Author: rwheeler

Posted on

Are You Lost as a Leader? Did you see the road signs? Pt 2

Great Leaders Recognize The Road Signs of Development
14383930-dirty-under-construction-signWhen leaders face boundaries in their development they may not realize at first that they face a boundary at all.  The realization unfolds as actions and decisions that once were effective no longer work.  Success in working through boundaries requires that the leader to recognize the presence of a boundary and make a commitment to shift from the old to the new. Without this mental shift the odds of ending up in a major pitfall are significant.

Leaders develop through boundary events that occur in course of life. Boundary events are either powerfully formative or devastatingly destructive.  It is not the experience itself that determines the outcome in leaders lives.  Individual choices determine the outcomes of these boundary experiences.  Outcomes are not inherent in the experience itself.

Boundary Events are Predictable

Boundary events are experiences (1) such as trials or tests that corner the person and force them to answer questions about who they are and what is really important to them and (2) a point at which a leader faces the necessity of moving to depth in: skills, perspective or self-awareness to continue in and grow in effectiveness.

As illustrated below leaders face significant boundaries at various periods of time in their career and personal life. Boundary experiences are like warning signs indicating a change ahead. Leaders ignore these signs at their own peril. The degree to which a person fails to embrace boundary experiences they increase their internal dissonance, slow their growth and plateau in their development (as illustrated in Figure 1 in the four negative deltas indicating stalled growth).

Figure 1 illustrates development over a lifetime and the significant boundaries associated with early career (1); mid-career adjustments (2) e.g., when career expectations are typically reevaluated; late-career (3); and post-retirement (4) when people typically ponder how their legacy will impact future generations and how they come to terms with their own mortality.

Notice in Figure 1 that the development of new skill is only part of the aspect of development in a leader.  It is easy in our western society with its emphasis on qualitative definitions of reality to forget that development as a person and especially development as a leader is not mono-faceted but multi-faceted.

Figure 1 illustrates the “drag” that occurs on development (z-axis). When leaders fail to acknowledge or address internal issues related to identity and spirituality dissonance grows louder. When internal dissonance is high, such as in the middle of a boundary experience, then one’s confidence and sense of purpose diminish (a negative force) and contribution/confidence sags.

Notice that in some boundary experiences it takes time to adjust to new situations or positions or relationships before a sense of contribution grows again (see delta 3 in Figure 1). In situations where learning and adjustment take longer than is comfortable it is even more important to recognize and accept the boundary event as a catalyzing event and look for ways to define its meaning. Embracing the event or circumstance is the prerequisite to deep change.

Figure 1: Boundary Factors in Development

Boundary Experiences

Three Common Boundaries

There are three common road signs to which leaders must pay attention. These boundary experiences are critical shaping events.

New Experience – defined as being thrust into new terrain such as an overseas assignment, unexpected turn of events in business or family life, new social or organizational role.  Overcoming disorientation the disorientation common in new experiences to weave it into one’s own experiential tapestry is the challenge. Be aware of the frame through which you view new experiences.  Your first impressions will most likely be wrong. Ask questions.  Learn to rely on others, gain common ground by telling stories and encouraging others to share their views. Remember that such events conspire to make you a leader more than any inherent talent or unique ability you have.

Setback – loss or failure that is profoundly disruptive and bewildering. In a setback, internal dissonance amplifies when what was permanent is transient what was believed is questioned. The challenge in setbacks is to see one’s situation in a fundamentally new and more comprehensive way.  Seeing this bigger picture is as liberating as seeing only the experience itself is debilitating.  A comprehensive perspective introduces new opportunities and options previously hidden by the individual’s comfort myopia (the shortsightedness that assigns success or sense of well-being a permanent status in life) .  In today’s difficult economic environment setbacks are common.  What is not as common is watching people use setbacks to define a new sense of meaning and purpose and skill.

Deferral – an unanticipated hiatus during which routines are set aside, sometimes forcibly, and replaced with a regimented structure or no structure at all.   Deferrals challenge leaders to clarify or create their personal mission and purpose; to cement their foundational beliefs and values.  These beliefs and values are critical to shaping organizational culture, creating powerful delegation and unleashing innovation.

The Significance of Seeing and Embracing Boundaries

The significance of identifying boundaries is twofold.  First, the experience of a boundary event or episode is normal and is not a sign of fate aligned against the person.  I occasionally meet people so narcissistic they believe that everything and everyone is against them – effective leaders do not have time for such self-absorption.

Second, boundaries tend to cluster around specific periods of development. New territory boundaries cluster in early career, reversals tend to cluster in mid-carrier and suspension seem to cluster around later career.  Even though this clustering pattern is clear it is not absolute – all three boundary experiences can present at any time.  But recognizing the clustering pattern does help leaders (1) recognize boundaries and mitigate panic/anxiety and (2) expect their arrival to capitalize on the learning experience faster.

The question then is how do you handle your transitions and boundary times? Do new experiences, setbacks or deferred hopes collapse your personal sense of purpose and emotional resilience?  Or do you use these boundary times to engage learning and development to see new things about yourself and your situation?  It takes courage to face change regardless of whether the change is “good” or “bad”.

Growth occurs in the exercise of new skills and perspectives.  What makes a person successful in one role is not what is required in a new role – whether the role is a new job, a new relationship or a new life stage.  The simple fact is that leaders fail not because of what they can or cannot do (ability) but because of what they do or do not let go of.  Six specific actions help:

  1. Establish a clear break point: discipline yourself to make a mental transition in terms of the old – take up the new.  For example in a new job make a mental transition from old to new – take time to celebrate your move.
  2. Relearn how to learn: exposure to new demands typically results in feelings of incompetence and vulnerability. While these emotions are normal to learning they become problematic when they unconsciously cause you to gravitate toward areas you feel competent (usually a step backwards from where you should be functioning).  Learning strategies that go wrong result in behaviors that are; defensive, screen out criticism and blame-shift.  If you see these characteristics in your relationships read the road signs! Be committed to a learning process.
  3. Hit the ground running: the transition to something new begins the moment you understand you are in a period of transition. Work to define the significance of your transition and where you are going then you will gain some traction in the new role or new way of thinking. Then plan what you want to carry out by specific milestones. The simple act of planning helps people keep a clear head.
  4. Assess your vulnerabilities: transitions associated with a promotion occur because those that hire you thought you had the skills to succeed. You probably do. Avoid the temptation to work at the level below what you were hired to be. Do this by assessing your preferences and comparing these to the demands of your new role. Ask your mentor(s) to help you avoid the temptation to go back to more familiar behavior.
  5. Watch out for your strengths: strengths have attendant pitfalls. Watch out for these as much as you watch out for your weaknesses. Your strengths could lead you down the fatal path of micromanagement or other behaviors that demoralize your relationships. (Use assessments. Birkman Method assessment is an excellent tool to understand your perceptual strengths and show blind spots or the impact of stress on the way others experience your behavior.)
  6. Find a coach: as illustrated in my story, leader’s do not have a magic insight into reality that functions independent of others. Janice’s insistence we ask for directions helped transition our situation from being lost to getting back on track.  Listen to great leaders long enough and you will hear them talk about the impact their coaches or mentors have had on them in the course of their career.  Why is coaching so formative? Coaching is an intentional and facilitated conversation. It encourages rigor in the way leaders organize thinking, visioning, planning and expectations. Coaching challenges the limits of competence and learning horizons.

Conclusion

Great leaders are masters at asking for direction, watching the signs along the way and making decisions about where they want to end up. They recognize when internal dissonance indicates they face a boundary in their development. They recognize that facing boundaries is predictable and they prepare for to face boundary times by keeping close mentoring and coaching relationships.

What clearly differentiates the great from the mediocre is a commitment to leverage every boundary experience (either positive or negative) as a learning opportunity.  Do you recognize the boundaries you face? Are you learning or are you resisting? Your answer determines your destination.

Posted on

Are You Lost as a Leader? Did you see the road signs? Pt 1

Great Leaders Know when to Ask for Directions
AA026695She let out a long sigh. “We are lost. Why don’t we stop and ask for directions?” she said.

“No, no,” I responded, “this looks familiar I know the college is just around here somewhere.  I got it.”

The conversation occurred in 1975 when my wife and I were on our way to Eugene to start our second year of undergraduate work.  We had courted the first year out of high school and then married while we both kicked out our first two semesters of our freshman year before transferring to Eugene. I exhibited the seeds of leadership failure we typically call hubris – it is the kind of fierce independence that usually smacks of an equally fierce insecurity.  It kills leaders, and it would have killed me except I had married this delightfully independent woman who was not about to be dragged all over Eugene by a man clearly acting like an evolutionary throw back.

“Turn in here,” she shouted as we drove within range of a gasoline station.  I complied more out of stunned shock than an admission that I was lost. She jumped out of the car before it stopped and ran inside the station to ask directions.  Her recognition of our situation (we were lost) and her ability to connect with a perfect stranger and ask for help expedited our arrival at the campus.  The event sticks with me to this day as an illustration of a critical leadership question – am I aware of the transitions I face and do I have the relationships I need to ask for help in facing them?

… transitions are critical times when small differences in your actions can have disproportionate impacts on results. Leaders, regardless of their level, are most vulnerable in their first few months in a new position because they lack detailed knowledge of challenges they will face and what it will take to succeed in meeting them: they also have not developed a network of relationships too sustain them.[1]

Knowing how to ask for directions and recognizing the nature of critical transitions are critical for leadership development.  To continue the metaphor for a moment (perhaps to the breaking point) many people drive aimlessly about in life complaining about the lack of road signs or inadequate maps when clarity in their life depends in part on asking for directions.

The ability to rise to the challenge of either voluntary or involuntary transitions instead of collapsing under pressure is a decision. When leaders collapse they disengage. When they disengage they show deteriorating output, aggravation, absenteeism, negativity, toxic aggressiveness, depression and loss of direction.

Great Leaders Watch the Signs of the Road

The fact of the matter is that like road signs indicating a choice of direction, people face transitions that point to the necessity of new choices and decisions that either set a pathway for continued development or derail development.

Transitions are experiences (1) such as trials or tests that corner the person and force them to answer questions about who they are and what is really important to them and (2) a point at which a leader faces the necessity of moving to depth in: skills, perspective or self-awareness to continue in and grow in effectiveness.  Facing these barriers means that leaders have the opportunity to:[1]

  • Bring to closure recent experiences – closure identifies significant lessons and allows the person to move forward.
  • Deepen spiritual growth (relationship to God). This is not religious weirdness.  Spiritual growth results in a clearer picture of purpose, moral fabric and awareness of others’ current and potential contribution.  One of my friends identifies himself as a Christian the other does not. But both describe a deeply spiritual experience in the challenges they faced.
  • Expand perspective to see new things – without the challenge of barriers or challenges people often tend to plateau in their growth.  Remember the proverbial definition of insanity attributed to Peter Drucker i.e., doing the same activity over and over expecting different results.
  • Make decisions that launch a new phase of development – this development extends to everyone within reach of the leader’s influence.  The entire organization benefits when leaders successfully navigate the barriers to their personal growth.

Conclusion

Great leaders are masters at asking for direction, watching the signs along the way and making decisions about where they want to end up. The New Year is often a time of transition.  Not only do we make resolutions about who we want to be or what we want to do – the month of January is also the time of year when a significant number of people land new jobs. Do you recognize the road signs of your own development? Are you taking responsibility for your own career/life development and growth?  Do you ask for directions? What does 2013 hold in store for you?

[1] Michael Watkins. The First 90 Days: Critical Success Strategies for New Leaders at all Levels (Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press, 2003), xi.

Posted on

A Vacation Reflection – be the Leader You Always Wanted to Follow

Being Real Requires Vulnerability and Commitment
Conversation 2“Look there’s another one…” Janice indicated the presence of another older man accompanied by younger woman just entering the restaurant.  They did not seem to be a father/daughter on an outing. It did not seem to be a business meeting. It looked like a date and an awkward one at that. There was no clear familial connection although one of the couples may have been father/daughter still struggling through the tensions inherent in learning how to relate as adults.

Perhaps it was the place of our vacation (on the beach in Southern California) or simply a heightened awareness of couples mismatched in age resulting from our earlier conversation. Perhaps our perspective was biased. We had been talking about the struggles yet another friend traversed whose marriage and family slowly and painfully fell apart in the latter years of mid-life during at the onset of empty nest. The couples we watched in the restaurant that day did not show the body language of intimacy.

These couples acted disconnected.[1]  They did not look delightfully or longingly into each other’s eyes.  They seemed tolerantly aware of each other and not comfortable with each other. Their behavior stood in contrast to comfort that comes to close friends who have been shaped and formed by different perspectives, animated disagreements and the work of understanding that is at home with one another’s silence.   There was no hostility per se, just a lack of presence. We wondered what they were looking for in each other. Was it security? Vibrancy? Sex? Companionship? Prestige?

Janice and I married for 38 years and married younger than we recommend to others have traversed the sometimes shaky and often intense (read emotionally fraught) transitions common to life.  We routinely experience both sides of change. On the one hand we face change as people finding our way to defining who we are and want to be. On the other hand we face change as a couple facing the redefinition of our relationship again and again to keep it vibrant and relevant to our changing perspectives, needs, wants and goals in life. We have learned something about life in the combination our own experience and the twenty-five years we spent in pastoral ministry.  The deeply personal insight into the consequences of life choices made by the people who volunteered their stories and worked through their choices with us as confidants in a quest to make sense of life’s realities are permanently seared into our life compass.

“I am ticked when I see some of these couples,” Janice related.

“Why?” I asked.

“Look at how much pain that young woman is enduring – and for what?” The young woman did not offer a command performance in her pedestal high heel shoes as she literally grimaced across the restaurant and jeans that seemed more tattooed to her body than pulled over her skin.

“Are they making the kind of commitment it takes to develop a close friendship or are they simply in the pursuit of convenience?  And if it is convenience, what does it end in? Where will either of them be in 20 years?” Janice looked back at me with that deeply penetrating look I have learned is the request for vulnerability.

“Perhaps they are searching for something more than acquisition, conquest, power, or pleasure.” I responded. Searching and unable to find…few things are more frustrating.  It doesn’t take a psychologist, theologian or sociologist to see meeting the quest for intimacy with the pursuit of pleasure or conquest pushes people toward cynicism and hurt.  Perhaps the couples we saw where trying to find friendships.

The most difficult choice I make in life is to be vulnerable. I often don’t want to be vulnerable.  I want to be powerful and independent.  The problem is that when I fail to exercise vulnerability I achieve deep loneliness. I think of specific transition points in our relationship together when I have been honest about my frustrations, desires, fears, doubts with Janice about our relationship.  There have been times for both of us that someone else acted more interested, more compassionate, more understanding more available emotionally or physically than we have been to each other.  Those conversations were both excruciating and healing.

We left the restaurant and walked through the village on the beach.  I reflected on our lunch time conversation. The point is not that we are still married. Marriage in itself is no particular achievement at least not given some of the couples I have met who stay married and miserable for failure to do the work involved taking any other action. The point is that anything worth pursuing in the next year requires the same two actions that has brought us to this point in our relationship and joy together i.e., commitment and vulnerability.

In 2013 exercise maturity as a person and vulnerability in relationship. Will you remain differentiated (be a unique individual) and stay in relationships?[2] This is the nature of the commitment.  It is a commitment that:

  • Exercises a capacity to take responsibility for one’s own emotional well-being.
  • Promotes healthy differentiation in others and throughout the system in which one lives and works.
  • Recognizes the folly of relational sabotage being a differentiated person triggers from the least differentiated members of a group.
  • Knows that those with whom one is most closely related cannot rise above the maturity level you demonstrate regardless of your skills or knowledge base.
  • Remains aware that people cannot hear you unless they are moving toward you which means that as long as you are pursuing or rescuing them your message will never catch up.

As Janice and I reflect on our careers, our hopes for 2013 and our sense of purpose as servant leaders in our fields we know that as friends in marriage and as professionals related to teams our success continues to be dependent upon the exercise of commitment and vulnerability that takes specific actions.

  • We exercise the capacity to go it alone – there are times that we see things that others don’t yet see, but they are worth pursuing.  This is as true in the potential of our marriage as it is in the business endeavors we lead.  Going it alone is not the destruction of our intimacy it is sometimes the price of intimacy while we hope the other also makes that same commitment and we converge on a new path together.
  • We exercise the ability to recognize and extricate ourselves from emotional binds.  We are not always in sync with each other’s emotions.  Sometimes those around us are not in sync with their own emotions. The ability to extricate ourselves from the emotional binds we sometimes lay out for one another is critical to maintaining a healthy interaction.
  • We avoid the folly of trying to will each other or others to change.  We cannot, by force of will, shape each other to be anyone different.  There is a shaping that occurs as we pursue life together, but this shaping requires vulnerability and willingness to see from another perspective other than our own.
  • We exercise the modifying potential of a non-anxious presence.  Fortunately we rarely panic at the same time.  There are scary things in life.  We find that the voice that attempts to shame us into non-action still rears its belittling head.  It is then we help each other by providing a non-anxious presence for one another instead of a continuous escalation of anxiety and anger.
  • We understand the ratifying power of endurance in crisis.  We are present for each other.  We endure each other’s worse behavior (that is different from being victimized by it – neither of us will be victims of the other). We endure through crisis with those we work with as well.
  • We remind ourselves of the factors that cause each of us stress and coach one another away from the brink of anxious despair.
  • We exercise the self-regulation necessary for dealing with reactive sabotage. The fact is that the least emotionally mature around us do not want to accept responsibility for their emotional well-being or their job performance. Someone will always attempt to undermine our success and our achievement.  This is part of the reason we work to define success as grounded in who we are not just what we do.

So who do you want to be in 2013?  The fact of the matter is that you will succeed in your goals and hopes and dreams only to the degree you succeed in being yourself in commitment and vulnerability.

[1] Admittedly this may be little more than a biased observation – we did not conduct good social research to come to this conclusion there were no interviews or focus groups, no regressive analysis of common themes.

[2] Edwin Friedman Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix Margaret M. Treadwell and Edward W. Beal eds. (New York, NY: Church Publishing [Kindle Version downloaded from Amazon.com], 2007), 3912 of 5400.

Posted on

2012 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 3,500 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 6 years to get that many views.

Click here to see the complete report.

Posted on

The new year is a natural time of reflection and much will be written about the importance of reflection. Steve Morgan encapsulates the pitfall of writing goals. Enjoy the read.

Posted on

Developing as a Leader is an Incremental Process not a Giant Leap

successDevelopment – the process by which the vision, purpose, strengths, abilities, weaknesses of an individual become visible in degrees of clarity through the fog of uncertainty, fear, chaos, grief, loss, victory and daily living.
Leaders develop in hind sight through distinct processes and hurdles. Smart leaders use the power of hindsight as a means of foresight to persevere in their darkest hours because they know there is transformation on the other side if they keep up a learning posture and if they exercise the most important developmental leverage of all – forgiveness (see http://raywheeler.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/when-leadership-requires-the-power-of-forgiveness/).

I read the blogs of emerging leaders and I noticed that many of them feel overwhelmed while simultaneously desiring to explore new territory and that is how it should be for emerging leaders. Focus comes later in development.  I felt the words “overwhelmed” when I read them.  I experienced a visceral impact because I still recall those periods of self-doubt mixed with confidence (or arrogance).  So, I am compelled to offer both encouragement and a reminder.

The encouragement is keep exploring and pushing the boundaries of what you think is possible. Embrace failure and attribute success.  In my early days as a leader I took as much pride in the number of failures I had accomplished as successes and celebrated the lessons learned in both.

The reminder is that vision, purpose, strengths, abilities, weaknesses become visible in degrees of clarity through the fog of uncertainty, fear, chaos, grief, loss, victory and daily living.

Keep going, not everything in your path will be pleasant or desirable.  Yet everything in your path will shape and develop you powerfully if you see and learn.

Posted on

Legitimate Leadership – Why We Need Great Examples

A Function of Moral Judgment
The recent wave of significant leadership resignations and some of the interactions I have had with clients in the last three months have me thinking about how leaders gain or lose legitimacy and the role mentors play in leadership health.

The loss of legitimacy rooted in poor moral and ethical judgment is a significant pitfall for leaders. The failure of national and globally influential leaders should give all leaders pause to reflect on the ethical and moral foundations of their own choices. It is unfortunate however that a large number of leaders will exercise their hubris and declare, to themselves if not also to those around them, that the failure of these leaders was that they got caught and not that they made incredibly poor moral judgments.  There are important leadership lessons to learn from these failures.

David H. Petraeus resigned as director of the CIA after his affair came to light. His lapse of judgment cited in his letter of resignation affirms the need for a strong moral core in those who lead and who carry the weight of other people’s lives and well-being in their daily decision-making.[1]  Petraeus’ actions lead to a loss of trust.

Christopher Kubasik, chief operating officer and future chief executive of Lockheed Martin, resigned after he admitted to an improper relationship with a subordinate.[2]  The board of Lockheed Martin asked for Kubasik’s resignation after his tryst came to light because it violated the company’s code of ethics and business conduct. Kubasik’s misstep was an abuse of power.

The BBC’s Director General George Entwistle resigned over a story of an alleged sexual scandal that failed to apply quality journalistic standards to a story broadcast in November 2012 because as editor-in-chief he failed to put integrity over sensationalism.[3]  Without integrity the process of journalism succumbs to a quest for the novel – like an addiction for more and more sensational tidbits so that the purpose of journalism is lost in a narcissistic pursuit of the next hot piece or conspiracy theory that serve as little more than escapes from personal responsibility.

Three stories and three failures: a failure of trust, an abuse of power and a lack of integrity tear apart the essence of leadership. Good leadership as characterized in benevolence, integrity and ability is far more than a formula for organizational success – it is a building block of healthy community and social interaction. Given the amount of time each of us spends at work the influence of work on the rest of our personal life is significant in both its direct and indirect effect.

A Function of Follow Through

It isn’t enough to start well – good leaders know they must finish well. Follow through is a theme that has stood out for me personally in the last few months both as I reflect on my own leadership and as I work with helping other leaders develop. When leaders short-circuit their development they diminish their capacity so that they collapse under pressure. Leaders who find themselves out of their depth have essentially two choices: (a) fake it or (b) ask for help.

If a leader chooses to fake it they start down the road of defective reasoning that ultimately ends in ruin. Defective reasoning explains why otherwise intelligent leaders fail to exercise moral sensitivity. The three contributing factors to defective reasoning include: insecurity, greed and ego.

Insecurity is that low self-esteem that equates identity to the job.  This lack of differentiation as a person means that the trappings of the job become the sole source of identity. Jobs are artificial!  A job represents a temporary structure to an end. The greater importance rests on the person in the job – a person who understands their unique contribution that far outlasts the current situation. When jobs become real in the mind of their occupants i.e., the source of all security, identity and well-being they take on god-like characteristics in the minds of those that hold them and they are defended at all costs including the destruction of all others.  When the job defines ones identify the loss of a job is not seen as a mere transition and time for new opportunity but a loss of self. The insecure twist moral reasoning so that it becomes a means of self-protection.

Greed is simply cheating because payoff is high or dishonesty is justified by systemic injustice. The result of greed is always that the consideration of the good disappears.  Greed suppresses moral reasoning to make way for the acquisition of ever greater personal gain. The ultimate moral formula for greed is a self-focused Darwinian fallacy that only the strong survive and the weak – the victims of greed – exist to feed more of greed’s ambition. Symbiotic relationships don’t exist for the greedy.  There are only the winners and the dominated.

Ego is a set of beliefs that sets one apart from others – it is not a differential belief as is found in healthy people it is an exceptional belief in that the egotist sees themselves as an exception to the rule.  Hence the belief that one is above average, or more ethical than others, or in control of their environment, or immune from consequences, or possesses all information needed or is irreplaceable in their organization. Each of these beliefs led to the conclusion that the exceptions ego finds are simply higher rules or inconsequential loop holes that the less intelligent or capable just have not seen.

Clearly the preferred option is to ask for help. Leaders (men and women) wise enough to call for help understand his/her differentiation from the group. A differentiated sense of self enables a person act without being adversely affected by a group’s (institution’s) own emotional processes.  Without a clearly differentiated sense of self the leader fails to develop clear values, a unique vision or a defined moral foundation.  Instead the undifferentiated person looses the nerve to be his or her own self in the face of the emotional reaction of the group to both internal and external events.[4] Mentors serve as a significant force for growth by helping leaders follow through in their development and maintaining their nerve to be themselves.

A Call for Mentors

I am drawn more and more to work with leaders. I am available to emerging and established leaders to encourage them and to ask them probing questions.  I also find that I want deeper levels of accountability in my own life – I desire to be connected with a community of those who pursue meaning and purpose in life i.e., those who persist in working to make sense of a life that is often senseless, disappointing, inconsistent, and sometimes just pure evil.

Craig Johnson diagrams the components of developing ethical capacity in a helpful way in Figure 1.[5]  Johnson built a concentric model that starts with leadership development components at the core of the model. Leadership development requires three components consisting of challenge, assessment and support. The role of mentors provides all three of these components in the life of the leader that can then be applied to the ethical capacity of the leader i.e., skills, motivation, knowledge and perspective (the next layer of the model).  The result of ethical capacity is ethical outcomes illustrated here in the outer characteristics of the model i.e., self-confidence, moral imagination etc.

Figure 1: Developing Ethical Capacity

If Petraeus, Kubasik and Entwistle had mentors ready to challenge their ego, insecurity and greed consistently would their stories be different today?  What challenge did they fail to follow through on?  What assessment did they ignore?  What support did they pass off as unnecessary?

I find that one of the greatest challenges I face as a leader is being an engaged follower.  How do I help the leaders I work for avoid the defective reasoning that will not only ruin their life but also negatively impact the lives of those around them?  Left to their own devises we see entire companies destroyed by leaders exercising defective reasoning.  Where are their peer mentors?  Where are their followers who are courageous and differentiated enough to challenge defective reasoning?

It is a bit unnerving to discover that I face similar ethical dilemmas as the followers Hitler in that I face the temptation to ignore the defective reasoning of leaders around me and thus consider myself exempt from the consequences of their bad decisions.  Are followers who know of defective reasoning themselves exempt from accountability for that reasoning if they do nothing? People in my experience have not died as a result of my inaction but they have led miserable lives and faced the loss of employment. The point is that dysfunctional systems are built by followers who do not exercise their own differentiation not leaders who exercise defective reasoning! Without followers leaders have nothing to work with.

Conclusion

Reflecting on the failure and accomplishments of Petraeus, Kubasik and Entwistle led me to resolve to persistently pursue feedback, assessment and support in my own development. At a personal level I understand the draw of defective reasoning. Defective reasoning is easy to nurture – especially as I get older. On the other hand the consequences of defective reasoning are unavoidably clear.  Rather than taking the easy road of defective reasoning and rationalization I will be a leader who finishes well.

And another commitment arises – to be a mentor.  I am grateful to one of my mentors for pointing out that mentoring possesses different expressions and time commitments – mentoring may be active, occasional or passive in its time constraints and approaches. I can and I will make a difference in the lives of leaders I work for and leaders I work with. Good leadership characterized in benevolence, integrity and ability is more than a formula for organizational success – it is a building block of healthy community and social interaction. So, I am committed to helping build a community of health.  Will you join me?

Posted on

Missional Churches Re-shaping Things to Come: a quest for something deeper

The Future and Three Essential Commitments
It is a political season and political discourse causes me to think about the future. However, I find the political discourse of part of the church disappointing in both its lack of depth and failure to show character that looks different from the norm. What is the shape of the church tomorrow?  How will the church re-shape the future? What is important to remember every day when taking single steps into the future? There is, I am sure, more than one answer to these questions. The variety of cultural and geographic situations of the local church guarantees an assortment of answers.  One thing seems persistently true in every culture – thinking about the future has a dual character of release (freedom from the ineffective and imprisoning) and rebirth (an entrance into trauma that makes new). Release and rebirth reflect the nature of God’s promise and leads me to think about the future in two ways.

First, I think about the local church. I have served in the church as a campus pastor, pastor, church planting supervisor, executive pastor, missions director, board member, and 2 and 3-year-old teacher for over forty years…it does not seem that long!  Time has reinforced my appreciation for the fact that new generations must wrestle with how to be the authentic and vibrant church.  New insights and forms consistently disrupt and encourage how I think about faith.

Second, I think about the business stewardship with which I am entrusted i.e., how businesses create, communicate and deliver value to customers through the products or services they design and manufacture or offer.  Businesses cannot ignore the social changes facing the local church and their own business any more than other leaders can. The reality is that the church by nature is a catalyst to change (transformation) and not just a victim of social change.  As believers we have to embrace the disruption of our thinking because the promise of God woos and summons us to a new future. I like the way Ed Stetzer and Thom Rainer put it in their new book:

The alternative to this biblically mandated transformation is to pick a rut and make it deeper.  And this is just what many churches have done, preferring, even if not consciously, repetition or even stagnation.  As leaders we sometimes fool ourselves into thinking that just managing the status quo is good enough…Rather than missionary disciples for Christ going out into the world, we have a group of people content to go in circles.[1]

I have seen businesses and congregations dig ruts that look too much like a graves – they have either gone out of business or gone bankrupt.  The only way I see to avoid following in a similar path is to engage the sometimes uncomfortable and always transformative vision of the future the work of God brings.  Isn’t it strange that the promise of God is simultaneously comforting and disconcerting?

In thinking about the church and business in today’s social environment I cannot avoid the need for three essential commitments. In my view without commitments like these the church fails miserable at being a differentiated body of people.  Without commitment the church floats somewhat aimlessly amid the currents of culture without making any real difference and without demonstrating any real change. I attempt to explain these commitments below.

Engage the Conversation

Commitment 1: Engage the conversation about how the church relates to the culture.  One of my friends complained that the church can never get this right.  It is right to say that the conversation is perennial, and it needs to be.  Culture is not static.  New generations grow in changing contexts and express different ways of addressing their situation’s critical questions.

Paul S. Minear in his book on the images of the church reinforces the necessity of thinking about how to reach the world in which we live.   Conversations about how to relate to the culture necessarily start with a commitment to Jesus as Lord. Minear’s insight is sobering:

Yet we know enough concerning God’s design for the church to be haunted by the accusation of the church’s lord: “I never knew you.” So there is much about the character of the church to which the church itself is blind.  Our self-understanding is never complete, never uncorrupted, never deep enough, never wholly transparent.  In every generation the use and reuse of the Biblical images has been one path by which the church has tried to learn what the church truly is….[2]

Commitment to Jesus as Lord result in a devotion to learning that is characteristic of a close friendship.  Friends are attentive to each other. Friends discover preferences and share dreams and fears.  It is disappointing to find church leaders who are more self-assured than humble learner – can we really afford to behave in ways that contradict the words of Christ while claiming to act in the name of Christ?  By learning I don’t mean academic learning.  Instead I mean a willingness to face one’s self and one’s context with the realization that knowledge is incomplete and perspective is always limited.  The most effective leaders I know live transparently as learners – they constantly work on relating to their world authentically.  Their congregations don’t run into ruts but race toward a powerful vision. Learning means constantly looking and listening for what the church needs to fulfill its vision in a constantly changing social context.

Demonstrate Conviction

Commitment 2: Undiluted and transparent conviction is essential to saying anything important.

In a day when pluralism is emphasized as a social necessity (respect for people who hold opposing views or differing cultural perspectives is essential for a civil society) it also unfortunately acts as a barrier to real communication.

Pluralism means several different things.  In common terms it describes the reality that ethnic, religious, political differences identify groups of people as distinct from one another.  Sociologically it defines a policy or theory that minority groups within a society should support their cultural differences and share overall political and economic power.  Philosophically the term describes the theory that reality is made up of many kinds of being or substance and (1) may not be definable or (2) that a plurality of realities actually exists. Each of these nuances is used in various ways when people talk about pluralism.

For this discussion pluralism can be categorized in two schools of thought; identist (all religions are oriented toward the same religious object) and differential (religions promote different ends – different salvations).  In this definition it is safe to say that evangelicals generally define pluralism differentially i.e., we recognize that different ideas of salvation or the need of salvation exist but that Jesus claimed a unique status and a single reality in the midst of these differences.

Here is the challenge. There are those who consider any unique conviction to be a denial of pluralism (a loss of respect for any other view). My contention is that without clear convictions communication cannot take place because without clearly stated convictions there is no opportunity to agree or disagree there is simply an artificial truce that goes nowhere.  Luther, who was not known to hold back on his convictions and opinions, describes a Christian’s basic conviction this way:

The chief article and foundation of the gospel is given you …when you see or hear of Christ doing or suffering something, you do not doubt that Christ himself, with his deeds and suffering, belongs to you.  On this you may depend…to have a proper grasp of the gospel, that is, of the overwhelming goodness of God….This is the great fire of the love of God for us, whereby the heart and conscience become happy, secure, and content.  This is what preaching the Christian faith means.  This is why such preaching is called gospel, which in German means a joyful, good, and comforting “message”….[3]

The good news of God’s great love and goodness as revealed in Jesus Christ is at odds with certain religious and social views.  This does not cut its universal application – it affirms humankind’s universal dilemma i.e., the quest for meaning and the diagnosis that the lack of meaning stems from separation from God. In the biblical view there is no exception to this diagnosis (Rom. 3:23 and 6:23).

This clear conviction does not need to be reduced to unbending bias, cultural/ethnic hegemony or squishy acquiescence of one’s deep convictions. If the church is going to say anything important today it has to be honest and transparent about its assumptions and beliefs and to allow for the scrutiny of its convictions with the confidence that God really is at work in the world around us.  An example of this kind of conviction occurs in Paul’s defense before Festus and Agrippa in Acts 26 (see vs. 24-28).

Hans Küng carries the idea of conviction further. The way the church lives out its attributes determines its credibility and authenticity.  There is a point at which the clarity of difference summons a decision to believe or disbelieve.

“That the world may believe” (Jn. 17:21) depends entirely upon whether the Church presents her unity, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity credibly in accordance with this prayer of our Lord.  Credible here does not mean without any shadows; this is impossible in the Church composed of human beings and indeed sinful human beings.  Credible does mean, however, that the light must be so bright and strong that darkness appears as something secondary, inessential, not as the authentic nature….[4]

One implication I find in Küng is that authentic living does not need “spin”.  If being credible means that the light need to be stronger than the darkness then I understand this to mean that being credible is not only living out one’s conviction but admitting when one’s behavior does not align with one’s convictions.  In our experience in business admitting mistakes or errors and working with our customers to find a solution creates far more credibility and customer loyalty than trying to cover things up.  Isn’t the same true for the church?

Make a Contribution

Commitment 3: Contribution to the world around us in measurable meaningful actions is the earmark of grace.

The church father Cyprian summarized what is sometimes missing in more esoteric theological reflection on the nature of the church.  Cyprian wrote in more concrete terms about the nature of the church i.e., how should the church behave? The third commitment may be framed as a question, how does the behavior of a congregation impact its neighbors?

In conclusion, my dear brothers, the divine admonition never rests, is never silent; in the holy Scriptures both old and new, the people of God at all times and in all place are stirred up to works of mercy…’Share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house.  When you see the naked, clothe him; and do not neglect the household of your own family. Then shall your light break forth in due season and…the glory of God will encompass you.[5]

I love Cyprian’s insistence that the impulse to contribute to the world around us is divinely motivated and never at rest. When I look at the unknown future I find courage in the fact that if our company continues to be stirred up to works of mercy i.e., to contribute to real needs we will never end up in ruts that look like graves and lead to demise.  The same is true for the church.

Conclusion

There may well be other important aspects of facing the future but it seems to me that if we engage in conversation with those around us and do it with honest convictions with the goal to make a real contribution then the future does not present itself as a threat but as an opportunity.  Will there be such a thing as the church in 20 years?  Yes. I am more confident to assert that if we keep up a commitment to conversation, conviction and contribution the as expressed in congregations and in business will offer a quality and vital impact in society.  What does your conversation, conviction and contribution look like?  Does it lead unmistakably to Christ?  Or, is it muddled, muddied and misleading?  Join me in making a measurable difference by being a living demonstration of what it means to be a believer.

[1] Ed Stetzer and Thom S Rainer. Transformational Church (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing, 2010), 3.

[2] Paul S. Minear. Images of the Church in the New Testament (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 2004), 25.

[3]  Martin Luther, “A brief Instruction on What to Look for and Expect in the Gospels” in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, 2nd ed, Timothy F. Lull ed. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005), 95.

[4]  Hans Küng. Structures of the Church (New York, NY: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1982), 27.

[5]  Cyprian. “On Works and Alms” in Documents in Early Christian Thought, Maurice Wiles and Mark Santer eds. (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 210.

Posted on

It’s Not About Experts – It’s about Nerve, Endurance and a Commitment to Learning

Convenient Misconceptions
The conversations started over a year ago when an executive in one of my clients approached me, “You are the leadership guru,” he began, “how will you get the CEO to become a leader?” I was a little surprised by the intensity of the statement especially because the scope of my assignment had little to do with directly working with the executive team.  However, this was not the first time a COO has approached me with this level of frustration.

“I won’t,” I responded.

He looked me up and down for a moment.

“What do you mean?” he continued.

“How long have you been with this CEO?” I queried.

“About 15 years,” he answered.

“Hmm, over that time how has the rest of the team, yourself included, adjusted to the CEO’s poor leadership?  What changes in your own leadership perspectives have to occur if the CEO did become the leader you want him to be?  What has changed now that makes the CEO, you and the rest of the team open to change that was not in play before now? What makes you think I can bring change you have either been unable or unwilling to initiate in the last 15 years?” I had more questions but I could see that I had already more than amply primed the pump.

It is not uncommon in a consultation to be viewed as the answer to all an organization’s most troubling problems.  In fact it is a little heady to be viewed as one possessing such power…that is until reality pops back up. In my younger days I would have jumped into the middle of this discussion and outlined a change project that failed to take into account the systems, organizational culture and long-term relationships that had authenticated the leadership of the CEO (warts and all) for so long. In my earlier days I often failed to appreciate that pushing on a system to change only meant having the system snap back with the same force to expel me.  The simple fact is knowledge is only a small part of a transformative process.  It opens the door to new perspectives and may inform future decisions.  But it cannot make people travel a path they don’t want to pursue.

The COO sat across the table from me silent. When the conversation started back up we talked about the questions I raised. “One thing that is different,” he began, “is that you have challenged the CEO in a way none of us ever have before. He is talking about change now where before he acknowledged that he was the limiting factor to the organization but he would not step away from his role.”

“What will you do with the observation you just made,” I asked.  “In what ways have I challenged the CEO that you have not? What makes this challenge so effective? What step will you take next since you are in a place to do far more change organizationally than I am?”

At this the conversation shifted to talk about how to define leadership and how leaders develop.  Over the course of the next several months the COO and I met periodically to continue the discussion and to talk about communication and where the company needed to go in his view.  The COO talked about his conversations with the CEO and how they had changed to be more transparent or open.

The COO’s opening statement about guru’s was a convenient misconception.  In his frustration and resignation with how things were it seemed far easier to assume a holding pattern that waited for some outside force to start the changes he felt were needed. Convenient misconceptions are simply ways to avoid the stress of upsetting the status quo. All of us weigh the cost to change.  We understand that in some cases acting like a turtle under duress seems safer – withdraw, pull down a paycheck and try to reduce the impact living at odds with either core values or sense of purpose. But, convenient misconceptions ultimately show up for what they are – denial.

The Change – it begins internally

Month’s passed and the COO invited me to lunch. “I want to talk about a different future,” he said in his call, “this is strictly confidential.”

“I understand, I will keep the conversation confidential and I would love to go to lunch” I replied.

At lunch the COO laid out his plan to either take over the role of the CEO or step down from his role as COO.  “I cannot continue in either the scope of my role as now defined or the tension of this role knowing that without significant change we may be in trouble in just a few years.  I want to do something significant. I can do it here or somewhere else,” he told me at lunch.

The problem in all interpersonal relationships is the challenge of preserving self in a close relationship.  Somewhere along the way the COO had lost his sense of self.  He now began to reclaim it and to decide how he would stay a differentiated person while simultaneously maintaining a healthy interaction with the CEO and the rest of the company’s leadership team.  This requires maturity that Friedman defines as, “…the willingness to take responsibility for one’s own emotional being and destiny.”[1]

Leadership is an emotional process and not only a process of analysis and data. The significance of this shows up in how a leader deals with resistance. In this case resistance from the CEO was not something to avoid.  Instead the CEO’s resistance was a reality associated with the shifting balances in the emotional processes of a relationship system of the company. Resistance was inherent in change the COO wanted to pursue and was not caused by the company’s “…specific issues, makeup, or goals….”[2]  The capacity of the COO to identify and manage this emotional process began a road to change.  This kind of self-management that addresses and not avoids emotional issues is paramount to success in leadership.

Now what?

The COO invited me to help with the changes he mapped out. I reviewed his plan and provided feedback.  When he presented his plan to the CEO and to the board the plan was enthusiastically received. We met again after the board meeting and the COO outlined his next steps.

“Your job is changing pretty dramatically,” I offered.

“Yes, I suppose it is,” he stated.

“May I suggest that the transition you are now entering, and that your entire team is entering, is the same as though you were moving to a new company altogether?” I asked. He agreed with this assessment and we talked about how he would approach his first 90 days. I recommended the book by Watkins, The First Ninety Days.  In his book Watkins points out that,

… transitions are critical times when small differences in your actions can have disproportionate impacts on results. Leaders, regardless of their level, are most vulnerable in their first few months in a new position because they lack detailed knowledge of challenges they will face and what it will take to succeed in meeting them: they also have not developed a network of relationships too sustain them.[3]

In the transition the COO has entered he has to manage the shifting balances of the emotional processes in the company and do this while matching his strategy to the situation. Understanding the situation of the company is the first step in outlining a strategy that has the potential to succeed.  It is now imperative that the COO find the right formula for success especially now that he secured the changes he wanted.  So what does it mean to match strategy to situation?

Match Strategy to Situation

Understanding the developmental stage of the organization provides a basis for engaging the right kind of leadership approach. If the business situation of the company is not understood then it is easy to set the wrong goals and then fail to meet them. In the first 90 days of a transition it is important to establish credibility and knowing the business situation is critical. Watson’s STARS model (i.e., is the business a start-up, turnaround, realignment or sustained success?) is a simple diagnostic tool that can guide critical leadership/management decisions.[4]

Figure 1: STARS model[5]

 

The goal in a transition is to focus energy on the actions that set up the greatest chance of success in a new environment. Figure 2 below summarizes the choices. Focusing energy in a new assignment is a function of three core questions:[6]

  1. How much emphasis will you place on learning as opposed to doing?
  2. How much emphasis will you place on offense as opposed to defense?
  3. What should you do to get some early wins?

Figure 2: Focus Energy on the Right Approach

By offense Watkins means activities such as identifying new markets, developing new products/technologies and building new alliances.

By defense he means protecting current market share positions, strengthening products and realigning relationships. In turnarounds a good defensive position includes pairing things back to the most valuable core and identifying the most valuable employees.  New relationships are important to forge with the right people so that the team that results is ready to work in a new direction. Friedman’s work around systems in leadership relationships is an important addition to Watkins at this point.[7]

Friedman defines the difference between healthy (differentiated) and unhealthy (non-differentiated) people and the dynamics involved in various relational triangles. His point that all relationships are three-sided versus two-sided is an important insight to a leader stepping into any new situation particularly in the case of the COO who has a team made up of new and existing members all of whom must now redefine themselves in light of the shifts in reporting structure.   The COO must decide the situation of his own company.  Consider your situation.  What challenges and opportunities do you face?

See the Challenges and Opportunities of Transition Times[8]

In a start-up people are excited and hopeful. The challenges include:

  • Building structures and system from scratch without a clear framework or boundaries.
  • Welding together a cohesive high-performing team
  • Making do with limited resources

The opportunities in a start-up include:

  • You can do things right from the beginning
  • People are energized by the possibilities
  • There is no preexisting rigidity in people’s thinking.

Clearly a leader has much more flexibility in a start-up.  Remember however that flexibility also means the leader’s own strengths and weaknesses will mark the company. Diversifying leadership by acquiring good mentors and choosing the right employees helps prevent adopting fatal flaws.

In a turnaround the focus stays on key issues like vision, strategy, structures and systems. The challenges include:

  • Re-energizing demoralized employees and other stakeholders
  • Handling time pressure and having a quick and decisive impact
  • Going deep enough with painful cuts and difficult people choices

The opportunities of a turnaround are:

  • Everyone recognizes that change is necessary
  • Affected constituencies (such as suppliers who want the company to stay in business) may offer significant external support
  • A little success goes a long way.

In realignment the goal is to pierce the veil of denial that has allowed the organization to get too close to irrelevance. The challenges a person faces in realignment include:

  • Dealing with deeply ingrained cultural norms that no longer contribute to high performance.
  • Convincing employees that change is necessary.
  • Restructuring the top team and refocusing the organization.

The opportunities a person faces when leading realignment include:

  • The organization  has significant pockets of strength
  • People want to continue to see themselves as successful.

When leaders find themselves in successful organizations where the assignment is to sustain success the objective is to invent a challenge the organization can rally behind.  The challenges faced by leaders in successful organizations include:

  • Playing good defense by avoiding decisions that cause problems
  • Living in the shadow of a revered leader and dealing with the team he or she created
  • Finding ways to take the business to the next level

Successful organizations present great opportunities as well:

  • A strong team may already be in place
  • People are motivated to succeed
  • Foundations to continued success (such as the product pipeline) may be in place

Conclusion

The COO’s journey has changed from tedious boredom plodding toward retirement to enthusiastic purpose striding to a new future. I appreciate the invitation to work alongside this team as they pursue a different future. The road ahead is not without deep challenges. Even though the team agrees on the need for change not all of them anticipate how the changing relational structures and strategic emphasis impacts their relationships, skill development and leadership capacity.  Those who are weakest in their self-differentiation will have the hardest time adjusting – if they do adjust.

Remember, it’s not about experts – it’s about nerve, endurance and a commitment to learning. So how do you assess your own sense of purpose and your role in the organization in which you work? Do you have the courage or nerve to be an agent of excellence and/or change?  The COO’s own change and self-differentiation ran parallel to his willingness to step away from a good paying job to pursue his sense of purpose and a more meaningful relationship. The CEO could easily have agreed to his departure. I suspect however that the COO would have found the pursuit of purpose a far greater force than the temporary loss of revenue. In your situation ask yourself the following questions and see where they lead you.[9]

  1. Which of the four STARS situations are you facing?
  2. What are the implications for the challenges and opportunities you are likely to confront?
  3. What are the implications for your learning agenda? Do you only need to understand the technical side of the business, or is it critical that you understand culture and politics as well?
  4. Which of your skills and strengths are likely to be most valuable in your situation and which have the potential to get you into trouble?
  5. What is the prevailing frame of mind? What psychological transformation do you need to make and how will you bring it about?
  6. Should your focus be on offense or defense?
  7. When you dig deeper, what is the mix of types of situation that you are managing? Which portions of your unit are in start-up, turnaround, realignment, and sustaining success modes?  What are the implications for how you should manage and reward the people who work for you?

[1] Edwin Friedman. Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Margaret M. Treadwell and Edward W. Beal eds. (New York, NY: Church Publishing. [Kindle Version downloaded from Amazon.com], 2007), 235 of 5400.

[2] Friedman 292 of 5400.

[3] Michael Watkins. The First 90 Days: Critical Success Strategies for New Leaders at all Levels (Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press, 2003), iv.

[4] This is another way to describe where a corporation or company is at in its life cycle. Compare Ichak Adizes. Corporate Lifecycles: How and Why Corporations Grow and Die and What to Do About It (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  Prentice Hall, 1988).  The model also takes into account the insights from Ken Blanchard in his work on innovation/revitalization showing how revitalization must occur as an organization approaches its prime.  See Ken Blanchard and Terry Waghorn.  Mission Possible: Becoming a World-Class Organization While there’s Still Time (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1997).

[5] Watkins, 63.

[6] Watkins, 69.

[7] Edwin Friedman. Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix Margaret Treadwell and Edward Beal eds. (New York, NY: Church Publishing, 2007).

[8] Watkins, 66.

[9] Watkins 77-78.

Posted on

Develop Next Generation Leaders – Bridging Different Perspectives

“The most important leadership activity,” Bobby said, “is identifying and developing leaders.” In my business and non-profit experience equipping a new generation is a high priority quest today.  Leadership development is not just concerned with specified succession and talent planning but understanding how to reach emerging markets or effectively reach a growing demographic diversity.
The Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) recently released a study that had two important insights about the next generation leaders now in need of development.

First – what is it that excites today’s leaders about the emerging generation?  Several things stood out in the CCL report:

Their comfort/skill with technology and social networks for information/connectivity. (See: http://www.ccl.org/leadership/pdf/research/ExpandingLeadershipEquation.pdf).

  • Their creativity, openness to new ideas and the fresh perspective they bring.
  • Their multi-cultural/global awareness and tolerance of difference.
  • Their adaptability, learning-orientation and acceptance of rapid change.
  • Their confidence and willingness to take a stand or challenge the status quo.
  • Their enthusiasm, dedication and work ethic.
  • Their collaborative and team-orientation – their willingness to work across boundaries
  • Their strong sense of ethics, service-oriented leadership and desire to make a difference.

The potential inherent in new technologies for doing great and good things is inspiring – even with the dark side of technology.  Every new generation has to wrestle with the dark side of change.  The fact is that they way we do business today, the way customers find us, the way customers buy are all radically different than even ten years ago. The changes are both breath taking and astonishing.

Yet I remember one of my mentors telling me, “Ray, I am not impressed with talent.  I see a lot of talent.  I am impressed with character that shapes talent into consistent outcomes, commitment and endurance.” The same idea is said about today’ s emerging leaders and it is a message that should be heard. In my experience the weakest of these traits (when I find weakness) rests on the confidence and assertiveness of emerging leaders.  Some emerging leaders need help identifying their own uniqueness and how to relate – a need discussed in one of my earlier blogs see http://wp.me/pYuoc-9K.

The survey results also identified what many leaders are concerned about in the development of emerging leaders namely:

  • Their unjustified/unrealistic sense of entitlement, need for instant gratification and affirmation
  • Their lack of ability to communicate effectively face-to-face and their over-dependence on technology
  • Their lack of a strong work ethic, focus/commitment/drive,  that they don’t always seem self-motivated
  • Their lack of learning opportunities (mentoring, positive role models, training adequate to future challenges they will face)
  • Their lack of a strong sense of values, ethics, or social responsibility
  • Their lack of reflection/self-awareness/maturity
  • Their overconfidence and resistance to input or feedback

Clearly the perceptions don’t apply to every emerging leader.  However, in both my non-profit work and work in business I see these two sets of traits constantly.  So what?  CCL’s survey results set the stage for some great conversations.  How is your organization leveraging the development of its emerging leaders?  Mentors need to know how to lead emerging leaders into owning their development and becoming truly differentiated people. Emerging leaders don’t have to wait to be mentored…find mentors!  In one of my relationships with an emerging leader the sense of entitlement demonstrated itself in this person’s assumption that by simply showing up with a college degree they would be made a manager.  Their disappointment when they were overlooked for a promotion was palpable. However, they were overlooked for their failure to take advantage of mentoring and other informal learning opportunities.

How are you addressing the dynamics described in the lists above in your organization or company?