Author: rwheeler

Posted on

Change the Paradigm

51Pv2jzHD3L._SX348_BO1,204,203,200_The title is ambitious I admit. But, the way we think about leadership and express it in the church and in business needs a change in my view. I wrote this book because I see the possibility of unleashing something radically life changing by altering the way we lead. Why? Uncritically adopted leadership styles often promise efficiency and effectiveness but they just as often fail to address the challenge – congregations and businesses feel compressed, threatened, and lost in the radical shifts occurring all around them.  At worst churches and Christian organizations act no different from any other corporation in how they relate to their employees and their members.
Jesus changed the formula of leadership – he initiated a hope that is transforming and healing and not oppressive and disillusioning. This book is a blue print for how to lead like Jesus and produce extraordinary results. I am committed to being a part of a changing paradigm of leadership. Its my hope that writing a handbook on how to put a new perspective to work encourage a new conversation and a different way of leading.

Here is what those who reviewed the manuscript had to say about.

“…well written, organized, and amazingly detailed…Ray writes in an intellectual tone that doesn’t come off as arrogant or stiff, but rather uplifting and humble.” Editorial Team, Xulon Press.

“…challenges my paradigms on being a leader…. I wish I had read earlier on in my leadership experiences.” Steve Morgan, Global Leadership Development, CRU

“…elegant and powerful.  I don’t read Christian books on leadership. They just don’t have the content. But your manuscript is new and needed I could not put it down.”  Mark Simmons, business entrepreneur,Seattle, Washington.

“…a must read for anyone seeking increased effectiveness leading an organization through a holistic approach aligned with Scriptural principles.”  Jim J. Adams, President, LIFE Pacific College

“…profound, practical and prophetic in its impact. I believe it can shape a culture that can change the world!” Glenn C. Burris, Jr., President, The Foursquare Church

“…will transform how you engage others. Dare to apply Ray’s assertions…they will change your life…from the inside out.” Dennis Bachman,Executive Pastor. NewSong Church, San Dimas, California

“This Book will take you to a place you were not expecting to go – the transformation of your own heart.” Casey Cox, Pastor, Living Faith Fellowship, San Dimas, California

Pick up a copy today at:

Amazon, http://www.amazon.com/Change-Paradigm-Raymond-L-Wheeler/dp/1498440169/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1436281607

Barnes & Noble, http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/change-the-paradigm-raymond-l-wheeler/1122227562?ean=9781498440165

Posted on

Did God Say? When Your Sense of Destiny Surpasses Your Resouces

Moses burning bushHave you ever faced the tension of growth in your organization – that uncomfortable realization that (1) you are out growing your current resources; (2) that God has stirred your imagination and summoned you to a larger capacity faith and sense of destiny; and (3) that there is no clear way to step from where you are to where you see your organization will be? I have a friend that is in just this situation.  His organization has outgrown their current facilities, outstripped their fundraising, and expanded beyond their current administrative structure. It’s what every leader hopes for and then freaks when they see it happen.
It is normal to freak out over an expanding sense of destiny – that summons from God to take part in a work that requires God’s participation to carry out.  Moses freaked out in Exodus 4:1 after hearing God give him a new sense of destiny, “What if they will not believe me or listen to what I say?  For they may say, ‘The Lord has not appeared to you.'”  Joshua doesn’t freak out after the death of Moses although in giving Joshua his destiny vision God repeatedly tells him to be strong and courageous. (Joshua 1:1-9)  However, after his defeat at Ai he freaks out, “Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell to the earth on his face before the ark of the Lord until the evening…And Joshua said, ‘Alas O Lord God, why didst Thou ever bring this people over the Jordan, only to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us?'”  Saul freaked out when Samuel told him God had selected him to lead Israel as their first king, “Am I not a Benjamite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel, and my family the least of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin? Why then do you speak to me in this way?” (1 Samuel 9:21)  You get the point.
Somewhere between believing that sense of destiny God instills in the leader and the full evidence of that destiny lie a series of choices that test the leader’s (1) attentiveness to God’s voice; (2) dependency on God’s provision; (3) and recognition of God’s purpose i.e., it’s not about the leader.  The question driving this period of development in the leader is, what step of faith do I take?  It is easy to run ahead – a problem that ultimately disqualified Saul from being king when he panicked at God’s apparent tardiness. (1 Samuel 15) This is exactly the situation my friend is in. He needs a bigger facility, he doesn’t have the budget, and God has given him a glimpse of a future he feels compelled to act on. He is at a boundary point of development and so wrote me to ask what he should do if the building that seems right (a series of events has led him to this moment) comes open before his board can fully take up the matter.  So, I wrote him the following and I share it here in hopes that it will encourage other leaders facing the same developmental boundary.
The situation of the building and its potential is great. I suggest a simple process of discernment when the building comes open – God’s guidance is met with God’s provision.
If the two converge take it. You have guidance – a clear sense that God is expanding the influence of your organization and that influence is both direct and indirect (i.e., meeting your organization’s mission and influencing other organizations to rethink their approach to equipping and release of gifts/talents/strengths). You have made the need known to your prayer network and the board – so let’s watch the provision come in.
If the two don’t converge at the point the investment group drops out – don’t force it.  Stay connected with what God is doing. You know that direction often unfolds with events over time and that first loss many times reinforces God’s ownership of God’s agenda (v our agenda) and brings God’s people into alignment with his purposes (think Moses’ initial “failure” to secure deliverance for Israel even with God’s clear guidance).
I’m confident that God’s plan so exceeds our capacity to see and envision that if we saw the thing clearly at the front end we’d run away terrified by our own inadequacies.  So, keep paying attention to what God is doing. Realize that the capacity represented in the building is the easy part of the process – to increase the physical capacity requires a corresponding increase in leadership capacity that impacts you, the board, and to a greater degree the national/regional coordinators. God is working on the entire system.
Run forward with joyful confidence that God is – see what God can do.
Posted on

When it is Time to Transition the Family Business

starting pointThe problem – Poor Talent Management
I have a growing number of clients (privately held and controlled businesses) that have begun the transition to the next generation. In a recent Harvard Business Review a great article appeared that looks at the issues involved in succession of the family business. In research conducted by Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter (2015) it is clear that family owned and controlled businesses play a critical role in the global economy.[1]  However, because of poor talent management and inadequate succession planning many fail to thrive or survive.  In fact only 30% of family owned businesses last into the second generation and only 12% are viable into the third generation.[2]

The Best Led Companies

The best family-led companies do four things well: they establish a baseline of good governance, preserve family gravity, identify future leaders from within and without, and bring discipline to their CEO succession.

Governance Baseline

Managing a family business successfully over the long haul requires a clear separation between family and business – a separation that ensures that the professionals hired by the business can clearly settle their hesitations about joining a family business namely: uncertainty about levels of autonomy, hidden agendas, lack of dynamism, and the potential for nepotism and irrational decisions.  Professionals frankly want to be sure a level playing field exists in terms of future possibilities, growth, and advancement.  94% of the family owned companies surveyed by Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter were controlled by a supervisory or advisory board of about nine members on average.  Family representation on these boards averaged 46% in Europe, 28% in the Americas, and 26% in Asia. Good governance appears to be the first hurdle for family businesses that want to hire and retain the best people and remain competitive over the long haul.

Issues to consider.  Owning a Mom and Pop operation does not need the formal governance structure larger family owned and run businesses need.  They do need outside mentors and advisors to remain competitive. If the objective of the Mom and Pop business is to grow into a significant player in their market then a good governance baseline is a critical component.  I have seen Mom and Pop businesses grow only to provide a divestiture of businesses for their children to run – reproducing Mom and Pop businesses. The model works but not as a foundation for creating a large family run and controlled business.  What may be difficult in the divestiture model is retaining the talent that grew the business in the first place.

Family Gravity

The researchers concluded that while family owned and operated businesses need independent governance structures they also must be careful not to lose that makes them unique in their market niche.  This uniqueness is what the researchers called “family gravity.”  Every successful family owned and operated business in the research pool had one key family member (sometimes up to three) who stood at the center of the organization personifying the corporate identity and aligning differing interests around clearly defined values and a common vision. The key family members all had a common view i.e., the next generation not just the next quarter. Each of these key family members embraced strategies that put customers and employees first while also emphasizing social responsibility. It is interesting to note that these are elements of servant leadership.  While the researchers did not make servant leadership a subject of their project, they never-the-less uncovered critical attributes that differentiate servant leadership from other leadership approaches. The significance of this correlation rests in the fact that leaders who practice servant leadership out perform their peers in almost every business metric.   Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter contend that,

When a single family member (or a few who are completely in sync) maintains the right presence in a family business, recruitment, retention, and results clearly benefit.[3]

Issues to consider. The leadership team needs to answer six fundamental questions that will then eliminate even small discrepancies in their thinking. Realize that none of these questions can be addressed in isolation; they must be answered together. To fail to answer these questions clearly is to fail in becoming a healthy organization. Remember don’t use jargon or buzz phrases.[4]

Why do we exist?

How do we behave?

What do we do?

How will we succeed?

What is most important, right now?

Who must do what?

Finding Future Leaders

It is generally understood that the person who is right for the highest-level positions in a firm must possess competencies including: strategic orientation, market insight, results orientation, customer impact, collaboration and influence, organizational development, team leadership, and change leadership. But what Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter found in their research adds another important dimension – one that differentiates family businesses – values served as the acid test.  95% of the businesses interviewed by Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter overlapped in language used to describe their corporate ethos e.g., respect, integrity, quality, humility, passion, modesty, and ambition.  This commonality in the values held by these firms contributes to a shared vision and trust of each other. Family members evaluated executive candidates based on cultural fit above all else. So important is the concept of cultural fit that it drove a significant part of each company’s definition of development. 40% of the companies in the study included members of the next generation in their boards and committees in order to nurture their business and management skills.

The best family firms find their future leaders early and invest in them – whether they are cousins and grandchildren, existing nonfamily employees who show promise, or outsiders with no previous connection to the firm. Likely prospects are carefully brought up through the business so that when they’re ready for more-senior roles, the values and competencies match is a sure thing.[5]

Issues to consider.  Have you done the work to identify the components that make up competencies such as: strategic orientation, market insight, results orientation, customer impact, collaboration and influence, organizational development, team leadership, and change leadership? What other competencies may be needed in your unique industry. The clearer you are on what is needed in a future CEO the easier it is to create a development plan. In addition to competencies it helps to have an assessment of leadership and personality style. Often it is personality conflicts more than lack of competence that drives a leader over the precipice of failure. A good assessment helps a leader gain self awareness and assists him or her in working with people who are different.  The best led companies searched among family, internally, and then externally for future leaders.  However, they all followed the pattern outlined above in the three phases.

In my own field research I observed family owned and controlled businesses that require their sons/daughters to earn college degrees and then find employment and success outside of the family business before they are considered for executive candidacy inside. In one particular firm I looked at family members recruited into the business served in a variety of roles designed to prepare them for senior management and groomed them as potential successor CEOs.

Disciplined CEO Succession

The greatest threat to any company is a failed CEO succession. Jim Collins found that all but one of the companies in decline he studied had experience a problematic transition at the top. In one family owned and operated business I studied the CEO (son of the founder) explained one day how he had nearly driven the highly successful company he inherited into the ground.  Why?  He equated entitlement with success.  He arrived, put his feet up on the desk and commanded others like they didn’t know what they were doing. Instead of learning about the business he utilized the servers of the company over the employee lunch break to play online video games. On the verge of bankruptcy he had to come to terms with his own lack of competencies. The succession event that put him in the driver’s seat had none of the characteristics described so far by Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter. In contrast a disciplined succession process possesses three phases.

Phase 1: Discussion and commitment by the Shareholders.  In this phase the owner family and/or board provides a briefing on succession and an analysis of possible scenarios with the shareholders.  A shareholder workshop is held to strategize about the future and design succession processes.  The result is the creation of an ideal successor profile based on strategic goals, values, and desired competencies.

Phase 2: Candidate Selection. In this phase a list of suitable internal and external candidates is identified and evaluated.  This progresses to a short-listing and obtaining references for a select group of qualified candidates.  The desired outcome is agreement on one or two finalists and contract negotiations with the chosen successor.

Phase 3: Integration and Development of the Successor. Once a candidate is selected an agenda for the first six to 12 months is established and the top management team is selected.  After 12 months, a 360˚ feedback is conducted and, if needed, a development plan is made to meet strategic and business targets after roughly two years. This leads to a discussion and decision about renewing the CEO’s contract t when due.

The process is a highly personal one. As one of the subject companies explained,

“When we get someone in, we accompany him like a personal scout,” one family CEO explained. “A director or board member introduces him, helps him, and talks to him regularly. The know-how is transferred personally.”[6]

Issues to consider. If your company does not have a formal process it should consider creating one. In the subject companies some did find new leadership through inspiration or chance. However the research showed that CEO appointments were far more successful when they followed a disciplined search involving multiple candidates. What does this mean to a company preparing to hand off the CEO role to a son of the current CEO?  Help the son through the process outlined. Further, it is not a bad idea to have a second candidate or to be ready to search for one should the son not succeed in the role.  Too many retirement nest eggs, depending on the sale of the company to the son or daughter, disappear because of poor succession planning.

Conclusion

The conclusion of the researchers is that not-with-standing the minefield leadership decisions can be, a family business can thrive for generations if they establish good governance, preserve family gravity, identify and develop high-potential executives within the family and outside it, and bring the right discipline to their CEO succession and integration processes.  Other research by Ernst & Young, the Family Business Network, and Credit Suisse shows that large, long-standing, publicly traded family businesses grow faster than nonfamily companies, are more resilient, and outperform market returns by several percentage points. There is no reason why smaller non-publicly traded companies cannot mirror similar results if they apply the same disciplines.  Part of the question business owners have to answer is to determine what the horizon of their vision for their company will be. This is not an easy question.  It deals with issues of ultimate contribution and is determined by the degree to which owners are willing to grow their own capacity as leaders.

[1] Claudio Fernández-Aráos, Sonny Iqbal, and Jörg Ritter. “Leadership Lessons from Great Family Businesses” Harvard Business Review. April 2015: 82-88.

[2] Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter, 85.

[3] Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter, 86.

[4] Patrick Lencioni. The Advantage (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2012). Lencioni’s discussion of clarity in values and communication is must read for all family owned and controlled businesses.

[5] Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter, 87.

[6] Fernández-Aráos, Iqbal, and Ritter, 88.

Posted on

Conceptualizing Leadership Development

Look at Leadership Three Dimensionally
Thinking about leadership development.

“This looks like it is built for business, it seems like it only loosely applies to me,” the statement stemmed from wonder – having just completed a 360 degree assessment of leadership competencies Terry was looking for a way to integrate the concise definitions of competencies into his experience. “How do I integrate these insights into my role in leading a mission organization?” he asked.

The question is not uncommon. The contrast in purpose and metrics between a church or mission agency and a business seem stark. However, the way business and non-profit leadership is defined reveals far more about the degree to which a person has integrated their faith and work than it does any inherent difference in purpose between these two entities. Why? Because business fundamentally seeks to define needs and answer them.  Faith based ministries fundamentally do the same thing. Each works in a different sphere of human experience that often crosses into the domain of the other.

True, some businesses seem driven solely by profit and are sometimes willing to sacrifice friendships, people, family, and care for the environment to make a greater profit. But before I go too far in raising straw man arguments of false comparison; it is equally true that some non-profits are pure and simple charades designed solely for the enrichment of the founder or pastor or evangelist. Abuses happen in all sectors – the banality and reality of evil is ever-present. So, making false comparisons that vilify either business or faith reveals only mental laziness.

Understanding leadership is not an easy chore.  Often the challenge is that leadership is defined one dimensionally i.e., as a matter of applied skills or competencies (as happens in business) or as a matter of applied values and purpose (as happens in ministry). However, it does not take long to discover that leadership is as much about one’s self-awareness and personality as it is skill. What’s more, endurance, resilience, and consistency over time as a leader have more to do with a sense of meaning or purpose that we associate with spirituality.  Loehr & Schwartz (2003) writing on managing energy as a leader point out that the physical, emotional, and mental capacities of a leader are dependent upon a leader’s spiritual development.[i]

It helps to have a comprehensive model of leadership development that illustrates a three-dimensional approach to defining leadership. I use the term three-dimensional to point toward the necessity of seeing leadership as actions that stem from and are dependent upon the spiritual, personal, and skill development in a leader’s life. These three dimensions of a leader’s life represent the leader’s sense of empowerment, motivation, and learning posture. These three dimensions are illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Components of Leadership Development[ii]

Critical Developmental Categories

Possessing a model like Figure 1 allows a leader, or those charged with developing leaders, to imagine a holistic process of development. Terry’s integrative work needs a model such as this to help categorize his thinking and conceptualizing.  Competencies are categorized as skill development in this model. Skills build competence. The importance of develop skills recognizes the truism that good intentions not only pave the road to hell, they undermine a leader’s credibility when not accompanied with the competencies needed to do the work of leadership.

Terry’s consternation in attempting to synthesize what he knows about leadership was compounded by the fact he has participated in a variety of assessments. The Birkman Method® Assessment, Strength Finders, Meyer’s Brigg’s, the Birkman 360, DiSC, and others do not measure the same thing to the same degree. It is important to categorize assessments by development domain. Terry for example, threw Strength Finders and the Birkman 360 into the same bucket (Personal Development in Figure 1). These two instruments are better categorized and Personal Development and Skill Development respectively (Figure 1). An integrative model such as Figure 1 accelerates understanding the relationship between personality and skill development.

Models also help diagnose difficulties faced by leaders. I sat with Ted, a CEO of a privately held firm with annual revenue of $50M. Ted expressed frustration with his team, the direction his company was going, and the mediocre performance of his company. It could be argued that Ted lacked certain competencies (e.g., vision casting or dealing with conflict) but this did not fully explain his own sense of aimlessness. The longer we talked the more clear it became that Ted’s real lack emanated from the fact he had lost his sense of purpose and ultimate contribution. Ted was in a spiritual crisis that undermined his ability to cast vision for the future. His company was disintegrating into a series of silos competing with one another for a dwindling pool of resources. In the absence of a clear purpose the company was collapsing into turf wars between strong personalities jockeying for power.

I saw in the real struggles Ted expressed the same patterns I found reading through the Prophet Amos (common to both Christian and Jewish Scriptures). I was struck with the fact I could synthesize my model of leadership development with Amos’ commentary on the disintegration of his social context to define derailed development see Figure 2.

Figure 2: Symptoms of Derailed Development in Leaders

Derailed personal develop Amos

Amos outlined three destructive cycles of derailed development. Each of these cycles corresponds to categories of development: indifference stems from derailed spiritual development, anger stems from derailed personal development, and destructive behavior is the result of derailed skill development. I have seen all three of Amos’ destructive cycles in the workplace. Notice in Figure 2 that Amos provides symptoms to each of his destructive cycles. Figure 2 serves as a diagnostic model from which to name the root problem that derails leadership development.  Ted for example had started his company with the desire to model servant leadership and social responsibility. Yet his lack of skill in knowing how to build strong teams and deal with conflict eroded his sense of purpose to the point he withdrew from leading. He looked at his team with suspicion and contempt. The fact is he looked in the mirror with the same emotions and projected them onto others. He became angry when I asked him to define his sense of purpose. He deflected the question by telling me to work on enhancing the skills of his leadership team. He became even more agitated when I suggested that the root problem was a lack of purpose not skill and that even with improved skills on the part of his leadership team he would be not happier than he was now. In fact improving the skills of his leadership team would only guaranteed more conflict as his team attempted to cast vision without him.

Conclusion

Leadership Development models offer a way to guide development, integrate new material, measure behavior, and diagnose derailed development. Is there a bottom line for leaders? Yes, leaders who do not think critically about their own and other’s development are leaders who eventually find themselves caught in cycles of indifference, anger, and destructive behavior. If you want to be a leader who finishes well then do the work of reflecting on and encouraging your own and other’s development from a three-dimensional perspective.

[i] Jim Loehr and Tony Schwartz. The Power of Full Engagement: Managing Energy, Not Time, is the Key to High Performance and Personal Renewal (New York, NY: The Free Press, Simon and Schuster, 2003).

[ii] Raymond L. Wheeler. Change the Paradigm: Learning to Lead Like Jesus in Today’s World (Maitland, FL: Xulon Press, 2015). (Not yet released – coming this fall.)

Posted on

Develop a Discerning Moral Pallet

Janice and I sat in one of our first five star dinning experiences years ago with the appropriate level of delight. With our first bite we were amazed at the convergence of subtle flavor, the nuance of spice, that drew out the character of our food without over powering it. We found that the more experiences like these we had the more “discerning” our pallets became. We laughed at ourselves the day we realized we had become food critics – with each new experience we compared and contrasted the artistry and skill of prior culinary delights.
The author of the letter to the Hebrews in the Christian scriptures refers to this kind of development i.e., the discernment that comes by exposure over time, in the ability to recognize moral and ethical issues;

…for everyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is unskilled in the word of righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, for those whose faculties have been trained by practice to distinguish good from evil. (Hebrews 5:13-14)

It is easier to go through life without this kind of moral development, to avoid the rigor of thought or the discipline of learning. Yet the consequence of ignorance is far from blissful. The morally underdeveloped neither recognize the consequences of their own behaviors nor the outcomes resulting from others’ behaviors. This failure to extrapolate outcomes, to only live in the moment of narcissistic abandonment, excuses damaging behaviors as by-products of fate or the intent of some outside force of evil or just bad luck. Moral immaturity is not neutral, as it often claims to be, by persisting  in a failure to develop it becomes the most common of agents in the propagation of evil – passive acquiescence.

Edmund Burke said,

The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

I contend that the act of doing nothing (it is an action resulting from deliberate choice) trains a person to consistently contribute to the existence of evil. This kind of socially acceptable moral turpitude shows up with many faces. It is evident in the unwillingness to resist the behavior of a bad boss. It shows up in a failure to correct ignorant rants on Facebook. It shows up in turning a blind eye to someone stealing from the company. It shows up in deciding that such efforts as voting or writing a congressman are mere futility. It shows up in any attitude that seeks to insulate oneself from the discomfiture of evil as though the reach of evil were containable. Perhaps the biggest lie exposed in the study of history is that evil can be eradicated by ignoring it. We may consider Chamberlain a fool for attempting to pacify Hitler, yet in an odd form of irony conduct our lives on the same principle thus demonstrating our own foolishness.

I do not suggest that the mature become some kind of pompous moral bigots who determine the norm of morality like brown-shirted moral police. Rather I suggest that good men and women cease being silent to those things that damage others. Say something. Learn by practice how to recognize the difference between good and evil. One need not become a raving moral crusader to be a person who develops and expresses clear moral convictions. One need only to abandon the lie of insular passivity.

I was struck by this passage in Hebrews. It made me think about my own moral development. How discerning is my moral pallet? Am I able to discern the subtleties of moral decision making or am I still a child who can neither identify the issue nor ponder solutions? Am I captive to fear? I know the consequence of speaking up and I see the consequence of remaining silent. I choose the former because its end is a healing release from the tyranny of repression and shaming (the tools of manipulation). I don’t move forward as a master of moral arbitration but as a student of moral reasoning still learning how to distinguish the good and walk it out in behavior. How about you?

Posted on

One CEO's Conundrum 

Scale“There are times that I wonder how to balance the needs of the organization with compassion.” My client sat pondering the issue for a moment then continued, “But then that is the responsibility of the CEO.” Jayne (not her real name) was right. There are few positions that juxtapose organizational and individual needs like that of the CEO. Everything hinges on the CEO’s ability to support the dynamic tension between the needs of the organization and the needs of all the stake holders – in this case a key employee.
Jayne runs a 30 million dollar operation in senior life care with 300 employees. She follows a CEO whose style can best be described as laissez-faire. The outgoing CEO neither had the emotional intelligence nor the drive to pull together a workable executive team. He focused on his own strengths and interpersonal forcefulness to build himself a legacy and push things through the system. Effective?  Yes, it got the things done that were important to his legacy. Healthy? No. As a result, Jayne is working through her executive team replacing toxic people with healthy ones and literally resetting the organization from the chaos left in the absence of the kingpin to a healthy team that knows what the organization needs and has the values and skills to get it there.  One of Jayne’s executive team (a VP) is struggling.
“She told me the other day that I intimidate her, I am not sure I feel bad about that,” Jayne said.
“Apparently your VP wanted you to feel bad about it?” I queried.
“Yes, that was the clear message – in her words I have ruined her life by demanding performance proper to her level of employment.” Jayne paused. “The VP said, ‘I can’t even get dressed in the morning without wondering if Jayne will approve of my wardrobe – I am not sure I will ever win your approval.”  Jayne locked eyes with me for a moment and said, “I have never said I disapprove of her wardrobe or of her as a person. She said I was killing her personality. She is right on one hand I do disapprove of her lack of performance.” Jayne’s tone changed as she turned to face me.
“I understand holding people to a change in performance.” Jane began. “But how do I hold them accountable for their personality?”
I could tell the question troubled her. I suggested, “Perhaps it is your choice of vocabulary that has you stymied. Your VP can’t change her personality and in fact, that is not the issue. The issue is behavior and she can change behavior.”
“Oh, that helps,” Jayne said.
The VP, like many challenging employees, sought to blame something external to herself (the CEO) for the consequences of her own behaviors. The fact is that concern on the part of the VP about her job is right. She should consider whether she wants to grow her capacity by modifying her behavior or look for job with less responsibility somewhere elsewhere.
On writing on the leadership of George Washington, Richard Brookhiser observed, “Problems, and a leader’s solutions to them, consist of ideas, forces, and facts of life. But they are always accompanied by, or incarnated in, people. Judging people accurately and managing them well can make the difference between success and failure.”[1]
When leaders avoid the discomfort associated with addressing problems the result is that they only transfer conflict (the evidence of problems) to larger groups of people in the organization they serve.  This transfer has a cascading effect that disrupts large segments of the organization’s performance. This contributes to employee angst and job misery more than anything else in organizational life.
How do you work through conflict in the organization you lead?  Judging people accurately includes the awareness of their uniqueness and their stress points. Any leader’s job not only includes helping others work at their peak skills but also of performing in their most constructive behaviors.  Hold people, and yourself, accountable for both performance and behavior and watch your people become the high performing team you always wanted to see.
[1] Richard Brookhiser. George Washington on Leadership. (New York, NY: MJF Books, 2008), 83.

Posted on

One CEO’s Conundrum 

Scale“There are times that I wonder how to balance the needs of the organization with compassion.” My client sat pondering the issue for a moment then continued, “But then that is the responsibility of the CEO.” Jayne (not her real name) was right. There are few positions that juxtapose organizational and individual needs like that of the CEO. Everything hinges on the CEO’s ability to support the dynamic tension between the needs of the organization and the needs of all the stake holders – in this case a key employee.
Jayne runs a 30 million dollar operation in senior life care with 300 employees. She follows a CEO whose style can best be described as laissez-faire. The outgoing CEO neither had the emotional intelligence nor the drive to pull together a workable executive team. He focused on his own strengths and interpersonal forcefulness to build himself a legacy and push things through the system. Effective?  Yes, it got the things done that were important to his legacy. Healthy? No. As a result, Jayne is working through her executive team replacing toxic people with healthy ones and literally resetting the organization from the chaos left in the absence of the kingpin to a healthy team that knows what the organization needs and has the values and skills to get it there.  One of Jayne’s executive team (a VP) is struggling.

“She told me the other day that I intimidate her, I am not sure I feel bad about that,” Jayne said.

“Apparently your VP wanted you to feel bad about it?” I queried.

“Yes, that was the clear message – in her words I have ruined her life by demanding performance proper to her level of employment.” Jayne paused. “The VP said, ‘I can’t even get dressed in the morning without wondering if Jayne will approve of my wardrobe – I am not sure I will ever win your approval.”  Jayne locked eyes with me for a moment and said, “I have never said I disapprove of her wardrobe or of her as a person. She said I was killing her personality. She is right on one hand I do disapprove of her lack of performance.” Jayne’s tone changed as she turned to face me.

“I understand holding people to a change in performance.” Jane began. “But how do I hold them accountable for their personality?”

I could tell the question troubled her. I suggested, “Perhaps it is your choice of vocabulary that has you stymied. Your VP can’t change her personality and in fact, that is not the issue. The issue is behavior and she can change behavior.”

“Oh, that helps,” Jayne said.

The VP, like many challenging employees, sought to blame something external to herself (the CEO) for the consequences of her own behaviors. The fact is that concern on the part of the VP about her job is right. She should consider whether she wants to grow her capacity by modifying her behavior or look for job with less responsibility somewhere elsewhere.

On writing on the leadership of George Washington, Richard Brookhiser observed, “Problems, and a leader’s solutions to them, consist of ideas, forces, and facts of life. But they are always accompanied by, or incarnated in, people. Judging people accurately and managing them well can make the difference between success and failure.”[1]

When leaders avoid the discomfort associated with addressing problems the result is that they only transfer conflict (the evidence of problems) to larger groups of people in the organization they serve.  This transfer has a cascading effect that disrupts large segments of the organization’s performance. This contributes to employee angst and job misery more than anything else in organizational life.

How do you work through conflict in the organization you lead?  Judging people accurately includes the awareness of their uniqueness and their stress points. Any leader’s job not only includes helping others work at their peak skills but also of performing in their most constructive behaviors.  Hold people, and yourself, accountable for both performance and behavior and watch your people become the high performing team you always wanted to see.

[1] Richard Brookhiser. George Washington on Leadership. (New York, NY: MJF Books, 2008), 83.

Posted on

Restoring a Wounded or Broken Leader

broken-potA friend of mine recently wrote me to ask, “A local friend who is a professional consultant for non-profits and church ministry (organizational leadership) went through a divorce this past year (after 20 years of marriage and 5 kids). We meet together last week. I sought him out to for purely relational follow-up  – we had been out of touch for just short of 3 years. He took advantage of my invitation to share with me all that had transpired. In our discussion I asked if he had any sort of “restoration” or “rehabilitation” to leadership in place for himself. (As this may be important for future clients to know.) Nothing official as such. He has sought individual services and support, but nothing that is outside of his own initiative. Hence, he invited me to present a plan or concept  – to which he would be most grateful.   I thought I’d ask you if – you had any quick thoughts on this or reference points handy.”
I wrote him the following response.

Yes, I have personal thoughts on this however I don’t have any resources for you. So, let me start with a definition and move on to come comments. Restore: renew, rebuild, or to bring back into existence. It is a process epitomized in Psalm 51: 10-15.
Typically the issue around Christian ministers is that some governing body has suspended their credential because of some mitigating circumstance or trauma to: (1) build the margins needed to work through the trauma; (2) work through the pain and the loss incurred to seek restoration of broken relationships if possible; (3) reaffirm the gifts and the calling of God for the sake of the one being restored (God’s gifts and calling are without repentance however the one traumatized is often filled with self-deprecating grief and guilt); (4) represent the person to the body of Christ as one who has been made whole/healed and so is able to re-engage the demands of ministry with integrity and accountability.
In the case you outline the only thing missing is a governing body that would start the restoration. So, your friend is subject to the diverse opinion of his potential clients. These fall into three categories in my experience:
1.  Those who know him  and know of the way he has worked over the years to attempt restoration to no avail.  These watch at times with uncomfortable uncertainty about what to do while others make sure that he does not collapse from weariness, guilt, grief, or shame or any combination of these by checking in with him regularly.  A process of restoration is important for this group because they care about his well-being and such a process will reassure them.
2.  Those who don’t know him and may treat him as though his trauma is contagious (it is actually a reminder that nothing in life is certain and that scares people). They may reject him or marginalize him by holding him at arm’s length not really trusting the integrity of his character and spiritual health or because they simply are uncomfortable facing the messy, painful realities of following Christ in a broken world. A process of restoration is important for this group because they need to see that painful loss is not the end – they need the reassurance from others that your friend is a trustworthy man in whom they can be confident.
3. Those who don’t know him but will gladly throw him under whatever self-righteous bus happens to pass by. I have never really understood the rationale of these except it seems to me that causing pain somehow momentarily eases their own pain or at least gives them someone else to focus on before the gravity of their own narcissism pulls them back into themselves. A process of restoration is important because it will combat the attempt to destroy your friends reputation and ministry that these people will attempt.
To enter a process of restoration (on the assumption that something has been lost and something has died) requires a group of leaders that your friend trusts and that others respect as leaders – people who can help him walk through any blind spots, or areas still immobilized by grief, or emotions that have yet to find good expression, or anger that still must be processed and expressed, or fears that try to limit his reach.  This group must have permission to probe and ask hard questions. They must name, with your friend, what the end of restoration looks like because they put their reputations on the line for your friend.  This is what the body of Christ looks like.
I urge you to put together such a proposal, ask your friend who he trusts, and then recruit these people to (1) hear his story completely; (2) define what restoration looks like for him; (3) walk out the process I just described; (4) affirm when the goals have been reached for both your friend and anyone else who asks; (5) so that his ministry in the body of Christ can be warmly received and released without fear of future failure stemming from some unresolved residual issue around the mitigating crisis.
That’s all I’ve got, he is fortunate to have a friend like you who has raised the subject.