As leaders encounter entirely new kinds of challenges and responsibilities, they find that they have the strength and resources to meet these challenges. For example, some first-time leaders ultimately learn that they have a gift for leading and inspiring others. Others find that they're especially talented at gauging others' motivations and values. Each time you make something happen as a leader—whether it's shaping your group's culture in positive ways, helping someone master a new task, or assembling a top-notch team—leaders expand their abilities. They become more seasoned, experienced, and confident leaders, and have a sharper awareness of their own strengths and areas for improvement. Not only do they learn more about themselves as they progress in a leadership role; they also learn more about organizational life in general.
The command and control techniques of previous generations are increasingly ineffective. Today’s leaders must be forward thinking, possess moral courage, and skilled in the art of diplomacy. As a Trustee, I can recall several joint board meetings when the Pastor wasn’t present and it was difficult to keep everyone on task. I experienced similar instances onboard ship when the Commanding Officer and Executive Officer were ashore. The changing structure of organizations, the growth of alliances between organizations, and the changing nature of work itself calls for new approaches to leadership. Paul suggested a new approach in Galatians 5:22, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith…” By faith, Paul refers to something more than the knowledge of the earthly life of Jesus. He means a commitment of an individual to the way of life Jesus exemplified. This approach has less to do with formal authority and the power to control, and more to do with using situational, strategic, and ethical leadership skills to keep groups of people who may not report to you aligned with an overarching purpose.
The most Important Ingredient: Ethics
Ethical Leadership includes a variety of elements. Beliefs regarding ethics involves taking into account the purpose of the action taken, the consequences to self and others, and the moral standard by which the action is measured. This doesn’t mean ignoring profit and loss, productions costs, and so forth but rather concern for the rational measures of performance coupled with the recognition of the importance of treating people right every day. “Moral leadership is about distinguishing right from wrong and doing right, seeking the just, the honest, the good, and the right conduct in its practice” (Daft, 1999, p. 369).
Whether it involves judgment based on character or legal infractions, ethics has always been a popular topic. When leaders wonder whether their conduct is ethical, they need to ask ‘What would I think if someone else did it?’ Paul believed that the law identifies the flaws in a person's character but it does not remove them. Paul writes, "…whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4). Compassion is grounded in a larger understanding of our relationship to God and one another. When we define Christianity as a list of do’s and don'ts, we restrict ourselves from enjoying an intimate relationship with God. We get caught up in rules as if God were waiting to catch us out of line when He’s really waiting to pick us up when we fall. Christ does not make demands on us that limit our self-direction therefore we should not be inclined to judge others in that manner. In his Virtue-Centered Theory of Judging, Lawrence Solum argued “theories of fairness are prior to theories of justice (2003, p. 178). True Christianity sees the role of leadership as based on love and grace.
We have all known people whose character was not consistent with their personality. However, character is of higher importance than personality. Malphurs (2003) maintained “A Christian Leader emphasizes godly character” (p. 19). The organization will hold people accountable for their behavior (character) but not for their personality traits. If the ‘fruit’ of the spirit (love, joy, peace, etc) and ‘fruit’ of the flesh (adultery, hatred, envy, etc) are the outcomes, then our character is the means towards that outcome. We must seek to do the right thing.
Character is our commitment to doing the right thing, which is why we should focus on character development. In 1 Timothy 4:7 Paul urges Timothy “…exercise thyself rather unto godliness.” Character and self-discipline are a leader’s moral strength to behave according to proper values. The difficulty arises not in knowing what is right but rather doing what is right. Look for organizations where the leaders have clearly defined, articulate, and exemplify the organizational values. “Leadership is doing the right thing even when we do not feel like it, perhaps especially when we do not feel like it” (Hunter, 2004, p. 145).
There are numerous ways to assist emerging leaders in ethical development. I would start with leading by example. It’s difficult to appreciate the pressures on a leader unless you have had that position. The best way to assist up-and-coming leaders whether they’re your peers or subordinates is to let them see Christ working through you. “The movement away from command and control leadership has brought new leadership styles that are more democratic and coach-like” (Lassiter, 2001). Terms such as shared or servant leadership are increasingly used to describe some of these ways of interacting.
Another way to develop ethical behavior is to develop a personal creed – that which defines who you are, what your goals in life are, and how you intend to live your life. Kouzes and Posner (2002) observed “When you clarify the principles that will govern your life and the ends that you will seek, you give purpose to your daily decisions” (p. 394). An ethical leader has one personality. Whether at home or at work, there is only one set of principles that guides his behavior.
As an Engineering Training Team leader onboard a Guided Missile Frigate, I worked hard to build trust within the team. Everything was smooth until Petty Officer Johnson joined. Several members suggested that he lacked experience and he did not collaborate very well. The group went out for a "team" lunch, and left Johnson behind. I was shocked and disappointed. Johnson was extremely competent and showed passion for his work. I met individually with all team members, including Johnson, to allow them to communicate their concerns. I actively listened to what's being said. By better understanding the concerns of the group I was able get to the root causes of the problem. One method that helps make teams innovative is to “Make sure that the members of the group are communicating with one another.” (Biolos, 1996, p. 1).
The Most Important Lessons: Situations
“A Christian leader is a servant with the credibility and capabilities to influence people in a particular context to pursue their God-given direction” (Malphurs, 2003, 131). The same person can be a successful leader in one situation but fail in another. It is unlikely that there is a single set of abilities and characteristics that can be found in all leaders. It’s not that the characteristics are not important, but rather, the essential characteristics of the leader vary depending on the circumstances. The requirements to be a successful Naval Officer, for example, would differ from those of a Elementary School Principal or Sales Manager. McGregor (2006) suggested “…that it is more fruitful to consider leadership as a relationship between the leader and the situation than as a universal pattern of characteristics possessed by certain people” (p. 253).
The Situational Leadership Theory developed by Hersey and Blanchard focuses on the characteristics of followers as the important element of the situation, and consequently of determining effective leader behavior. Yukl (2002) observed “Major situational variables include the characteristics of followers, the nature of the work performed by the leader’s unit, the type of organizations, and the nature of the external environment” (p. 13). In other words, subordinates vary in readiness levels therefore leader behavior should be influenced by the factors that influence the entire situation.
Daft (1999) summarized the relationship between leader style and follower readiness into four categories: telling, selling, participatory, and delegating. Telling is very directive, selling involves explaining decisions, participatory is sharing ideas to facilitate decision making, and delegating is a style that affords very little direction and support. (p. 99 – 102). As leaders, our professional identity will transform in relation to the skills and abilities of the group as well as outside influences. This means that we look at the world from a different perspective.
As the Material and Logistics Officer for a Destroyer Squadron my areas of responsibility included two major departments on each of our six ships: Engineering and Supply. At the end of every month I experienced difficulty in getting summary reports from the Engineers but the Supply reports were always right on-time. However, when the ships were underway the Engineering departments functioned admirably while the Supply departments were somewhat shoddy. I had to adjust my style of leadership when dealing with the Department Heads as the situations changed. For the monthly summary reports I used delegation with the Supply Officers but a more directive approach with the Engineers but the reverse during the operational phases. From a naval perspective, the Engineers were very operationally and technically proficient while the Supply Officers were very business oriented.
When we become a manager, we enter the role with our own expectations of what our new job will involve. Often, those expectations differ from the job's real requirements. In addition, the various people with whom we'll work—our direct reports, supervisors, and peers—have their own expectations regarding our role—and some of their expectations may conflict with ours. Every situation we encounter will involve different skill sets. Each situation underscores the extent to which problem solving is central to the work of leadership. In the age of teams, leaders don’t solve problems alone. They must operate from a business discipline that will enable a group of workers to frame a problem and agree on the most efficient way to solve it. Yet as basic as this task is, many organizations don’t solve problems using processes that result in optimal solutions.
An effective team is diverse with differing skills that trust each other enough to challenge one another’s work. Members don’t always agree but they should communicate and have a general openness to new ideas. There should be enough differences in viewpoints that they have something interesting to say to each other. Biolos (1996) maintained “…a homogeneous group whose members are prone only to agree with one another will typically not promote high levels of creativity” (p. 14).
Broken barriers can also have a positive influence on the organization. Entrepreneur Herman Cain discussed this very topic during the Executive Leadership Banquet during the 2005 residency at Regent University. He stated that the purpose of leadership was to “remove barriers” that prevent followers from succeeding. London (2001) listed numerous barriers that not only prevent followership development but leadership development as well. Among others, he listed discrimination, sexual harassment, lack of confidence, Role conflict (e. g., being a boss and colleague), inadequate experience/training for a key assignment, disapproval by others (especially public criticism), uncertainty about the future (e.g., because of a sudden change), and lack of information. (p. 218). Some of these barriers can sneak up slowly giving leaders time to adjust to the situation, as well as time to avoid the barrier thereby increasing the problem. Other barriers may occur suddenly and have detrimental affects on the organization. The important task is that leaders learn how to recognize and deal with these barriers!
The Indispensable Quality: Strategy
People often hunger for something greater than themselves. “Work without purpose (even if it takes great skill) can become mindless, heartless drudgery” (Woolfe, 2002, p. 24). People must have a common goal to work towards. Some call it vision, some call it foresight. Which ever the case, it involves leading with a purpose. Leaders who offer that will never have a shortage of followers. Purpose forced the fisherman to drop their nets and follow Jesus. Purpose compelled the woman at the well to drop her water pot and spread the good news. “Your passion for something is an indication of what you find worthy in and of itself” (Kouzes and Posner, 2002, p. 112).
The purpose of each prophet was that each in his own way would keep an entire nation on task. Moses’ purpose was to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt to the edge of the Promised Land. Joshua’s purpose was to lead them in and Solomon’s was to build a temple, not for his own glory, but for the glory of a higher purpose. Woolfe (2002) maintained “When a leader is dedicated to a purpose, and when all the ‘troops’ see that dedication is unwavering and ‘for real,’ great things happen (p. 27). Strategic leadership involves not only creating a vision but articulating and executing that vision as well.
Strategic Leadership involves the relationship of the external environment to choices about vision, mission, strategy, and their implementation. The organizational vision reflects the environment and works in concert with the organization’s mission (values, purpose, etc.). Strategy provides directions for translating the vision into action and is the basis for developing methods for implementation. Strategic leadership theory explains how changes in the organization’s environment affects the relative power of leaders. Yukl (2002) identified three factors that affect the ability of leaders to influence the performance of the organization: 1) The evolutionary stage of the organization; 2) Political power within the organization; and 3) The leader’s time in office (p. 348 – 352). Simply stated, the opportunity of a leader’s vision to impact the performance of an organization is greatly affected by historical factors such as the evolution of the organization, the leader’s level of influence, and his executive tenure.
Strategic Leadership involves the relationship of the external environment to choices about vision, mission, strategy, and their implementation. The organizational vision reflects the environment and works in concert with the organization’s mission (values, purpose, etc.). Strategy provides directions for translating the vision into action and is the basis for developing methods for implementation. Strategic leadership theory explains how changes in the organization’s environment affects the relative power of leaders. Yukl (2002) identified three factors that affect the ability of leaders to influence the performance of the organization: 1) The evolutionary stage of the organization; 2) Political power within the organization; and 3) The leader’s time in office (p. 348 – 352). Simply stated, the opportunity of a leader’s vision to impact the performance of an organization is greatly affected by historical factors such as the evolution of the organization, the leader’s level of influence, and his executive tenure.
When I reported as the Chief Engineer aboard USS SAMUEL B. ROBERTS (FFG 58), I asked the Commanding Officer, my mentor and boss, where he saw the department going. He made a vague comment and turned the question around, and ask—"Where do you see the department going?" I became somewhat puzzled with his response. He was purposefully being vague and not answering my question because it was my job, as the Chief Engineer, to create the vision and direction for my department.
I should have been thinking about where I saw the department going, what it will take to get there, and how it fits into the Command’s overall strategy. The conclusion I arrived at became my most important motivational tool, and helped to align resources and to keep people focused on the tasks at hand. “The most important role of visions in organizational life is to give focus to human energy.” (Kouzes and Posner, 2002, p. 130). An effective vision is a leader’s most important motivational tool; you’ll refer to it time and again, explaining its benefits and relevance to various audiences as you work to keep them on board. Maxwell (1993) asserts “People do not follow a dream in itself. They follow the leader who has that dream and the ability to communicate it effectively. Therefore, vision in the beginning will make a leader, but for that vision to grow and demand a following, the leader must take responsibility for it” (p. 141).
More Than Logic
Leadership is not just about logic and reason. They have their place but there is much more to it than that. Acknowledging that it is not all rational is a major step toward accepting that there is something more important – people’s feelings and emotions. Kippenberger (2002) maintained that “Leaders need to understand that at the heart of what they are trying to do is getting the best out of people.” (p. 113).
To gain and keep the commitment of followers, the leader/follower relationship has to be nurtured. “Leadership is a relationship between those who aspire to lead and those who choose to follow.” (Kouzes & Posner, 2002, p. 20). Diplomacy requires that we not only know and control our own emotions but also learn how to recognize and handle other people’s emotions as well. What a leader achieves today depends on the people they are leading, and the best way to succeed is to get them to give their best. “The job of a leader is to achieve a goal – that is the end, leading people is the means” (Kippenberger, 2002, p. 114).
Communicating Authenticity
Authenticity is hard to develop and harder to coach. “Since authenticity is a way of being as a leader rather than things you do as a leader, few instructions are outwardly helpful.” (Pearce, 2003, p. 11). Responsibility for authenticity, then, belongs to the leader. Through a combination of introspection and discipline, they have to find their authentic voice and amplify it so that it resonates with their followers.
One of the most difficult tasks for those who would measure and evaluate leadership is the task of trying to look at the elements that make up leadership. One way to look at these elements is to suggest that a leader has various skills, also has or exercises a distinctive style and, still more elusive, has various qualities that may be pronounced. By skill, I mean the capacity to do something well. Something that is learnable and can be improved, such as speaking or negotiating or planning. Most leaders need to have technical skills (such as writing well); human relations skills, the capacity to supervise, inspire, build coalition and so on; and also what might be called conceptual skills – the capacity to play with ideas, shrewdly seek advice and forge grand strategy. Skills can be examined. Skills can be taught. And skills plainly make up an important part of leadership capability. Skills alone, however, cannot guarantee success.
Autocratic vs Consultative Leadership
When one speaks about Leadership styles, there are several different models to choose from. However, whatever the model it is never an easy process to implement or practice a particular style of leadership and hope to get the results that was intended. "Leadership" per se is both an Art as well as a Science. The one key element that all leaders should possess is their ability to communicate their visions and values to the people they are leading and to get the people to buy into their visions and values.
The key concern is whether the leader is getting his people to 'buy-in' or is he trying to 'sell' his vision. When you want to 'sell' you need to be convincing and give the impression that the ideas you have are inherently beneficial to the people and therefore they should accept it. This usually is a challenging dilemma as sometimes the people you are leading might not quite see the relevance of your visions and values and may not be forthcoming in accepting them. However, if you are able to create the circumstances whereby the people feel that what you possess are important visions and values, and that by they buying into these it would benefit them well, you have created a winning formula to lead your people successfully.
If you want your people to 'buy-in' rather than 'sell' your visions and values you need to pay meticulous attention to the type of leadership style that you portray. I personally find that in this context, leadership can be classified either as autocratic leadership style or a consultative leadership style.
Autocratic Leadership Style
Autocratic leadership is one which is based on a clear top-down approach. The leader is in a position of absolute power and he can implement and do whatever he wants to get things done. Usually in an autocratic leadership environment there will not be much discussion of affairs as the people find that their voices does not carry weight in the problem solving and decision making aspects of their organization.
An autocratic leader will be the driver of his people and without his leadership the organization will not be able to function. Usually autocratic leaders like to delegate their power but at the same time having a stranglehold on all those subordinate to them. They also like to coach their people to do things the way they want it and may create a 'my way or the highway' kind of working environment. The impression one gets in an autocratic leadership style is that the leader is seen as some kind of megalomaniacal tyrant to be feared and followed.
Although there is some truth to this, autocratic leadership is not necessarily a bad style. In fact there are some circumstances where an autocratic leadership should be the preferred style. One instance where autocratic leadership style may be applicable is when the organization is new and the people are inexperience and thus look up to the leadership to guide them in their work. Another instance is if the people are disengaged in their job and have no clear direction and there is vast internal politicking of the kind that is disruptive and causes an emotional strain in the way the organization is being managed. Here a powerful autocratic leadership might help to re-align the organization to its original position and get the people back in shape.
The downside of all this is that an extended period of engaging in an autocratic style of leadership can strain the relationship between the leader and the people in that the people might find the leader to be so task-oriented that they may develop a sense of resentment. Further, when the leader becomes too autocratic he may forget that he is dealing with humans and not machines and might create the impression that the people are just part of the machinery. This can create a sense of dissonance in the work environment which will not be beneficial to the leader, the people and the organization in the long run. Take the cue from Dwight D. Eisenhower who said: "You do not lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership"
Consultative Leadership
Consultative leadership is the way to go in the long run. Management Guru, Kenneth Blanchard said: "The key to successful leadership today is influence, not authority". This is the very nature of consultative leadership in that you the leader will have to develop the ability to influence people rather than impose on them your authority as is the case in an autocratic leadership style. In consultative leadership style, the leader will engage the subordinates efficaciously in the decision making and problem solving process. This kind of leadership style endorses the fact that the leader is indeed the servant of the people he is leading. The people have the power to engage in consultation with the leader and are able to make suggestions which they know would be taken into serious contemplation by the leader.
Further, consultative leadership style endorses the concept of empowerment rather than delegation. When a leader empowers, he is basically giving the person concern a freehand to do what is necessary. The leader may draw up certain parameters for the person to work within and to ensure that he is kept in the loop by the person. In a consultative leadership style, the leader still has strong visions and concrete values that he can communicate with his people. However unlike the autocratic leader, the concept underlying consultative leadership style is one of administering a people-oriented kind of management rather than a task-oriented one.
The consultative leader's role will continuously involve the development of his people and this is done by being kept aware of the needs and wants of the people. The only way this information can be gotten is by having constant dialogue with the people and clarifying the goals and aspirations that you have and synchronizing this with their personal visions. When the people get to experience this state of being they will be more prepared to 'buy-in' the visions and values of the leader.
In the long haul, consultative leadership will be the most appropriate one. As the organization mature, the leader has to learn to move away from delegation to empowerment. When the people become more experienced and participative in their professional relationship with you the leader, you will have to play the role of a mentor to them. Consultative leadership style will invoke in you the ability to find out the strengths and weaknesses of the individuals under your authority and allow you the opportunity to nurture the best out of them. The parting quote by Elisabeth Dole seems apt to be mentioned here where she said: "What you always do before you make a decision is consult. The best public policy is made when you are listening to people who are going to be impacted. Then, once policy is determined, you call on them to help you sell it".
The key concern is whether the leader is getting his people to 'buy-in' or is he trying to 'sell' his vision. When you want to 'sell' you need to be convincing and give the impression that the ideas you have are inherently beneficial to the people and therefore they should accept it. This usually is a challenging dilemma as sometimes the people you are leading might not quite see the relevance of your visions and values and may not be forthcoming in accepting them. However, if you are able to create the circumstances whereby the people feel that what you possess are important visions and values, and that by they buying into these it would benefit them well, you have created a winning formula to lead your people successfully.
If you want your people to 'buy-in' rather than 'sell' your visions and values you need to pay meticulous attention to the type of leadership style that you portray. I personally find that in this context, leadership can be classified either as autocratic leadership style or a consultative leadership style.
Autocratic Leadership Style
Autocratic leadership is one which is based on a clear top-down approach. The leader is in a position of absolute power and he can implement and do whatever he wants to get things done. Usually in an autocratic leadership environment there will not be much discussion of affairs as the people find that their voices does not carry weight in the problem solving and decision making aspects of their organization.
An autocratic leader will be the driver of his people and without his leadership the organization will not be able to function. Usually autocratic leaders like to delegate their power but at the same time having a stranglehold on all those subordinate to them. They also like to coach their people to do things the way they want it and may create a 'my way or the highway' kind of working environment. The impression one gets in an autocratic leadership style is that the leader is seen as some kind of megalomaniacal tyrant to be feared and followed.
Although there is some truth to this, autocratic leadership is not necessarily a bad style. In fact there are some circumstances where an autocratic leadership should be the preferred style. One instance where autocratic leadership style may be applicable is when the organization is new and the people are inexperience and thus look up to the leadership to guide them in their work. Another instance is if the people are disengaged in their job and have no clear direction and there is vast internal politicking of the kind that is disruptive and causes an emotional strain in the way the organization is being managed. Here a powerful autocratic leadership might help to re-align the organization to its original position and get the people back in shape.
The downside of all this is that an extended period of engaging in an autocratic style of leadership can strain the relationship between the leader and the people in that the people might find the leader to be so task-oriented that they may develop a sense of resentment. Further, when the leader becomes too autocratic he may forget that he is dealing with humans and not machines and might create the impression that the people are just part of the machinery. This can create a sense of dissonance in the work environment which will not be beneficial to the leader, the people and the organization in the long run. Take the cue from Dwight D. Eisenhower who said: "You do not lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership"
Consultative Leadership
Consultative leadership is the way to go in the long run. Management Guru, Kenneth Blanchard said: "The key to successful leadership today is influence, not authority". This is the very nature of consultative leadership in that you the leader will have to develop the ability to influence people rather than impose on them your authority as is the case in an autocratic leadership style. In consultative leadership style, the leader will engage the subordinates efficaciously in the decision making and problem solving process. This kind of leadership style endorses the fact that the leader is indeed the servant of the people he is leading. The people have the power to engage in consultation with the leader and are able to make suggestions which they know would be taken into serious contemplation by the leader.
Further, consultative leadership style endorses the concept of empowerment rather than delegation. When a leader empowers, he is basically giving the person concern a freehand to do what is necessary. The leader may draw up certain parameters for the person to work within and to ensure that he is kept in the loop by the person. In a consultative leadership style, the leader still has strong visions and concrete values that he can communicate with his people. However unlike the autocratic leader, the concept underlying consultative leadership style is one of administering a people-oriented kind of management rather than a task-oriented one.
The consultative leader's role will continuously involve the development of his people and this is done by being kept aware of the needs and wants of the people. The only way this information can be gotten is by having constant dialogue with the people and clarifying the goals and aspirations that you have and synchronizing this with their personal visions. When the people get to experience this state of being they will be more prepared to 'buy-in' the visions and values of the leader.
In the long haul, consultative leadership will be the most appropriate one. As the organization mature, the leader has to learn to move away from delegation to empowerment. When the people become more experienced and participative in their professional relationship with you the leader, you will have to play the role of a mentor to them. Consultative leadership style will invoke in you the ability to find out the strengths and weaknesses of the individuals under your authority and allow you the opportunity to nurture the best out of them. The parting quote by Elisabeth Dole seems apt to be mentioned here where she said: "What you always do before you make a decision is consult. The best public policy is made when you are listening to people who are going to be impacted. Then, once policy is determined, you call on them to help you sell it".
The Key to Organizational Success
There is a growing recognition in the business world that a good leadership strategy can significantly improve business results. At the same time, good leaders seem to be rare things these days. According to recent study, it has been found that recruiting and retaining qualified leaders has become crucial challenge facing businesses today and in the future.
However, organizations are feeling the pressure of implementing a leadership strategy quickly and effectively. However, they seem to be faced with three interlinked difficulties such as:
1. They lack an understanding of which factors constitute an effective leadership strategy.
2. They remain unclear on the impact of leadership on organizational performance.
3. They are not doing enough to encourage leadership development internally.
Now first let us understand what we mean by Effective Leadership.
Effective Leadership is a self-sustaining organizational practice that transcends the personalities of individual leaders. The key to establishing a sound leadership approach is to identify which factors make up an effective leadership strategy and to understand how each of these factors affects overall results.
Does Effective Leadership influence organizational success?
Yes, Effective Leadership with its top seven factors does assign positive influence on organizational results. These top seven factors are:
1. Initiating and Managing change: Organization must encourage a culture of change leadership internally in order to assert leadership externally. Today's turbulent organizational environment is characterized by a continuous race between competing businesses. Therefore, organizations must seize existing opportunities and create new ones in order to thr8ive. To reap the full benefits of change, they must also need to have a systematic change management approach that will enable them to react with agility and speed to changes within and outside the organization.
2. Communicating a Common Vision: In order to lead their organization successfully, leaders needs to have a clear vision (See Exhibit 1: Dynamic pattern of organizational structure) for the firms and must also possess the ability to think strategically. Recent survey reports indicates, "Creating an environment of shared values and goals" has been one of the most important factors in improving employee productivity and financial results. Also a well-developed personal vision and the ability to sell that vision is the key skill needed for effective leadership in today's evolving economy. In order to create a culture of common goals, regular communication at all levels of the organization is required.
3. Empowering others to lead: Good leaders today understand that in the present economy, creating a culture of leadership and empowering others to make decisions are essential for long-term business success. The study shows that it is more important for an organization to have in place the systems and processes that enable leadership to emerge naturally and that is those systems that often explain why some organization outperform their competitors throughout the terms of many different CEO's and why some leaders can succeed in one organization and final in the next. The sharing of the leadership role is essential in the fragile and uncertain times that leaders face and will continue to face in the future. Teamwork and "Cooperative leadership" (See Exhibit 2: Leadership attribution) can only increase in importance as a way of staying ahead of the competition. Leadership through teamwork also works to keep people, processes and ideas to check and to prevent a single personality from making foolish or irrational decisions.
4. Global Sensitivity: Effective leadership in the present economy must adopt a global perspective and must integrate global experience and cultural sensitivity. There is no escaping the trend towards globalization, which is presently taking place within organizations. However, organization needs to be ready to face competition locally and form global. In order to be well equipped to deal with the competition, they need to recognize the importance of having qualified leaders who are capable of applying a global perspective in their business dealings and are able to approach issues from different angles.
5. Cultivating Relationships: The ability to cultivate and manage relationships both within and outside the organization is an integral aspect of effective leadership. Forming and maintaining relationship with employees, customers and suppliers is essential to safe guard the interests of the organization. The ability to network effectively with relevant parties is essential because it maximizes an organizations chance of capturing new business opportunities in the future and also enables leaders to learn from others and to gain expertise in new areas. Trying to walk alone in an increasingly competitive business environment is a self-defeating act, particularly since organizations are increasingly being rated on their innovation and knowledge capabilities.
6. Growing Top Talent: Building great leaders are a hot topic in today's business media. Due to a growing shortage of talent in the world economy, leadership skills needs to be developed internally so that employees can be prepared to assume leadership roles in the future. Retaining the people who had key leadership skills has found to be difficult.
7. Managing Performance: An effective leadership strategy needs to include a performance management system, which is geared towards positively reinforcing employees at all, levels of the organization and which is aligned with the end goals of the organization. A performance management system needs to involve recruitment and selection, training and development, coaching and feedback, performance appraisal and reviews.
Now let us focus on how leadership transitions bring about success in an organization.
Leadership transitions are a fact of our organizational lives. While times of transition can be exciting and energizing, they often prove difficult both for the leaders, who has new role and for the followers. Leaders work from the start to establish their credibility in their new position. In a sense, all eyes are on the new person, with some followers wishing for success and in many cases others pointing out the weaknesses that might prove to be failure.
During organizational changes, the needs of the new leaders and the followers often conflicts. The leader seeks to impact the organization immediately and the followers want a slow pace of change. Successful transitions requires understanding both parties need and building communication and trust between them as quickly as possible.
During transitions four areas of interactions between leaders and followers are critical. These four areas are:
1. Partnering in decision-making: The new leader needs to understand the organization. Successful new leaders emphasis listening to followers, drawing out the issues that needs to be addressed and the ideas that can potentially improve the organization. Followers can assist the leaders. Throughout this process by bringing to the table not only their own ideas but also facts and data that inform those opinions. Quality analysis of issues fosters significant conversations between the leader and the follower that result in effective decisions.
2. Successful Implementations: Followers play major roles in implementing organizational products and services. Successful leaders trust followers to implement decisions so that they can focus their own time and effort on defining successful outcomes. It is almost impossible for a leader new to the organization to know enough to be helpful in making implementation decisions. A new leader who does not shift to focus on the results the organization is trying to achieve deprives the organization of leadership and singles to followers that they are not trusted to understand defined outcomes and implement them successfully. The level of trust between leaders and followers is a key to success. Focused discussions between leaders and followers about successful outcomes and accountability mechanisms can results in focused and successful implementations.
3. Challenging the leader: The courage to challenge the leader is an important element in organizational success. Leaders benefit greatly from listening to employees and encouraging them to respectfully disagree. Honest interaction between leaders and followers can bring the leader new and important information. Ensuring that the top management includes those who have the courage to challenge the leader is particularly important.
4. Supporting the leader and the followers: It is important for the new leader to develop support networks of peers who can provide advice and counsel on the new role. In addition, the new leader needs followers to understand the basic functional needs of leadership. Given how over whelming the new role might be, just dealing with the daily stream of ideas, demands, e-mails and so on can challenge the new leader. Followers can assist new leaders by seeking information about their preferred styles of communication, not only how they would like to interact or the preferred means of communication but also what information needs to be shared with them.
Sum Up
Due to the current talent shortage in the economy, organization cannot rely solely on hiring leadership talent externally. Instead, they need to focus on finding ways to retain the best people and develop them into potential leaders for the future.
However, a leadership transition poses dangers and challenges for both leaders and followers. While each party naturally focuses on the organizations success, time needs to be spent on how the new relationship will develop and mature into effective working relationships.
In light of the strong link between leadership and organizational performance, organization must invest heavily in leadership development programmes and must have a comprehensive performance management system in place to identify and reward their present and potential leaders. Organizations that fail to capitalize on leadership will lose their competitive advantage in the market.
However, organizations are feeling the pressure of implementing a leadership strategy quickly and effectively. However, they seem to be faced with three interlinked difficulties such as:
1. They lack an understanding of which factors constitute an effective leadership strategy.
2. They remain unclear on the impact of leadership on organizational performance.
3. They are not doing enough to encourage leadership development internally.
Now first let us understand what we mean by Effective Leadership.
Effective Leadership is a self-sustaining organizational practice that transcends the personalities of individual leaders. The key to establishing a sound leadership approach is to identify which factors make up an effective leadership strategy and to understand how each of these factors affects overall results.
Does Effective Leadership influence organizational success?
Yes, Effective Leadership with its top seven factors does assign positive influence on organizational results. These top seven factors are:
1. Initiating and Managing change: Organization must encourage a culture of change leadership internally in order to assert leadership externally. Today's turbulent organizational environment is characterized by a continuous race between competing businesses. Therefore, organizations must seize existing opportunities and create new ones in order to thr8ive. To reap the full benefits of change, they must also need to have a systematic change management approach that will enable them to react with agility and speed to changes within and outside the organization.
2. Communicating a Common Vision: In order to lead their organization successfully, leaders needs to have a clear vision (See Exhibit 1: Dynamic pattern of organizational structure) for the firms and must also possess the ability to think strategically. Recent survey reports indicates, "Creating an environment of shared values and goals" has been one of the most important factors in improving employee productivity and financial results. Also a well-developed personal vision and the ability to sell that vision is the key skill needed for effective leadership in today's evolving economy. In order to create a culture of common goals, regular communication at all levels of the organization is required.
3. Empowering others to lead: Good leaders today understand that in the present economy, creating a culture of leadership and empowering others to make decisions are essential for long-term business success. The study shows that it is more important for an organization to have in place the systems and processes that enable leadership to emerge naturally and that is those systems that often explain why some organization outperform their competitors throughout the terms of many different CEO's and why some leaders can succeed in one organization and final in the next. The sharing of the leadership role is essential in the fragile and uncertain times that leaders face and will continue to face in the future. Teamwork and "Cooperative leadership" (See Exhibit 2: Leadership attribution) can only increase in importance as a way of staying ahead of the competition. Leadership through teamwork also works to keep people, processes and ideas to check and to prevent a single personality from making foolish or irrational decisions.
4. Global Sensitivity: Effective leadership in the present economy must adopt a global perspective and must integrate global experience and cultural sensitivity. There is no escaping the trend towards globalization, which is presently taking place within organizations. However, organization needs to be ready to face competition locally and form global. In order to be well equipped to deal with the competition, they need to recognize the importance of having qualified leaders who are capable of applying a global perspective in their business dealings and are able to approach issues from different angles.
5. Cultivating Relationships: The ability to cultivate and manage relationships both within and outside the organization is an integral aspect of effective leadership. Forming and maintaining relationship with employees, customers and suppliers is essential to safe guard the interests of the organization. The ability to network effectively with relevant parties is essential because it maximizes an organizations chance of capturing new business opportunities in the future and also enables leaders to learn from others and to gain expertise in new areas. Trying to walk alone in an increasingly competitive business environment is a self-defeating act, particularly since organizations are increasingly being rated on their innovation and knowledge capabilities.
6. Growing Top Talent: Building great leaders are a hot topic in today's business media. Due to a growing shortage of talent in the world economy, leadership skills needs to be developed internally so that employees can be prepared to assume leadership roles in the future. Retaining the people who had key leadership skills has found to be difficult.
7. Managing Performance: An effective leadership strategy needs to include a performance management system, which is geared towards positively reinforcing employees at all, levels of the organization and which is aligned with the end goals of the organization. A performance management system needs to involve recruitment and selection, training and development, coaching and feedback, performance appraisal and reviews.
Now let us focus on how leadership transitions bring about success in an organization.
Leadership transitions are a fact of our organizational lives. While times of transition can be exciting and energizing, they often prove difficult both for the leaders, who has new role and for the followers. Leaders work from the start to establish their credibility in their new position. In a sense, all eyes are on the new person, with some followers wishing for success and in many cases others pointing out the weaknesses that might prove to be failure.
During organizational changes, the needs of the new leaders and the followers often conflicts. The leader seeks to impact the organization immediately and the followers want a slow pace of change. Successful transitions requires understanding both parties need and building communication and trust between them as quickly as possible.
During transitions four areas of interactions between leaders and followers are critical. These four areas are:
1. Partnering in decision-making: The new leader needs to understand the organization. Successful new leaders emphasis listening to followers, drawing out the issues that needs to be addressed and the ideas that can potentially improve the organization. Followers can assist the leaders. Throughout this process by bringing to the table not only their own ideas but also facts and data that inform those opinions. Quality analysis of issues fosters significant conversations between the leader and the follower that result in effective decisions.
2. Successful Implementations: Followers play major roles in implementing organizational products and services. Successful leaders trust followers to implement decisions so that they can focus their own time and effort on defining successful outcomes. It is almost impossible for a leader new to the organization to know enough to be helpful in making implementation decisions. A new leader who does not shift to focus on the results the organization is trying to achieve deprives the organization of leadership and singles to followers that they are not trusted to understand defined outcomes and implement them successfully. The level of trust between leaders and followers is a key to success. Focused discussions between leaders and followers about successful outcomes and accountability mechanisms can results in focused and successful implementations.
3. Challenging the leader: The courage to challenge the leader is an important element in organizational success. Leaders benefit greatly from listening to employees and encouraging them to respectfully disagree. Honest interaction between leaders and followers can bring the leader new and important information. Ensuring that the top management includes those who have the courage to challenge the leader is particularly important.
4. Supporting the leader and the followers: It is important for the new leader to develop support networks of peers who can provide advice and counsel on the new role. In addition, the new leader needs followers to understand the basic functional needs of leadership. Given how over whelming the new role might be, just dealing with the daily stream of ideas, demands, e-mails and so on can challenge the new leader. Followers can assist new leaders by seeking information about their preferred styles of communication, not only how they would like to interact or the preferred means of communication but also what information needs to be shared with them.
Sum Up
Due to the current talent shortage in the economy, organization cannot rely solely on hiring leadership talent externally. Instead, they need to focus on finding ways to retain the best people and develop them into potential leaders for the future.
However, a leadership transition poses dangers and challenges for both leaders and followers. While each party naturally focuses on the organizations success, time needs to be spent on how the new relationship will develop and mature into effective working relationships.
In light of the strong link between leadership and organizational performance, organization must invest heavily in leadership development programmes and must have a comprehensive performance management system in place to identify and reward their present and potential leaders. Organizations that fail to capitalize on leadership will lose their competitive advantage in the market.
14 Leadership Tips
Leadership is the road map to success. It brings continuous excellence in human life.
Are there born leaders? Every man is a leader and leadership is evolved with in and it flourishes in every aspect of living; let it be business, your office, in sports, in politics, in society, family and in every corner of the world.
First we must understand that leadership is not just an outside process, we lead our self first and influence our self to establish the self-direction and self motivation to deliver the best.
Leadership begins within. The seeds are already embedded inside us. We need to care it, water it, nourish it and get the best out of it continuously. If you can develop your personal leadership skills i.e. once you learn to lead yourself, you can set examples of your selves and lead your people.
Leadership is a multidimensional activity. It seems to be very complex but its simple and within ourselves. We need to bring the leadership out, spread its rays and bring meaning to life. Leadership is both an inward and outward activity. Leadership starts with personal leadership and it spreads around taking shape of what I call people leadership. It is result oriented and relationship oriented. The CEO of a company and the sales executive both are leaders. A CEO leads the organization where as a sales executive uses his leadership skills to establish himself in the organization.
Effective Leadership Training Program in 1 hour time
Leadership Tips 1 of 14: Set the right attitude
Leadership Tips 2 of 14: Fine tuning 'the self'
Leadership Tips 3 of 14: Developing vision and conquer time
Leadership Tips 4 of 14: Knowledge building
Leadership Tips 5 of 14: Courage builder
Leadership Tips 6 of 14: Creativity - cultivate different seeds
Leadership Tips 7 of 14: Change adaptability
Leadership Tips 8 of 14: Setting the environment
Leadership Tips 9 of 14: Communication with understanding
Leadership Tips 10 of 14: Understand emotional needs
Leadership Tips 11 of 14: Art of positive motivation
Leadership Tips 12 of 14: Appreciate, recognize and reward
Leadership Tips 13 of 14: Breaking the shell
Leadership Tips 14 of 14: Transfer leadership
Leadership Tips 1 of 14: Set the right attitude
Attitude contributes a lot to success. A study in Harvard University figured out an interesting result that a person gets a job or promotion because of his attitude, contributing 85% and remaining 15% only to other factors.
Always be positive, optimistic. Stay away from negative areas. Never let negativity enter your mind. Take life with a smile. Inhale positive thoughts and spread positive energy. I have a friend she is a very positive person and when ever you say something she laughs loudly in a special way. This positive ness from her laugh generates lot of power and energy, in everyone around her. It's always great to have some natural positive power generators as friends.
If one believes he can win, he will win. We have to develop our positive believing attitude.
We may loose out or may not achieve perfection still we are winners because we are positive, we have the desire and commitment. Learn from other mistakes and avoid it happening to you. Success is routed through failures but the 'never say die' attitude leads to success.
Leadership Tips 2 of 14: Fine tuning 'the self'
Self discipline is the key in a leader's life. A system should be developed so that the maximum level of performance energy can be achieved. One has to manage oneself first. For this we need to fine tune ourselves both physically and mentally. Setting good habits are very important and it directly results in positive ness and optimistic vision.
The first and best victory is to conquer self.
- Plato, Greek Philosopher
Bring a system in your life
Wake up early
Most leaders wake up early. In doing so they have lot more time to organize and feed their mind & body with positive energy. Too much sleeping makes you dopey. It won't fresh you up, rather it tires you. So Sleep well and wake up naturally before the alarm rings.
Energize your mind & body
Get up early, devote some time for yourself, do some mind and body exercises. You will feel refreshed and calm for the whole day and also will boost your confidence level. This is so because human body generates lot of enzymes and fluids, if we exercise and these help in increasing the performance level of our body and mind.
Good Food habits
Food habits play an important role in your body and mind activities. You are what you eat or your thoughts are what you eat. So take a balanced diet.
Relax yourself, take a stroll, day dream
Releasing of stress is very important and our body and mind needs to relax. A break is always mandatory.
Leadership Tips 3 of 14: Developing vision and conquer time
Vision is your goals; it can be a combination of goals, your career goal, business goal, financial goal, family goal, etc. Goal is time bound. Your goal should be broken down into smaller goals; it should be clear and specific. You can also have short term goals running parallel to your long term goal. Goals cannot be vague and it should be realistic and balanced. It must be SMART.
S - specific (prioritize)
M - measurable
A - achievable
R - realistic
T - time bound
You have to balance the goal with environment - let it be your family, business, finance, health, society.
The most important is the plan. You should have a specific plan that helps you to achieve your goal in time. Goals are dynamic because of the changes that life brings. So it's important to adapt or foresee the change and update your goals.
Leadership Tips 4 of 14: Knowledge building
Feed you mind continuously with good thoughts and knowledge. In this competitive world it is important to gain external & internal knowledge. External knowledge is on the world around you; it may or may not affect you. It can be the market knowledge. Internal knowledge is directly related to your vision. It is a critical success factor for successful accomplishment of your vision.
Convert opportunity to success, for this you need to look for inputs always. Collect as many data as possible, eliminate junk and keep only the relevant ones. This Data is Information, listen to it carefully. Information is Knowledge, understand it well. Knowledge is Intelligence, its wisdom. Knowledge is potential power and Wisdom is power. Power is success.
'ACT' on the knowledge and wisdom attained. Just acquiring the knowledge will not lead to success; link it with your vision and ACT.
Leadership Tips 5 of 14: Courage builder
Courage is the strength and power of leadership. Most people don't like to take risk. They don't even initiate opportunities, because of fear of loosing or the change involved in it. People are afraid to take ownership of situation, either it be a good situation or bad situation. And, if it's a bad situation it's the blame game they play. Eliminate fear! The best way to control or win fear is to face it with mental strength and determination.
Leadership Tips 6 of 14: Creativity - cultivate different seeds
Creative ideas lead over experience and existing winners. It cuts every limit to success.
Stop doing the same thing over and over, stop imitating what others did. Most inventions or creative ideas evolve when men are alone, while day dreaming during their leisure time and when their mind is relaxed and full with positive energy.
Leadership Tips 7 of 14: Change adaptability
Learn to manage change. Life is full of choices and compromises. It's dynamic and changing. The environment around us is changing, society is changing, people are changing, technology is changing, and almost everything is changing. The best way to manage change is to embrace it. Anticipate it, monitor it, accept it, adapt to it & enjoy it. Make, 'change' part of your life, a leader is a continuous learner so he has to change continuously by enhancing skills and move forward.
Leadership Tips 8 of 14: Setting the environment
Set the office environment right, display or hang motivational posters, product banners, policy documents, incentive charts, mission statement etc around. Display employee performance chart and best performer awards and photos around. Establish a positive quality environment where the staffs are motivated to deliver their best.
Leadership Tips 9 of 14: Communication with understanding
The greatest road block in communication is our tendency to evaluate or make judgments once you hear or see something. This is our natural urge. We usually agree or disagree to a statement from our point of view. Suppose this statement on which you evaluate has greater emotions, feelings and a strong message then your reactions will be sensitive. Either you approve or disapprove the attitude expressed. This impulse to evaluate any emotionally meaningful statement from our point of view is what blocks interpersonal communication.
Leadership Tips 10 of 14: Understand emotional needs
Victory has an emotional attachment, a passion in achievement of vision. Every individual of the victorious team will have a winning purpose and will be emotionally attached to it. This emotional purpose is the driving force towards victory.
Leaders need to take care of their staff. Discover their emotional needs, then motivate and give every support needed to meet their emotional need.
A leader's greatest job is to bring out the value of his team members. Let them know their value. A leader should be compassionate at times, which will bring in an extra bonding and emotional attachment, developing into trust, understanding and value for each other. It develops unity. It is a great feeling when your team leader listens to you; value your points and helps in solving the problems, either official or personal. It reduces stress and alleviates their performance to achieve the vision.
Leadership Tips 11 of 14: Art of positive motivation
The best motivation comes from within. A good leader just has to ignite the belief system and fuel it; success will ensue. Motivate staff regularly, from your top performing executive to your office boy because I believe, if one person in your team is de-motivated it can ruin the entire team. If there is a problem of concern at office on any matter bring it out rather that encasing it.
Your internal motivation is your self drive (hunger to succeed) and attitude. Don't be complacent.
In a positive environment even an under performer is motivated and becomes a performer but in a negative environment a performer can fail miserably because he is not valued and is continuously de-motivated.
Listen to your staff, make sure their views and points are considered and appreciated. Further, keep promises, give respect and seek respect, be committed to the staff and be one among them. Let the team have a shared vision and it's not an individual, it's a team with passion, which succeeds.
Leadership Tips 12 of 14: Appreciate, recognize and reward
Appreciation, reorganization and reward, play magic on individuals or team. Employees who feel recognized deliver excellent results. Keep the team and the individual team member well informed on the company activities and their performance status. Update the sales score board daily. Trigger the competition among team members, competition among teams, and among different branches.
Appreciate, recognize and reward performance. A job well done pat on the shoulders, well done hand shake, a personalized appreciation email or letter can be very motivating and will help in steady growth in the performance of the team.
Recognize employee performance at the right time, delay can cause de-motivation. And, reward them at the right occasion. Results are best when you reward. But remember it's a regular process.
Increase reward program and minimize finger pointing. Praise the employees publicly and specifically for his work. Display testimonial letters on the board. Celebrate occasions and event like birthday, marriage anniversary, etc.
Leadership Tips 13 of 14: Breaking the shell
Life is a continuous learning process. Regularly update your skills and be hungry for new updates in different areas. Read and listen to motivational books, tapes and disks. Arrange presentation and learning session. Let every staff contribute to it.
The whole idea behind it is to develop a family environment, free of stress and fear. Employees can free themselves and display their strength in every area. They are encouraged to take risk and develop new ideas which will help to discover new processes and strategies. Employees never fear to bring new creative thoughts or ideas and experiment them. These ideas may be successful or it may fail, either ways it is recognized and rewarded. It's not suppressed, it is appreciated and encouraged. The basic idea is to energize, develop, equip and take new challenges & responsibility which will lead the company to greater vision and success. Work is delegated to those employees who tend to put extra effort. They are smart workers. They work more for the company; they spend more time on office work.
Leadership Tips 14 of 14: Transfer leadership
Be a transparent leader, be committed at all levels, keep even the small promises not just in you work place but in your life also. Be sincere and caring. Don't put off things, do it with out any delay. Stand by your employees; if some complaints arise from customer first investigate it and take corrective or preventive action. Never put an employee in state of fear of loosing the job. Advice him, and see that he and other staffs don't repeat the same mistake again.
Are there born leaders? Every man is a leader and leadership is evolved with in and it flourishes in every aspect of living; let it be business, your office, in sports, in politics, in society, family and in every corner of the world.
First we must understand that leadership is not just an outside process, we lead our self first and influence our self to establish the self-direction and self motivation to deliver the best.
Leadership begins within. The seeds are already embedded inside us. We need to care it, water it, nourish it and get the best out of it continuously. If you can develop your personal leadership skills i.e. once you learn to lead yourself, you can set examples of your selves and lead your people.
Leadership is a multidimensional activity. It seems to be very complex but its simple and within ourselves. We need to bring the leadership out, spread its rays and bring meaning to life. Leadership is both an inward and outward activity. Leadership starts with personal leadership and it spreads around taking shape of what I call people leadership. It is result oriented and relationship oriented. The CEO of a company and the sales executive both are leaders. A CEO leads the organization where as a sales executive uses his leadership skills to establish himself in the organization.
Effective Leadership Training Program in 1 hour time
Leadership Tips 1 of 14: Set the right attitude
Leadership Tips 2 of 14: Fine tuning 'the self'
Leadership Tips 3 of 14: Developing vision and conquer time
Leadership Tips 4 of 14: Knowledge building
Leadership Tips 5 of 14: Courage builder
Leadership Tips 6 of 14: Creativity - cultivate different seeds
Leadership Tips 7 of 14: Change adaptability
Leadership Tips 8 of 14: Setting the environment
Leadership Tips 9 of 14: Communication with understanding
Leadership Tips 10 of 14: Understand emotional needs
Leadership Tips 11 of 14: Art of positive motivation
Leadership Tips 12 of 14: Appreciate, recognize and reward
Leadership Tips 13 of 14: Breaking the shell
Leadership Tips 14 of 14: Transfer leadership
Leadership Tips 1 of 14: Set the right attitude
Attitude contributes a lot to success. A study in Harvard University figured out an interesting result that a person gets a job or promotion because of his attitude, contributing 85% and remaining 15% only to other factors.
Always be positive, optimistic. Stay away from negative areas. Never let negativity enter your mind. Take life with a smile. Inhale positive thoughts and spread positive energy. I have a friend she is a very positive person and when ever you say something she laughs loudly in a special way. This positive ness from her laugh generates lot of power and energy, in everyone around her. It's always great to have some natural positive power generators as friends.
If one believes he can win, he will win. We have to develop our positive believing attitude.
We may loose out or may not achieve perfection still we are winners because we are positive, we have the desire and commitment. Learn from other mistakes and avoid it happening to you. Success is routed through failures but the 'never say die' attitude leads to success.
Leadership Tips 2 of 14: Fine tuning 'the self'
Self discipline is the key in a leader's life. A system should be developed so that the maximum level of performance energy can be achieved. One has to manage oneself first. For this we need to fine tune ourselves both physically and mentally. Setting good habits are very important and it directly results in positive ness and optimistic vision.
The first and best victory is to conquer self.
- Plato, Greek Philosopher
Bring a system in your life
Wake up early
Most leaders wake up early. In doing so they have lot more time to organize and feed their mind & body with positive energy. Too much sleeping makes you dopey. It won't fresh you up, rather it tires you. So Sleep well and wake up naturally before the alarm rings.
Energize your mind & body
Get up early, devote some time for yourself, do some mind and body exercises. You will feel refreshed and calm for the whole day and also will boost your confidence level. This is so because human body generates lot of enzymes and fluids, if we exercise and these help in increasing the performance level of our body and mind.
Good Food habits
Food habits play an important role in your body and mind activities. You are what you eat or your thoughts are what you eat. So take a balanced diet.
Relax yourself, take a stroll, day dream
Releasing of stress is very important and our body and mind needs to relax. A break is always mandatory.
Leadership Tips 3 of 14: Developing vision and conquer time
Vision is your goals; it can be a combination of goals, your career goal, business goal, financial goal, family goal, etc. Goal is time bound. Your goal should be broken down into smaller goals; it should be clear and specific. You can also have short term goals running parallel to your long term goal. Goals cannot be vague and it should be realistic and balanced. It must be SMART.
S - specific (prioritize)
M - measurable
A - achievable
R - realistic
T - time bound
You have to balance the goal with environment - let it be your family, business, finance, health, society.
The most important is the plan. You should have a specific plan that helps you to achieve your goal in time. Goals are dynamic because of the changes that life brings. So it's important to adapt or foresee the change and update your goals.
Leadership Tips 4 of 14: Knowledge building
Feed you mind continuously with good thoughts and knowledge. In this competitive world it is important to gain external & internal knowledge. External knowledge is on the world around you; it may or may not affect you. It can be the market knowledge. Internal knowledge is directly related to your vision. It is a critical success factor for successful accomplishment of your vision.
Convert opportunity to success, for this you need to look for inputs always. Collect as many data as possible, eliminate junk and keep only the relevant ones. This Data is Information, listen to it carefully. Information is Knowledge, understand it well. Knowledge is Intelligence, its wisdom. Knowledge is potential power and Wisdom is power. Power is success.
'ACT' on the knowledge and wisdom attained. Just acquiring the knowledge will not lead to success; link it with your vision and ACT.
Leadership Tips 5 of 14: Courage builder
Courage is the strength and power of leadership. Most people don't like to take risk. They don't even initiate opportunities, because of fear of loosing or the change involved in it. People are afraid to take ownership of situation, either it be a good situation or bad situation. And, if it's a bad situation it's the blame game they play. Eliminate fear! The best way to control or win fear is to face it with mental strength and determination.
Leadership Tips 6 of 14: Creativity - cultivate different seeds
Creative ideas lead over experience and existing winners. It cuts every limit to success.
Stop doing the same thing over and over, stop imitating what others did. Most inventions or creative ideas evolve when men are alone, while day dreaming during their leisure time and when their mind is relaxed and full with positive energy.
Leadership Tips 7 of 14: Change adaptability
Learn to manage change. Life is full of choices and compromises. It's dynamic and changing. The environment around us is changing, society is changing, people are changing, technology is changing, and almost everything is changing. The best way to manage change is to embrace it. Anticipate it, monitor it, accept it, adapt to it & enjoy it. Make, 'change' part of your life, a leader is a continuous learner so he has to change continuously by enhancing skills and move forward.
Leadership Tips 8 of 14: Setting the environment
Set the office environment right, display or hang motivational posters, product banners, policy documents, incentive charts, mission statement etc around. Display employee performance chart and best performer awards and photos around. Establish a positive quality environment where the staffs are motivated to deliver their best.
Leadership Tips 9 of 14: Communication with understanding
The greatest road block in communication is our tendency to evaluate or make judgments once you hear or see something. This is our natural urge. We usually agree or disagree to a statement from our point of view. Suppose this statement on which you evaluate has greater emotions, feelings and a strong message then your reactions will be sensitive. Either you approve or disapprove the attitude expressed. This impulse to evaluate any emotionally meaningful statement from our point of view is what blocks interpersonal communication.
Leadership Tips 10 of 14: Understand emotional needs
Victory has an emotional attachment, a passion in achievement of vision. Every individual of the victorious team will have a winning purpose and will be emotionally attached to it. This emotional purpose is the driving force towards victory.
Leaders need to take care of their staff. Discover their emotional needs, then motivate and give every support needed to meet their emotional need.
A leader's greatest job is to bring out the value of his team members. Let them know their value. A leader should be compassionate at times, which will bring in an extra bonding and emotional attachment, developing into trust, understanding and value for each other. It develops unity. It is a great feeling when your team leader listens to you; value your points and helps in solving the problems, either official or personal. It reduces stress and alleviates their performance to achieve the vision.
Leadership Tips 11 of 14: Art of positive motivation
The best motivation comes from within. A good leader just has to ignite the belief system and fuel it; success will ensue. Motivate staff regularly, from your top performing executive to your office boy because I believe, if one person in your team is de-motivated it can ruin the entire team. If there is a problem of concern at office on any matter bring it out rather that encasing it.
Your internal motivation is your self drive (hunger to succeed) and attitude. Don't be complacent.
In a positive environment even an under performer is motivated and becomes a performer but in a negative environment a performer can fail miserably because he is not valued and is continuously de-motivated.
Listen to your staff, make sure their views and points are considered and appreciated. Further, keep promises, give respect and seek respect, be committed to the staff and be one among them. Let the team have a shared vision and it's not an individual, it's a team with passion, which succeeds.
Leadership Tips 12 of 14: Appreciate, recognize and reward
Appreciation, reorganization and reward, play magic on individuals or team. Employees who feel recognized deliver excellent results. Keep the team and the individual team member well informed on the company activities and their performance status. Update the sales score board daily. Trigger the competition among team members, competition among teams, and among different branches.
Appreciate, recognize and reward performance. A job well done pat on the shoulders, well done hand shake, a personalized appreciation email or letter can be very motivating and will help in steady growth in the performance of the team.
Recognize employee performance at the right time, delay can cause de-motivation. And, reward them at the right occasion. Results are best when you reward. But remember it's a regular process.
Increase reward program and minimize finger pointing. Praise the employees publicly and specifically for his work. Display testimonial letters on the board. Celebrate occasions and event like birthday, marriage anniversary, etc.
Leadership Tips 13 of 14: Breaking the shell
Life is a continuous learning process. Regularly update your skills and be hungry for new updates in different areas. Read and listen to motivational books, tapes and disks. Arrange presentation and learning session. Let every staff contribute to it.
The whole idea behind it is to develop a family environment, free of stress and fear. Employees can free themselves and display their strength in every area. They are encouraged to take risk and develop new ideas which will help to discover new processes and strategies. Employees never fear to bring new creative thoughts or ideas and experiment them. These ideas may be successful or it may fail, either ways it is recognized and rewarded. It's not suppressed, it is appreciated and encouraged. The basic idea is to energize, develop, equip and take new challenges & responsibility which will lead the company to greater vision and success. Work is delegated to those employees who tend to put extra effort. They are smart workers. They work more for the company; they spend more time on office work.
Leadership Tips 14 of 14: Transfer leadership
Be a transparent leader, be committed at all levels, keep even the small promises not just in you work place but in your life also. Be sincere and caring. Don't put off things, do it with out any delay. Stand by your employees; if some complaints arise from customer first investigate it and take corrective or preventive action. Never put an employee in state of fear of loosing the job. Advice him, and see that he and other staffs don't repeat the same mistake again.
Labels:
Leadership Tips
The Cornerstone of Success in the Martial Arts and In Life
Leadership is one of the most talked about and least understood aspects of human behavior. There must be hundreds of definitions of leadership, yet none of them is useful for success in life because none of them allows you to 'create' leadership from within your life.
Why is that? Why isn't leadership one of those things you can go to school to learn, pick up through experience, or work on yourself to develop?
To answer this important - life-changing - question, the first thing you need to understand are the false assumptions - the myths - about leadership. Then you'll come to realize that leadership is one of those things you can go to school to learn...
...if there was school that knew how to teach it.
You can pick it up through experience...
...if you know what leadership is and, as importantly, what it isn't.
You can work on yourself to develop it...
...but you need to know what to work on.
The first barrier to developing leadership is breaking through the false assumptions we have come to accept without questioning. You may not believe all the assumptions listed below but it's a good bet you believe some of them. Yet, they're all false.
THE FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT LEADERSHIP
* 1. Leadership is innate - you're either born with it or you're not. Absolutely false! Leadership consists of a set of skills that can be identified and learned. It's true that some people have a greater aptitude for leadership but all of us can be leaders and can build our leadership skills.
* 2. Leadership is charisma and style; it's the way we do things, not what we do. False. We'd all like to be charismatic and stylish, and many leaders are just that. But leadership is substance, not style. Leadership has to do with what we do and the impact we have on others. There have been great leaders who were dull as dust and others who have been charismatic. In our own time Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft, is dull, "nerdy," and as uncharismatic as one can get, yet look at what he's led others to do and the impact he's had on Today's world.
* 3. There's no structure or system to leadership; it's situational. Again, absolutely false. Not only is leadership - true leadership - structured and systematic, it can be duplicated again and again. Students in the Mastery Leadership program learn how to do this during the course of their study. Leadership has principles, skills that can be learned, and specific ways to get results. All those things are the building blocks of the successful accomplishment of goals, managing the aspects of our lives, and creating a life worth living. And if you can systemize it, you can duplicate it. Believe it - leadership can be built into your life as a workable, predictable system.
* 4. The top person - the "boss" - is the leader, and it can't be any other way. False. In fact it's the exact opposite that is so often true. In the best businesses, families, schools, and groups, anyone in the group can exhibit leadership. Leadership should be encouraged at every level of the organization (with a few rules of behavior to prevent conflict and confusion).
If you believe any or all of these myths, you'll need to revise your beliefs or you'll never build true leadership into your life.
SO, WHAT IS TRUE LEADERSHIP?
Leadership is nothing more than a core set of skills that can be learned. There are five of them:
* Vision
* Discrimination
* (or discernment) Strategic Thinking
* Commitment
* , and... Inspirational Communication.
You'll learn about them and how to develop them in yourself and others as you progress through the Mastery Leadership program's Mastery Keys for the Emerging Leader. At the same time, you will be able to assess your own leadership capabilities and of those you associate with, and devise a leadership development program for enhancing your skill level.
THERE'S NO MYSTERY TO LEADERSHIP
Contrary to popular belief, there's nothing mysterious about leadership. Once you know its core skills and specific systems, it becomes a straightforward personal development task, just like any other system in your life.
Like many other seemingly mysterious things, once you know the secrets of duplicable leadership, you'll want to say, "How simple! Why didn't I see it sooner?"
Leadership is probably the single-most important aspect of your life and ability to produce the results you want.
It's leadership that figures out what you need to do to enhance your life and give it the power, thrust and momentum it needs.
And it's leadership that determines how to do it.
Then it's leadership that makes sure it gets done.
Without leadership, life is aimless, purposeless, random, ineffective, and - no exaggeration...
...terminally ill.
With effective leadership, your life will thrive, you will navigate through any storm, and surpass every goal you ever set for yourself.
Leadership is the cornerstone of the warrior's ability to create the life worth living and developing the skills necessary for protecting that life from anything that would threaten it. And so it is also the cornerstone of the Warrior Concepts Life Mastery Program. Here at WCI, just like every other solid, educational institution, we create leaders - not just in the martial arts, but at home, school or work, and in the community.
Why is that? Why isn't leadership one of those things you can go to school to learn, pick up through experience, or work on yourself to develop?
To answer this important - life-changing - question, the first thing you need to understand are the false assumptions - the myths - about leadership. Then you'll come to realize that leadership is one of those things you can go to school to learn...
...if there was school that knew how to teach it.
You can pick it up through experience...
...if you know what leadership is and, as importantly, what it isn't.
You can work on yourself to develop it...
...but you need to know what to work on.
The first barrier to developing leadership is breaking through the false assumptions we have come to accept without questioning. You may not believe all the assumptions listed below but it's a good bet you believe some of them. Yet, they're all false.
THE FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT LEADERSHIP
* 1. Leadership is innate - you're either born with it or you're not. Absolutely false! Leadership consists of a set of skills that can be identified and learned. It's true that some people have a greater aptitude for leadership but all of us can be leaders and can build our leadership skills.
* 2. Leadership is charisma and style; it's the way we do things, not what we do. False. We'd all like to be charismatic and stylish, and many leaders are just that. But leadership is substance, not style. Leadership has to do with what we do and the impact we have on others. There have been great leaders who were dull as dust and others who have been charismatic. In our own time Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft, is dull, "nerdy," and as uncharismatic as one can get, yet look at what he's led others to do and the impact he's had on Today's world.
* 3. There's no structure or system to leadership; it's situational. Again, absolutely false. Not only is leadership - true leadership - structured and systematic, it can be duplicated again and again. Students in the Mastery Leadership program learn how to do this during the course of their study. Leadership has principles, skills that can be learned, and specific ways to get results. All those things are the building blocks of the successful accomplishment of goals, managing the aspects of our lives, and creating a life worth living. And if you can systemize it, you can duplicate it. Believe it - leadership can be built into your life as a workable, predictable system.
* 4. The top person - the "boss" - is the leader, and it can't be any other way. False. In fact it's the exact opposite that is so often true. In the best businesses, families, schools, and groups, anyone in the group can exhibit leadership. Leadership should be encouraged at every level of the organization (with a few rules of behavior to prevent conflict and confusion).
If you believe any or all of these myths, you'll need to revise your beliefs or you'll never build true leadership into your life.
SO, WHAT IS TRUE LEADERSHIP?
Leadership is nothing more than a core set of skills that can be learned. There are five of them:
* Vision
* Discrimination
* (or discernment) Strategic Thinking
* Commitment
* , and... Inspirational Communication.
You'll learn about them and how to develop them in yourself and others as you progress through the Mastery Leadership program's Mastery Keys for the Emerging Leader. At the same time, you will be able to assess your own leadership capabilities and of those you associate with, and devise a leadership development program for enhancing your skill level.
THERE'S NO MYSTERY TO LEADERSHIP
Contrary to popular belief, there's nothing mysterious about leadership. Once you know its core skills and specific systems, it becomes a straightforward personal development task, just like any other system in your life.
Like many other seemingly mysterious things, once you know the secrets of duplicable leadership, you'll want to say, "How simple! Why didn't I see it sooner?"
Leadership is probably the single-most important aspect of your life and ability to produce the results you want.
It's leadership that figures out what you need to do to enhance your life and give it the power, thrust and momentum it needs.
And it's leadership that determines how to do it.
Then it's leadership that makes sure it gets done.
Without leadership, life is aimless, purposeless, random, ineffective, and - no exaggeration...
...terminally ill.
With effective leadership, your life will thrive, you will navigate through any storm, and surpass every goal you ever set for yourself.
Leadership is the cornerstone of the warrior's ability to create the life worth living and developing the skills necessary for protecting that life from anything that would threaten it. And so it is also the cornerstone of the Warrior Concepts Life Mastery Program. Here at WCI, just like every other solid, educational institution, we create leaders - not just in the martial arts, but at home, school or work, and in the community.
The Gettysburg Leadership Experience
We are standing among a group of twenty-five or so business executives on a windy, chilly ridgeline in south central Pennsylvania, facing west. To our right is a road, the Chambersburg Pike. Behind us about a mile is another higher ridge-Seminary Ridge and on top of that a building with a cupola. In front and directly behind is a gently rolling field and across the field in front is woodland that extends around to our left. We imagine that it is an early morning, July 1, 1863. We also imagine that we see the dust rising from a line of soldiers in gray uniforms coming up the road.
"You are Brigadier General John Buford," says our group leader. "You are in command of a scouting element of the Army of the Potomac. You have 2,000 cavalry and two small artillery batteries. Your orders are to find the location of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia of 75,000 men that invaded Pennsylvania about a week ago. Now you've found them. Behind the ridge is a crossroads town named Gettysburg. Ten miles to the south, I Corps with 20,000 Union troops are marching north under Major General John Reynolds. That's a good half-day march or more. There are 80,000 additional Union troops coming in from other directions, within a day's march. In front of you are the leading elements of A. P. Hill's corps from North Carolina under General Henry Heth. You and your cavalry are the only Union forces between the rebels and the high ground behind you. Take a look around at the terrain, what do you see? What are your choices? What are your assets and liabilities? What would you do? How do you know your choice will succeed?"
The members of the group look around, sensing the urgency that John Buford must have felt, and they begin to answer. Soon, the discussion becomes lively, with different options being weighed and debated. The facilitator turns the questioning into a dialogue about finding and recognizing opportunities in the corporate world. Each member of the group talks about how opportunities and risk are evaluated in his or her work unit or corporation and how the leader is sometimes the first the individual to see an opening for doing something new or different. The facilitator sums up the discussion by threading together the comments and refers back to Buford's decision to hold off the Confederates until Reynolds' divisions came up. "He was a leader who knew how to calculate a risk; he knew holding the ground was worth it." Heads nod and reflect on the concept of calculated risk. The group breaks up briefly as different members wander across the ground, deep in thought. Then, the group gathers and heads to the next stop on their way around the battlefield at Gettysburg where another incident and another leader's actions will be analyzed and discussed.
How Did Leadership Development Get to Seminary Ridge?
In the 1990s and continuing today, new trends emerged in the management development world. The three- to five-day program largely moved out of favor; training for executives had to be special-and short for them to invest their scarce time. To compete for the attention of technology-savvy younger managers, the experience also had to be entertaining. Authors and speakers with unique theories were hired to run workshops. Celebrity professors from business schools were asked to lecture on the latest thinking and lead a case discussion on a topic of interest. Philosophers taught the Classics to CEOs and their teams; English professors wrung management theory out of Shakespeare. All of these had in common a remarkable intellectual challenge, an outside perspective and expertise, and brevity.
However, something seemed to be missing from the latest waves of management and leadership training. To be sure, the concepts, cases, and models were interesting, even compelling, and, despite the raft of experiential exercises, the instructional models were mostly based on discussion and dialogue. Leadership training had evolved into a left-brained exercise-cerebral, analytical, and predictable.
Around the end of the 1990s, a new approach emerged: the historical leadership experience. Momentum for this method started when several retired US military officers rekindled an old military teaching tradition-the Staff Ride-and marketed it to corporations. As we will see, this new approach had design elements-emotion and drama that corporate audiences had rarely experienced. While many current historical leadership experiences revolve around battlefield visits and military themes, the method is appropriate for a wide variety of venues and topics. A historical event that involves a dramatic, documented story, a cast of visible characters, and a place to visit preferably with actual artifacts can serve as a platform to teach management competencies in a memorable and unique way. The designer of the experience needs to understand the historical story, have insight into the possibilities for linking management concepts to that and create an agenda that takes advantage of the setting and story. The successful implementation of the design then depends on the creativity of a skilled facilitator to draw out the lessons. What makes the historical leadership lesson different is that participants learn principles that are wrapped around indelible images of characters and events.
A historical leadership experience involves bringing students to a site, methodically visiting specific locations, retelling the story of the events that took place, and discussing various topics with an instructor.
Historical Leadership Lesson Example: The Gettysburg Experience
By looking at a specific example of a historical leadership experience created for corporate audiences, we can examine the challenges to instructional design and how they were met. This examination of constraints and approaches is meant to serve as a guideline to others who have an opportunity to pursue this unique instructional model.
This writer became involved with Gettysburg as a leadership development tool when an organization needed help in designing and co-conducting a leadership experience for executives which they would subsequently market. As a design consultant and leadership expert, I would be working with a retired US Army Colonel and former military history professor from the US Military Academy at West Point who knew the story and all the characters to a high level of detail. That this would be a significant design challenge became clear when we made an inventory of the conditions we would be facing:
The story.
In the American Civil War, the battle of Gettysburg represented the culminating moment in a chain of events intended, by the Confederate leadership, to force US President Abraham Lincoln to accept a negotiatied settlement or to encourage the British to support the South. The challenge was that story was complex; a participant needed a contextual understanding of the causes of the war, progress of the war to July 1, 1863, Confederate General Robert E. Lee's strategy, the many characters involved and much more. There was additional useful information about the military technology of the time, how armies were organized, what their methods were, and other background information that would allow the participant to better grasp and envision the events they were about to vicariously relive. The challenge was to get participants up to speed on this background without overburdening them.
Even when participants were oriented to the historical events that led up to the incidents to be discussed, literally everyone knew the outcome of the historical story beforehand. The Confederates were defeated; Pickett's Charge was a gallant attempt which failed; Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain's regiment from Maine bravely held the end of the Union left flank at Little Round Top. The question was how the designers could create suspense under these conditions.
The terrain, the location and the weather.
A historical leadership lesson takes place at the venue where events occurred. At Gettysburg, that meant on the ground at the National Military Park in Gettysburg, PA. The park itself is 20 square miles with 26 miles of public and parkland roads transiting the site. Walking to the various sites required traversing muddy fields, stonewalls, climbing steep hills, dealing with rain and occasionally very hot weather. In addition, we would have to do most of our discussions standing up; there are no benches nor places for repose. And, as we would be on the ground for several hours at a time, there was a need to be near rest room facilities that were, in fact, available but not necessarily easy to get to.
In addition, Gettysburg is remote even today. It is at least two hours from major airports in Baltimore and Washington, D.C. The experience could not be a half-day or a single day. The leadership experience would require participants to invest two days and another for travel. So, the pressure for a creating a valuable use of time for busy executives is magnified.
The crowds.
Gettysburg attracts two million visitors a year. These include tourists, families, school groups, other youth groups, veterans and organized tours of all sizes. Professional and licensed Gettysburg tour guides conduct many of these tours. In addition, there are yearly reenactments conducted by dedicated enthusiasts who represent both Union and Confederate forces. The challenge is that there can potentially be many people arriving at a specific site at the same time as the leadership class. This raises questions about how to conduct meaningful discussions in the midst of other people milling around, some being lectured to by tour guides, other posing for pictures, etc. The stories of what individuals did and the choices they had are both dramatic and poignant. Creating that mood in a public setting would be difficult.
The leadership model.
There was a question of what model to teach. Was it the Jim Collins, Good to Great construct, or Noel Tichy's, Leadership Engine? Would we look to Warren Bennis, Peter Drucker or Ram Charan? Was it a question of practical leadership lessons like those of Captain Michael Abrashoff's It's Your Ship, or do we embrace Tom Peters' provocative views? When looking at examples of leaders in action, we needed to relate what we saw to some context, a framework that provided an interpretative bridge. With literally thousands of theories and constructs to choose from, we needed a content base we could use to reflect the events that occurred in 1863.
The "link."
Probably the biggest challenge of all was creating the link between what was discussed in the leadership experience and what participants could take away as practical lessons for their own practice of leadership. In a way, the experience of looking into the details of a Civil War character's predicament and discussing options had a risk of devolving into a stimulating and entertaining tour, with participants playing the role of interested and glorified tourists. Without the lessons of the past being tied directly to present-day work and leadership challenges, the value of the experience as a development technique would be questionable.
Taken as a whole, this inventory of challenges is formidable. However, we kept in mind the best asset we had: an incredibly dramatic story with many subplots and personalities and the ground itself where the events took place.
How We Approached The Design Challenge
Our first decision was to closely examine the history and learn what happened--what preceded and followed the event. We read Michael Shaara's Killer Angels, a historical novel noted for a high degree of scholarly accuracy, Shelby Foote's Stars In Their Courses, a closely written description of the campaign, the classic study of character, Lee's Lieutenants, by Douglas Southall Freeman and historian James M. McPherson's Hallowed Ground. We even watched the Ted Turner movie, Gettysburg, which was filmed on location, to better understand the immensity of the drama that took place. We poured over books of photographs of the battle, like David Eicher's Gettysburg Battlefield.
What emerged from this review were two things: A sense of the characters involved-who they were as people, their personalities and their strengths and foibles. We also identified what we called leadership moments-those incidents where an opportunity was identified, a decision had to be made, an obstacle to be surmounted or a desperate plan needed to be communicated.
Leadership Moments: The Stories
The leadership moments formed the thread of the series of stories we would tell our participants and which contained potential lessons that could link to current day leadership dilemmas. The first was John Buford's decision to forestall the Confederate advance on the morning of July 1. We talked about Buford's experience as an Indian fighter, the rapid fire carbines of his troops, the advantages he created by using a particular formation called a defense in depth. Another was Lee's decision to engage the Army of the Potomac after the action had already started through a chance encounter without knowing what he was facing due to the absence of intelligence from his missing scout, General Jeb Stuart and his cavalry. In another situation, with the first afternoon of the battle moving to the Confederate's advantage, Lee saw an opportunity to take Cemetery Hill, giving General Richard Ewell a vague command to take the ground "if practicable." Ewell's subsequent hesitation cost the Confederates their advantage, and his caution in deciding not to move against the hill is debated today as a turning point in not only the battle, but in American history. Some historians posit that if Ewell had taken the high ground that afternoon, the entire war --and American history--might have turned out completely differently.
We also viewed Union General Dan Sickle's autonomous decision on Day Two of the battle to move his troops to what he felt was a better defensive position at the Peach Orchard-contrary to General George Meade's orders-as an interesting interpretation of initiative. Sickle's flamboyant personality, non-military background, and scandalous past-he shot his wife's lover and was the first person in the US to use the insanity defense-had all the elements of a rich discussion on how creative energy could be managed and the role of disciple in modern organizations. The story of the 20th Maine Regiment at Little Round Top was an example of perseverance and ingenuity in the face of overwhelming obstacles. The ongoing and unsettling conflict between Lee and his main lieutenant, General James Longstreet, who opposed the idea of an offensive strategy from the beginning of the campaign, sets up a classic leadership challenge of getting people to buy into a plan and execute against it. Finally, we included Abraham Lincoln's vision of a nation and what the conflict meant to him.
These leadership moments all had a sense of drama and tension. When the stories were told, they unraveled details of what actually happened made for rich discussion and debate of the choices the leaders faced, the complexity of decisions, absence of easy answers and urgency of difficult moments-exactly the kinds of issues business leaders face today.
A Leadership Model: What Emerged From The Stories
One of the challenges we faced was identifying a leadership model to relate all these stories to. This would provide a unifying lens, so to speak, so that we could understand these long-ago leadership moments in context and relate them to current challenges. Taken individually, for example, each leadership moment we identified represented an individual's encounter with leadership principles- positive or negative examples of some aspect of leadership behavior. Ewell's over-analysis of the situation at Cemetery Hill could be taken as an example of having to be highly certain before deciding; Lee's laissez-faire attitude of planning-delegating details to his officers-represents setting an organizational climate where low clarity can have a devastating impact. Chamberlain's ingenuity and courage represent what we expect every leader to demonstrate-emotional commitment and dedication. But, what was the thread-the construct, the set of principles or behaviors-- that held all these disparate principles together? What we needed as a model that put the leadership concept together and described what leaders did. It had to be simple, behavioral and most important, useful.
After reviewing leadership models from many well-known sources, it became clear to us that one model would not fit our needs. The source of this Leadership Lens, as we called it, would be our knowledge of leadership behavior as we knew it from our consulting and research and the characters and their stories.
The Leadership Lens we synthesized is a simple three-part model.
Create The Fundamental Idea:
A leader's role is to scan the environment, learn the "ground", recognize opportunities, and from that, create a focused direction. The implication goes beyond the idea of a vision statement; a leader is the source of the vision, the set of eyes that is always looking for opportunities. Once that vision is clear in the leader's mind, it has to be formulated in a way that others can see it as well. While this is a relatively simple concept, we felt it was a reflection of all the leaders we have studied and certainly was reflected for better or worse by the cast of characters at Gettysburg. Robert E. Lee, for example, viewed the invasion of the North as a key strategic move to bring about an armistice. While his lieutenants knew his vision, they weren't totally clear on how this was going to be carried out, creating the root cause for the conflict between General James Longstreet, the second in command, and Lee.
Set and Impose Operating Values, Practices, Principles:
A leader is the tone-setter and rule-maker of an organization. As we know from organizational climate research, management creates a feeling of what it is like to work in the organization based on the rules and practices the leader puts in place. This feeling of climate is a key to motivation. The leader figuratively puts the operating manual of the organization in place or changes what is already there to something more in line with his or her beliefs and values. We view this as a conscious imposition by the leader. W. Morrell and S. Capparell's study of Antarctic explorer Ernest Shackleton, Shackelton's Way, depicts a leader who created a work environment where all crew members, regardless of role, had to perform menial tasks and, at the same time, were expected to be positive, cheerful and cooperative with each other. At Gettysburg, we learn that Union commander General George Meade was appointed to his role two days before the battle, having no time to create an operating climate of his own other than the usual military discipline. This gap can be viewed as contributing to his subordinate Dan Sickles' feeling free to take independent action which led to confusion and potential ruin on Day Two of the battle. To this day, new managers are tested by direct reports who soon learn that strong leaders set up clear boundaries and expectations for performance.
Demonstrate An Emotional Edge:
Every leader creates an emotional reaction in his or her followers, based on the level of commitment and dedication he or she overtly displays. The leader can demonstrate high moral values, boundless energy, steady and calm resolve, affection for employees or courage; there isn't a right way to demonstrate an emotional edge. What counts is how the leader shows up as a person, exposing his or her commitment, beliefs and energy. When a leader captures his or her employee's attention and respect, their motivation will follow. Lee was regarded with great affection by his troops. Even in defeat, Robert E. Lee was highly respected by both sides. The idea of emotional edge is completely subjective; it is one of those factors that you know when you see it. Buford's resolve at McPherson's Ridge, Chamberlain's courage on Little Round Top and other examples all have modern equivalents in corporate and civic leadership. Who could not feel moved by Rudi Guiliani's sense of command and compassion on September 11? Who could not feel impressed and excited by Steve Jobs' announcement of another innovation? Of course, a prime example of emotional edge is Lincoln's speech at the Gettysburg battlefield. The humility and respect he paid to those who gave "their last full measure of devotion" and the simple resolution that they "have not died in vain" and that the government of, by and for the people "shall not perish from this earth" shows what courage can be in the face of uncertainty.
These three elements and the more specific behaviors which further describe them, taken together, represent an easy to remember and apply view of leadership. We wanted our model to be "portable" so our participants could carry it around with them in their memories and recall it when we discussed different leadership moments. As we learned, the model became the springboard for discussion; participants were able to critique the character's leadership moments and relate their own corporate examples using the elements of the model.
The Flow and Timing
With the leadership moments and model in mind, we created a flow of events, linking these together from the beginning of the battle to its calamitous conclusion at Pickett's Charge. Our idea was to tell the story of the three-day battle in chronological order. We would start with Buford, move to Lee's decision, Ewell's uncertainty, ending Day One of the story. Day Two of the battle would cover a discussion about Lee's conflict with Longstreet, his decision to conduct a coordinated attack, Sickle's excursion into the Peach Orchard, and the story of Chamberlain on Little Round Top. We would cover Day Three of the battle by revisiting Lee's decision to attack the middle of the Union line while attempting an end-run cavalry attack, how Lee's management style changed from more or less laissez-faire to highly directive, Longstreet's reluctance and his choices as a leader, and the consequences of Pickett's Charge. The final lesson would take place at the Gettysburg cemetery where Lincoln made his address.
Each "Day" of the battle would require at least a half day of instruction and would visit at least three locations. We would begin early, head by bus to each venue, pause for lunch and continue. A chase car driven by a staff member would accommodate the need for people to take a break. We selected locations that were off the beaten track, for the most part, or we visited them when crowds were minimal. For example, the group found itself quite alone on Little Round Top at the end of our first day of the experience.
We had a debrief session after our day on the battlefield in a classroom like setting at our hotel. The discussion involved comparing what happened to incidents participants were familiar with and in extracting key messages and ideas that became illuminated by the experience.
Telling The Big Story: Setting the Context
Our approach was to tell the story of a series of decisions by a relatively small number of people and discuss these in terms of the leadership model we created. The larger story was now background while our leadership moments became foreground. Our participants needed to understand the historical context and the larger issues being played out by the characters in the story.
Toward that end, we planned to ask our participants to read Michael Shaara's Killer Angels prior to coming to the leadership experience. Knowing that some participants might not read the entire novel, we also provided them with a short historical synopsis of the origins of the Civil War and the history of the battle of Gettysburg. In our opening introductory session, our military historian-facilitator planned a concise lecture description of the how the war was going just prior to Lee's decision to invade the North. Finally, we found that the bus chartered for the experience had audio-visual capabilities, allowing us to use scenes from the movie, Gettysburg, to orient our participants before arriving at a location as well as reviewing significant incidents after we left a location. We felt we could craft these elements into a design that would start with readings, continue with an orientation lecture, and be supported by handouts and movies.
Making the Link
The leadership lens became the key vehicle for linking the program to each participant's real-world leadership challenge. We used the model to summarize our discussions of the key leadership moments, and we drilled down on them for specific "how-tos" in our debriefing sessions. For example, if participants had stated that motivating staff was an issue for them at work, we would return to that personal learning theme whenever the leadership moment we were discussing was relevant. "What did you learn from Lee's behavior about how a leader should or shouldn't motivate his direct reports?" would be a typical summary question. Through discussion of the historical character's difficulties and actions, participants were able to appreciate the impact of having a clear, relevant, challenging Fundamental Idea-Vision can be to direct reports. In debriefing, we would ask participants what the historical characters could have done differently in setting a vision and what some good examples were of corporate leaders who had motivating Fundamental Ideas. From this exchange, the facilitators were able to tease out the characteristics of a strong Fundamental Idea and how it could be used to motivate direct reports. The participants collected these thoughts and incorporated them into the learning journals.
That aspect of making the link between the story and real work is a fairly predictable design feature. There were, however, other factors unique to a historical learning experience that made the lessons memorable. The drama of each leader's story, the very act of standing on the ground where the story took place and the poignancy of the outcomes created a strong emotional reaction in each participant. That reaction cemented the underlying meaning of the leadership principle into place. The image of General Ewell standing at the base of Cemetery Hill, struggling to make a decision, his hesitation, the vague instructions he was given, the fading daylight, the opportunity lost adds a dimension to the concept of analysis paralysis that can't be conjured up in a classroom discussion. Walking the same mile or so of ground that Pickett's divisions crossed under heavy fire, taking momentary refuge in the swales, emerging exposed under the Union's guns imprints a lesson about courage, loyalty, and a leader's emotional edge in choosing to take a huge risk offers a lesson that is impossible to forget.
Bear in mind, we were telling our leadership stories on an empty stage; the actors had gone long ago. What ultimately makes a historical leadership lesson work is the power of place, the stories of real leaders and the imagination of participants.
Learning Leadership From History: Lessons Learned
The Gettysburg battle is only one example of a how leadership can be learned from history. We have also conducted brief sessions on board "Old Ironsides"-USS Constitution-in Boston Harbor and have plans for non-military venues. Thomas Edison's workshop, the site of the first nuclear reaction under the football stadium at the University of Chicago, Lewis and Clark's fort on the Oregon coast are examples of sites that have potential for this approach.
From working with these settings, it is clear there are some requirements for a successful historical leadership learning experience.
A significant, well-documented story with dramatic events
The historical event has to have a powerful story where momentous decisions were made and far-reaching implications were played out. Like any good story, there has to be drama, conflict, overwhelming odds, emotion and a lot of "what-if" moments. In addition, the story has to be documented, preferably from a number of first-hand sources.
A compelling set of characters
The story needs to contain main characters and lesser lights who have dimensionality, personality, and depth. When we learn that General Ewell had just returned from convalescent leave and had been married while away from the war, his hesitation at Cemetery Hill takes on another dimension. In preparing this kind of learning activity, the facilitators and designers are obliged to do their homework and dig through the sources for facts that round out the characters.
An accessible, intact setting
As noted, the site of the leadership lesson is a critical asset. Being in the same exact place where momentous events took place pulls on participants' imagination and helps dissolve time. Granted, not every participant is able to make the imaginative leap or has the sensitivity to see what historical characters can teach them. However, with careful pre-readings, a thoughtful scene-setting presentation, expert facilitation from group leaders who have a flair for story telling, the emotional connection can be made for those who engage the idea.
Clear lessons from decisions, initiatives, opportunities
Finally, the story itself has to contain a number of leadership moments where the characters in the historical story are placed in a dilemma, faced huge obstacles or overwhelming odds. The designers of the experience have to be able to show how what happened--for better or worse--reflected valid leadership principles. That implies creating or applying a leadership model that can be used as the learning content of the program. It also suggests that that leadership principle will be meaningful and useful to participants and that they can relate present-day stories to it. Without this framework as a foundation, participants can lose the thread of the lessons being taught.
Summary: The Final Ingredient
In all candor, an historical leadership experience is not for everyone. These venues can be difficult to reach, physical conditions are not always ideal for walking around, let alone learning, and the onus for making links to current work challenges is squarely on the participant. Despite that, we have found that the best participants are those who have sought out the experience and come voluntarily, are willing to do the pre-readings, engage in discussion and work at conjuring up the past. So, the final ingredient in making a historical leadership learning experience effective is the commitment of the participant. When the combination of right venue, story, leadership model, dedicated facilitators and engaged participants converge, this kind of learning event can have a life-long impact.
"You are Brigadier General John Buford," says our group leader. "You are in command of a scouting element of the Army of the Potomac. You have 2,000 cavalry and two small artillery batteries. Your orders are to find the location of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia of 75,000 men that invaded Pennsylvania about a week ago. Now you've found them. Behind the ridge is a crossroads town named Gettysburg. Ten miles to the south, I Corps with 20,000 Union troops are marching north under Major General John Reynolds. That's a good half-day march or more. There are 80,000 additional Union troops coming in from other directions, within a day's march. In front of you are the leading elements of A. P. Hill's corps from North Carolina under General Henry Heth. You and your cavalry are the only Union forces between the rebels and the high ground behind you. Take a look around at the terrain, what do you see? What are your choices? What are your assets and liabilities? What would you do? How do you know your choice will succeed?"
The members of the group look around, sensing the urgency that John Buford must have felt, and they begin to answer. Soon, the discussion becomes lively, with different options being weighed and debated. The facilitator turns the questioning into a dialogue about finding and recognizing opportunities in the corporate world. Each member of the group talks about how opportunities and risk are evaluated in his or her work unit or corporation and how the leader is sometimes the first the individual to see an opening for doing something new or different. The facilitator sums up the discussion by threading together the comments and refers back to Buford's decision to hold off the Confederates until Reynolds' divisions came up. "He was a leader who knew how to calculate a risk; he knew holding the ground was worth it." Heads nod and reflect on the concept of calculated risk. The group breaks up briefly as different members wander across the ground, deep in thought. Then, the group gathers and heads to the next stop on their way around the battlefield at Gettysburg where another incident and another leader's actions will be analyzed and discussed.
How Did Leadership Development Get to Seminary Ridge?
In the 1990s and continuing today, new trends emerged in the management development world. The three- to five-day program largely moved out of favor; training for executives had to be special-and short for them to invest their scarce time. To compete for the attention of technology-savvy younger managers, the experience also had to be entertaining. Authors and speakers with unique theories were hired to run workshops. Celebrity professors from business schools were asked to lecture on the latest thinking and lead a case discussion on a topic of interest. Philosophers taught the Classics to CEOs and their teams; English professors wrung management theory out of Shakespeare. All of these had in common a remarkable intellectual challenge, an outside perspective and expertise, and brevity.
However, something seemed to be missing from the latest waves of management and leadership training. To be sure, the concepts, cases, and models were interesting, even compelling, and, despite the raft of experiential exercises, the instructional models were mostly based on discussion and dialogue. Leadership training had evolved into a left-brained exercise-cerebral, analytical, and predictable.
Around the end of the 1990s, a new approach emerged: the historical leadership experience. Momentum for this method started when several retired US military officers rekindled an old military teaching tradition-the Staff Ride-and marketed it to corporations. As we will see, this new approach had design elements-emotion and drama that corporate audiences had rarely experienced. While many current historical leadership experiences revolve around battlefield visits and military themes, the method is appropriate for a wide variety of venues and topics. A historical event that involves a dramatic, documented story, a cast of visible characters, and a place to visit preferably with actual artifacts can serve as a platform to teach management competencies in a memorable and unique way. The designer of the experience needs to understand the historical story, have insight into the possibilities for linking management concepts to that and create an agenda that takes advantage of the setting and story. The successful implementation of the design then depends on the creativity of a skilled facilitator to draw out the lessons. What makes the historical leadership lesson different is that participants learn principles that are wrapped around indelible images of characters and events.
A historical leadership experience involves bringing students to a site, methodically visiting specific locations, retelling the story of the events that took place, and discussing various topics with an instructor.
Historical Leadership Lesson Example: The Gettysburg Experience
By looking at a specific example of a historical leadership experience created for corporate audiences, we can examine the challenges to instructional design and how they were met. This examination of constraints and approaches is meant to serve as a guideline to others who have an opportunity to pursue this unique instructional model.
This writer became involved with Gettysburg as a leadership development tool when an organization needed help in designing and co-conducting a leadership experience for executives which they would subsequently market. As a design consultant and leadership expert, I would be working with a retired US Army Colonel and former military history professor from the US Military Academy at West Point who knew the story and all the characters to a high level of detail. That this would be a significant design challenge became clear when we made an inventory of the conditions we would be facing:
The story.
In the American Civil War, the battle of Gettysburg represented the culminating moment in a chain of events intended, by the Confederate leadership, to force US President Abraham Lincoln to accept a negotiatied settlement or to encourage the British to support the South. The challenge was that story was complex; a participant needed a contextual understanding of the causes of the war, progress of the war to July 1, 1863, Confederate General Robert E. Lee's strategy, the many characters involved and much more. There was additional useful information about the military technology of the time, how armies were organized, what their methods were, and other background information that would allow the participant to better grasp and envision the events they were about to vicariously relive. The challenge was to get participants up to speed on this background without overburdening them.
Even when participants were oriented to the historical events that led up to the incidents to be discussed, literally everyone knew the outcome of the historical story beforehand. The Confederates were defeated; Pickett's Charge was a gallant attempt which failed; Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain's regiment from Maine bravely held the end of the Union left flank at Little Round Top. The question was how the designers could create suspense under these conditions.
The terrain, the location and the weather.
A historical leadership lesson takes place at the venue where events occurred. At Gettysburg, that meant on the ground at the National Military Park in Gettysburg, PA. The park itself is 20 square miles with 26 miles of public and parkland roads transiting the site. Walking to the various sites required traversing muddy fields, stonewalls, climbing steep hills, dealing with rain and occasionally very hot weather. In addition, we would have to do most of our discussions standing up; there are no benches nor places for repose. And, as we would be on the ground for several hours at a time, there was a need to be near rest room facilities that were, in fact, available but not necessarily easy to get to.
In addition, Gettysburg is remote even today. It is at least two hours from major airports in Baltimore and Washington, D.C. The experience could not be a half-day or a single day. The leadership experience would require participants to invest two days and another for travel. So, the pressure for a creating a valuable use of time for busy executives is magnified.
The crowds.
Gettysburg attracts two million visitors a year. These include tourists, families, school groups, other youth groups, veterans and organized tours of all sizes. Professional and licensed Gettysburg tour guides conduct many of these tours. In addition, there are yearly reenactments conducted by dedicated enthusiasts who represent both Union and Confederate forces. The challenge is that there can potentially be many people arriving at a specific site at the same time as the leadership class. This raises questions about how to conduct meaningful discussions in the midst of other people milling around, some being lectured to by tour guides, other posing for pictures, etc. The stories of what individuals did and the choices they had are both dramatic and poignant. Creating that mood in a public setting would be difficult.
The leadership model.
There was a question of what model to teach. Was it the Jim Collins, Good to Great construct, or Noel Tichy's, Leadership Engine? Would we look to Warren Bennis, Peter Drucker or Ram Charan? Was it a question of practical leadership lessons like those of Captain Michael Abrashoff's It's Your Ship, or do we embrace Tom Peters' provocative views? When looking at examples of leaders in action, we needed to relate what we saw to some context, a framework that provided an interpretative bridge. With literally thousands of theories and constructs to choose from, we needed a content base we could use to reflect the events that occurred in 1863.
The "link."
Probably the biggest challenge of all was creating the link between what was discussed in the leadership experience and what participants could take away as practical lessons for their own practice of leadership. In a way, the experience of looking into the details of a Civil War character's predicament and discussing options had a risk of devolving into a stimulating and entertaining tour, with participants playing the role of interested and glorified tourists. Without the lessons of the past being tied directly to present-day work and leadership challenges, the value of the experience as a development technique would be questionable.
Taken as a whole, this inventory of challenges is formidable. However, we kept in mind the best asset we had: an incredibly dramatic story with many subplots and personalities and the ground itself where the events took place.
How We Approached The Design Challenge
Our first decision was to closely examine the history and learn what happened--what preceded and followed the event. We read Michael Shaara's Killer Angels, a historical novel noted for a high degree of scholarly accuracy, Shelby Foote's Stars In Their Courses, a closely written description of the campaign, the classic study of character, Lee's Lieutenants, by Douglas Southall Freeman and historian James M. McPherson's Hallowed Ground. We even watched the Ted Turner movie, Gettysburg, which was filmed on location, to better understand the immensity of the drama that took place. We poured over books of photographs of the battle, like David Eicher's Gettysburg Battlefield.
What emerged from this review were two things: A sense of the characters involved-who they were as people, their personalities and their strengths and foibles. We also identified what we called leadership moments-those incidents where an opportunity was identified, a decision had to be made, an obstacle to be surmounted or a desperate plan needed to be communicated.
Leadership Moments: The Stories
The leadership moments formed the thread of the series of stories we would tell our participants and which contained potential lessons that could link to current day leadership dilemmas. The first was John Buford's decision to forestall the Confederate advance on the morning of July 1. We talked about Buford's experience as an Indian fighter, the rapid fire carbines of his troops, the advantages he created by using a particular formation called a defense in depth. Another was Lee's decision to engage the Army of the Potomac after the action had already started through a chance encounter without knowing what he was facing due to the absence of intelligence from his missing scout, General Jeb Stuart and his cavalry. In another situation, with the first afternoon of the battle moving to the Confederate's advantage, Lee saw an opportunity to take Cemetery Hill, giving General Richard Ewell a vague command to take the ground "if practicable." Ewell's subsequent hesitation cost the Confederates their advantage, and his caution in deciding not to move against the hill is debated today as a turning point in not only the battle, but in American history. Some historians posit that if Ewell had taken the high ground that afternoon, the entire war --and American history--might have turned out completely differently.
We also viewed Union General Dan Sickle's autonomous decision on Day Two of the battle to move his troops to what he felt was a better defensive position at the Peach Orchard-contrary to General George Meade's orders-as an interesting interpretation of initiative. Sickle's flamboyant personality, non-military background, and scandalous past-he shot his wife's lover and was the first person in the US to use the insanity defense-had all the elements of a rich discussion on how creative energy could be managed and the role of disciple in modern organizations. The story of the 20th Maine Regiment at Little Round Top was an example of perseverance and ingenuity in the face of overwhelming obstacles. The ongoing and unsettling conflict between Lee and his main lieutenant, General James Longstreet, who opposed the idea of an offensive strategy from the beginning of the campaign, sets up a classic leadership challenge of getting people to buy into a plan and execute against it. Finally, we included Abraham Lincoln's vision of a nation and what the conflict meant to him.
These leadership moments all had a sense of drama and tension. When the stories were told, they unraveled details of what actually happened made for rich discussion and debate of the choices the leaders faced, the complexity of decisions, absence of easy answers and urgency of difficult moments-exactly the kinds of issues business leaders face today.
A Leadership Model: What Emerged From The Stories
One of the challenges we faced was identifying a leadership model to relate all these stories to. This would provide a unifying lens, so to speak, so that we could understand these long-ago leadership moments in context and relate them to current challenges. Taken individually, for example, each leadership moment we identified represented an individual's encounter with leadership principles- positive or negative examples of some aspect of leadership behavior. Ewell's over-analysis of the situation at Cemetery Hill could be taken as an example of having to be highly certain before deciding; Lee's laissez-faire attitude of planning-delegating details to his officers-represents setting an organizational climate where low clarity can have a devastating impact. Chamberlain's ingenuity and courage represent what we expect every leader to demonstrate-emotional commitment and dedication. But, what was the thread-the construct, the set of principles or behaviors-- that held all these disparate principles together? What we needed as a model that put the leadership concept together and described what leaders did. It had to be simple, behavioral and most important, useful.
After reviewing leadership models from many well-known sources, it became clear to us that one model would not fit our needs. The source of this Leadership Lens, as we called it, would be our knowledge of leadership behavior as we knew it from our consulting and research and the characters and their stories.
The Leadership Lens we synthesized is a simple three-part model.
Create The Fundamental Idea:
A leader's role is to scan the environment, learn the "ground", recognize opportunities, and from that, create a focused direction. The implication goes beyond the idea of a vision statement; a leader is the source of the vision, the set of eyes that is always looking for opportunities. Once that vision is clear in the leader's mind, it has to be formulated in a way that others can see it as well. While this is a relatively simple concept, we felt it was a reflection of all the leaders we have studied and certainly was reflected for better or worse by the cast of characters at Gettysburg. Robert E. Lee, for example, viewed the invasion of the North as a key strategic move to bring about an armistice. While his lieutenants knew his vision, they weren't totally clear on how this was going to be carried out, creating the root cause for the conflict between General James Longstreet, the second in command, and Lee.
Set and Impose Operating Values, Practices, Principles:
A leader is the tone-setter and rule-maker of an organization. As we know from organizational climate research, management creates a feeling of what it is like to work in the organization based on the rules and practices the leader puts in place. This feeling of climate is a key to motivation. The leader figuratively puts the operating manual of the organization in place or changes what is already there to something more in line with his or her beliefs and values. We view this as a conscious imposition by the leader. W. Morrell and S. Capparell's study of Antarctic explorer Ernest Shackleton, Shackelton's Way, depicts a leader who created a work environment where all crew members, regardless of role, had to perform menial tasks and, at the same time, were expected to be positive, cheerful and cooperative with each other. At Gettysburg, we learn that Union commander General George Meade was appointed to his role two days before the battle, having no time to create an operating climate of his own other than the usual military discipline. This gap can be viewed as contributing to his subordinate Dan Sickles' feeling free to take independent action which led to confusion and potential ruin on Day Two of the battle. To this day, new managers are tested by direct reports who soon learn that strong leaders set up clear boundaries and expectations for performance.
Demonstrate An Emotional Edge:
Every leader creates an emotional reaction in his or her followers, based on the level of commitment and dedication he or she overtly displays. The leader can demonstrate high moral values, boundless energy, steady and calm resolve, affection for employees or courage; there isn't a right way to demonstrate an emotional edge. What counts is how the leader shows up as a person, exposing his or her commitment, beliefs and energy. When a leader captures his or her employee's attention and respect, their motivation will follow. Lee was regarded with great affection by his troops. Even in defeat, Robert E. Lee was highly respected by both sides. The idea of emotional edge is completely subjective; it is one of those factors that you know when you see it. Buford's resolve at McPherson's Ridge, Chamberlain's courage on Little Round Top and other examples all have modern equivalents in corporate and civic leadership. Who could not feel moved by Rudi Guiliani's sense of command and compassion on September 11? Who could not feel impressed and excited by Steve Jobs' announcement of another innovation? Of course, a prime example of emotional edge is Lincoln's speech at the Gettysburg battlefield. The humility and respect he paid to those who gave "their last full measure of devotion" and the simple resolution that they "have not died in vain" and that the government of, by and for the people "shall not perish from this earth" shows what courage can be in the face of uncertainty.
These three elements and the more specific behaviors which further describe them, taken together, represent an easy to remember and apply view of leadership. We wanted our model to be "portable" so our participants could carry it around with them in their memories and recall it when we discussed different leadership moments. As we learned, the model became the springboard for discussion; participants were able to critique the character's leadership moments and relate their own corporate examples using the elements of the model.
The Flow and Timing
With the leadership moments and model in mind, we created a flow of events, linking these together from the beginning of the battle to its calamitous conclusion at Pickett's Charge. Our idea was to tell the story of the three-day battle in chronological order. We would start with Buford, move to Lee's decision, Ewell's uncertainty, ending Day One of the story. Day Two of the battle would cover a discussion about Lee's conflict with Longstreet, his decision to conduct a coordinated attack, Sickle's excursion into the Peach Orchard, and the story of Chamberlain on Little Round Top. We would cover Day Three of the battle by revisiting Lee's decision to attack the middle of the Union line while attempting an end-run cavalry attack, how Lee's management style changed from more or less laissez-faire to highly directive, Longstreet's reluctance and his choices as a leader, and the consequences of Pickett's Charge. The final lesson would take place at the Gettysburg cemetery where Lincoln made his address.
Each "Day" of the battle would require at least a half day of instruction and would visit at least three locations. We would begin early, head by bus to each venue, pause for lunch and continue. A chase car driven by a staff member would accommodate the need for people to take a break. We selected locations that were off the beaten track, for the most part, or we visited them when crowds were minimal. For example, the group found itself quite alone on Little Round Top at the end of our first day of the experience.
We had a debrief session after our day on the battlefield in a classroom like setting at our hotel. The discussion involved comparing what happened to incidents participants were familiar with and in extracting key messages and ideas that became illuminated by the experience.
Telling The Big Story: Setting the Context
Our approach was to tell the story of a series of decisions by a relatively small number of people and discuss these in terms of the leadership model we created. The larger story was now background while our leadership moments became foreground. Our participants needed to understand the historical context and the larger issues being played out by the characters in the story.
Toward that end, we planned to ask our participants to read Michael Shaara's Killer Angels prior to coming to the leadership experience. Knowing that some participants might not read the entire novel, we also provided them with a short historical synopsis of the origins of the Civil War and the history of the battle of Gettysburg. In our opening introductory session, our military historian-facilitator planned a concise lecture description of the how the war was going just prior to Lee's decision to invade the North. Finally, we found that the bus chartered for the experience had audio-visual capabilities, allowing us to use scenes from the movie, Gettysburg, to orient our participants before arriving at a location as well as reviewing significant incidents after we left a location. We felt we could craft these elements into a design that would start with readings, continue with an orientation lecture, and be supported by handouts and movies.
Making the Link
The leadership lens became the key vehicle for linking the program to each participant's real-world leadership challenge. We used the model to summarize our discussions of the key leadership moments, and we drilled down on them for specific "how-tos" in our debriefing sessions. For example, if participants had stated that motivating staff was an issue for them at work, we would return to that personal learning theme whenever the leadership moment we were discussing was relevant. "What did you learn from Lee's behavior about how a leader should or shouldn't motivate his direct reports?" would be a typical summary question. Through discussion of the historical character's difficulties and actions, participants were able to appreciate the impact of having a clear, relevant, challenging Fundamental Idea-Vision can be to direct reports. In debriefing, we would ask participants what the historical characters could have done differently in setting a vision and what some good examples were of corporate leaders who had motivating Fundamental Ideas. From this exchange, the facilitators were able to tease out the characteristics of a strong Fundamental Idea and how it could be used to motivate direct reports. The participants collected these thoughts and incorporated them into the learning journals.
That aspect of making the link between the story and real work is a fairly predictable design feature. There were, however, other factors unique to a historical learning experience that made the lessons memorable. The drama of each leader's story, the very act of standing on the ground where the story took place and the poignancy of the outcomes created a strong emotional reaction in each participant. That reaction cemented the underlying meaning of the leadership principle into place. The image of General Ewell standing at the base of Cemetery Hill, struggling to make a decision, his hesitation, the vague instructions he was given, the fading daylight, the opportunity lost adds a dimension to the concept of analysis paralysis that can't be conjured up in a classroom discussion. Walking the same mile or so of ground that Pickett's divisions crossed under heavy fire, taking momentary refuge in the swales, emerging exposed under the Union's guns imprints a lesson about courage, loyalty, and a leader's emotional edge in choosing to take a huge risk offers a lesson that is impossible to forget.
Bear in mind, we were telling our leadership stories on an empty stage; the actors had gone long ago. What ultimately makes a historical leadership lesson work is the power of place, the stories of real leaders and the imagination of participants.
Learning Leadership From History: Lessons Learned
The Gettysburg battle is only one example of a how leadership can be learned from history. We have also conducted brief sessions on board "Old Ironsides"-USS Constitution-in Boston Harbor and have plans for non-military venues. Thomas Edison's workshop, the site of the first nuclear reaction under the football stadium at the University of Chicago, Lewis and Clark's fort on the Oregon coast are examples of sites that have potential for this approach.
From working with these settings, it is clear there are some requirements for a successful historical leadership learning experience.
A significant, well-documented story with dramatic events
The historical event has to have a powerful story where momentous decisions were made and far-reaching implications were played out. Like any good story, there has to be drama, conflict, overwhelming odds, emotion and a lot of "what-if" moments. In addition, the story has to be documented, preferably from a number of first-hand sources.
A compelling set of characters
The story needs to contain main characters and lesser lights who have dimensionality, personality, and depth. When we learn that General Ewell had just returned from convalescent leave and had been married while away from the war, his hesitation at Cemetery Hill takes on another dimension. In preparing this kind of learning activity, the facilitators and designers are obliged to do their homework and dig through the sources for facts that round out the characters.
An accessible, intact setting
As noted, the site of the leadership lesson is a critical asset. Being in the same exact place where momentous events took place pulls on participants' imagination and helps dissolve time. Granted, not every participant is able to make the imaginative leap or has the sensitivity to see what historical characters can teach them. However, with careful pre-readings, a thoughtful scene-setting presentation, expert facilitation from group leaders who have a flair for story telling, the emotional connection can be made for those who engage the idea.
Clear lessons from decisions, initiatives, opportunities
Finally, the story itself has to contain a number of leadership moments where the characters in the historical story are placed in a dilemma, faced huge obstacles or overwhelming odds. The designers of the experience have to be able to show how what happened--for better or worse--reflected valid leadership principles. That implies creating or applying a leadership model that can be used as the learning content of the program. It also suggests that that leadership principle will be meaningful and useful to participants and that they can relate present-day stories to it. Without this framework as a foundation, participants can lose the thread of the lessons being taught.
Summary: The Final Ingredient
In all candor, an historical leadership experience is not for everyone. These venues can be difficult to reach, physical conditions are not always ideal for walking around, let alone learning, and the onus for making links to current work challenges is squarely on the participant. Despite that, we have found that the best participants are those who have sought out the experience and come voluntarily, are willing to do the pre-readings, engage in discussion and work at conjuring up the past. So, the final ingredient in making a historical leadership learning experience effective is the commitment of the participant. When the combination of right venue, story, leadership model, dedicated facilitators and engaged participants converge, this kind of learning event can have a life-long impact.
The Real Story and Truth About the Value of Leadership Trait Theory
I will make the case that Leadership traits exist, and admit that the situation faced may call from different traits or different application, or combinations of traits. Some scholars discount the value of traits in leaders, or their impact on individuals becoming successful and effective leaders. My published leadership and adversity Doctoral research documents the value of leadership traits for the sixteen prominent leaders that I personally interviewed who all overcame adversity and became successful leaders, in spite of their adversities, included: Dr. Tony Bonanzino, Jack Canfield, William Draper III, U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch, Mark Victor Hansen, Monzer Hourani, U.S. Senator Daniel Inouye, J. Terrence Lanni, Dr. John Malone, Angelo Mozilo, Larry Pino, Dr. Nido Qubein, U.S. Army Major General Sid Shachnow, Dr. John Sperling, Dr. Blenda Wilson, and Zig Ziglar.
My leadership and adversity research has been peer debriefed, reviewed and agreed with by five internationally known, well respected leadership scholars, and best-selling authors: Dr. Ken Blanchard, Dr. John Kotter, Professor Jim Kouzes, Dr. Paul Stoltz, and Dr. Meg Wheatley.
My Doctoral dissertation research revealed that sixteen prominent leaders specifically indentified as number of leadership traits that they believed were important in becoming a leader. My research revealed that, honesty and integrity were high on their lists of the essential qualities of a leader. The sixteen prominent leaders and research participants shared an emphasis on the willingness to serve those they lead and to be a humble servant-leader.
Under the umbrella of leadership traits, the notion of the importance of servant leadership and being a Humble Servant Leader (from my leadership research) is repeated here because it remained a strong theme in the sixteen prominent leaders' interviews. The sixteen prominent leaders I interviewed all talked about the importance of caring about people and listening to their needs. The participants emphasized that having clear and consistent communication and willingness to share their vision, their objectives, and the tone of the journey was essential to their success as leaders. They believe that having a complete and deep understanding of the business was needed to lead and succeed. They were quick to repeat the need to be able to cope with adversity 'head-on,' overcome obstacles, and view challenges as opportunities.
The question is: Are leadership traits real or a myth? Dozens of leadership authors (even some well-known leadership scholars), and no I am not going the specifically identify them by name, as it may cause some embarrassment, has specifically claimed that "leadership trait theory is dead," "leadership trait theory is out of step with the mainstream of current academic scholars thoughts in the field of leadership," or "recent leadership research by noted scholars disagree with the concept there are traits of leaders."
I found that the source of the misinformation stems around an article by Stogdill which is frequently misquoted or misinterpreted. Many leadership writers, even some leadership scholars, misquoted or misunderstood the article. But they have commented on his now sixty year old article from his review and findings from various trait studies, relying on a prior interpretation, instead going back the primary document. He is often cited as finding them contradictory or inconclusive. Several authors have also stated that the well-respected late Professor Stogdill could not find a reliable and coherent pattern in the 120 trait studies he initially reviewed.
I re-read the entire 1948 article by Stogdill, and he never made the statements that were attributed to him regarding his alleged opinion that Leadership Trait Theory is false or not true. I personally and professional do not believe that that leadership theory is false or dead.
I will proceed to counter and document the false information, or misinformation, that leadership traits are untrue or invalid. Stogdill in his reporting of his leadership research, just instead used the term Leadership Factors instead of Leadership Traits. In the original article which was published in a 1948 issue of the Journal of Psychology, Stogdill discussed in detail the results of his leadership foundation literature review and study, in which he found and published that certain factors (or traits) which have been associated with leadership could all probably be classified under the general headings of capacity, achievement, responsibility, participation, status, and situation..
Of particular note, what Stogdill's calls his Situational Factor (Situational Leadership Trait) is very similar or comparable to the underpinnings of leadership philosophies such as servant-leadership, principle-centered leadership, or even transformation leadership. He explicated in detail the meaning of each factor, using terms or adjectives for his sub-factors that others might call Leadership Traits.
Stogdill, discussed what other leadership scholar have before and since called Traits, but he re-categorized them and called "factors" He instead as argued that the five individual Factors" with "sub-factors, existed, but that there was a sixth factor which was the specific situation itself.
My Doctoral dissertation leadership research clearly showed that there are a number of key leadership traits or qualities. One of the key factors usually not included in the list of traits is the ability to overcome adversity. The ability of leader to effective deal with adversity or obstacles was an important trait, according to the sixteen prominent leaders I interviewed on the subject of leadership and adversity. One of my leading scholars that peer reviewed my leadership research, Professor Jim Kouzes, said, as reported in my published Doctoral dissertation, that he generally they would agree with my research finding statement that the adversity or obstacles in their adult lives was the most important event in their development as leaders.
Stogdill did conducted a follow-up survey to his 1948 work of 163 individual leadership trait studies and updated it through 1970. The resulting comparison of the 1948 and 1974 research was reviewed in narrative form and then compiled into table form, labeled with the six basic characteristic types factors (traits) and multiple sub-categories sub-factors (sub-traits).
In his later work on leadership factors (aka leadership traits), Stogdill (1974) simply modified his six basic characteristic types and expanded them to include eight factor descriptions. One of the key elements of the later review of characteristics was the inclusion of a much larger percentage of survey information gathered much more information or data from adults in the working world. The trait study done by Stogdill reviewed a series of trait studies done mostly on children or social groups, not usually on adults.
Stogdill's original article has been repeatedly misquoted as evidence that personal traits have little significance or bearing on leadership. This consistent and out-of-context misquoting, or simple misunderstanding, of his position, bothered Stogdill enough that he clarified that he did not hold this view on the lack of importance of these traits. In fact, Stogdill, later specifically noted in writing that his 1948 work had been cited frequently as evidence in support of the view that leadership is entirely situational in origin and that no personal characteristics are predictive of leadership. This view seems to overemphasize the situational and underemphasize the personal nature of leadership. He indicated that different leadership skills and traits are required in different situations.
The behaviors and traits enabling a mobster to gain and maintain control over a criminal gang are not the same as those enabling a religious leader to gain and maintain a large following. Yet certain general qualities, such as courage, fortitude, and conviction-appear to characterize both.
How could Stogdill have not believed in the value and relevance of Leadership Traits, when Bass and Stogdill (1990) concluded their chapter entitled Traits of Leadership: A Follow-up with the statement, "Evidence abounds about particular patterns of traits that are of consequence to leadership."
Why did he and Bass devote three chapters on the Traits of Leadership, if he did not believe in them?
If any doubt remains, Bass summed up his position on the importance and transferability of certain traits and attributes were transferable or situational. Even though Stogdill has been misquoted by other scholars, the record shows that he and Bass, 1990, in their best-selling Handbook of leadership reviewed the last century of leadership research on traits or attributes which they documented and footnoted in nine full chapters under the heading Personal Attributes of Leaders
My Doctoral dissertation leadership research clearly shows that "leadership trait theory" is not dead or false. The leadership literature and my Doctoral dissertation leadership research seems to indicate that traits alone are not enough, but that traits may be helpful, or even foundational, or a precondition in the development of leadership. It may even be possible that a particular combination of Traits, Factors, and Attributes for a given situation may be a conditional precedent to developing effective leadership. Leadership Traits (regardless of the term used) are clearly Not dead, just relabeled.
What is the real difference between leadership: Traits, Factors, and Attributes, it is really it just scholarly semantics.
My leadership and adversity research has been peer debriefed, reviewed and agreed with by five internationally known, well respected leadership scholars, and best-selling authors: Dr. Ken Blanchard, Dr. John Kotter, Professor Jim Kouzes, Dr. Paul Stoltz, and Dr. Meg Wheatley.
My Doctoral dissertation research revealed that sixteen prominent leaders specifically indentified as number of leadership traits that they believed were important in becoming a leader. My research revealed that, honesty and integrity were high on their lists of the essential qualities of a leader. The sixteen prominent leaders and research participants shared an emphasis on the willingness to serve those they lead and to be a humble servant-leader.
Under the umbrella of leadership traits, the notion of the importance of servant leadership and being a Humble Servant Leader (from my leadership research) is repeated here because it remained a strong theme in the sixteen prominent leaders' interviews. The sixteen prominent leaders I interviewed all talked about the importance of caring about people and listening to their needs. The participants emphasized that having clear and consistent communication and willingness to share their vision, their objectives, and the tone of the journey was essential to their success as leaders. They believe that having a complete and deep understanding of the business was needed to lead and succeed. They were quick to repeat the need to be able to cope with adversity 'head-on,' overcome obstacles, and view challenges as opportunities.
The question is: Are leadership traits real or a myth? Dozens of leadership authors (even some well-known leadership scholars), and no I am not going the specifically identify them by name, as it may cause some embarrassment, has specifically claimed that "leadership trait theory is dead," "leadership trait theory is out of step with the mainstream of current academic scholars thoughts in the field of leadership," or "recent leadership research by noted scholars disagree with the concept there are traits of leaders."
I found that the source of the misinformation stems around an article by Stogdill which is frequently misquoted or misinterpreted. Many leadership writers, even some leadership scholars, misquoted or misunderstood the article. But they have commented on his now sixty year old article from his review and findings from various trait studies, relying on a prior interpretation, instead going back the primary document. He is often cited as finding them contradictory or inconclusive. Several authors have also stated that the well-respected late Professor Stogdill could not find a reliable and coherent pattern in the 120 trait studies he initially reviewed.
I re-read the entire 1948 article by Stogdill, and he never made the statements that were attributed to him regarding his alleged opinion that Leadership Trait Theory is false or not true. I personally and professional do not believe that that leadership theory is false or dead.
I will proceed to counter and document the false information, or misinformation, that leadership traits are untrue or invalid. Stogdill in his reporting of his leadership research, just instead used the term Leadership Factors instead of Leadership Traits. In the original article which was published in a 1948 issue of the Journal of Psychology, Stogdill discussed in detail the results of his leadership foundation literature review and study, in which he found and published that certain factors (or traits) which have been associated with leadership could all probably be classified under the general headings of capacity, achievement, responsibility, participation, status, and situation..
Of particular note, what Stogdill's calls his Situational Factor (Situational Leadership Trait) is very similar or comparable to the underpinnings of leadership philosophies such as servant-leadership, principle-centered leadership, or even transformation leadership. He explicated in detail the meaning of each factor, using terms or adjectives for his sub-factors that others might call Leadership Traits.
Stogdill, discussed what other leadership scholar have before and since called Traits, but he re-categorized them and called "factors" He instead as argued that the five individual Factors" with "sub-factors, existed, but that there was a sixth factor which was the specific situation itself.
My Doctoral dissertation leadership research clearly showed that there are a number of key leadership traits or qualities. One of the key factors usually not included in the list of traits is the ability to overcome adversity. The ability of leader to effective deal with adversity or obstacles was an important trait, according to the sixteen prominent leaders I interviewed on the subject of leadership and adversity. One of my leading scholars that peer reviewed my leadership research, Professor Jim Kouzes, said, as reported in my published Doctoral dissertation, that he generally they would agree with my research finding statement that the adversity or obstacles in their adult lives was the most important event in their development as leaders.
Stogdill did conducted a follow-up survey to his 1948 work of 163 individual leadership trait studies and updated it through 1970. The resulting comparison of the 1948 and 1974 research was reviewed in narrative form and then compiled into table form, labeled with the six basic characteristic types factors (traits) and multiple sub-categories sub-factors (sub-traits).
In his later work on leadership factors (aka leadership traits), Stogdill (1974) simply modified his six basic characteristic types and expanded them to include eight factor descriptions. One of the key elements of the later review of characteristics was the inclusion of a much larger percentage of survey information gathered much more information or data from adults in the working world. The trait study done by Stogdill reviewed a series of trait studies done mostly on children or social groups, not usually on adults.
Stogdill's original article has been repeatedly misquoted as evidence that personal traits have little significance or bearing on leadership. This consistent and out-of-context misquoting, or simple misunderstanding, of his position, bothered Stogdill enough that he clarified that he did not hold this view on the lack of importance of these traits. In fact, Stogdill, later specifically noted in writing that his 1948 work had been cited frequently as evidence in support of the view that leadership is entirely situational in origin and that no personal characteristics are predictive of leadership. This view seems to overemphasize the situational and underemphasize the personal nature of leadership. He indicated that different leadership skills and traits are required in different situations.
The behaviors and traits enabling a mobster to gain and maintain control over a criminal gang are not the same as those enabling a religious leader to gain and maintain a large following. Yet certain general qualities, such as courage, fortitude, and conviction-appear to characterize both.
How could Stogdill have not believed in the value and relevance of Leadership Traits, when Bass and Stogdill (1990) concluded their chapter entitled Traits of Leadership: A Follow-up with the statement, "Evidence abounds about particular patterns of traits that are of consequence to leadership."
Why did he and Bass devote three chapters on the Traits of Leadership, if he did not believe in them?
If any doubt remains, Bass summed up his position on the importance and transferability of certain traits and attributes were transferable or situational. Even though Stogdill has been misquoted by other scholars, the record shows that he and Bass, 1990, in their best-selling Handbook of leadership reviewed the last century of leadership research on traits or attributes which they documented and footnoted in nine full chapters under the heading Personal Attributes of Leaders
My Doctoral dissertation leadership research clearly shows that "leadership trait theory" is not dead or false. The leadership literature and my Doctoral dissertation leadership research seems to indicate that traits alone are not enough, but that traits may be helpful, or even foundational, or a precondition in the development of leadership. It may even be possible that a particular combination of Traits, Factors, and Attributes for a given situation may be a conditional precedent to developing effective leadership. Leadership Traits (regardless of the term used) are clearly Not dead, just relabeled.
What is the real difference between leadership: Traits, Factors, and Attributes, it is really it just scholarly semantics.
Three Ways of Defining Leadership
Here are 3 popular ways of defining leadership, each from a slightly different perspective:
1. Leadership means being the dominant individual in a group.
2. Leadership means getting things done through people.
3. Leadership means challenging the status quo, promoting a better way.
For many, leadership means doing all three of these things but there are subtle and important differences. Let's look at them one by one.
* Leadership means being the dominant individual in a group.
In primitive tribes and higher animal species the dominant individual was the leader. Being the leader simply meant having the power to attain and hold the top position for a reasonable length of time. Contrary to definition 2, you could be the leader without getting anything done through others. A leader was the person in charge even if the group was in a stable state where people went about their business as normal. As long as group members obeyed the leader's rules, the leader did not even need to be actively involved in the lives of group members, let alone get anything done through them. You could also be the leader in such a group without promoting a better way as suggested by definition 3. If you didn't need to be voted into power, why have a platform for change? You simply seized power; no sales pitch was needed on how you could make life better for the group. Yes, such leaders may have led groups successfully in battle and built great monuments with them, but, strictly speaking, you could be the leader without achieving anything through a group effort. The meaning of leadership, according to this definition, is simply to be at the top of the pile.
* Leadership means getting things done through people.
Great leaders throughout history have led their groups to momentous achievements, but the idea that leadership should be defined as getting things done through people has been developed most fully by modern business, which is all about achieving results. As business has become more complex, the leadership challenge has grown form one of the simple issuing of orders to a few "hands" to the subtle coordination of highly skilled, diverse knowledge workers to build sophisticated machines and put men on the moon. There is a problem with this definition of leadership, however. It used to belong to management. Why the switch from management to leadership? And is this a good move? Up to the late 1970's writers used the terms leadership and management interchangeably but with more emphasis on management. For example, the management theorists, Blake and Mouton, developed their famous managerial grid in the 1960's. At the time, it was portrayed as a way of identifying your management style. Today, in line with the shift to leadership, the name is the same (managerial grid) but it is now positioned as a leadership style instrument.
Similarly, we used to talk about management style more than leadership style. Managers could be either "theory X" and task oriented or "theory Y" and concerned for people. But a profound shift in thinking took place in a revolutionary period lasting from the late 1970's through the mid 1980's. The cause of this upheaval was the commercial success of Japanese industry in North America. This led pundits to claim that the U.S. had lost its competitive edge because U.S. management was too bureaucratic, controlling, uninspiring and inept at fostering innovation. Rather than upgrade management, there was an emotional over reaction such that management was rejected and replaced by leadership. Since then, leaders were portrayed as theory Y, inspiring and concerned about people while management got saddled with all the bad guy attributes of being controlling, theory X, uninspiring and narrowly task focused. Similarly, the distinction between being transformational and transactional was originally launched to differentiate two leadership styles, but it wasn't long before it became used to separate leadership from management, the former being transformational and the latter transactional.
In our haste to trash management, we grabbed whatever tools were handy but with heavy costs. First, we painted leadership into a corner by suggesting that you needed to be an inspiring cheerleader to be a leader, leaving no room for quiet or simply factual leadership. Second, we created a bloated concept of leadership by banishing management. Third, by attaching leadership to getting things done through a team, we associated leadership irrevocably with being in charge of people, thereby ruling out positionless leadership. Yes, there is informal leadership but this concept is essentially the same as formal leadership except for their power bases. Like its formal counterpart, informal leadership still means taking charge and managing a group to achieve a target. In either case, you need to have the personal presence, organizational skills and motivation to take charge to be a leader.
* Leadership means challenging the status quo, promoting a better way.
We have always felt, intuitively, that leaders have the courage to stand up and be counted. They go against the grain, often at great risk, to call for change. We only need to look at Martin Luther King, Jr. His leadership rested not so much on his oratorical skills - they were just icing on the cake. He was a leader primarily because he marched and spoke against injustice. He challenged the status quo and promoted a better world.
However, and this is the whole point here, if you think through what it means to challenge the status quo or advocate change, there is no necessary implication that you have to be in charge of the people you are trying to influence. The bottom line is that this third definition, when worked through fully, gives us a way to break the stranglehold of the previous two definitions. The benefit of this move is that we gain a clearer understanding of how all employees can show leadership even if they totally lack the skills or inclination to take charge of groups in a managerial sense, even informally. Think again of Martin Luther King, Jr. He sought to move the U.S. Government and the population at large to think differently about such issues as segregation on buses. His leadership efforts were successful when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled such discrimination unconstitutional. Now, it is obvious that he was not in a managerial role within the Supreme Court. He showed leadership to this group as an outsider. You could say the same of Jack Welch who had a leadership impact on countless businesses around the globe through his novel practices, such as being first or second in a market. Again, those who followed the lead of Jack Welch did not report to him. They were not even members of a common group.
Leadership Reinvented for the 21st Century
If we cast aside the first two definitions of leadership, what is left? If leadership means nothing more than promoting a better way, then we need to upgrade management to take care of everything to do with getting things done through people. We need to say that management does not entail being controlling, bureaucratic or theory X, that they can be as inspiring as they need to be, good at coaching, developing and empowering people.
A critical supporting fact is that the power on which leadership is based is shifting from having a dominant personality to the ability to devise new ways of working, new products and better services. Businesses that compete on the basis of rapid innovation are engaged in a war of ideas and no one has a monopoly on good ideas. This is revolutionary because it suggests that leadership can no longer be about group domination. Now, leadership is a brief influence impact, an episode or act, not an ongoing state or role. You still may need a larger than life personality to ascend to the role of Chief Executive, but leadership conceived as a good idea for a better way can be very small scale and local. Any employee with a better idea can promote it, even if only by example, without having the personal presence to be promoted to a managerial role. Strictly, speaking there are no longer any leaders, only leadership. This view captures the fact that leadership is a fleeting state that can shift quickly from one person to another. It is an impact rather than a type of person or position. It must be so if it can be shown by outsiders.
Key Features of Leadership Reinvented
* It does not involve managing people to get things done.
* It comes to an end once those led get on board. It sells the tickets for the journey; management drives the bus to the destination.
* It is a discrete episode, a one-off act of influence, not an ongoing position of dominance.
* It is based on the promotion of a better way.
* It can be shown bottom-up as well as top-down.
* It can be shown by outsiders and between competing individuals or groups.
Thought Leadership - The Essence of Leadership Reinvented
Organizations today need all employees to think creatively and to promote new products. Promoting a better idea can be called thought leadership. In a knowledge driven environment, the newest, best idea influences others to get on board. When a product developer convinces top management to adopt a new product, that person has shown thought leadership bottom-up. But it can be shown across groups as well. When Microsoft develops products or services invented by Apple or Google, they are following the lead of these innovators. This also is thought leadership.
While the possession of great emotional intelligence and the oratory of a Martin Luther King, Jr. can help thought leaders make their case, it is vital to see that these skills are nice to have add-ons, not an essential part of the meaning of leadership. Technical geeks with zero emotional intelligence and an obnoxious influencing style can show thought leadership if they can demonstrate the value of their ideas. This is very empowering because it moves us away from the demand to develop sophisticated leadership skills as a precondition of showing leadership. Strictly speaking there are no leadership skills, only influencing skills and great content. Imagine asking Tiger Woods. after the end of the third round when he is in the lead, how he developed such great leadership skills. The truth is that he shows leadership through being great at the content of his profession, not by having a separate set of talents called leadership skills. On the other hand, there are very definite management skills. Getting work done through people calls for quite sophisticated interpersonal and organizational skills.
Content is King
The point of the previous section is that convincing content or substance can trump great style or form. Having a larger than life personality may still help you get to be CEO but this is the power of style over substance. If the prospective leader has enough charisma, it almost doesn't matter what is being advocated (the content). Conversely, thought leadership is most convincing if backed up by hard evidence. Having persuasive influencing skills helps but isn't essential. This means that front line knowledge workers can focus on what it really takes to show leadership: begin by developing convincing content. If your idea is good enough it will virtually sell itself. It's not that influencing skills are not valuable. The point is that we can define leadership without mentioning influencing style. Also, there is the fact that opportunists will get on board with a great idea with no persuasion whatsoever. Thus, if it is possible to show leadership without being personally persuasive, then having such skills cannot be a necessary condition to show leadership.
The Future of Leadership
Leadership reinvented can still be shown by CEOs. They just need to accept that much of what they do needs to be reclassified as management. They also need to devote more time to fostering leadership in front line employees, thereby taking empowerment a huge leap forward. If they want to reap the full innovative potential of all employees, CEOs and other managers need to engage and inspire employees more fully. Helping them to see how all employees can show leadership now could make all the difference between winning the war of ideas and falling further behind. Where knowledge rules, the old fashioned conception of leadership as group domination is dangerously obsolete. Complexity drives specialization. It is time to bring management back from the dead to take care of getting things done through people, leaving leadership to focus on finding and promoting new directions.
Definition number 1 may still be good enough to capture what happens in small street gangs and primitive tribes but it is most clearly out of date in a world that is a war of ideas. Number 2 is a mess because it is a total confusion of leadership and management. Only definition number 3 captures all leadership - that shown by people in charge, by those with neither the inclination nor the skills to take charge, and by outsiders like Martin Luther King, Jr. Uniquely, this definition also captures what it means to be a market leading company or a leading individual or team in sports. Leadership is simply a matter of showing the way. One of the many exciting features of this definition is that followers must choose to follow of their own free will because coercive power and authority are missing. Definition number 3 captures the essence of pure leadership.
1. Leadership means being the dominant individual in a group.
2. Leadership means getting things done through people.
3. Leadership means challenging the status quo, promoting a better way.
For many, leadership means doing all three of these things but there are subtle and important differences. Let's look at them one by one.
* Leadership means being the dominant individual in a group.
In primitive tribes and higher animal species the dominant individual was the leader. Being the leader simply meant having the power to attain and hold the top position for a reasonable length of time. Contrary to definition 2, you could be the leader without getting anything done through others. A leader was the person in charge even if the group was in a stable state where people went about their business as normal. As long as group members obeyed the leader's rules, the leader did not even need to be actively involved in the lives of group members, let alone get anything done through them. You could also be the leader in such a group without promoting a better way as suggested by definition 3. If you didn't need to be voted into power, why have a platform for change? You simply seized power; no sales pitch was needed on how you could make life better for the group. Yes, such leaders may have led groups successfully in battle and built great monuments with them, but, strictly speaking, you could be the leader without achieving anything through a group effort. The meaning of leadership, according to this definition, is simply to be at the top of the pile.
* Leadership means getting things done through people.
Great leaders throughout history have led their groups to momentous achievements, but the idea that leadership should be defined as getting things done through people has been developed most fully by modern business, which is all about achieving results. As business has become more complex, the leadership challenge has grown form one of the simple issuing of orders to a few "hands" to the subtle coordination of highly skilled, diverse knowledge workers to build sophisticated machines and put men on the moon. There is a problem with this definition of leadership, however. It used to belong to management. Why the switch from management to leadership? And is this a good move? Up to the late 1970's writers used the terms leadership and management interchangeably but with more emphasis on management. For example, the management theorists, Blake and Mouton, developed their famous managerial grid in the 1960's. At the time, it was portrayed as a way of identifying your management style. Today, in line with the shift to leadership, the name is the same (managerial grid) but it is now positioned as a leadership style instrument.
Similarly, we used to talk about management style more than leadership style. Managers could be either "theory X" and task oriented or "theory Y" and concerned for people. But a profound shift in thinking took place in a revolutionary period lasting from the late 1970's through the mid 1980's. The cause of this upheaval was the commercial success of Japanese industry in North America. This led pundits to claim that the U.S. had lost its competitive edge because U.S. management was too bureaucratic, controlling, uninspiring and inept at fostering innovation. Rather than upgrade management, there was an emotional over reaction such that management was rejected and replaced by leadership. Since then, leaders were portrayed as theory Y, inspiring and concerned about people while management got saddled with all the bad guy attributes of being controlling, theory X, uninspiring and narrowly task focused. Similarly, the distinction between being transformational and transactional was originally launched to differentiate two leadership styles, but it wasn't long before it became used to separate leadership from management, the former being transformational and the latter transactional.
In our haste to trash management, we grabbed whatever tools were handy but with heavy costs. First, we painted leadership into a corner by suggesting that you needed to be an inspiring cheerleader to be a leader, leaving no room for quiet or simply factual leadership. Second, we created a bloated concept of leadership by banishing management. Third, by attaching leadership to getting things done through a team, we associated leadership irrevocably with being in charge of people, thereby ruling out positionless leadership. Yes, there is informal leadership but this concept is essentially the same as formal leadership except for their power bases. Like its formal counterpart, informal leadership still means taking charge and managing a group to achieve a target. In either case, you need to have the personal presence, organizational skills and motivation to take charge to be a leader.
* Leadership means challenging the status quo, promoting a better way.
We have always felt, intuitively, that leaders have the courage to stand up and be counted. They go against the grain, often at great risk, to call for change. We only need to look at Martin Luther King, Jr. His leadership rested not so much on his oratorical skills - they were just icing on the cake. He was a leader primarily because he marched and spoke against injustice. He challenged the status quo and promoted a better world.
However, and this is the whole point here, if you think through what it means to challenge the status quo or advocate change, there is no necessary implication that you have to be in charge of the people you are trying to influence. The bottom line is that this third definition, when worked through fully, gives us a way to break the stranglehold of the previous two definitions. The benefit of this move is that we gain a clearer understanding of how all employees can show leadership even if they totally lack the skills or inclination to take charge of groups in a managerial sense, even informally. Think again of Martin Luther King, Jr. He sought to move the U.S. Government and the population at large to think differently about such issues as segregation on buses. His leadership efforts were successful when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled such discrimination unconstitutional. Now, it is obvious that he was not in a managerial role within the Supreme Court. He showed leadership to this group as an outsider. You could say the same of Jack Welch who had a leadership impact on countless businesses around the globe through his novel practices, such as being first or second in a market. Again, those who followed the lead of Jack Welch did not report to him. They were not even members of a common group.
Leadership Reinvented for the 21st Century
If we cast aside the first two definitions of leadership, what is left? If leadership means nothing more than promoting a better way, then we need to upgrade management to take care of everything to do with getting things done through people. We need to say that management does not entail being controlling, bureaucratic or theory X, that they can be as inspiring as they need to be, good at coaching, developing and empowering people.
A critical supporting fact is that the power on which leadership is based is shifting from having a dominant personality to the ability to devise new ways of working, new products and better services. Businesses that compete on the basis of rapid innovation are engaged in a war of ideas and no one has a monopoly on good ideas. This is revolutionary because it suggests that leadership can no longer be about group domination. Now, leadership is a brief influence impact, an episode or act, not an ongoing state or role. You still may need a larger than life personality to ascend to the role of Chief Executive, but leadership conceived as a good idea for a better way can be very small scale and local. Any employee with a better idea can promote it, even if only by example, without having the personal presence to be promoted to a managerial role. Strictly, speaking there are no longer any leaders, only leadership. This view captures the fact that leadership is a fleeting state that can shift quickly from one person to another. It is an impact rather than a type of person or position. It must be so if it can be shown by outsiders.
Key Features of Leadership Reinvented
* It does not involve managing people to get things done.
* It comes to an end once those led get on board. It sells the tickets for the journey; management drives the bus to the destination.
* It is a discrete episode, a one-off act of influence, not an ongoing position of dominance.
* It is based on the promotion of a better way.
* It can be shown bottom-up as well as top-down.
* It can be shown by outsiders and between competing individuals or groups.
Thought Leadership - The Essence of Leadership Reinvented
Organizations today need all employees to think creatively and to promote new products. Promoting a better idea can be called thought leadership. In a knowledge driven environment, the newest, best idea influences others to get on board. When a product developer convinces top management to adopt a new product, that person has shown thought leadership bottom-up. But it can be shown across groups as well. When Microsoft develops products or services invented by Apple or Google, they are following the lead of these innovators. This also is thought leadership.
While the possession of great emotional intelligence and the oratory of a Martin Luther King, Jr. can help thought leaders make their case, it is vital to see that these skills are nice to have add-ons, not an essential part of the meaning of leadership. Technical geeks with zero emotional intelligence and an obnoxious influencing style can show thought leadership if they can demonstrate the value of their ideas. This is very empowering because it moves us away from the demand to develop sophisticated leadership skills as a precondition of showing leadership. Strictly speaking there are no leadership skills, only influencing skills and great content. Imagine asking Tiger Woods. after the end of the third round when he is in the lead, how he developed such great leadership skills. The truth is that he shows leadership through being great at the content of his profession, not by having a separate set of talents called leadership skills. On the other hand, there are very definite management skills. Getting work done through people calls for quite sophisticated interpersonal and organizational skills.
Content is King
The point of the previous section is that convincing content or substance can trump great style or form. Having a larger than life personality may still help you get to be CEO but this is the power of style over substance. If the prospective leader has enough charisma, it almost doesn't matter what is being advocated (the content). Conversely, thought leadership is most convincing if backed up by hard evidence. Having persuasive influencing skills helps but isn't essential. This means that front line knowledge workers can focus on what it really takes to show leadership: begin by developing convincing content. If your idea is good enough it will virtually sell itself. It's not that influencing skills are not valuable. The point is that we can define leadership without mentioning influencing style. Also, there is the fact that opportunists will get on board with a great idea with no persuasion whatsoever. Thus, if it is possible to show leadership without being personally persuasive, then having such skills cannot be a necessary condition to show leadership.
The Future of Leadership
Leadership reinvented can still be shown by CEOs. They just need to accept that much of what they do needs to be reclassified as management. They also need to devote more time to fostering leadership in front line employees, thereby taking empowerment a huge leap forward. If they want to reap the full innovative potential of all employees, CEOs and other managers need to engage and inspire employees more fully. Helping them to see how all employees can show leadership now could make all the difference between winning the war of ideas and falling further behind. Where knowledge rules, the old fashioned conception of leadership as group domination is dangerously obsolete. Complexity drives specialization. It is time to bring management back from the dead to take care of getting things done through people, leaving leadership to focus on finding and promoting new directions.
Definition number 1 may still be good enough to capture what happens in small street gangs and primitive tribes but it is most clearly out of date in a world that is a war of ideas. Number 2 is a mess because it is a total confusion of leadership and management. Only definition number 3 captures all leadership - that shown by people in charge, by those with neither the inclination nor the skills to take charge, and by outsiders like Martin Luther King, Jr. Uniquely, this definition also captures what it means to be a market leading company or a leading individual or team in sports. Leadership is simply a matter of showing the way. One of the many exciting features of this definition is that followers must choose to follow of their own free will because coercive power and authority are missing. Definition number 3 captures the essence of pure leadership.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)