communication. Three factors help start then negotiate a culture shift.

Vulnerability

Brené Brown has made an impact on the way leaders think about vulnerability by defining vulnerability accepting the uncertainty and risk associated with emotional exposure. What is the benefit to this approach? The opportunity for love to grow.  “Shame, blame, disrespect, betrayal, and the withholding of affection damage the roots from which love grows. Love can only survive these injuries if they are acknowledged, healed and rare.”
― Brené BrownThe Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are  What does love have to do with business or leadership?  It has everything to do with engaging work with who one really is rather than what people think they should be.

I remember my first VP in business after my transition from pastoral ministry to the corporate world.  One day he asked me what I thought about being in the “real world.”  I turned and laughed at him.

“Real? You think this is real? All I see are people afraid to be themselves, filled with competitive envy who are confident of only one thing – the moment they let down their guard someone will view them as less successful.  You want real?  Come to my pastoral office where people pour out their fears, describe their losses, unveil their shame and guilt and ask for help in becoming the person they want to be…that is real.  This is mostly a farce where some people enjoy what they do yet worry that they may be truly known and others hate what they do and will never allow themselves to be truly known.”  The VP looked stunned for a moment then wandered off muttering something about my being really different.

Vulnerability makes the shift from hiding to walking into the open with all the skills, insights, interests and passion that sit at the core of people’s true engagement.  Without the willingness to embrace the chance of failure no real success will ever occur.  I have a quote hanging on my office wall from Theodore Roosevelt, 26th president of the United States that summarizes this idea.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.”

Love

James Autry, retired president of the magazine group at Meredith Corporation, reflected on one of the most transformative encounters he experienced as a leader. He was listening to Bob Barnett, then CEO of the Meredith Corporation in 1968.  According to Autry, Barnett reflected on the importance of self renewal as a leader pointing out that the most important thing in this process is love.

Love in business?  Why not? Love is not being a jolly, well-liked sap who cannot make difficult decisions or who has lost the respect of others and become an impotent in leader. Rather it is a commitment to act out beyond ego to recognize when denial or hubris has misdirected critical thinking. Love is the humility to learn from others regardless of their status and a commitment to grow personally. Love sets a tone in which others can risk excelling – an act that requires they also risk failing.

So did love work for Autry?  Under his tenure the magazine group went from $160 million in revenue to $500 million.  In Autry’s words “I tried to integrate love in the corporate setting. And it just kept working; I just kept getting results.”

My CEO friend is on the verge of becoming deliberate about love. He clearly has compassion for his employees and cares about their well-being.  However, he has not yet defined love in a way that allows him to also exercise difficult leader decisions. As a result he sometimes lacks clarity in the muddle of his own duplicity in action. He affirms when he needs to correct and sometimes corrects when he needs to affirm.  He has retained less than capable people with the hope they will improve and not designed a development plan to move them toward improvement or replacement.

Clarity

In my conversation with this newly minted CEO I asked him to tell me what his vision was for the company.  He outlined a profit target.

“Ok,” I said, “hitting a profit is great and necessary to continue in business but what inspires you to work to that end? What will you use to rally the people in your charge to truly invest themselves in the work of the company?”

“Hitting the profit goal,” he responded with even greater intensity. He appears to see profit as the means to an end. It is of course in one sense, he will not keep his position or meet his other goals without making a profit.  However, he has fallen into the great distortion of the American corporation.  The real work of any business is not making profits; making profits is the result of the real work.

In his book, Drive, Daniel Pink noted that purpose was one of the core aspects of motivation.  When people own and work toward a greater purpose their internal drive reduces any need to force a motivation onto them. Most managers learn that extrinsic motivators are not consistently reliable and often work to undermine rather than amplify motivation.

The greatest businesses I have had opportunity to engage all have and live in a sense of purpose and they can describe their purpose clearly and succinctly. Sure they are aware of their metrics and check their profit.  However, their profitability (and all of them are profitable) does not arise out of their monitoring of profit but out of their passion for their work.

When I pressed this new CEO for a purpose his communication became a muddled disarray of incomplete thoughts.  It seems to me that once the CEO becomes clear about love he will also become much more clear about purpose. Clarity in purpose is essential for any company that seeks to thrive and walk toward greatness.  Those companies that only walk toward profit are not great, they are wreaks of burned out employees and bitter executives living to avoid the next round of cuts.

Conclusion

I see vulnerability, love and clarity as revolutionary in force and outcome. In my own leadership I have seen the power these unleash the gifts and abilities of others and myself. These characteristics always probe my weaknesses and push on my strengths. These characteristics consistently help turn negative poor performing units and companies into thriving and financially successful operations in my experience. However, they clearly need a commitment to personal change and growth. How does vulnerability, love and clarity factor into your leadership?  If they don’t, why? How can you introduce them? Do you need help – who will you talk with? I am always game for a conversation – I am still learning.  Let’s talk.

breaking down barriers

Terry has joined an important dialogue. I recommend her article and your comments. Women in leadership will find encouragement. Men in leadership will (or should) find insight.

Thank you for serving

iStock_000009064865MediumWe were entertaining one of our new employees from our Tennessee factory and to give him a true Southern California experience we took him to In-N-Out.  I paid for the order and turned to see a  man in a classic 1960s green fatigue coat with the unmistakable yellow service ribbon with three stripes.  He looked worn almost haunted.
“Are you a Vietnam vet?” I asked.

“I am” he answered with a look that wondered where I was going with the inquiry.  The mix of pride and suspicion with which he answered the question struck me. But then, I grew up during that war.  I had friends in that war that I sat with upon their return and heard about their struggles, the same mix of pride and suspicion.  I know these two emotions aren’t just rooted in the political chaos that surrounded the Vietnam war, but in the very nature of war and combat itself. I saw combat change friends.

“Thank you, for your service,” I said holding his gaze.

Suspicion seemed to melt into gratitude – almost relief. There was no commentary on what I think about war and its morality.  There was no judgment about his role.  There was my simple recognition that while I have no real idea of what any veteran has endured in combat (the draft ended right after I registered). I do have an appreciation for any man or woman who will stand in the gap to defend the defenseless and insist upon justice.  There is a place to debate the morality of war – it is not in the face of those who have endured its worse.

“You are welcome,” he said as he sat a little straighter.

To all veterans I say, thank you, for your service. Thank you, for standing up for the ideals of liberty, justice for all and the idea that all men (and women) are created equal. Thank you, for enduring the wounds both physical and emotional.  Thank you, for serving with discipline in the midst of unbridled cruelty. Thank you, for delivering and protecting the country that has provided me with the opportunities I enjoy – opportunities your service encourages me to use to serve others as you have done so courageously.

Powerlessness, Greatness and Choice – what every leader needs to remember

leaderHave you ever felt frustrated or powerless at work? A friend of mine recently admitted, “I am at odds at work.  How much commitment do I really want to give to a company that seems compelled to undermine its own success?  Any commitment I do make seems like an exercise in futility.”
The question was not trite. The question stemmed from frustration. My friend is a remarkably gifted leader recruited to the company for which he now works to change to a struggling department. However, he feels stymied in the continued development of his department. The impulses of his Vice President derail planned action thus limiting the traction needed to produce consistent positive results.  Unsurprisingly this is a common experience for many managers and directors.

Last week I heard Jim Collins speak – he always encourages and challenges me.  I was reminded of something he wrote,

Most businesses also have a desperate need for greater discipline.  Mediocre companies rarely display the relentless culture of discipline – disciplined people who engage in disciplined thought and who take disciplined action – that we find in truly great companies.  A culture of discipline is not a principle of business; it is a principle of greatness….we need a new language…reject the naive imposition of the language of business…embrace the language of discipline.[1]

The concept of being great hits me every time I read it. The question I ask myself is, “do I have the discipline and perspective needed to contribute to a truly great enterprise?”  Further more do I contribute to a culture of discipline? The challenge here is to buck any trend toward mediocrity by building a culture of discipline around my responsibilities.

Collins’ research concluded that building a great company occurs in four stages. Think about these stages as I have outlined them in Table 1 and consider; (1) how you contribute to these stages; (2) how do you encourage others to step into this mind-set; (3) whether you are hirable today as one who contributes to these stages and (4) if you are not hirable today in a great company what do you need to change?

One of the most important insights Collins presents in his monograph on the social sector is the insight that Level 5 leaders often exist within diffuse power structures and can be effective in creating pockets of greatness.  Collins identified two kinds of power i.e., executive and legislative.

In executive leadership enough concentrated power exists to simply make right decisions. Executive power makes right decisions no matter how painful they may be. However, many Level 5 leaders do not have this kind of concentrated power. Many leaders in the middle are not the CEO but work somewhere in the mishmash of organizational structure and political reality.

Legislative leadership on the other hand possesses enough structural power to create the conditions for right decisions via persuasion, political currency, and shared interests.  Many leaders have legislative power within their departments or divisions and can take the responsibility to move toward greatness not-with-standing the pressures that push the rest of the organization toward mediocrity.

Table 1: Inputs of Greatness[2]

Inputs of Greatness Defined Actions I can take
Stage 1: Disciplined people
Level 5 Leadership Exhibits personal humility i.e., they are ambitious for a cause and  the organization and professional will i.e., fierce resolve to do whatever it takes to make good on that ambition
First who, then what First, get the right people into the right places and the wrong people out and then think about what you need to do i.e., the “what”
Stage 2: Disciplined thought
Confront brutal facts Identify and remove those barriers to being great live the Stockdale paradox i.e., confidence you will ultimately succeed while also identifying all the barriers to that success.
The hedgehog concept Attain piercing clarity about how to produce the best long-term results, then exercise relentless discipline to exit those things that fail the test – (1) what are you deeply passionate about? (2) What drives your economic engine? (3) What can you be best in the world at?
Stage 3: Disciplined action
Culture of Discipline Accepting one’s responsibility (larger than a job) to consistently work to greatness.
The Flywheel Relentless action toward the goal that builds momentum on small successes
Stage 4: Building Greatness to last
Clock Building not time telling Great organizations prosper through multiple generations of leaders – build mechanisms that stimulate greatness
Preserve the core/stimulate progress Great organizations run on a fundamental duality: (1) a timeless set of core values and reason for being and (2) a creative compulsion for change and progress.

What kind of leadership power do you have?  Are you willing to take responsibility to exercise your power in building a great department or division? If you are unwilling to take responsibility what does this say about you as a person and a leader?

One of the things I find consistently true in leadership is that the very act of leading forces me to engage in an assessment about whom I am as a person and whether I can live with myself as that person. My friend’s question shook me up.  It made me think. Taking responsibility to exercise greatness in my corner of influence is not an option – it is the only rational course by which I can make a lasting contribution to the good.  How about you?


[1] Jim Collins. Good to Great and the Social Sectors (Boulder, CO: Jim Collins, 2005), 1-2.

[2] Collins 2005:34-35.

Sitting in the Cocoon of Transformation – Feedback that Changes Destiny

cocoonThe statement stung.  “Ray,” Don said, “this will be the hardest thing you have ever done.”  By itself the statement could sound noble. But it was ignoble.  Don had just told me that developing other leaders would be the hardest thing I had ever accomplished because I was accustom to the privilege and power of being the top dog.
Don zeroed in, “Ray, you will always find it easier to do it yourself because you are pretty competent.  But until you allow yourself the discomfort of feeling less than competent you won’t learn the skills, time applications and work values needed to become a more effective developer of others.”
I protested, “I developed leaders all the time, I empowered them, directed them toward success, helped them do what they thought they could not.”
“You have done that pretty effectively in small organizations over which you exerted absolute control. What about organizations in which you are simply a cog among other cogs? How will you influence the development of others when you don’t control the environment?  That is what you need to learn.” Don said.
Upon reflection I had to admit that I had little experience working in larger complex systems over which I exerted little or no control.  I did need to learn how to apply the skills I had developed in small organizations to social and operation networks of complex organizations. Complex organizations are characterized in sub-surface allegiances and alliances carved out by power brokers. In smaller organizations I simply powered over these allegiances and alliances.
Following my encounter with Don, I found my self embroiled in painfully challenging conversations that refused to simply act on my great advice.  In fact they rejected my advice altogether.  Slowly, I began to see that I need to learn new approaches to developing others. I learned the power of asking questions to help others get at their own assumptions and unseen biases.  I learned the power of dialogue that helped me engage the effort to align my experience and knowledge to the needs experienced by the individual I was hoping to influence.  I learned that there were multiple skills and approaches to leadership development that were dictated by the circumstance, the leader and the history of the organization in which I was working.
Don challenged the embedded models of leadership that I had never critically assessed.  By “embedded models” I mean those leadership behaviors, speech patterns and assumptions I had “caught” from watching others and used to gain success.  I assumed, wrongly, that the skills and insights that made me successful in one venue would make me successful in all venues.  Not only is this assumption misguided but it reinforced behavior that did not stand the test of either theological reflection or the crucible of experience.  In my worse nightmare I discovered that how I acted as a leader sometimes contradicted both the message I intended to announce and the work I was trying to complete.
This growing self awareness describes the essence of adaptive change – in order to engage in this kind of change one must be willing to face the difficult facts of their actual situation.  I resisted what Don had to say because he showed me things about myself that I did not want to see.  But my resistance was rooted in another motive besides denial – I was afraid.  I was afraid that I would loose my sense of competence.  What is more I was afraid I would never regain it.  Resistance to change is usually never rooted in the change itself, it is rooted in the sense of loss that accompanies the change.  If the loss looms large enough it eclipses the gains.
After my conversation with Don I went through a series of events in which I lost my job, my role, and my sense of accomplishment.  I went through a time of embarrassment and shame – borrowing a descriptor I learned from my friends from Asia, I lost face.  What I did not see at the time was that like a caterpillar’s descent into a cocoon I faced a deconstruction of my self-image so that a different expression of who I am could emerge.
It has been years since Don first challenged me by his statement.  Developing leaders is still the hardest thing I do.  But now when Don and I get together we often laugh about how comical my stunned response was to his pointed observation.  I am thankful that he respected me enough to challenge me with his observation. I am grateful that he never withdrew from me in my turmoil.  The question that emerged for me through the experience is simple, will I really listen to the feedback that can change my work for the better? Will I maintain a learning posture so that the work of transformation continues to shape me into a more effective leader? Will I act in ways that consistently align to my announced intention and work I want to complete?
If you find yourself in a time of descent into the cocoon of transformation it is important to remember one important lesson. Whether or not you emerge on the other side of the experience stronger or weaker, ready or defeated is all up to you. Will you embrace the change, see the potential and let go of bitterness and resentment that seek to limit and define you?  Will you forgive?  Yes, forgiveness is a critical leadership development choice. Without it the muddle of the cocoon will never develop into the clarity and focus of powerful leadership.

Sitting in the Cocoon of Transformation – Feedback that Changes Destiny

cocoonThe statement stung.  “Ray,” Don said, “this will be the hardest thing you have ever done.”  By itself the statement could sound noble. But it was ignoble.  Don had just told me that developing other leaders would be the hardest thing I had ever accomplished because I was accustom to the privilege and power of being the top dog.
Don zeroed in, “Ray, you will always find it easier to do it yourself because you are pretty competent.  But until you allow yourself the discomfort of feeling less than competent you won’t learn the skills, time applications and work values needed to become a more effective developer of others.”

I protested, “I developed leaders all the time, I empowered them, directed them toward success, helped them do what they thought they could not.”

“You have done that pretty effectively in small organizations over which you exerted absolute control. What about organizations in which you are simply a cog among other cogs? How will you influence the development of others when you don’t control the environment?  That is what you need to learn.” Don said.

Upon reflection I had to admit that I had little experience working in larger complex systems over which I exerted little or no control.  I did need to learn how to apply the skills I had developed in small organizations to social and operation networks of complex organizations. Complex organizations are characterized in sub-surface allegiances and alliances carved out by power brokers. In smaller organizations I simply powered over these allegiances and alliances.

Following my encounter with Don, I found my self embroiled in painfully challenging conversations that refused to simply act on my great advice.  In fact they rejected my advice altogether.  Slowly, I began to see that I need to learn new approaches to developing others. I learned the power of asking questions to help others get at their own assumptions and unseen biases.  I learned the power of dialogue that helped me engage the effort to align my experience and knowledge to the needs experienced by the individual I was hoping to influence.  I learned that there were multiple skills and approaches to leadership development that were dictated by the circumstance, the leader and the history of the organization in which I was working.

Don challenged the embedded models of leadership that I had never critically assessed.  By “embedded models” I mean those leadership behaviors, speech patterns and assumptions I had “caught” from watching others and used to gain success.  I assumed, wrongly, that the skills and insights that made me successful in one venue would make me successful in all venues.  Not only is this assumption misguided but it reinforced behavior that did not stand the test of either theological reflection or the crucible of experience.  In my worse nightmare I discovered that how I acted as a leader sometimes contradicted both the message I intended to announce and the work I was trying to complete.

This growing self awareness describes the essence of adaptive change – in order to engage in this kind of change one must be willing to face the difficult facts of their actual situation.  I resisted what Don had to say because he showed me things about myself that I did not want to see.  But my resistance was rooted in another motive besides denial – I was afraid.  I was afraid that I would loose my sense of competence.  What is more I was afraid I would never regain it.  Resistance to change is usually never rooted in the change itself, it is rooted in the sense of loss that accompanies the change.  If the loss looms large enough it eclipses the gains.

After my conversation with Don I went through a series of events in which I lost my job, my role, and my sense of accomplishment.  I went through a time of embarrassment and shame – borrowing a descriptor I learned from my friends from Asia, I lost face.  What I did not see at the time was that like a caterpillar’s descent into a cocoon I faced a deconstruction of my self-image so that a different expression of who I am could emerge.

It has been years since Don first challenged me by his statement.  Developing leaders is still the hardest thing I do.  But now when Don and I get together we often laugh about how comical my stunned response was to his pointed observation.  I am thankful that he respected me enough to challenge me with his observation. I am grateful that he never withdrew from me in my turmoil.  The question that emerged for me through the experience is simple, will I really listen to the feedback that can change my work for the better? Will I maintain a learning posture so that the work of transformation continues to shape me into a more effective leader? Will I act in ways that consistently align to my announced intention and work I want to complete?

If you find yourself in a time of descent into the cocoon of transformation it is important to remember one important lesson. Whether or not you emerge on the other side of the experience stronger or weaker, ready or defeated is all up to you. Will you embrace the change, see the potential and let go of bitterness and resentment that seek to limit and define you?  Will you forgive?  Yes, forgiveness is a critical leadership development choice. Without it the muddle of the cocoon will never develop into the clarity and focus of powerful leadership.

Make a Significant Difference in the World – network with those making a difference

village churchMaking a difference in the world for me is investing in leaders – helping them find their own voice and engaging the power of their own unique personality, abilities and vision. I often get to do this through business. I have opportunity to do it through education. But the most exciting vehicle I get to be a part of is the church.  Why?  I think Rick Warren said it best:

‎”Even if we had the cure for AIDS right now, you couldn’t get it to everybody in the world without the church because I can take you to 10 million villages in the world where the only thing in it is a church. They don’t have a school. They don’t have a post office. They don’t have a government. They don’t have a fire department. They don’t have a business, but they’ve got a church. The church is the only truly global organization. Nothing else comes close. Everybody else just plays at globalization.”

(Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, founder of the PEACE Plan and author of the New York Times best-selling book, “The Purpose Driven Life,” at a recent forum on religious freedom at Georgetown University.)

How to you respond to Warren’s statement?  Let me know.