By Richard Russey
The thing about art is that it is inextricably linked to life in all its forms, variations, and manifestations. That makes the arts in all its forms (visual, dance, music, theater, media, including endless combinations and adaptations) a perfect reflection of life.
Writer John Cheever once said that “art is the triumph over chaos.” If that is true, the statement implies that there is an organization, an arrangement, or a configuration that can be applied to life that assists us in sorting out the chaos.
Those learned in experiencing art have long used a methodology for making sense out of art, thus life. It consists of a step by step approach that leads along a gradual path of gathering essential information, scrutinizing and considering that information, construing meaning from the analysis, and finally forming an opinion or deriving a conclusion from the process.
Gathering Essential Information
One can listen to a piece of music by Johann Sebastian Bach or John Lennon, experience a theatrical performance written by William Inge or Wendy Wasserstein, revel in a dance choreographed by Twyla Tharp or Alberto Alonso, or study a painting by Henri Matisse or Julian Schnabel, and the approach to experiencing the “art” is essentially the same. By attuning to the elements utilized in an art form (line and color, rhythm and pattern, words and point of view, tone and tempo) the essential components of artistic construction become clear.
Scrutinizing and Analyzing
Emerging from the wondrous blending of the basic artistic elements, the impact of one element on another begins to take on importance and serves to push the essential content of the work of art forward. It is this essential step that serves as the basis for construing meaning about the work of art be it a theatrical production, a dance performance, a musical composition, or a two-dimensional painting. One can look closely at the essentials that serve to comprise the art form, examining and exploring the “dance” of artistic elements such as line, color, form, texture, and rhythm. Meaning surfaces through the analysis of the artistic elements.
Construing Meaning
The miraculous result is that the meaning may be universally understood, or very personal to an individual. The significance and the consequence of one’s interpretation of the experience of art is as critical as it is to the interpretation of the experience of life writ large. Construing meaning doesn’t imply agreement or disagreement with the content of the artistic message – rather, solely that meaning has emerged and is apparent to viewer and/or listener.
Deriving Conclusions
Finally, one can derive conclusions related to the content of the message, one can form judgment. At this point the judgment is fairly derived, where it would have been premature to jump to judgment upon the initial gathering of visual and auditory information.
So What?
So, what does the experiencing of art have to do with prospering professionally? Is there an art-life connection that lives outside of the direct experience of an art form? The answer is as simple and as complicated as applying the same step by step approach to one’s everyday moments and professional life that can be applied to experiencing art in any one or all of its many forms. That is, to:
· carefully and expansively gather essential information
· scrutinize and consider that information through analysis
· construe meaning (interpretation) from the analysis
· form an opinion and/or derive a conclusion
Think about, and most importantly, practice this process. The one very important thing this does is to prolong the urge to form an opinion (or, judgment) until AFTER the necessary steps of preparation have been accomplished. The extraordinary amount of strife and discord in the world and workplace makes it clear that there is a huge tendency to jump to judgment rather than to engage in the carefully constructed practice of gathering and processing information prior to making judgments.
The next time you are enjoying a symphony, beholding a dance performance, sitting in rapt attention as a member of the audience at the theater, reading a particularly good novel, or standing in awe transfixed by a painting’s bold and beautiful message, make an attempt at s-l-o-w-i-n-g down the process of absorbing, analyzing, and interpreting the input received by your eyes, ears, heart, and mind. Then, consider how this same process can be applied to the experience of hearing a new idea in a business setting, meeting a new colleague (or better yet, a competitor), or handling a particularly challenging situation.
So “triumph over the chaos of life,” specifically your professional life -- you can indeed live artfully, and prosper professionally!
Monday, May 18, 2009
Monday, May 11, 2009
On A Clear Day: Creating Visions and Missions of Clarity
By Richard Russey
Volumes have been written about the importance of vision and mission statements, and related strategic plans with specific objectives outlining the way forward for any organization. So, what is there to add? Well, my personal perspective of course … having worked for and with a wide variety of public and private sector organizations over the course of thirty years. What I have to add is a listing of things that are wise to do, and things to avoid when it comes to developing vision and mission statements, as well as their corresponding objectives.
As many who follow my blog will expect, I will first and foremost urge a collaborative, inclusive approach to developing and/or reviewing and renewing an organization’s vision and mission statements. To use a rather well worn phrase, it indeed “takes a village” to accomplish the work you do, so it makes good sense to include that village in the development of the vision and mission … and critically important to the development of the objectives, tasks, or activities (different strokes for different types of organizations).
But, how is this accomplished without becoming unwieldy, hugely time consuming, and frustrating? There are some guidelines that I’ve learned as I’ve experienced the good, the bad, and the ugly of processes around writing vision and mission statements, then developing a precise set of objectives to accomplish them.
I’ll present my thoughts in the positive “do this” type framework, but will include the hazards that accompany a particular suggestion if you decide to take another track. This will become clear as you read through the suggestions that follow.
Inclusivity Rules!
Everyone, and I mean everyone, employed or having a stake in an organization should be included, at some point, in the development and/or review of the drafting of vision and mission statements, as well as the important listing of objectives related to getting the work of the organization (as related to the vision and mission) accomplished.
There are some leaders who see the development of the vision and the mission as the responsibility of the leaders of the organization, the so-called “senior staff” and perhaps the board. My take on that approach is that one immediately sets up (intentionally or not) an “us” versus “them” mindset that will only serve to diminish the effectiveness of the organization over time. Is it more difficult to include everyone in the process? Absolutely, yes, the task becomes more difficult. But, it is worth the extra effort to be inclusive? Again, the answer is absolutely yes! One would hope that the very idea of an organization’s vision and mission is not only to communicate to the audience, constituency, or the public at large about the organization’s raison d’etre, but to involve and motivate the good people who are in your employ, or are volunteers, or even members of your constituency. To develop a vision and mission in a vacuum is a sure path to trouble ahead. Trust me on this one: I’ve seen too many organizations struggle to keep their staff (their teams) motivated and engaged, all the while keeping the sum and substance of the organization’s purpose for being held tightly to the chests of only the most senior of staff members, and perhaps a few members of the board. I’m certain there will be many CEO’s, executive directors, and other leaders who will scoff at this idea of broad inclusiveness. I know, because I’ve seen it first hand. But, be warned, holding the deck with exclusivity may not bring your organization to its knees, but it will certainly manifest in any number of problems down the road.
Vision with 20/20 Preciseness
One of the mistakes frequently made when an organization sets about to write a vision statement is that by using the very principle I advocate above, inclusiveness, the whole kitchen sink gets dumped into the vision without the necessary trimming and cutting and word smith work that creates an appropriate vision statement – born of inclusiveness, but articulating the collective with precision.
Some of the very best vision statements are no longer than a single sentence. It really is the short answer of, “What are we here to do, and what do what the future to look like?” All the details of who, what, how, and why will follow in the mission, and related objectives, tasks, and activities. But, the vision should remain crystal clear, precise, and memorable. It is the oft-used “elevator ride” articulation of a vision that works best. That is, can you describe your organization’s vision in about 10 seconds – about the amount of time it would take to ride an elevator from one floor of a building to the next?
So, you see, a vision statement is limited to the most precise articulation of what an organization seeks to be in the world – often including a sense of what the future looks like vis-à-vis the corporate (or nonprofit) impact on the world.
The Mission, Map or Trap? Keeping the Collective “Eye” on the Prize
There may be some occasions where one could argue for developing or utilizing a vision born of a few individuals or even a single person (usually referred to as a “founder”) of an organization. I concede that there are some instances around which a vision, inspired by an event or circumstance in one’s life is best articulated by a single person or small group of people. However, passing the resulting vision statement by a cracker-jack editor is definitely a good idea.
But, the development of a mission statement that is intended to fill out the details of just how the vision will be made manifest in the world does indeed beg for a wider circle of participation. How can this be accomplished without chaos ensuing? There are a number of ways and means and no one size fits all. A facilitated meeting of all staff members, board members, and representatives of various stake holder groups can work well. Or, a series of smaller focus groups that are charged with breathing life into the vision can be effective, particularly where very large numbers of staff are concerned. But what is clear is that those individuals who will be charged with delivering on the intent of the vision and those stakeholder groups are rich sources of adding flesh to the bones of the razor clear vision. This collective, by whatever means the input is gathered, can help enormously in “keeping the eye on the prize” of the original vision. It is all too easy for the mission statement to grow exponentially as input is gathered from a broad group of interested parties or individuals. So …
Brevity is Best
Keeping the mission statement, along with the accompanying written strategies, objectives, or activities concise is critical as well. We’ve probably all seen mission statements that go on for pages and pages of text. But, I contend that no matter how complex and multi-layered the vision and mission of an organization the description of that work should be able to be boiled down to perhaps several paragraphs of very concise and precise language. An old adage definitely applies here: less is more. Embrace that concept, however difficult it may be to switch one’s thinking from the “kitchen sink” approach to writing a mission statement to the difficult but ultimately rewarding work of paring down the explanation of the mission to its most salient and pertinent points.
Review, Renew, Reward
Once a draft of the vision, mission, and objectives or task activities is completed be brave enough to let it be reviewed. That means sending it back through all the individuals that were involved in its development. Gather feedback, utilize a good editor, and look for ways to add nuance and specificity by the intentional selection of particular words and phrases and discarding other less precise language. Approach this process with an ego-less mind and heart; the result will be better for your bravery, and will be absent the limiting sense of singular ownership.
Plan for a regular review (at least annually) of the vision and mission in order to make sure it remains relevant to the rapidly changing environment in which we all do our work. Certainly in a year’s time there will have been significant changes in an organization’s audience or beneficiaries, in technology, in the political landscape, in funding opportunities (or lack thereof), and in opportunities and threats to the organization and its vision. Remember the truth of the admonishment: change is the only constant.
Be open to renewing your organization’s vision and mission to align with current realities. IF the vision was conceived and written with great care … it may live on without need for significant change for many years. However, it is likely that the particulars of the mission and the objectives required to “get the work done” will require some re-tooling regularly over time.
Finally, reward everyone involved for their efforts and their contributions to the vision and mission of your organization. I refer here to ALL staff, board members, the constituency or audience served, vendors, allied organizations, and others. If they are acknowledged and rewarded in some way that is relevant to your organization they will be all the more motivated to jump in the trenches as each new day dawns and do their all to keep that vision alive. The reward need not be monetary, and probably shouldn’t be – as all available financial resources ought to be going to the delivery of your organization’s purpose. But, it is amazing how impactful effective leadership can be in this regard (please refer to previous posts on this blog related to leadership).
Let the Vision Live … Each Day in Every Way
Then, let the vision and mission live! See the result of your dedicated work as having life that applies each and every day and that guides the minute to minute activity of the organization. One very effective means of doing so is to make sure the vision and mission is in full view of every member of your team, posted above their desks, printed on small cards that can be carried in a wallet or purse, emblazoned on t-shirts or coffee mugs, or otherwise kept front and center. In this way, one can judge whether every action performed in the course of daily work for the organization serves the vision and mission, or is straying off base. This is a particularly meaningful way to keep the vision alive, and all energies focused on its manifestation. It is a particularly useful time management tool as well. It provides the foundation to be able to reply with a “yes” or “no” to the barrage of requests or demands on the time that will be directed to both leaders and the entire team involved in any organization. Walk the talk and each day will be a clear day.
Volumes have been written about the importance of vision and mission statements, and related strategic plans with specific objectives outlining the way forward for any organization. So, what is there to add? Well, my personal perspective of course … having worked for and with a wide variety of public and private sector organizations over the course of thirty years. What I have to add is a listing of things that are wise to do, and things to avoid when it comes to developing vision and mission statements, as well as their corresponding objectives.
As many who follow my blog will expect, I will first and foremost urge a collaborative, inclusive approach to developing and/or reviewing and renewing an organization’s vision and mission statements. To use a rather well worn phrase, it indeed “takes a village” to accomplish the work you do, so it makes good sense to include that village in the development of the vision and mission … and critically important to the development of the objectives, tasks, or activities (different strokes for different types of organizations).
But, how is this accomplished without becoming unwieldy, hugely time consuming, and frustrating? There are some guidelines that I’ve learned as I’ve experienced the good, the bad, and the ugly of processes around writing vision and mission statements, then developing a precise set of objectives to accomplish them.
I’ll present my thoughts in the positive “do this” type framework, but will include the hazards that accompany a particular suggestion if you decide to take another track. This will become clear as you read through the suggestions that follow.
Inclusivity Rules!
Everyone, and I mean everyone, employed or having a stake in an organization should be included, at some point, in the development and/or review of the drafting of vision and mission statements, as well as the important listing of objectives related to getting the work of the organization (as related to the vision and mission) accomplished.
There are some leaders who see the development of the vision and the mission as the responsibility of the leaders of the organization, the so-called “senior staff” and perhaps the board. My take on that approach is that one immediately sets up (intentionally or not) an “us” versus “them” mindset that will only serve to diminish the effectiveness of the organization over time. Is it more difficult to include everyone in the process? Absolutely, yes, the task becomes more difficult. But, it is worth the extra effort to be inclusive? Again, the answer is absolutely yes! One would hope that the very idea of an organization’s vision and mission is not only to communicate to the audience, constituency, or the public at large about the organization’s raison d’etre, but to involve and motivate the good people who are in your employ, or are volunteers, or even members of your constituency. To develop a vision and mission in a vacuum is a sure path to trouble ahead. Trust me on this one: I’ve seen too many organizations struggle to keep their staff (their teams) motivated and engaged, all the while keeping the sum and substance of the organization’s purpose for being held tightly to the chests of only the most senior of staff members, and perhaps a few members of the board. I’m certain there will be many CEO’s, executive directors, and other leaders who will scoff at this idea of broad inclusiveness. I know, because I’ve seen it first hand. But, be warned, holding the deck with exclusivity may not bring your organization to its knees, but it will certainly manifest in any number of problems down the road.
Vision with 20/20 Preciseness
One of the mistakes frequently made when an organization sets about to write a vision statement is that by using the very principle I advocate above, inclusiveness, the whole kitchen sink gets dumped into the vision without the necessary trimming and cutting and word smith work that creates an appropriate vision statement – born of inclusiveness, but articulating the collective with precision.
Some of the very best vision statements are no longer than a single sentence. It really is the short answer of, “What are we here to do, and what do what the future to look like?” All the details of who, what, how, and why will follow in the mission, and related objectives, tasks, and activities. But, the vision should remain crystal clear, precise, and memorable. It is the oft-used “elevator ride” articulation of a vision that works best. That is, can you describe your organization’s vision in about 10 seconds – about the amount of time it would take to ride an elevator from one floor of a building to the next?
So, you see, a vision statement is limited to the most precise articulation of what an organization seeks to be in the world – often including a sense of what the future looks like vis-à-vis the corporate (or nonprofit) impact on the world.
The Mission, Map or Trap? Keeping the Collective “Eye” on the Prize
There may be some occasions where one could argue for developing or utilizing a vision born of a few individuals or even a single person (usually referred to as a “founder”) of an organization. I concede that there are some instances around which a vision, inspired by an event or circumstance in one’s life is best articulated by a single person or small group of people. However, passing the resulting vision statement by a cracker-jack editor is definitely a good idea.
But, the development of a mission statement that is intended to fill out the details of just how the vision will be made manifest in the world does indeed beg for a wider circle of participation. How can this be accomplished without chaos ensuing? There are a number of ways and means and no one size fits all. A facilitated meeting of all staff members, board members, and representatives of various stake holder groups can work well. Or, a series of smaller focus groups that are charged with breathing life into the vision can be effective, particularly where very large numbers of staff are concerned. But what is clear is that those individuals who will be charged with delivering on the intent of the vision and those stakeholder groups are rich sources of adding flesh to the bones of the razor clear vision. This collective, by whatever means the input is gathered, can help enormously in “keeping the eye on the prize” of the original vision. It is all too easy for the mission statement to grow exponentially as input is gathered from a broad group of interested parties or individuals. So …
Brevity is Best
Keeping the mission statement, along with the accompanying written strategies, objectives, or activities concise is critical as well. We’ve probably all seen mission statements that go on for pages and pages of text. But, I contend that no matter how complex and multi-layered the vision and mission of an organization the description of that work should be able to be boiled down to perhaps several paragraphs of very concise and precise language. An old adage definitely applies here: less is more. Embrace that concept, however difficult it may be to switch one’s thinking from the “kitchen sink” approach to writing a mission statement to the difficult but ultimately rewarding work of paring down the explanation of the mission to its most salient and pertinent points.
Review, Renew, Reward
Once a draft of the vision, mission, and objectives or task activities is completed be brave enough to let it be reviewed. That means sending it back through all the individuals that were involved in its development. Gather feedback, utilize a good editor, and look for ways to add nuance and specificity by the intentional selection of particular words and phrases and discarding other less precise language. Approach this process with an ego-less mind and heart; the result will be better for your bravery, and will be absent the limiting sense of singular ownership.
Plan for a regular review (at least annually) of the vision and mission in order to make sure it remains relevant to the rapidly changing environment in which we all do our work. Certainly in a year’s time there will have been significant changes in an organization’s audience or beneficiaries, in technology, in the political landscape, in funding opportunities (or lack thereof), and in opportunities and threats to the organization and its vision. Remember the truth of the admonishment: change is the only constant.
Be open to renewing your organization’s vision and mission to align with current realities. IF the vision was conceived and written with great care … it may live on without need for significant change for many years. However, it is likely that the particulars of the mission and the objectives required to “get the work done” will require some re-tooling regularly over time.
Finally, reward everyone involved for their efforts and their contributions to the vision and mission of your organization. I refer here to ALL staff, board members, the constituency or audience served, vendors, allied organizations, and others. If they are acknowledged and rewarded in some way that is relevant to your organization they will be all the more motivated to jump in the trenches as each new day dawns and do their all to keep that vision alive. The reward need not be monetary, and probably shouldn’t be – as all available financial resources ought to be going to the delivery of your organization’s purpose. But, it is amazing how impactful effective leadership can be in this regard (please refer to previous posts on this blog related to leadership).
Let the Vision Live … Each Day in Every Way
Then, let the vision and mission live! See the result of your dedicated work as having life that applies each and every day and that guides the minute to minute activity of the organization. One very effective means of doing so is to make sure the vision and mission is in full view of every member of your team, posted above their desks, printed on small cards that can be carried in a wallet or purse, emblazoned on t-shirts or coffee mugs, or otherwise kept front and center. In this way, one can judge whether every action performed in the course of daily work for the organization serves the vision and mission, or is straying off base. This is a particularly meaningful way to keep the vision alive, and all energies focused on its manifestation. It is a particularly useful time management tool as well. It provides the foundation to be able to reply with a “yes” or “no” to the barrage of requests or demands on the time that will be directed to both leaders and the entire team involved in any organization. Walk the talk and each day will be a clear day.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
What Becomes a Leader LEAST?
By Richard Russey
As readers of this blog know, I’m inclined towards the discussion of leadership in terms that are considered positive attributes of leadership. But, there is power in pointing out some of the mistakes leaders make either willfully or benignly. Over the years that I’ve been led, or that I’ve served as a leader in a variety of settings, including both the public and private sector and non-profit organizations, I’ve observed a number of ways that leaders may deal with situations – specifically related to how they lead their team – that are not productive, and in fact serve to undermine the team and destroy esprit de corps of the staff collective. At other times some of these negative traits may zero in on an individual staff member creating problems ranging from disillusionment to extreme negativity.
Perhaps a meaningful subtitle for this article would be “How NOT to be a Good Boss.” So, with that in mind, I present my list of leadership behaviors to avoid:
Catch-22 Situations
Joseph Heller brilliantly coined the phrase and examined the seemingly unending Catch-22 situations people serving in the military face. But, it is not just military leaders who subject their teams to these no-win situations of contradictory options. Leaders of all stripes may inadvertently set up Catch-22 predicaments that fence their team in with illogical rules and regulations. The way to avoid Catch-22 situations where staff members find themselves in difficult, and often embarrassing circumstances is to strive to be logically clear in communications, provide appropriate and meaningful support, and to place yourself as a leader in your team member’s shoes regularly (at least as an exercise of the mind) to examine whether you have set up impossible Catch-22 situations.
Cavalier Attitudes
It is difficult to fathom that any leader would be cavalier, yet perhaps all of us can name a few we know who would fit that description, at least part of the time. I contend that it is not an option for any leader to be inattentive to staff needs, unconcerned with the welfare of their organization’s mission and their team’s ability to help them fulfill that mission, or exhibit any degree unengaged behavior. To allow a cavalier attitude to develop within oneself as a leader is strikingly dangerous – creating havoc within the organization, or apathy, or both. There is no time to waste in our march towards fulfilling the important goals of our organizations or to allow for the wasteland that a cavalier attitude may precipitate.
Amorphous Guidance
Confusion is the rule of the day whenever there is a lack of precise and well-articulated outcomes and goals to set the stage for team activity. Whether at the start of each day, or when commencing a project, a good leader will strive to provide direction that is not vague or poorly conceived. Without the direct and specific guidance necessary for the professionals on your team to move forward and do the work they are highly capable of doing, they are left to forge their own way towards a goal that is either not articulated at all, or is so nonspecific as to be virtually absent. Many actions taken by a good leader can ameliorate confusion. A solid strategic plan (that has been developed with the input of the team) is a beginning. Regular team meetings to discuss short, mid, and long-term goals will help to keep the team on track, and will allow for an airing of questions and concerns as they arise. A feedback loop is essential too, so that a leader is not cut-off from important issues that may come up during the course of the team’s work.
Querulous Demeanor
The idea of leadership is to motivate a team to move in the same direction towards the successful accomplishment of a set of goals or mission. All too often leaders, being the human beings they are, allow a querulous demeanor to intrude on their otherwise effective leadership style. To be specific – avoid small and petty complaints about your team’s style, work habits, or personality traits. Unnecessary nit-picking will lead your team in exactly the wrong direction – away from you and your organization’s mission. Of course it is important to have standards in place for workplace behavior, dress, and allowable actions and customs. But, it is important to remember that people who work under you leadership are not robotic, and will have their own traits, quirks, and styles. To the degree that these attributes do not serve to block the flow of successful task completion and the realization of stated goals – do not let your personal preferences about the style, personality, and habits of your employees interfere with success. Remember that a team is a group of individuals, and some of the great strength of a team comes from the uniqueness brought by each participating member.
Narcissism
Being obsessed with promoting oneself as leader rather than giving ample credit to both the team as a whole and individual staff members for small and large successes may likely create a climate that engenders apathy, reticence, and lack of innovation. When a leader grabs credit for many or all the work performed by individual staff members, or the team as a whole, the result is usually a team that moves from high performance to mediocrity. Team members will gradually learn that it doesn’t “pay” to give their all, to perform at top capacity. Staff will be reticent to bring new ideas to the table for fear that their leader is all too ready to grab the credit and attention. There is a simple fix to this narcissistic leadership trait: give credit where credit is due; give credit as publicly as possible; and praise the team for successful accomplishment of goals. Previously in other blog postings I’ve stated that positive attention accrues to a good leader naturally, as the world is set up to understand that the success of a team requires a good leader. So let the credit go to the team. Not to worry, the public, your board, or other’s that you are responsible to will notice the good work being done and will credit you, as leader, ultimately for that success. But they will understand, too, that as the leader of the team you have created an atmosphere for success.
Unilateral Vacuum
It is true that from time to time a critical decision must be made quickly and in a vacuum, that is without the benefit of advice and counsel and information provided by the team. However, a leader should strive to minimize those situations where decisions must be made unilaterally. Unilateral decision making by a leader should, in my opinion, be the gross exception. One of the reasons I use the term “team” more frequently than “staff” or “employees” is that it connotes collaboration and consultation among a group of individuals who all have their eye on the same goal. Of course it may be necessary to consult with different groups around different specific content – in one instance it may be the officers of the board, in another instance it may be a specific work team, and in yet another instance it may be with the entire employee group of an organization. But, to make decisions unilaterally is risky business unless the leader considers oneself as all-knowing (and that leads back to the trait of narcissism.)
Spurious, How Curious
One of the most important traits of a leader is authenticity. A leader must be squeakily genuine in their interactions with their team as a whole and with each individual member of that team. Truthful, honest communication is one of the benchmarks of authenticity. Acknowledging one’s idiosyncratic qualities and behaviors and being open about working to keep those behaviors from working against the greater good of the organization and the team’s purpose is another path towards genuine interaction with the individual’s in your employ. As every employee of an organization of any size knows, a spurious leader can be smelled a mile away! Authenticity rules the day!
By examining some of the more negative traits of leaders, I hope to have brought attention to a few of the pitfalls of leadership that may not be conscious and intentional. It does require strong initiative and drive to be an effective leader. Lacking the ability or the will to look at one’s leadership style or traits that may not be as productive as they could be is to be on a sure path of eventual leadership failure. The good news is that leaders of ability, energy, and openness can self-correct. It only requires honest self-reflection, and the desire and willingness to amend behaviors that may be preventing you from becoming the best leader you can be!
As readers of this blog know, I’m inclined towards the discussion of leadership in terms that are considered positive attributes of leadership. But, there is power in pointing out some of the mistakes leaders make either willfully or benignly. Over the years that I’ve been led, or that I’ve served as a leader in a variety of settings, including both the public and private sector and non-profit organizations, I’ve observed a number of ways that leaders may deal with situations – specifically related to how they lead their team – that are not productive, and in fact serve to undermine the team and destroy esprit de corps of the staff collective. At other times some of these negative traits may zero in on an individual staff member creating problems ranging from disillusionment to extreme negativity.
Perhaps a meaningful subtitle for this article would be “How NOT to be a Good Boss.” So, with that in mind, I present my list of leadership behaviors to avoid:
Catch-22 Situations
Joseph Heller brilliantly coined the phrase and examined the seemingly unending Catch-22 situations people serving in the military face. But, it is not just military leaders who subject their teams to these no-win situations of contradictory options. Leaders of all stripes may inadvertently set up Catch-22 predicaments that fence their team in with illogical rules and regulations. The way to avoid Catch-22 situations where staff members find themselves in difficult, and often embarrassing circumstances is to strive to be logically clear in communications, provide appropriate and meaningful support, and to place yourself as a leader in your team member’s shoes regularly (at least as an exercise of the mind) to examine whether you have set up impossible Catch-22 situations.
Cavalier Attitudes
It is difficult to fathom that any leader would be cavalier, yet perhaps all of us can name a few we know who would fit that description, at least part of the time. I contend that it is not an option for any leader to be inattentive to staff needs, unconcerned with the welfare of their organization’s mission and their team’s ability to help them fulfill that mission, or exhibit any degree unengaged behavior. To allow a cavalier attitude to develop within oneself as a leader is strikingly dangerous – creating havoc within the organization, or apathy, or both. There is no time to waste in our march towards fulfilling the important goals of our organizations or to allow for the wasteland that a cavalier attitude may precipitate.
Amorphous Guidance
Confusion is the rule of the day whenever there is a lack of precise and well-articulated outcomes and goals to set the stage for team activity. Whether at the start of each day, or when commencing a project, a good leader will strive to provide direction that is not vague or poorly conceived. Without the direct and specific guidance necessary for the professionals on your team to move forward and do the work they are highly capable of doing, they are left to forge their own way towards a goal that is either not articulated at all, or is so nonspecific as to be virtually absent. Many actions taken by a good leader can ameliorate confusion. A solid strategic plan (that has been developed with the input of the team) is a beginning. Regular team meetings to discuss short, mid, and long-term goals will help to keep the team on track, and will allow for an airing of questions and concerns as they arise. A feedback loop is essential too, so that a leader is not cut-off from important issues that may come up during the course of the team’s work.
Querulous Demeanor
The idea of leadership is to motivate a team to move in the same direction towards the successful accomplishment of a set of goals or mission. All too often leaders, being the human beings they are, allow a querulous demeanor to intrude on their otherwise effective leadership style. To be specific – avoid small and petty complaints about your team’s style, work habits, or personality traits. Unnecessary nit-picking will lead your team in exactly the wrong direction – away from you and your organization’s mission. Of course it is important to have standards in place for workplace behavior, dress, and allowable actions and customs. But, it is important to remember that people who work under you leadership are not robotic, and will have their own traits, quirks, and styles. To the degree that these attributes do not serve to block the flow of successful task completion and the realization of stated goals – do not let your personal preferences about the style, personality, and habits of your employees interfere with success. Remember that a team is a group of individuals, and some of the great strength of a team comes from the uniqueness brought by each participating member.
Narcissism
Being obsessed with promoting oneself as leader rather than giving ample credit to both the team as a whole and individual staff members for small and large successes may likely create a climate that engenders apathy, reticence, and lack of innovation. When a leader grabs credit for many or all the work performed by individual staff members, or the team as a whole, the result is usually a team that moves from high performance to mediocrity. Team members will gradually learn that it doesn’t “pay” to give their all, to perform at top capacity. Staff will be reticent to bring new ideas to the table for fear that their leader is all too ready to grab the credit and attention. There is a simple fix to this narcissistic leadership trait: give credit where credit is due; give credit as publicly as possible; and praise the team for successful accomplishment of goals. Previously in other blog postings I’ve stated that positive attention accrues to a good leader naturally, as the world is set up to understand that the success of a team requires a good leader. So let the credit go to the team. Not to worry, the public, your board, or other’s that you are responsible to will notice the good work being done and will credit you, as leader, ultimately for that success. But they will understand, too, that as the leader of the team you have created an atmosphere for success.
Unilateral Vacuum
It is true that from time to time a critical decision must be made quickly and in a vacuum, that is without the benefit of advice and counsel and information provided by the team. However, a leader should strive to minimize those situations where decisions must be made unilaterally. Unilateral decision making by a leader should, in my opinion, be the gross exception. One of the reasons I use the term “team” more frequently than “staff” or “employees” is that it connotes collaboration and consultation among a group of individuals who all have their eye on the same goal. Of course it may be necessary to consult with different groups around different specific content – in one instance it may be the officers of the board, in another instance it may be a specific work team, and in yet another instance it may be with the entire employee group of an organization. But, to make decisions unilaterally is risky business unless the leader considers oneself as all-knowing (and that leads back to the trait of narcissism.)
Spurious, How Curious
One of the most important traits of a leader is authenticity. A leader must be squeakily genuine in their interactions with their team as a whole and with each individual member of that team. Truthful, honest communication is one of the benchmarks of authenticity. Acknowledging one’s idiosyncratic qualities and behaviors and being open about working to keep those behaviors from working against the greater good of the organization and the team’s purpose is another path towards genuine interaction with the individual’s in your employ. As every employee of an organization of any size knows, a spurious leader can be smelled a mile away! Authenticity rules the day!
By examining some of the more negative traits of leaders, I hope to have brought attention to a few of the pitfalls of leadership that may not be conscious and intentional. It does require strong initiative and drive to be an effective leader. Lacking the ability or the will to look at one’s leadership style or traits that may not be as productive as they could be is to be on a sure path of eventual leadership failure. The good news is that leaders of ability, energy, and openness can self-correct. It only requires honest self-reflection, and the desire and willingness to amend behaviors that may be preventing you from becoming the best leader you can be!
Friday, May 1, 2009
Why Good Leaders Must D.I.E.
By Richard Russey
Okay, I admit to hyping this blog post with a provocative title. But, stay with me if you will and I think you’ll see why good leaders must "D.I.E." Certainly, I am not referring to corporeal death, but to an acronym that represents qualities I believe to be essential to leaders of distinction.
The acronym “D.I.E.” stands for these significant “good leader” traits: the ability to be decisive; the wisdom to be introspective; and the grounding to be ethical. Adding these elements to the many leadership qualities I’ve previously explored in postings to this blog helps to round out the essence of what can only be described as extraordinary leadership. I’ve delved into many other qualities of leadership including these words of description that define an exemplary leader -- visionary, persuasive, intentional, likable, strategic, tactical, and focused. But, it is necessary to add the important “D.I.E.” descriptors that are the hallmark of leaders who stand out, leaders that are remembered for their positive impact, leaders who engender success through their approach and style, and leaders who are guided by intelligence and skill. All of these, I feel compelled to remind you, are learned traits. While a rare person may be born with an intuitive feel for leadership, even they must develop the skills and qualities that allow them to actualize their success in a leadership role.
Decisive
Essentially, a decisive leader can wrap their attention and thinking around an issue, and make a decision for the “greater good” of the mission of their organization even without possessing a complete set of data or information. They can do this precisely because they have honed the numerous other traits I’ve identified in my postings on leadership. Often there is limited time and/or certain market constraints imposed from the outside of a leader’s sphere of immediate influence. One reaction to these outside influences that can come without warning and with severity would be to freeze, to become transfixed by the challenge. But, one cannot be successful for very long by avoiding making decisions. The kind of leader I am discussing here works to develop a decisive nature, rapidly gathering all pertinent and available information, looking at the various perspectives of a situation, projecting scenarios of the outcomes of deciding in one way or another – then making a choice, making a decision.
There is perhaps no more powerful statement on the power of “deciding” than the famous words of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe who in the early years of the 19th Century said:
“I have come to the frightening conclusion that I am the decisive element. It is my personal approach that creates the climate. It is my daily mood that makes the weather. I possess tremendous power to make life miserable or joyous. I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration; I can humiliate or humor, hurt or heal. In all situations, it is my response that decides whether a crisis is escalated or de-escalated, and a person humanized or de-humanized. If we treat people as they are, we make them worse. If we treat people as they ought to be, we help them become what they are capable of becoming.”
Consider the incredible power of those words, which are the perfect segue to the next element of leadership in the “D.I.E.” acronym.
Introspective
A leader of positive consequence has the ability to be introspective. While much of a leader’s role is about projecting outward (to a team, a board, other leaders, and their organization’s constituency or audience) that outward projection must have a foundation in the ability of a leader to be introspective, self-examining, and “interior-aware.” It is the introspective element that is the foundation for the quality of intentionality that has been previously discussed in my postings on leadership.
I know what many readers must now be thinking … “Sounds good, but where will I find the time?” There are many answers to that question, and no one size fits all. The Buddhists would say that one can practice introspection in each moment. That is the famous “Zen” approach to life, to daily activity, and to personal engagement. My point here is that one need not go off on a retreat to be introspective. A leader cannot afford to delay introspection to another time or place. Introspection should not be separated from one’s moment to moment activity. Clearly, this is a learned skill that must be practiced consistently. And, for those queasy about “religious” practice or dogma, introspection isn’t just a Zen or Buddhist concept.
Another perhaps more cerebral approach to introspection is to develop the habit of asking oneself questions … all the time, about everything. Albeit, a very difficult habit to start, as it will seem intrusive and pesky initially, those questions asked of oneself can lead to new awareness, to “ah-ha” moments, and to different levels of thinking and thus, operating. Ask yourself all the questions you might imagine the outside world is going to ask of you as a means of starting an inner dialogue. Are the answers you hear forming in your mind satisfactory to you as a leader? If not, keep asking the questions – I promise you that your “inner-knower” will not fail you, because this provides the opportunity for the sum and substance of your intellect, your experience, and yes, your spirit, to come forth and provide the wisdom you are seeking.
Finally, when a leader fully engages in decisive and introspective activity, the corollary element of ethics comes into play.
Ethical
There is an element of ethical leadership that concerns the approach of being straightforward, direct, and truthful. Clearly, the act of being introspective can nudge one in the direction of ethical leadership. While there is an understanding around the word of ethics that is based in morality, I am not focusing on that aspect of the concept of ethical leadership here. Rather, I refer to decency and fairness, and leadership based on a set of principles. Again, no one size fits all. But, no leader can achieve the level of distinction that I believe we should all aspire to without ethical considerations being part and parcel of the leadership role.
Abraham Lincoln provides my guiding light on the issue of ethics, in part because his view was so simple and clear-eyed. He once remarked: “When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad.”
Clear, transparent, ethical behavior on the part of a leader is like a beacon of light that shines outward illuminating all. A leader’s team certainly is impacted by the modeling of ethical behavior. An organization’s constituency or audience is drawn to the unmistakable essence of “good” surrounding the mission and endeavor where ethical leadership is ever-present.
One can argue morality as it relates to ethics, but what seems unimpeachably true to me is that leading with a set of values, principles, and beliefs imbued with conscientious application engenders leadership of consequence and of distinction.
So, take one for the team … go out there and model how a leader should D.I.E.
Okay, I admit to hyping this blog post with a provocative title. But, stay with me if you will and I think you’ll see why good leaders must "D.I.E." Certainly, I am not referring to corporeal death, but to an acronym that represents qualities I believe to be essential to leaders of distinction.
The acronym “D.I.E.” stands for these significant “good leader” traits: the ability to be decisive; the wisdom to be introspective; and the grounding to be ethical. Adding these elements to the many leadership qualities I’ve previously explored in postings to this blog helps to round out the essence of what can only be described as extraordinary leadership. I’ve delved into many other qualities of leadership including these words of description that define an exemplary leader -- visionary, persuasive, intentional, likable, strategic, tactical, and focused. But, it is necessary to add the important “D.I.E.” descriptors that are the hallmark of leaders who stand out, leaders that are remembered for their positive impact, leaders who engender success through their approach and style, and leaders who are guided by intelligence and skill. All of these, I feel compelled to remind you, are learned traits. While a rare person may be born with an intuitive feel for leadership, even they must develop the skills and qualities that allow them to actualize their success in a leadership role.
Decisive
Essentially, a decisive leader can wrap their attention and thinking around an issue, and make a decision for the “greater good” of the mission of their organization even without possessing a complete set of data or information. They can do this precisely because they have honed the numerous other traits I’ve identified in my postings on leadership. Often there is limited time and/or certain market constraints imposed from the outside of a leader’s sphere of immediate influence. One reaction to these outside influences that can come without warning and with severity would be to freeze, to become transfixed by the challenge. But, one cannot be successful for very long by avoiding making decisions. The kind of leader I am discussing here works to develop a decisive nature, rapidly gathering all pertinent and available information, looking at the various perspectives of a situation, projecting scenarios of the outcomes of deciding in one way or another – then making a choice, making a decision.
There is perhaps no more powerful statement on the power of “deciding” than the famous words of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe who in the early years of the 19th Century said:
“I have come to the frightening conclusion that I am the decisive element. It is my personal approach that creates the climate. It is my daily mood that makes the weather. I possess tremendous power to make life miserable or joyous. I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration; I can humiliate or humor, hurt or heal. In all situations, it is my response that decides whether a crisis is escalated or de-escalated, and a person humanized or de-humanized. If we treat people as they are, we make them worse. If we treat people as they ought to be, we help them become what they are capable of becoming.”
Consider the incredible power of those words, which are the perfect segue to the next element of leadership in the “D.I.E.” acronym.
Introspective
A leader of positive consequence has the ability to be introspective. While much of a leader’s role is about projecting outward (to a team, a board, other leaders, and their organization’s constituency or audience) that outward projection must have a foundation in the ability of a leader to be introspective, self-examining, and “interior-aware.” It is the introspective element that is the foundation for the quality of intentionality that has been previously discussed in my postings on leadership.
I know what many readers must now be thinking … “Sounds good, but where will I find the time?” There are many answers to that question, and no one size fits all. The Buddhists would say that one can practice introspection in each moment. That is the famous “Zen” approach to life, to daily activity, and to personal engagement. My point here is that one need not go off on a retreat to be introspective. A leader cannot afford to delay introspection to another time or place. Introspection should not be separated from one’s moment to moment activity. Clearly, this is a learned skill that must be practiced consistently. And, for those queasy about “religious” practice or dogma, introspection isn’t just a Zen or Buddhist concept.
Another perhaps more cerebral approach to introspection is to develop the habit of asking oneself questions … all the time, about everything. Albeit, a very difficult habit to start, as it will seem intrusive and pesky initially, those questions asked of oneself can lead to new awareness, to “ah-ha” moments, and to different levels of thinking and thus, operating. Ask yourself all the questions you might imagine the outside world is going to ask of you as a means of starting an inner dialogue. Are the answers you hear forming in your mind satisfactory to you as a leader? If not, keep asking the questions – I promise you that your “inner-knower” will not fail you, because this provides the opportunity for the sum and substance of your intellect, your experience, and yes, your spirit, to come forth and provide the wisdom you are seeking.
Finally, when a leader fully engages in decisive and introspective activity, the corollary element of ethics comes into play.
Ethical
There is an element of ethical leadership that concerns the approach of being straightforward, direct, and truthful. Clearly, the act of being introspective can nudge one in the direction of ethical leadership. While there is an understanding around the word of ethics that is based in morality, I am not focusing on that aspect of the concept of ethical leadership here. Rather, I refer to decency and fairness, and leadership based on a set of principles. Again, no one size fits all. But, no leader can achieve the level of distinction that I believe we should all aspire to without ethical considerations being part and parcel of the leadership role.
Abraham Lincoln provides my guiding light on the issue of ethics, in part because his view was so simple and clear-eyed. He once remarked: “When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad.”
Clear, transparent, ethical behavior on the part of a leader is like a beacon of light that shines outward illuminating all. A leader’s team certainly is impacted by the modeling of ethical behavior. An organization’s constituency or audience is drawn to the unmistakable essence of “good” surrounding the mission and endeavor where ethical leadership is ever-present.
One can argue morality as it relates to ethics, but what seems unimpeachably true to me is that leading with a set of values, principles, and beliefs imbued with conscientious application engenders leadership of consequence and of distinction.
So, take one for the team … go out there and model how a leader should D.I.E.
Friday, April 24, 2009
The Oxygen of Partnerships and Collaborations
By Richard Russey
Partnerships and collaborations are critical relationships between and among public and private sectors entities, grant makers and grantees, the non-profit community, donors, programmatic entities, educational institutions on all levels, and clients/audience/constituency, among others. Importantly, and in the context of the ongoing examination of effective leadership featured on this blog, is the critical element of considering and acting on the belief that one’s staff or team are some of the very best partners one can have to achieve organizational success. (More on the concept of leader/staff partnership later in this article.)
First, potential partners must consider some of the key elements that will lead to the success of any short or long term collaborative partnership. They include:
Developing trust born of a common vision
Frequently the challenge blocking the way to true partnership is the issue of trust. “Can I trust those individuals and organizations I bring into close alliance?” is an oft asked question posed by leaders of every type of organization. Perhaps it seems blatantly obvious, but it is important to underscore the fact that real trust between individuals and organizations, a trust that leads to enhanced progress and success for both (or all) entities in partnership, is born of sharing a common vision. Those in alliance “for the greater good” must share a vision, even if not a specific mission. The over-arching reason for an alliance, partnership, or collaboration must be that, in essence, the sum is greater than the parts, that a greater value can be achieved than by going it alone. Each participant in a partnership must obtain value (however that is defined by each participating partner) in order for the alliance to be one that is productive and enduring.
Clearly organizations have the goal of hiring a team of individuals who are enthusiastic proponents of the established vision. For example, let’s look at one of the most famous and pithy vision statements in corporate America’s history, Ford Motor Company’s “Quality is Job #1.” Undoubtedly, to achieve success Ford had (and has) an interest in hiring team members at all levels who believe in that vision. For that vision to become actualized everyone from line factory workers to middle management, to vendors, board members, shareholders, and the highest level corporate executives, a shared belief in that “quality” vision is absolutely essential. Maybe this is an over simplification, as I am not a business analyst, but from the perspective of looking at success based on shared vision, perhaps this is one reason that the Ford Motor Company is not in the same dire straits as other American car companies during the current economic crisis.
Embracing a diversity of perspectives
While sharing a common vision is a basic tenant of effective partnerships and collaborations, that concept should not be translated dogmatically. It can be assumed that anytime two individuals, much less two or more organizations, are in partnership there is going to be a diversity of perspectives. At least two results can come from this fact – one is that the partnership or collaboration is not successful and falls apart, or alternatively and more positively that the collaborative partnership is strengthened by the diversity of perspectives. In order to share a vision, we must not express a rigid and doctrinaire adherence to a single vision. Rather, I assert that it is healthy within the context of broad agreement to have a healthy debate around specific perspectives that relate to how to accomplish a successful collaboration. Utilizing strength that comes from the vitality of difference partners can truly achieve a sum that is greater than the parts being brought together.
Of course, this approach is not for the faint of heart, for it requires both fearless and ego-less leadership and cooperation by all parties involved. Where blocks may arise due to differing perspectives on how to accomplish goals related to a shared vision, it is best for all parties to step back and remember that there was (and is) a shared vision that brought together the collaborative partnership in the first place. Then, building a strategy that not only embraces the diversity of opinions and approaches, but ultimately produces the yield desired for all members of a collaborative partnership, is vital. Close and frequent communication is one key to success. Facilitation by a third party of the collaborative partnership may be desirable and should not, in my opinion, be seen as a weakness. As I’ve stated, true and meaningful partnerships at any level, between or among any two or more people or organizations is not for the faint of heart. Commitment, strong motivation, trust, and accountability must be hallmarks of the partnership. But, as in any true collaborative partnership that has its risks, the rewards can be great. Goals can be achieved that are very difficult if not impossible if attempted in the vacuum of “going it alone.”
Knowing the difference between short term and long term partnerships and collaborations
The success and effectiveness of collaborative partnerships is to know “when to hold, and know when to fold.” But, the difference between a partnership of organizational entities and a card game is that all parties should have an understanding from the outset what the parameters of that partnership should be as it relates to all. Partnership between and among a leader and employees (team members) may be considered to be long-term and enduring, at least in theory. As any leader knows, turnover is costly in terms of time and expense and morale. So, in the scenario of “leader-staff” the goal is a long term partnership where benefits accrue to all. It is relevant here to quote one of the great thinkers on this subject, Ken Blanchard:
“In the past a leader was a boss. Today’s leaders must be partners with their people… they no longer can lead solely based on positional power.”
But, what about other forms of collaborations and partnerships – how long should they last? Again, that question should be considered before entering into an associative relationship. The original shared vision certainly provides some guidance, but at this point it will be important to get into the details of mission and goals. What does each member of a collaboration or partnership want or need as a result of that association? What time line is projected for the accomplishment of shared goals? To what degree does the collaborative partnership benefit each of the members of that partnership and serve their audiences or constituency over time? One example of effective short term collaboration might be two or more nonprofit organizations partnering to produce a grant request to a funding entity that will produce the benefit of realizing specific short term goals – such as producing an event for a specific purpose and audience. Of course beyond the very shortest and simplest of collaborations there are innumerable possibilities for partnerships of increasing length and complexity.
Partnership is a process
It is important to remember that a partnership is a process requiring ongoing attention, commitment, monitoring, and, essentially, accountability from each partner member to all others engaged in the partnership. It is important to keep the lines of communication open and active, with regularly scheduled communications using a variety of methodologies appropriate to that partnership. Valuing the unique contributions each partner brings to the table is essential for success. Sharing “power” or even better, relinquishing the idea of power as useful to a collaborative endeavor is one component of success. To the same degree that a collaborative partnership is entered into with a great deal of thought, intentionality, and “tooling,” ongoing assessment and re-tooling of the relationship is critical. Previous postings to this blog have made the important point that the only constant in life is change. So, it stands to reason that change is going to impact any given collaborative partnership from day one. That fact does not need to be a daunting thought that prevents partnerships from forming and serving valued functions. Instead, it can serve as a motivator for communication and invigoration around the original purpose and goals of the partnership.
Whenever a stumbling block or bump in the road comes along, my advice is to remember two important things: one is the original shared vision that brought together the collaborative partnership in the first place; and the other is the mantra, “this is a process … this is a process … a process born of common purpose.”
Partnerships and collaborations are critical relationships between and among public and private sectors entities, grant makers and grantees, the non-profit community, donors, programmatic entities, educational institutions on all levels, and clients/audience/constituency, among others. Importantly, and in the context of the ongoing examination of effective leadership featured on this blog, is the critical element of considering and acting on the belief that one’s staff or team are some of the very best partners one can have to achieve organizational success. (More on the concept of leader/staff partnership later in this article.)
First, potential partners must consider some of the key elements that will lead to the success of any short or long term collaborative partnership. They include:
Developing trust born of a common vision
Frequently the challenge blocking the way to true partnership is the issue of trust. “Can I trust those individuals and organizations I bring into close alliance?” is an oft asked question posed by leaders of every type of organization. Perhaps it seems blatantly obvious, but it is important to underscore the fact that real trust between individuals and organizations, a trust that leads to enhanced progress and success for both (or all) entities in partnership, is born of sharing a common vision. Those in alliance “for the greater good” must share a vision, even if not a specific mission. The over-arching reason for an alliance, partnership, or collaboration must be that, in essence, the sum is greater than the parts, that a greater value can be achieved than by going it alone. Each participant in a partnership must obtain value (however that is defined by each participating partner) in order for the alliance to be one that is productive and enduring.
Clearly organizations have the goal of hiring a team of individuals who are enthusiastic proponents of the established vision. For example, let’s look at one of the most famous and pithy vision statements in corporate America’s history, Ford Motor Company’s “Quality is Job #1.” Undoubtedly, to achieve success Ford had (and has) an interest in hiring team members at all levels who believe in that vision. For that vision to become actualized everyone from line factory workers to middle management, to vendors, board members, shareholders, and the highest level corporate executives, a shared belief in that “quality” vision is absolutely essential. Maybe this is an over simplification, as I am not a business analyst, but from the perspective of looking at success based on shared vision, perhaps this is one reason that the Ford Motor Company is not in the same dire straits as other American car companies during the current economic crisis.
Embracing a diversity of perspectives
While sharing a common vision is a basic tenant of effective partnerships and collaborations, that concept should not be translated dogmatically. It can be assumed that anytime two individuals, much less two or more organizations, are in partnership there is going to be a diversity of perspectives. At least two results can come from this fact – one is that the partnership or collaboration is not successful and falls apart, or alternatively and more positively that the collaborative partnership is strengthened by the diversity of perspectives. In order to share a vision, we must not express a rigid and doctrinaire adherence to a single vision. Rather, I assert that it is healthy within the context of broad agreement to have a healthy debate around specific perspectives that relate to how to accomplish a successful collaboration. Utilizing strength that comes from the vitality of difference partners can truly achieve a sum that is greater than the parts being brought together.
Of course, this approach is not for the faint of heart, for it requires both fearless and ego-less leadership and cooperation by all parties involved. Where blocks may arise due to differing perspectives on how to accomplish goals related to a shared vision, it is best for all parties to step back and remember that there was (and is) a shared vision that brought together the collaborative partnership in the first place. Then, building a strategy that not only embraces the diversity of opinions and approaches, but ultimately produces the yield desired for all members of a collaborative partnership, is vital. Close and frequent communication is one key to success. Facilitation by a third party of the collaborative partnership may be desirable and should not, in my opinion, be seen as a weakness. As I’ve stated, true and meaningful partnerships at any level, between or among any two or more people or organizations is not for the faint of heart. Commitment, strong motivation, trust, and accountability must be hallmarks of the partnership. But, as in any true collaborative partnership that has its risks, the rewards can be great. Goals can be achieved that are very difficult if not impossible if attempted in the vacuum of “going it alone.”
Knowing the difference between short term and long term partnerships and collaborations
The success and effectiveness of collaborative partnerships is to know “when to hold, and know when to fold.” But, the difference between a partnership of organizational entities and a card game is that all parties should have an understanding from the outset what the parameters of that partnership should be as it relates to all. Partnership between and among a leader and employees (team members) may be considered to be long-term and enduring, at least in theory. As any leader knows, turnover is costly in terms of time and expense and morale. So, in the scenario of “leader-staff” the goal is a long term partnership where benefits accrue to all. It is relevant here to quote one of the great thinkers on this subject, Ken Blanchard:
“In the past a leader was a boss. Today’s leaders must be partners with their people… they no longer can lead solely based on positional power.”
But, what about other forms of collaborations and partnerships – how long should they last? Again, that question should be considered before entering into an associative relationship. The original shared vision certainly provides some guidance, but at this point it will be important to get into the details of mission and goals. What does each member of a collaboration or partnership want or need as a result of that association? What time line is projected for the accomplishment of shared goals? To what degree does the collaborative partnership benefit each of the members of that partnership and serve their audiences or constituency over time? One example of effective short term collaboration might be two or more nonprofit organizations partnering to produce a grant request to a funding entity that will produce the benefit of realizing specific short term goals – such as producing an event for a specific purpose and audience. Of course beyond the very shortest and simplest of collaborations there are innumerable possibilities for partnerships of increasing length and complexity.
Partnership is a process
It is important to remember that a partnership is a process requiring ongoing attention, commitment, monitoring, and, essentially, accountability from each partner member to all others engaged in the partnership. It is important to keep the lines of communication open and active, with regularly scheduled communications using a variety of methodologies appropriate to that partnership. Valuing the unique contributions each partner brings to the table is essential for success. Sharing “power” or even better, relinquishing the idea of power as useful to a collaborative endeavor is one component of success. To the same degree that a collaborative partnership is entered into with a great deal of thought, intentionality, and “tooling,” ongoing assessment and re-tooling of the relationship is critical. Previous postings to this blog have made the important point that the only constant in life is change. So, it stands to reason that change is going to impact any given collaborative partnership from day one. That fact does not need to be a daunting thought that prevents partnerships from forming and serving valued functions. Instead, it can serve as a motivator for communication and invigoration around the original purpose and goals of the partnership.
Whenever a stumbling block or bump in the road comes along, my advice is to remember two important things: one is the original shared vision that brought together the collaborative partnership in the first place; and the other is the mantra, “this is a process … this is a process … a process born of common purpose.”
Monday, April 20, 2009
Let the Team Shine!
By Richard Russey
In my experience, one of the most critical factors of team leadership is best articulated by the wisdom of Lao Tzu, considered to be the “father” of Taoism:
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves."
Some leaders in our take charge, lead by shear force kind of world, will find the words of Lao Tzu anachronistic. Yet, I believe his thoughtful perception of a leader’s role vis-à-vis “the team” to be an enduring truism.
To bring his theory into the present, a recent client of mine was wont to say to me following a particularly successful delivery of a job: “Your team was superlative; but I know that a team cannot be successful without a good and effective leader.”
What are the elements of this approach to developing and leading a team of individuals towards group success? In my view the elements include:
Inclusiveness
Every member of a team is critical to the success of the team as a whole. You may recall that in one of my earlier postings on leadership I referred to my dislike for the practice of referring to staff by the monikers of “senior” and “junior.” You may also recall that I recognized that many hierarchical structures in organizations seem to have the need to sort out the positions of members of the team (staff) relative to one another. It is my view that we better serve our organizations and the people who work with us (rather than “for” us) by modeling true inclusiveness. This is done be recognizing and valuing the role that each and every member of the team plays. Some roles may involve more complex thinking, planning, and interacting, while others may be of a supportive and administrative nature. Nonetheless, ALL the activities of team members are critical to the successful outcome the group is striving to achieve. I submit that if a team member’s role is so unimportant as to not include them in all team meetings and communications and opportunities to contribute, then that particular position probably need not exist in an organization.
Leaders should ask themselves these questions: Do I regularly communicate with all of my team? Do I understand the value that each team member has the potentiality to play? Do I use the “team dynamic” to achieve the greatest level of success related to any given initiative or task? Do I treat team members as a group of equals, each with their own specific tasks to perform? Am I making the mistake of being supportive of some team members while being condescending towards others?
Communication
There are a multitude of ways to communicate with a team. As indicated above, it is critical to communicate with the team inclusively. Except in the rarest of circumstances that may involve extenuating circumstances, individual members of the team should not be left out of communications that will serve to support the team effort as a whole. No individual team member, whatever their role relative to the others should have to be in the embarrassing position of having to say, “But, I didn’t get that memo (email).”
Communicating with the team as a whole serves to reinforce the fact that every member of the team is important, and that all team members are expected to respect and honor one another as they work the path towards goal achievement and ultimate success. The methodologies of communication will vary depending on circumstances. The team leader’s role is to know when to communicate and what communication methodology is most appropriate for any given situation. There are times when an in-person team meeting is the most appropriate format to utilize. Typically, in-person team meetings are critical at the outset of a project, at certain milestone points during the project and at the point of a project wrap.
A number of factors will dictate how realistic the in-person meeting option is in reality. For example, are all team members co-located? Thanks to the wonders of technology, even teams that include members that are miles away may have productive group meetings via video-conferencing or phone-conferencing. E-mail communication should be used judiciously, as one of the commonalities all of us face in this new era of communication is overstuffed e-mail in-boxes. E-mailing is a time saver, but it must also be engaged in with great care. The nuance of communication experienced in face-to-face meetings is diminished in an e-mail. It is incumbent upon the e-mail sender to carefully construct a message that is clear, concise, and understandable. And, while it may be old-fashioned in this fast-paced “texting” oriented world, I am a proponent of utilizing whole sentences, capitalization, and correct punctuation in e-mail communications. To each their own style, of course, but my approach is that every time I communicate (either in person, via e-mail, or snail mail, or other) I am representing myself, my particular “brand,” to the outside world.
The larger point here is that whatever form communication may take; remember that as a team leader one has the responsibility to communicate inclusively, with specificity, and with conciseness. Anything less than that is less than the team deserves.
Macro-management
One common complaint by team members about their supervisor is that they are placed in a role related to specific tasks or activities that they are well qualified to perform but are then micromanaged by their leader to the point that they feel dispirited, undervalued, and inadequate. A leader serves their organization well to hire or position the best people to do certain tasks or groups of tasks then let them go to demonstrate their competence. This seems to be one of the most difficult things for some leaders to do because of their sense of responsibility to their supervisors, the CEO, the board, and importantly, the organization’s constituency. But, if a leader has confidence in the staffing choices made, then that should rollover to a sense of confidence that the team assembled has the right stuff to not only accomplish the tasks at hand, but to succeed with distinction.
So, leaders would be wise to get out of the business of micromanaging, and take on a new role, that of a “macro-manager.” That is, set forth the specifics related to any specific team goal (the scope of the work), provide the tools and resources needed by the team to do the job, facilitate the team dynamic, and honor the good work of the individual team members as well as the team collective.
Acknowledgement and Praise
A good team leader gives credit to the team frequently and publicly whenever and wherever possible. Good team leaders have the confidence to recognize that team success will inevitably accrue back to them. But, the really confident leadership trait to have is to draw attention to the team and not to oneself as leader. Again, following the idea that every team member is important and has value, this acknowledgement should at one point or another be shared with every person on the team. They all contributed, doing their part and accomplishing their tasks that led to the success of the overall team effort.
Acknowledgment and praise should not be shared only at the end of a project. Rather, the very first project team meeting should start with acknowledging the value of each team member, their particular role and unique contributions that are to play a part in the team’s success. A cautionary note: acknowledgment and praise should be sincere and specific; as the other side of that coin is that cynicism may be the reaction of team members if they feel that praise is inauthentic. If a leader has identified the right people to contribute to the team effort on any given task there will be copious opportunities to acknowledge individual and team efforts with authenticity.
Define “Team” Broadly
In today’s world of work, “teams” are fluid, flexible, and destined to change their make up and construction. Certain individuals may flow into then out of a team as different tasks and projects are undertaken. The leader’s job is to facilitate that flow and change, presenting it as exciting and energizing to an individual’s contribution to the organization. The entire staff of an organization should be led to recognize and value the idea of cross-teaming in order to address the needs of particular projects. The opposite of the excitement of fluid teams is an enervation that is destructive to individual and group morale.
Team members may include consultants, vendors, representatives from other organizations, individuals from an organization’s audience or constituency, and many other possibilities. Leaders would be wise to not restrict their concept of “team” too narrowly, as this leads to unnecessary constriction and deliverables that may be less stellar than they may be otherwise with the added influence and expertise of individuals outside an established team.
In Summary: The Tao of Team Revisited
Becoming a team leader that can facilitate the team dynamic such that the team will feel that they accomplished specific projects themselves requires a setting aside of ego that may be significantly challenging. However, in my view it is a requisite of effective team leadership. Remember, team success accrues to its leader naturally. One does not need to trumpet that news to the world, because the world is set up to “get” that leaders are acknowledged for the success of their organizations or teams.
Clearly, there is important work to be accomplished by a team leader: being inclusive in valuing and honoring every member of the team; communicating to all members of the team with modalities that are appropriate to a given situation; macro-managing by providing project goals and parameters, then letting go; and acknowledging and praising with authenticity and specificity.
The team leader’s role is not insignificant; but it is critical to recognize that the leader need not be the star. Let the team shine!
In my experience, one of the most critical factors of team leadership is best articulated by the wisdom of Lao Tzu, considered to be the “father” of Taoism:
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves."
Some leaders in our take charge, lead by shear force kind of world, will find the words of Lao Tzu anachronistic. Yet, I believe his thoughtful perception of a leader’s role vis-à-vis “the team” to be an enduring truism.
To bring his theory into the present, a recent client of mine was wont to say to me following a particularly successful delivery of a job: “Your team was superlative; but I know that a team cannot be successful without a good and effective leader.”
What are the elements of this approach to developing and leading a team of individuals towards group success? In my view the elements include:
Inclusiveness
Every member of a team is critical to the success of the team as a whole. You may recall that in one of my earlier postings on leadership I referred to my dislike for the practice of referring to staff by the monikers of “senior” and “junior.” You may also recall that I recognized that many hierarchical structures in organizations seem to have the need to sort out the positions of members of the team (staff) relative to one another. It is my view that we better serve our organizations and the people who work with us (rather than “for” us) by modeling true inclusiveness. This is done be recognizing and valuing the role that each and every member of the team plays. Some roles may involve more complex thinking, planning, and interacting, while others may be of a supportive and administrative nature. Nonetheless, ALL the activities of team members are critical to the successful outcome the group is striving to achieve. I submit that if a team member’s role is so unimportant as to not include them in all team meetings and communications and opportunities to contribute, then that particular position probably need not exist in an organization.
Leaders should ask themselves these questions: Do I regularly communicate with all of my team? Do I understand the value that each team member has the potentiality to play? Do I use the “team dynamic” to achieve the greatest level of success related to any given initiative or task? Do I treat team members as a group of equals, each with their own specific tasks to perform? Am I making the mistake of being supportive of some team members while being condescending towards others?
Communication
There are a multitude of ways to communicate with a team. As indicated above, it is critical to communicate with the team inclusively. Except in the rarest of circumstances that may involve extenuating circumstances, individual members of the team should not be left out of communications that will serve to support the team effort as a whole. No individual team member, whatever their role relative to the others should have to be in the embarrassing position of having to say, “But, I didn’t get that memo (email).”
Communicating with the team as a whole serves to reinforce the fact that every member of the team is important, and that all team members are expected to respect and honor one another as they work the path towards goal achievement and ultimate success. The methodologies of communication will vary depending on circumstances. The team leader’s role is to know when to communicate and what communication methodology is most appropriate for any given situation. There are times when an in-person team meeting is the most appropriate format to utilize. Typically, in-person team meetings are critical at the outset of a project, at certain milestone points during the project and at the point of a project wrap.
A number of factors will dictate how realistic the in-person meeting option is in reality. For example, are all team members co-located? Thanks to the wonders of technology, even teams that include members that are miles away may have productive group meetings via video-conferencing or phone-conferencing. E-mail communication should be used judiciously, as one of the commonalities all of us face in this new era of communication is overstuffed e-mail in-boxes. E-mailing is a time saver, but it must also be engaged in with great care. The nuance of communication experienced in face-to-face meetings is diminished in an e-mail. It is incumbent upon the e-mail sender to carefully construct a message that is clear, concise, and understandable. And, while it may be old-fashioned in this fast-paced “texting” oriented world, I am a proponent of utilizing whole sentences, capitalization, and correct punctuation in e-mail communications. To each their own style, of course, but my approach is that every time I communicate (either in person, via e-mail, or snail mail, or other) I am representing myself, my particular “brand,” to the outside world.
The larger point here is that whatever form communication may take; remember that as a team leader one has the responsibility to communicate inclusively, with specificity, and with conciseness. Anything less than that is less than the team deserves.
Macro-management
One common complaint by team members about their supervisor is that they are placed in a role related to specific tasks or activities that they are well qualified to perform but are then micromanaged by their leader to the point that they feel dispirited, undervalued, and inadequate. A leader serves their organization well to hire or position the best people to do certain tasks or groups of tasks then let them go to demonstrate their competence. This seems to be one of the most difficult things for some leaders to do because of their sense of responsibility to their supervisors, the CEO, the board, and importantly, the organization’s constituency. But, if a leader has confidence in the staffing choices made, then that should rollover to a sense of confidence that the team assembled has the right stuff to not only accomplish the tasks at hand, but to succeed with distinction.
So, leaders would be wise to get out of the business of micromanaging, and take on a new role, that of a “macro-manager.” That is, set forth the specifics related to any specific team goal (the scope of the work), provide the tools and resources needed by the team to do the job, facilitate the team dynamic, and honor the good work of the individual team members as well as the team collective.
Acknowledgement and Praise
A good team leader gives credit to the team frequently and publicly whenever and wherever possible. Good team leaders have the confidence to recognize that team success will inevitably accrue back to them. But, the really confident leadership trait to have is to draw attention to the team and not to oneself as leader. Again, following the idea that every team member is important and has value, this acknowledgement should at one point or another be shared with every person on the team. They all contributed, doing their part and accomplishing their tasks that led to the success of the overall team effort.
Acknowledgment and praise should not be shared only at the end of a project. Rather, the very first project team meeting should start with acknowledging the value of each team member, their particular role and unique contributions that are to play a part in the team’s success. A cautionary note: acknowledgment and praise should be sincere and specific; as the other side of that coin is that cynicism may be the reaction of team members if they feel that praise is inauthentic. If a leader has identified the right people to contribute to the team effort on any given task there will be copious opportunities to acknowledge individual and team efforts with authenticity.
Define “Team” Broadly
In today’s world of work, “teams” are fluid, flexible, and destined to change their make up and construction. Certain individuals may flow into then out of a team as different tasks and projects are undertaken. The leader’s job is to facilitate that flow and change, presenting it as exciting and energizing to an individual’s contribution to the organization. The entire staff of an organization should be led to recognize and value the idea of cross-teaming in order to address the needs of particular projects. The opposite of the excitement of fluid teams is an enervation that is destructive to individual and group morale.
Team members may include consultants, vendors, representatives from other organizations, individuals from an organization’s audience or constituency, and many other possibilities. Leaders would be wise to not restrict their concept of “team” too narrowly, as this leads to unnecessary constriction and deliverables that may be less stellar than they may be otherwise with the added influence and expertise of individuals outside an established team.
In Summary: The Tao of Team Revisited
Becoming a team leader that can facilitate the team dynamic such that the team will feel that they accomplished specific projects themselves requires a setting aside of ego that may be significantly challenging. However, in my view it is a requisite of effective team leadership. Remember, team success accrues to its leader naturally. One does not need to trumpet that news to the world, because the world is set up to “get” that leaders are acknowledged for the success of their organizations or teams.
Clearly, there is important work to be accomplished by a team leader: being inclusive in valuing and honoring every member of the team; communicating to all members of the team with modalities that are appropriate to a given situation; macro-managing by providing project goals and parameters, then letting go; and acknowledging and praising with authenticity and specificity.
The team leader’s role is not insignificant; but it is critical to recognize that the leader need not be the star. Let the team shine!
Friday, April 17, 2009
Focused, Strategic and Tactical Leaderhip
By Richard Russey
One of the world’s preeminent anthropologists, Margaret Meade, said:
“What people say, what people do, and what people say they do are entirely different things.”
Those words of keen insight, observance, and wisdom speak to assessing the competencies of leadership explored here. Do we as leaders speak and act with consistency? Are we as leaders focused on saying and doing things that are in concert with one another, indeed serve as two aspects of the same goal?
Too often, we say one thing publicly, and without negative purpose or malice end up acting in a way that doesn’t match our words. That is because, I think, it is likely easier to put our words out into the world than to follow those words with actions that are consistent with those words and that embody those words, making them real and measurable.
Focused Leadership
One way to bring our statements (what we say) and our actions (what we do) into alignment is an energy of focus brought to our leadership style. Focus can and should be an outgrowth of vision and mission (explored in the previous posting on leadership). This is where an established vision and mission gets actualized on a daily, moment-to-moment basis. Without appropriate focus we allow ourselves as leaders to be pulled in many directions simultaneously without accomplishing the specifics of our original vision and mission. Certainly, multi-tasking and the ability to keep a lot of balls in the air at once is one of the hallmarks of effective leadership. But, all those tasks and balls in the air ought to be focused on the original vision and mission that a leader is charged to bring to fruition.
It helpful and meaningful to engage in regular, frequent self-checks (self-assessments, if you will) as a leader, or indeed as a person at any level serving to contribute to an organizational endeavor. A few self-check questions to ask: Am I, as a leader, speaking and acting in alignment with my organization’s vision and mission? Are my words and actions consistent and supportive of each other? Does the outside world see a leader that represents their organization with clarity, convergence, and a sense of centeredness?
How is this accomplished? Examine the words used during your public pronouncements, speeches, and presentations. Look at your memos and other writings; be they simple email communications, or lengthy content-based articles. Then review your actions over a specific measure of time, whether it be moment-to-moment, daily, or weekly. What is the desired outcome of this self-examination? It is that on average, or more desirable even better than average, your words and your actions are in alignment. As Margaret Meade might hope to conclude: what you say you do, and what you do are in concert, seamlessly integrated into a consistent message to your board, team (staff), constituency, audience, and the broader world that is likely to be looking on and drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of your leadership based in part on your ability to focus; that is, to do what you say you do.
Strategic Leadership
Effective leaders are astute about their strategic approach to their endeavors. The ability to be strategic in ways that positively impact one’s organization involves a complex set of considerations, observations, behaviors, and actions. As I’ve acknowledged in previous postings on leadership, volumes have been written on the subject of strategic leadership alone. I’ll focus on what my years of experience have taught me, which will likely be familiar given they millions of words that have been devoted to the subject by many authors over time.
One of the first aspects of strategic leadership that must be looked at is the ability of a leader to be willing to examine with honesty the strengths and weaknesses of their organization. Many aspects must come under scrutiny, not the least of which is the leader of the organization and his or her style and approach. But, it is much more than that. There are, at the bottom line, really only three major categories of resources that we as leaders have to work with. They are time, money, and personnel. Think of your work, in terms of your ability to accomplish the established vision and mission of your organization. Is there anything there in terms of resource that does not fall into one of those categories? Remember, I’m speaking of resources to get the job done effectively; the job you were hired to accomplish. This does not discount the rich content (meaning) of your organization, the sum and substance of your work; but content expertise largely falls into the personnel category, whether it exists with full-time staff, or is brought into the organization through consultants, advisers, board members, your constituency at large, or even vendors.
Are the resources at your disposal adequate to the tasks established by your vision and mission? More than likely you will find, upon honest assessment, that there is lack in one or more of the resource categories over which you have some influence. Do you have enough time to meet your goals? If not, what needs to be adjusted in the objectives or strategic plan of your organization? Prioritization may be necessary if time seems to be the squeeze, unless you have an abundance of money and/or personnel to apply to the tasks to ameliorate any negative factor related to time. It is not a surprise, particularly in our current economic climate, that more often than not sufficient money to realize the vision and mission of our organization is an influencing factor. If that is true (and I haven’t learned of an organization yet where it is not) then the other two elements you have control over may need adjusting. That is, perhaps the time issue needs to be considered, or the staffing issue may need reworking. This all speaks to the need to develop realistic objectives based on the vision and mission of the organization. Otherwise, the strategic plan of the organization will be a set-up for failure, which is a completely unnecessary and unwanted outcome.
Strategic leadership involves much more, of course. Paramount among additional considerations is an analysis framework that is not of my creation … but has been around for a long time. Yet, it must be engaged in assiduously and with a sincerity that may seem breath-taking. I’m referring, of course, to the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that both define and challenge your organization.
An effective leader is constantly scoping the environment in which he/she operates – looking for those strengths and opportunities that may serve to deliver effectively on established goals, and indeed lead to growth. At the same time an effective leader is on the lookout for weaknesses and threats (internal and external) that could cause major damage to the organization if not met head-on. An important point here is that while I named the leader of the organization as the person primarily responsible for these tasks of scanning the internal and external environments for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, it should be the ongoing task of the board and the staff as well. When all stake holders in an organization are involved the result is a far less threatening approach and environment. With just one of those parties holding the responsibility of examining the internal and external factors that may be strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats, you will have at least two other parties that are feeling uncomfortable at the least, and “under the gun” at worst.
I believe in inclusive leadership that utilizes the human resources at hand, leaving no one out in the cold. Any important “meeting of minds” within an organization should include everyone that has vested their time and energy with that organization. Everyone on staff, and I mean everyone, has value and has something to contribute. To that end, I’ve always found it somewhat abhorrent to refer to “senior staff” as opposed to “junior staff.” This does not discount that in some organizations a necessary hierarchy exists. But, even the most rigid hierarchical structure does not mean that individuals at all levels of the organization should not be included in discussions around the welfare, direction, and purpose of the organization. In my experience, it is amazing what happens when everyone is brought to the table together when meetings are conducted that are specifically looking at strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats – and the resources available to address them.
Tactical Leadership
Finally, as a conclusion to this posting, we get down to the real nitty-gritty – sort of where the rubber hits the road to use a well-worn analogy. Tactical leadership includes the working concepts of engaging in intentional, deliberate, calculated, and planned activity. It is also oriented to the bottom-line (again, think of the resources available to you as a leader: time, money, and personnel). Tactical leadership utilizes data available, or seeks to establish a pool of data if it doesn’t already exist that will help with decisions about the direction forward. The thing about data, however it is gathered, is that is constantly needs updating. So, the endeavor of data collection, of fact-finding, of budget crunching, of identifying the consumers of your mission’s purpose (audience, constituency) is in need of constantly being brought current and reexamined. This brings us back to the purpose of the organization, where all the data collection and analysis, budget projections vs. actual expenditures, and other fact-finding will either support that purpose or serve as a red flag of warning that adjustments need to be made. Tactical leadership takes all these factors into account as a bottom-line means of measuring whether or not established outcomes are being reached, fulfilled, and satisfied.
Tactical leadership happens, again, by utilizing all the personnel available that have vested interest in the success of your organization’s mission. Board members, all staff, consultants, vendors, and importantly the audience or consumers of your organization’s mission should be included in both the data gathering and analyzing of that data. Similarly, representatives of all those subgroups should assist with budget development and analysis.
We often think of tactics in military terms … that is, secret for the purpose of engaging an enemy. Let’s redefine tactics with a more benign and “civilian” mind-set as a set of actions, based on facts, figures, data, and research that is openly and inclusively considered as a means to support the success of our organizations.
Effective leaders embrace openness and transparency as a hallmark of their leadership style, and understand the value of leadership behavior that is openly focused, strategic, and tactical.
One of the world’s preeminent anthropologists, Margaret Meade, said:
“What people say, what people do, and what people say they do are entirely different things.”
Those words of keen insight, observance, and wisdom speak to assessing the competencies of leadership explored here. Do we as leaders speak and act with consistency? Are we as leaders focused on saying and doing things that are in concert with one another, indeed serve as two aspects of the same goal?
Too often, we say one thing publicly, and without negative purpose or malice end up acting in a way that doesn’t match our words. That is because, I think, it is likely easier to put our words out into the world than to follow those words with actions that are consistent with those words and that embody those words, making them real and measurable.
Focused Leadership
One way to bring our statements (what we say) and our actions (what we do) into alignment is an energy of focus brought to our leadership style. Focus can and should be an outgrowth of vision and mission (explored in the previous posting on leadership). This is where an established vision and mission gets actualized on a daily, moment-to-moment basis. Without appropriate focus we allow ourselves as leaders to be pulled in many directions simultaneously without accomplishing the specifics of our original vision and mission. Certainly, multi-tasking and the ability to keep a lot of balls in the air at once is one of the hallmarks of effective leadership. But, all those tasks and balls in the air ought to be focused on the original vision and mission that a leader is charged to bring to fruition.
It helpful and meaningful to engage in regular, frequent self-checks (self-assessments, if you will) as a leader, or indeed as a person at any level serving to contribute to an organizational endeavor. A few self-check questions to ask: Am I, as a leader, speaking and acting in alignment with my organization’s vision and mission? Are my words and actions consistent and supportive of each other? Does the outside world see a leader that represents their organization with clarity, convergence, and a sense of centeredness?
How is this accomplished? Examine the words used during your public pronouncements, speeches, and presentations. Look at your memos and other writings; be they simple email communications, or lengthy content-based articles. Then review your actions over a specific measure of time, whether it be moment-to-moment, daily, or weekly. What is the desired outcome of this self-examination? It is that on average, or more desirable even better than average, your words and your actions are in alignment. As Margaret Meade might hope to conclude: what you say you do, and what you do are in concert, seamlessly integrated into a consistent message to your board, team (staff), constituency, audience, and the broader world that is likely to be looking on and drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of your leadership based in part on your ability to focus; that is, to do what you say you do.
Strategic Leadership
Effective leaders are astute about their strategic approach to their endeavors. The ability to be strategic in ways that positively impact one’s organization involves a complex set of considerations, observations, behaviors, and actions. As I’ve acknowledged in previous postings on leadership, volumes have been written on the subject of strategic leadership alone. I’ll focus on what my years of experience have taught me, which will likely be familiar given they millions of words that have been devoted to the subject by many authors over time.
One of the first aspects of strategic leadership that must be looked at is the ability of a leader to be willing to examine with honesty the strengths and weaknesses of their organization. Many aspects must come under scrutiny, not the least of which is the leader of the organization and his or her style and approach. But, it is much more than that. There are, at the bottom line, really only three major categories of resources that we as leaders have to work with. They are time, money, and personnel. Think of your work, in terms of your ability to accomplish the established vision and mission of your organization. Is there anything there in terms of resource that does not fall into one of those categories? Remember, I’m speaking of resources to get the job done effectively; the job you were hired to accomplish. This does not discount the rich content (meaning) of your organization, the sum and substance of your work; but content expertise largely falls into the personnel category, whether it exists with full-time staff, or is brought into the organization through consultants, advisers, board members, your constituency at large, or even vendors.
Are the resources at your disposal adequate to the tasks established by your vision and mission? More than likely you will find, upon honest assessment, that there is lack in one or more of the resource categories over which you have some influence. Do you have enough time to meet your goals? If not, what needs to be adjusted in the objectives or strategic plan of your organization? Prioritization may be necessary if time seems to be the squeeze, unless you have an abundance of money and/or personnel to apply to the tasks to ameliorate any negative factor related to time. It is not a surprise, particularly in our current economic climate, that more often than not sufficient money to realize the vision and mission of our organization is an influencing factor. If that is true (and I haven’t learned of an organization yet where it is not) then the other two elements you have control over may need adjusting. That is, perhaps the time issue needs to be considered, or the staffing issue may need reworking. This all speaks to the need to develop realistic objectives based on the vision and mission of the organization. Otherwise, the strategic plan of the organization will be a set-up for failure, which is a completely unnecessary and unwanted outcome.
Strategic leadership involves much more, of course. Paramount among additional considerations is an analysis framework that is not of my creation … but has been around for a long time. Yet, it must be engaged in assiduously and with a sincerity that may seem breath-taking. I’m referring, of course, to the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that both define and challenge your organization.
An effective leader is constantly scoping the environment in which he/she operates – looking for those strengths and opportunities that may serve to deliver effectively on established goals, and indeed lead to growth. At the same time an effective leader is on the lookout for weaknesses and threats (internal and external) that could cause major damage to the organization if not met head-on. An important point here is that while I named the leader of the organization as the person primarily responsible for these tasks of scanning the internal and external environments for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, it should be the ongoing task of the board and the staff as well. When all stake holders in an organization are involved the result is a far less threatening approach and environment. With just one of those parties holding the responsibility of examining the internal and external factors that may be strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats, you will have at least two other parties that are feeling uncomfortable at the least, and “under the gun” at worst.
I believe in inclusive leadership that utilizes the human resources at hand, leaving no one out in the cold. Any important “meeting of minds” within an organization should include everyone that has vested their time and energy with that organization. Everyone on staff, and I mean everyone, has value and has something to contribute. To that end, I’ve always found it somewhat abhorrent to refer to “senior staff” as opposed to “junior staff.” This does not discount that in some organizations a necessary hierarchy exists. But, even the most rigid hierarchical structure does not mean that individuals at all levels of the organization should not be included in discussions around the welfare, direction, and purpose of the organization. In my experience, it is amazing what happens when everyone is brought to the table together when meetings are conducted that are specifically looking at strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats – and the resources available to address them.
Tactical Leadership
Finally, as a conclusion to this posting, we get down to the real nitty-gritty – sort of where the rubber hits the road to use a well-worn analogy. Tactical leadership includes the working concepts of engaging in intentional, deliberate, calculated, and planned activity. It is also oriented to the bottom-line (again, think of the resources available to you as a leader: time, money, and personnel). Tactical leadership utilizes data available, or seeks to establish a pool of data if it doesn’t already exist that will help with decisions about the direction forward. The thing about data, however it is gathered, is that is constantly needs updating. So, the endeavor of data collection, of fact-finding, of budget crunching, of identifying the consumers of your mission’s purpose (audience, constituency) is in need of constantly being brought current and reexamined. This brings us back to the purpose of the organization, where all the data collection and analysis, budget projections vs. actual expenditures, and other fact-finding will either support that purpose or serve as a red flag of warning that adjustments need to be made. Tactical leadership takes all these factors into account as a bottom-line means of measuring whether or not established outcomes are being reached, fulfilled, and satisfied.
Tactical leadership happens, again, by utilizing all the personnel available that have vested interest in the success of your organization’s mission. Board members, all staff, consultants, vendors, and importantly the audience or consumers of your organization’s mission should be included in both the data gathering and analyzing of that data. Similarly, representatives of all those subgroups should assist with budget development and analysis.
We often think of tactics in military terms … that is, secret for the purpose of engaging an enemy. Let’s redefine tactics with a more benign and “civilian” mind-set as a set of actions, based on facts, figures, data, and research that is openly and inclusively considered as a means to support the success of our organizations.
Effective leaders embrace openness and transparency as a hallmark of their leadership style, and understand the value of leadership behavior that is openly focused, strategic, and tactical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
