Mar
13
Strategic Presence
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
In “Strategic Acceleration: Succeed at the Speed of Life”, Tony Jeary argues that leaders create impressions and perceptions that exist in the mind of every person they lead. Those impressions/perceptions s are created by the leader’s overall persona–which Jeary calls the leader’s Strategic Presence.
That Strategic Presence can be Positive and Negative and all leaders are constantly creating and presenting images of influence that produce both.
If leaders generate positive Strategic Presence, people will be more likely to support what they want, most of the time. However, if perceptions of leadership are negative people will substitute resistance for cooperation.
It’s either cooperation or resistance and there is not much middle ground between them. People are either for leaders or against them.
How is that we create an authentic, positive strategic presence?
Jeary argues that leaders can’t create an authentic presence if they see “strategic presence” as a strategy of manipulation. Followers can usually see through deception or disingenuousness in the leader. Phony personas are fragile and followers are not long deceived. Nevertheless, some leaders create perceptions that really don’t match their intent and understanding Strategic Presence will help such leaders minimize the possibility of being misunderstood.
What are the things about leadership that speaks the loudest about it?
What creates the perceptions that combine to produce Strategic Presence?
According to Jeary, there are two components that contribute to strategic presence: values and behavior.
Our values are established by what we believe to be right, wrong, true, false, acceptable, unacceptable, appropriate and inappropriate. Let’s face it, we have all developed deep, strong opinions about many things as we live our lives. Our opinions spring forth from your values and your values influence what we actually do.
Our values and beliefs in turn impact five behaviors, which Jeary says, create our Strategic Presence.
1. Work ethic
2. Integrity
3. Judgment
4. Courage
5. Willingness to help others
When I think of leaders who lead well, I recognize these five behaviors–though I might define “willingness to help others” as humility.
Dec
14
Cal Thomas on Movements
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Eric Swanson sent me a link to the editorial below by Cal Thomas. Cal hit on one of the secrets of spiritual movements–movements that bring real change. That secret is, of course, Jesus—and the kind of kingdom movements modeled after him.
What would be the implications if we “reJesus” our movement-building strategies as Cal suggests below?
(By the way chk out Frost and Hirsch’s new book:ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church. Can’t put it down.)
Jewish World Review Nov. 6, 2008 / 8 Mar-Cheshvan 5769
Religious Right, R.I.P.
When Barack Obama takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, he will do so in the 30th anniversary year of the founding of the so-called Religious Right. Born in 1979 and midwifed by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Religious Right was a reincarnation of previous religious-social movements that sought moral improvement through legislation and court rulings. Those earlier movements — from abolition (successful) to Prohibition (unsuccessful) — had mixed results.
Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren’t anywhere near as successful as those that focused on changing hearts. The four religious revivals, from the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s to the Fourth Great Awakening in the late 1960s and early ’70s, which touched America and instantly transformed millions of Americans (and American culture as a result), are testimony to that.
Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed.
The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?
I opt for trying something else.
|
|
Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question:
Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards?
Of course they do not.
Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?
Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others.
What is the answer, then, for conservative Evangelicals who are rightly concerned about the corrosion of culture, the indifference to the value of human life and the living arrangements of same- and opposite-sex couples?
The answer depends on the response to another question: do conservative Evangelicals want to feel good, or do they want to adopt a strategy that actually produces results? Clearly partisan politics have not achieved their objectives. Do they think they can succeed by committing themselves to 30 more years of the same?
If results are what conservative Evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose millions of conservative Evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to “love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans,” not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God’s love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?
Such a strategy could be more “transformational” than electing a new president, even the first president of color. But in order to succeed, such a strategy would not be led by charismatic figures, who would raise lots of money, be interviewed on Sunday talk shows, author books and make gobs of money.
God teaches in His Word that His power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness. He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow’s mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one’s self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice.
How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior “kingdom“?
Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow. By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results. If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics. (bold and italics above are mine–jay)
– Cal Thomas
Dec
12
Making Sense of Leadership
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
All movements in history have an adaptive, innovative quality. After all, movements always challenge the status quo—to make things happen, they have to push and probe and experiment.
If something is happening in your organization or movement, then you can expect to find leaders naturally asking the following questions (according to Making Sense of Leadership, by Esther Cameron and Mike Green):
- What’s not working?
- Are our members inspired, motivated and engaged? If not, why not?
- Are we connected to each other, to our purpose, and can we change when we need to?
- Are we completing key projects or efforts?
- Are we structured for the future?
In light of these questions, Cameron and Green suggest that organizations/movements ensure that someone leads in the following ways. As you read thru these descriptions, ask yourself. Do you have someone serving formally or informally in these roles?
Edgy Catalyser: Focuses on discomfort, asks difficult questions, spots dysfunction and resistance,
Visionary Motivator: Focuses on buy-in, articulates compelling picture of the future, motivates and inspires people.
Measured Connector: focuses on connectivity, reinforces what’s important and establishes a few simple rules, connects people and agendas.
Tenacious Implementer: focuses on projects, doggedly pursues the plan, holds people to account, leads by driving a project through to completion.
Thoughtful Architect: focuses on design, is principle architect and designer of the strategies, crafts seemingly disparate ideas into a way forward, scans the environment, sees what’s happening in the environment and creates an organizing framework.
Dec
10
Leaders as Initiators
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Reacting is based on instinct and intuition.
Responding requires thoughtfulness.
Initiating comes from imagination.
An atmosphere where people initiate can only come from a place where dreaming is encouraged. Leaders imagine a world that they would like to be a part of, a world worth fighting for. With this vision and all the emotion that gets stirred up in the heart, the leader begins to initiate. They see the issue or challenge that not everyone else sees and lead people to do something about it that was not done before.
Passion sparks initiative, a tremendous focus, belief, desire, and drive. - Seth Godin
Dec
4
The Role of Deliberate Practice in Leadership Development
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Malcolm Gladwell tells us in Outliers that when it comes to success, context is everything. Only by asking where a person comes from can we understand who succeeds and who doesn’t. Geoff Colvin would agree but there’s more.
In Talent is Overrated, Colvin rightly asserts that “great performance is in our hands far more than most of us ever suspected.”
When many people never become outstandingly good at what they do, no matter how many years they spend doing it, why do some people become excellent at what they do?
Colvin convincingly argues that in general, it’s not innate gifts or intelligence, but what researchers call deliberate practice that creates world-class performers.
A study by Anders Ericsson and his associates concluded that “the differences between expert performers and normal adults reflect a life-long period of deliberate effort to improve performance in a specific domain.”
Deliberate practice is not your normal practice.
It contains several important elements:
- it’s designed specifically to improve performance (usually with a teacher or coach),
- it can be repeated ad nauseam,
- feedback on results are continuously available,
- it’s highly demanding mentally (focus and concentration),
- and it isn’t much fun.
Add passion and the good news is that great performance is not reserved for a preordained few.
It is available to everyone.
If such deliberate practice produces great performance, how does this apply to leadership development—specifically to developing movement leaders? Is this how leaders are developed?
Colvin writes that organizations that apply the principles of great performance follow several major rules:
1. Understand that each person in the organization is not just doing a job, but is also being stretched and grown. The best organizations assign people to jobs to push them just beyond their current capabilities and build the skills that are most important. Organizations tend to assign people based on what they’re already good at, not what they need to work on.
2. Find ways to develop leaders within their jobs. One technique: short-term work assignments in which leaders take on an additional assignment outside their field of expertise.
3. Encourage their leaders to be active in their communities. Community leadership roles are opportunities for employees to practice skills that will be valuable at work.
4. Understand the critical roles of teachers and of feedback. At most organizations, nobody is in the role of teacher or coach. Employees aren’t told which skills will be most helpful to them and certainly aren’t told how to best develop them.
5. Identify promising performers early. A telling indicator is how interns get others to work with them when they have absolutely no authority.
6. Understand that people development works best through inspiration not authority.
7. Invest significant time, money, and energy in developing people. You don’t develop people on the cheap, and you don’t just bolt a development program onto existing HR procedures.
8. Make leadership development part of the culture. Developing leaders isn’t a program, it’s a way of living.
Dec
4
Why Leaders Fail
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
A recent article published in American Psychologist beautifully (Vugt, Hogan & Kaiser, 2008) argues that the modern culture of work sets leaders up to fail. Here are seven main reasons from this article for why leaders fail:
1. Strict hierarchies.
A large part of the problem with many modern organisations is their hierarchies. Leaders are at the top of the chain and are assumed to have all the answers, so they make most of the decisions. In reality knowledge and expertise is spread across people in organisations. But it’s the leaders who must be seen to lead and so followers get frustrated because their superior knowledge and expertise is frequently ignored.
This leads to:
2. Poor decision-making.
Leaders often don’t make any better decisions than followers, and frequently make worse ones. This is another consequence of strict hierarchies. Rather than setting up leaders to fail, it’s better to agree that leaders are not always the best people to make the decisions. Spreading the responsibility around, or using more participatory strategies for decision-making is often more effective.
But this isn’t the way things generally work, part of the problem is:
3. Huge pay differentials.
Followers often hate their leaders because of the huge difference in their salaries. It’s hard to feel any sympathy for someone whose pay is stratospheric (average CEO pay is 179 times that of average workers). And, because more pay means more status, leaders can quickly come to believe they really deserve the God-like status their pay suggests, resulting in their thinking they have all the answers and that they have the right to treat their employees less than fairly.
In the bosses’ defence, though, there are:
4. Impossible standards for leaders.
Perhaps because of the huge pay and incredible demands, followers expect their leaders to be almost superhuman. The leadership literature identifies a whole range of personal qualities thought important for a good leader. These include integrity, persistence, humility, competence, decisiveness and being able to inspire the troops. While a leader may be high on one or two of these, they are unlikely to have the full set.
Followers are almost bound to be disappointed by what is, after all, another fallible human who is just trying to:
5. Climb the greasy pole.
If the boss is nice to you, it’s a bonus, because it’s not required for them to get on in the organisation. Leaders are promoted by those higher than them, not those below them - so it’s only necessary for bosses to impress their bosses. This is a recipe for disaffection amongst the followers.
Talking of which, forget the psychology of leadership, what do we know about the:
6. Psychology of followership?
One of the best points Van Vugt et al. make is that although it’s leadership that has been most extensively studied and discussed, most of us end up as followers. So really the psychology of followership is more important than leadership.
What is it that makes us follow someone else?
And, more subversively: do we need leaders?
For example, some research shows that when people know what they’re doing, they resent having leadership imposed on them.
Generally, though, there’s little known about followership, and how to avoid:
7. Alienation.
As a result of the strict hierarchies, huge pay differentials, poor decision-making, greasy-pole climbing and feeling powerless to change huge bureaucracies, followers naturally develop feelings of alienation, and alienation kills motivation and productivity, along with any hope of job satisfaction.
Talk is cheap
By implication the way to rectify these perceived problems is to do the reverse.
Don’t instigate rigid hierarchies, discourage huge pay differentials, democratise decision-making and don’t set impossible standards for leaders.
Dec
3
Networks and Leadership
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
I recently found the series of posts by Steve Pratt on the Leadership Lessons of Web 2.0. I wanted to include his main points while making connections to our task of building and leading spiritual movements. But, take some time to peruse Steve’s excellent blog. Steve’s thinking, not only on leadership, but also on the role of emerging “media” will help us be better at our task.
Lesson #1: Give Up Control - The Power of One Vs. Many
Network Theory (illustrated so well by the web/internet) argues for the wisdom of the crowd. The web (Wikipedia, Facebook, blogs, Twitter, Open Source software, etc.) reflects an architecture of participation increasing known as crowdsourcing–the sharing and co-operation of ideas and innovation and leadership enacted on a global scale and in the hands of individuals. Pratt argues that the web discovered the massive power, knowledge, and efficiency that results from letting go of control and trusting the community to help solve problems and come up with better ideas.
As A Leader: The wisdom of the crowd is almost always greater than the wisdom of the leader, too.
Many leaders’ natural instincts tend towards control – they’ve likely reached ‘leader’ status because they have experience, they’re smart, and they’re good at solving problems and producing results. So it’s often very tough for a leader to actively give up control over an idea, a project, or a problem and place that responsibility entirely with his or her team. (Pratt)
When leaders give up control and trust the wisdom of teams, they move from being a manager (someone who solves a problem–or supports pre-decided solutions to problems–and then forces other to execute those solutions) to being a leader (someone who helps a team work more effectively by releasing the reins, by developing cooperation and trust, and by kindling the team’s inherent passion.)
Lesson #2: Engagement
Network Theory. At the heart of network theory is interactivity; it’s all about dialogue, a conversation, and exchange. At its heart, a network is about engagement, connection. Links. Hubs. Webs. When networks are functioning, a community is truly engaged–creating astonishing value and fueling more and more participation.
As A Leader: Much like a web community, a successful team in an organization is an engaged team. Taking lessons from Web 2.0, Pratt suggests the following methods to increase engagement on your team.
* Make meetings two-way conversations.
* Don’t make decisions in a silo – solicit input from the team.
* One of the best pieces of advice on starting conversations on a blog is to ask questions of your audience – this is also the best way to begin to engage your team.
* Seek information, don’t tell them the solution.
A leader cannot give a team a one-way step-by-step instruction manual and expect buy-in and passion. However, if a leader creates an environment where new ideas are welcomed, new ideas are implemented, and successes are championed, teams feel valued and more confident in using their knowledge and expertise. Give them autonomy and empowerment, and the sky is the limit to the value they will create.(Pratt)
A team is engaged when they show up early and stay late; when they constantly suggest new ideas; when they all feel a sense of ownership; when they feel valued.
Leadership Lesson #3: Be A Valuable Community Member
Network Theory: Steve Pratt uses the following scenario to describe the “community” nature of networks. (Since I’m a terrible at making comments and answering comments at blogs, I’m learning something here.)
Take the example of two different types of bloggers. Jim has a great looking blog with very compelling content. Sandra has a basic template blog with relatively average content. BUT, Sandra has a healthy stream of visitors to her blog every day, while Jim is quickly fading into obscurity.
Why does the mediocre blog win the race? Because Sandra participates in online communities that are related to the subject matter of her blog. She comments on other blogs, participates in forum discussions, and generously helps other bloggers where she can. As a result, Sandra is seen as a valuable community member. Other community members have gotten to know her and, as such, visit her site regularly.
On the flip side, Jim knows he’s got a great blog, but can’t be bothered with stooping to comment on other, inferior blogs. He knows everything about his subject matter and adamantly believes that once people ‘find’ his blog, the crowds will come pouring in.
Unfortunately for Jim, they won’t.
As A Leader: You can’t just hire people and let them loose. And you can’t force people to listen to you just because you’re the boss. Leaders can’t assume they are the ‘hub’ of the community. Leaders have to earn loyalty.
Pratt suggests the following ways to be valued community members as a leader:
* So be generous.
* Help out your team members when they need it.
* Get to know them.
* Support them when they’re having troubles and champion them when they succeed.
* Teach them.
* Coach them.
* Support them.
* Take an interest in their interests.
Leadership Lesson # 4: Permission to Fail
Network Theory: In networks, communities learn from their mistakes and get stronger, faster, and better over time. Networks police themselves. For example, on Wikipedia as an example, not every entry is 100% factually correct, but the community’s passionate, engaged users have learned how to correct most of the mistakes themselves. As a result, Wikipedia has assumed a increasingly trusted position, while Encyclopedias have become outdated.
As A Leader: Pratt writes:
In order to build trust and full engagement with your team, you need to be okay with failure, too. If a team tries something that’s different than the way YOU would have done it and it doesn’t work, you can’t panic and madly reach for the reins again so you can re-assert control. Just as you trusted the team with the initial idea and execution, you need to trust that the team will learn from its mistakes and get stronger and better from each failure.
Naturally, as a leader, you’ll need to develop ways to let people ‘flag as inappropriate’ situations. Some of these you’ll have to solve. Others you can allow the team to solve. As a team learns to solve its own problems, it gets stronger, faster, and better.
Nov
4
Equipping Your Key Volunteers
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
We’ll never build movements apart from building multiplying leaders. And all leaders begin as key volunteers. Don Simmons, an expert on church volunteers, argues that there are six elements involved in the equipping process.
1. Training
Training isn’t telling and listening isn’t learning. Effective training includes delivering information, but also practice, feedback and hands-on application. Training happens best when it’s just in place and just in time.
2. Affirmation
Affirmation is NOT saying ‘Thank You.’ It is about affirming people for who they are, not what they do.
Affirmation, says Simmons, is about valuing a person’s presence, not performance.
3. Feedback
“Authentic, love-based feedback can do much to develop servants into strong leaders,” writes Simmons. Avoiding feedback is a big mistake; it communicates something in and of itself–for we cannot not communicate.
Feedback comes in three forms: compliments, criticism and critique. Compliments are like a child’s bubbles–pretty, but difficult to grasp and use again. Criticism is like a weapon at which volunteers will pull away from.
Offering a critique, however, is the balance between the two when delivered in a grace-filled, timely manner. A good critique can be used to influence change for the next time and leads to proper self-examination.
4. Evaluation
Don’t confuse evaluation with feedback. Evaluations are done in teams and need a guide or measurement for success. Effective evaluations measure success of goals achieved, but are often skipped because of time. “We get too pushed for speed and neglect evaluation,” warns Simmons.
5. Recognition
While affirmation is about appreciating people for their presence and willingness, recognition is about performance.
Simmons says that “Affirmation honors people for WHO they are. Recognition acknowledges people for WHAT they do. Recognitions says, ‘Thanks, we noticed you served well!’”
One of the principle reasons the people leave their volunteer positions is that they feel unappreciated and not recognized.
The best recognition comes not from “large group recognition” events. The best kind of recognition often comes from a written note or the kind of phone call that is individual and connects to the person’s service specifically.
6. Reflection
Reflection is the ‘remembering’ part of service that looks intently into the meaning of the act. Simmons says that reflection always asks two simple questions: So what? and Now what?
Leaders must help volunteers reflect on what their service means to the bigger picture. They must constantly help people connect the dots, linking their good deeds to the good news of Jesus Christ.
Helping volunteers reflect helps them reconnect to the larger Kingdom purposes. (Source: Transforming Volunteers by K. Petty)
Oct
21
The Serving Leader
Filed Under Humility | Leave a Comment
I was jogging today, listening to a tape series entitled Lead Like Jesus. One interview captured me. Ken Blanchard was discussing the book, The Serving Leader: 5 Powerful Actions that will Transform your Team, Your Business, and Your Community. In that interview, Ken Jennings, one of the authors, suggested five simple leadership actions:
Upend the Pyramid
Serving leaders turn the organizational pyramid upside down. They truly see themselves at the bottom–serving, upholding, equipping the members of their organization. In many ways, they become their people’s first assistant. They see themselves as staff to their subordinates.
Raise the Bar
Serving leaders raise the bar of expectations on performance. They are tough primarily on whom they select as part of their senior team. Serving leaders pick leaders who can make other leaders. They want leaders who can disciple, who can build others. Technical competence in leaders means little–if those leaders can’t produce other leaders.
Blaze the Trail
Serving leaders get obstacles out of the way so people can run fast. They’re great teachers and story-tellers. They tell kinds of stories that help others navigate the tough paths ahead of them. They tell people stories of how to succeed and then they get all the stuff out of the way so they can succeed.
Build on Strength
Serving leaders make quilts. Quilters bring together rich, beautifully designed patterns and sew them together into a strong, beautiful quilt. Similarly, leaders bring together gifted people and knit them into a strong, beautiful organization. As strength finders, serving leaders realize that we’re not in this world to compete with each other. We’re here to complete each other.
Run To A Great Purpose
Serving leaders articulate a great purpose. They make sure that every day they talk about the great purpose to which their organization is committed. Leaders are clear about what they are doing and they show how each person is critical to that great purpose. Bad leaders make people feel unimportant or unneeded.
Oct
13
Leading Clever People
Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Who most determines your company’s success?
Clever people—employees whose knowledge and skills enable them to produce disproportionate value for your firm. Think the pharmaceutical researcher who formulates a new drug, or the programmer who creates a new piece of code. Their single innovation may bankroll their entire organization for a decade.
To make sure clever people do their best work at your company, you must harness their talents.
But that isn’t easy: Clever people don’t want to be led. They don’t care about titles or promotions. And they’re easily bored.
What to do?
Goffee and Jones suggest leading this crew differently.
Be a benevolent guardian, not a traditional boss—by protecting them from complex rules and politics.
Create a safe environment where they can experiment—and fail.
Respect their expertise while quietly demonstrating your own.
To increase clever people’s value—and prevent attrition:
* Reduce administrative distractions. Protect clever people from rules and politics associated with big-budget activities.
For example, at a newspaper, the editor lets an investigative reporter skip editorial meetings. In a big consumer goods company, a leader filters requests for information from the head office so a consumer profiler can experiment with a new marketing plan.
* Maintain diversity of ideas. Avoid centralized management structures that stifle innovative thinking.
Example:
Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche encourages the clever people in its three companies to pursue different projects as they see fit. CEO Franz Humer tells them, “You do what you want [at Genentech], and we will do what we want at Roche, and in five years’ time we will know. Sometimes you will be right and sometimes we will be right.”
* Make it safe to fail. Effective leaders know that for every successful product, many will fail. Ideally, the successes will more than recover the costs of the failures. By helping your clever people live with their failures, you boost the chances of more successes.
Example:
When three of Glaxo’s high-tech antibiotics all failed in the final stages of clinical trial, chairman Sir Richard Sykes sent letters to the team leaders. He thanked them for their hard work but also their decision to kill the drugs. He then encouraged them to move on to the next challenge.
* Let clever people pursue private efforts. These efforts may generate new business opportunities for your firm.
Example:
Google lets employees spend one day a week on Googlettes—their own start-up ideas. Result? Innovation at a speed that puts large bureaucratic organizations to shame. For instance, the Google-affiliated social networking Web site Orkut began as a Googlette.
* Demonstrate you’re an expert in your own right. Show how your expertise complements or supports your clever people’s expertise. You’ll establish credibility with them.
Example:
A marketing director at a brewer knew little about traditional brewing techniques. But he could quote details about his company’s sales performance. His clear mastery of the business side gave him authority and credibility, so brewers respected his product development opinions.