THE FOCUS OF LEADERSHIP

American newspaper commentator Walter Lippmann defined leaders as "the custodians of a nation's ideals, the beliefs it cherishes, of its permanent hopes, of the faith which makes a nation
out of a mere aggregation of individuals."

Custodians. The word means a keeper, a guardian, or a caretaker. It is a proactive word that implies action on the part of the bearer. Custodians hold something in trust on behalf of others. It is not a behavior motivated out of self-interest.

A custodian then, is an individual who upholds what is best for all people even if it may not be in their own interest to do so. A custodial role must be approached as a temporary role, preserving something greater than the self—principles of enduring and lasting value. This is an attitude of mind that focuses on the task at hand and not on what the leader may gain from the position. It implies a caring and concerned relationship between leaders and followers; individuals motivated by their constituents' best interests.

This idea seems at odds with what we see happening around us today. In all too many arenas, we see many of our leaders holding nothing in trust for those they purport to serve but advancing only their own ideals and hopes.Today, it is often difficult to tell if our leaders are serving themselves or us. And it is all too common to find leaders simply helping themselves to privilege and power. Mismanagement, deceit, greed, and frying-pan-into-the-fire problem solving all beg the question, "Where are our leaders leading?" "To whom can we look to for the direction we need?" Is Lippmann's statement merely an idealistic, unrealizable dream?

Choosing Service Over Self-interest

Throughout time, leaders who have exhibited the proper kind of custodianship—leaders who have sought service over self-interest—have been held in high regard. We gladly look to them for direction and guidance in times of indecision, turmoil and trouble.

One such custodian stood out in the Fifth century BC. The Roman army was surrounded. The country was in need of a leader who would seize the moment and turn the situation defeat into victory. They called upon a man who was out plowing his field, a farmer. He came. He saw. He conquered. He went home. Cincinnatus gained fame for his selfless devotion to his country. This half-legendary hero of the Roman Republic gave his all in a time of crisis and then gave up the reins of power when the task was done and went back to his plow.

In more modern times, America's first President, George Washington, considered "the Father of his Country," provides a paramount example of this same kind of custodial leadership that Lippmann espoused.

Washington was an aristocratic gentleman farmer of distinctive character. When called upon to defend the interests of a fledgling nation as Commander in Chief of the Revolutionary Army during the American War of Independence, he rose to the challenge and persevered against all odds. Then, after eight and a half years of being the most powerful man in America, he resigned his commission and returned to his agricultural pursuits.

Not surprisingly, he became the reluctant, yet automatic and unanimous choice for the first president of the United States. He served two terms. His final and perhaps greatest act of service to his country was that like Cincinnatus, who he had often been compared to by his contemporaries, he stopped serving and retired back to his Mount Vernon estate in Virginia.

Washington is remembered for his strength of character and discipline, his loyal patriotism, his principled leadership and selfless devotion to public duty. He held in trust for the American people the very values and beliefs that made their nation possible without regard for his own gain.

In reality, true leadership is and has always been a selfless action. It involves taking yourself out of the picture and considering the needs of others. It is a way of thinking that takes other people into account even when your own needs are pressing. It asks what is right or best in the wider interest. Few would doubt the need for more leaders like Cincinnatus and George Washington today. Leaders who will complete the job they were asked to do without regard for themselves; leaders who will lead and not merely register the popular will of the people. Yet it would be difficult to build a consensus as to how a leader might do that; how a leader might be a custodian of or hold in trust a nation's or a groups values and beliefs.

How might we answer this question in a world that has seemingly grown unmanageable? Today our world is faced with serious, even life-threatening problems of a global nature. Where will we find the wisdom necessary that might be applied to modern civilization's most pressing dilemmas?

Leadership Is Everyone's Business

Clearly, leadership is an issue that affects all of us. Not only are we impacted by it, but also, we are all called upon to exercise it. Whether we are called upon to be involved in leading government or business, guiding young minds, leading a family, standing for what is right, or organizing a dinner, a carpool, or a household, everyone has a leadership role to play. We are each thrust into many different leadership roles again and again, throughout our lives. We are each called upon to be custodians of what is right and good, lasting and of value, for those in our care.

Surprisingly, this idea of custodianship even runs through the writings of the Renaissance writer often thought to be one of the most cynical yet most observant political thinkers of all time, Niccolò Machiavelli. Machiavelli insisted that leadership was virtuous only if the good of the community was sought out and achieved above all else. A good leader, in other words, was a steward of the community.

When we are called upon to lead, what kind of custodian we will be depends greatly on what we understand a custodian to be, on how we think about other people, and on how we determine what is right and worth holding in trust.

The word custodian as we are applying it here is the same as the word steward that we find in the pages of the Bible and used throughout history. A custodian or steward performs the task of watching over that which is placed in their trust by the one who owns it or for those who will benefit by it. It is a service performed for others. It is not about ownership or control. It is not a technique. It is who the leader is. It is an attitude—a state of being—a way of looking at the world. But it is not the passive, hands-off leadership that some have attributed to this way of thinking. It is a component of leadership that leaders were not intended to function without.

In the context of what Mr. Lippmann is talking about, it means not only maintaining the vision of and faith in those ideals, beliefs and hopes but, living those values as a model and example for others to follow. It means raising the sights and holding the focus of those we lead such that they are empowered to reach their potentials. It means enabling people by getting the roadblocks out of their way and often out of their thinking. To do this, of course, the leader must grasp the larger picture at all times and hold the course for the benefit of all.

Understanding Servant Leadership

In the widening chasm between what we want and expect from our leaders and what we are getting, it seems only natural to take a hard look at leadership itself. And many do. Finding the leadership we see around us lacking, our traditional views of leadership might seem to be archaic. Out of what can only be frustration, we often find many traditional ideas tossed out for new and myopic ideas of what leadership is all about. Due to real and perceived problems with what we have seen leaders doing, the faults of the old views seem sufficient to float the new. The self-serving nature of many of the leaders we have looked to in the past, have led some to call for more passive, follower-driven leadership.

One such version has called for replacing leadership with a concept called "stewardship." Although this might look at first blush to be what Mr. Lippmann was referring to, it is not. Neither does it refer to the biblical concept. Stewardship cannot replace leadership because indeed it is an integral part of it.

This nouveau-stewardship, as we will refer to it here, has as a guiding principle, the belief that others have the knowledge and the answers within themselves. As such, there is no need to manage other adults. No need to teach others how to think, behave or conduct themselves. While this sounds very appealing, democratic, liberating and almost mystically primal, it is naïve. We know from experience that people do not always act in their own best interest.
The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between, the leader is a servant.
— Max DePree
All of this might sound arrogant to an age that has placed in higher esteem personal knowledge over external guidance. As the structures and institutions that have traditionally provided us with external guidance are dissolving—the family, schools and religion—the desire to believe that we are our own best source of wisdom and will act in our own best interest, is strong. Theoretically, it would seem to make sense. Practically, it has never worked in any sustainable way. Human studies have shown that we all take our cues not from the realities of the environment, but from our own biases, desires, perceptions, and distractions. A function of leadership then, should be to help followers create a more accurate and constructive view of reality by painting the larger picture.

What Is Stewardship?

The nouveau-stewardship model is based on a myth that leadership—where direction, vision and guidance comes from the top of an organization—creates a dependency on the part of the followers and removes personal responsibility and satisfaction. But does it really?

When the concept of nouveau-stewardship is presented, it most often claims to have roots in the Bible. Perhaps so. But then proponents of this nouveau-stewardship go off on a tangent that the Bible never intended. When the concept of stewardship is first presented in the Bible, in Genesis 1 and 2, Adam was instructed to "dress and keep" the physical creation God had made. Not a passive hands-off approach. Adam was to apply God's Laws and thinking to the physical realm he created. Adam was expected to do something. In living with it, he was to make changes in accordance with higher laws and thinking other than his own.

In the same way, when we are given any other leadership responsibility, we are responsible for maintaining a set of standards that is line with higher laws. Again, we are not to impose our own thinking, wants and desires on those we lead, but to apply those standards that are the best for the whole as authored by God. Naturally, this is implemented with respect for and two-way communication with those the leaders serve.

True leadership, not to be confused with dictatorship, does not take away an individual's freedom, choice, accountability, or responsibility. Just as the leader is to be serving and taking into account the ideas and needs of those they lead, those following that lead are to be doing the same thing. In doing so, they, along with the leader, practice self-restraint, develop character, integrate discipline, and practice love and respect for other people. This creates a kind of self-leadership at all levels of the group. It promotes a self-leadership environment where all are empowered and working toward the good of the whole because it is in the best interest of all.

Daniel Goldman, author of Emotional Intelligence, refers to this kind of concern for others feelings, ideas and opinions, as empathy. But, he cautions in a Harvard Business Review article, that "empathy doesn't mean a kind of 'I'm okay, you're okay' mushiness. For a leader, that is, it doesn't mean adopting other people's emotions as one's own and trying to please everybody. That would be a nightmare—it would make action impossible. Rather empathy means thoughtfully considering employees' feelings—in the process of making intelligent decisions." In other words, true stewardship or custodianship means taking others' ideas and feelings into account while holding in trust—keeping as boundaries or guardrails—the groups ideal's, beliefs and hopes. Ironically, an attitude of service keeps the leader aware of other's needs while in turn enabling them to become better leaders.

The nouveau-stewardship model sounds right on the surface, but it plays out more like a defense mechanism than a constructive method to get leadership thinking back on track. As Mr. Lippmann correctly defines, leadership is truly about choosing service over self-interest. Leadership properly performed is not a consensus-building exercise but an exercise in outgoing concern for others including defining and setting boundaries as needed.

Leadership's Firm Foundation

What is critical to the leadership process and its success, is where those values come from that determine those boundaries. They can't come from a single individual. Nor can they come from the collective whole. Where do we get the ideals, the beliefs and the permanent hopes that Mr. Lippmann wrote of, that define the boundaries—those guides that mold and shape us?

George Washington believed that those values and boundaries came from God. In his first Inaugural Address he asserted that "we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained."

Again, our boundaries must come from something outside of ourselves. That something is God. An effective leader has an agenda designed to produce results, but is guided by a core of values that come from outside and not from within. This process is maintained by means of the leader's integrity or custodianship of those values.

Stressing the need for integrity to an outside core of values in the performance of proper leadership, John Adair, Visiting Professor of Leadership Studies at the University of Surrey and Exeter in England, states, "Although it is impossible to prove it, I believe that holding firmly to sovereign values outside yourself grows a wholeness of personality and moral strength of character. The person of integrity will always be tested. The first real test comes when the demands of the truth or good appears to conflict with your self-interest or prospects. Which do you choose?"

Perhaps it is time to apply those "eternal rules of order and right", those values, to the leadership roles we must perform and lives we do lead. Everyday activities are opportunities to demonstrate and illustrate the values and beliefs for which we must be custodians. Thus, the element of empowerment is introduced into our lives. Every person becomes in some sense a leader.

The Being that created us and knows what is best for us, is the source of the values we must demonstrate. In His Word he teaches us how to serve, how to look after each other, how to esteem others higher than ourselves, how to teach—in other words, how to lead. It is where we will find the guidelines we seek to steer a course through this world.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

GENERAL DOUGLAS: PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP

Douglas MacArthur was one of the finest military leaders the United States ever produced. John Gardner, in his book On Leadership described him as a brilliant strategist, a farsighted administrator, and flamboyant to his fingertips. MacArthur’s discipline and principled leadership transcended the military. He was an effective general, statesman, administrator and corporate leader.

William Addleman Ganoe recalled in his 1962 book, MacArthur Close-up: An Unauthorized Portrait, his service to MacArthur at West Point. During World War II, he created a list of questions with General Jacob Devers, they called The MacArthur Tenets. They reflect the people-management traits he had observed in MacArthur. Widely applicable, he wrote, “I found all those who had no troubles from their charges, from General Sun Tzu in China long ago to George Eastman of Kodak fame, followed the same pattern almost to the letter."

Questions to ask yourself

Do I heckle my subordinates or strengthen and encourage them?

Do I use moral courage in getting rid of subordinates who have proven themselves beyond doubt to be unfit?

Have I done all in my power by encouragement, incentive and spur to salvage the weak and erring?

Do I know by NAME and CHARACTER a maximum number of subordinates for whom I am responsible? Do I know them intimately?

Am I thoroughly familiar with the technique, necessities, objectives and administration of my job?

Do I lose my temper at individuals?

Do I act in such a way as to make my subordinates WANT to follow me?

Do I delegate tasks that should be mine?

Do I arrogate everything to myself and delegate nothing?

Do I develop my subordinates by placing on each one as much responsibility as he can stand?

Am I interested in the personal welfare of each of my subordinates, as if he were a member of my family?

Have I the calmness of voice and manner to inspire confidence, or am I inclined to irascibility and excitability?

Am I a constant example to my subordinates in character, dress, deportment and courtesy?

Am I inclined to be nice to my superiors and mean to my subordinates?

Is my door open to my subordinates?

Do I think more of POSITION than JOB?

  Do I correct a subordinate in the presence of others?

These questions are key in determining whether you are operating by the right principles or not. Check yourself, make changes and see productive results!

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

THE MEN BEHIND THE GUNS OF BUSINESS

A few notable successes have been made in the industrial world through what is known as the "one man organization." But I believe that in the great majority of cases it is the men you choose as subordinates who make your success.

Select your men carefully and at the right time—then give them free reign within well defined limits. This attitude toward employees I believe underlies the success of a large number of big businesses.

Many a hundred-dollar man remains a fifteen-dollar subordinate because he is not given any latitude and is not allowed to develop. The head of a concern may have an employee off in one corner of the office who is in reality his superior in ability if only he were allowed to show it—if he were only given carte blanche to take the initiative.

It is far better to select an employee when young and start him at $10 a week, educate and develop him, than to transplant a man from some other business and put him into a position over the heads of old employees.

Let your employees grow up with you. Having selected an employee, give him a chance and a thorough trial and ascertain what he can do and just what his limits are. In this wan only can be determined whether he is a fit employee or not. Give this employee a wide latitude and discretion over little things and observe the results over a considerable period of time.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

Mistakes Help People Grow

Men learn only by the mistakes they make. An employer should expect and should encourage his men to take the initiative and make mistakes. Only in this way can they gain experience. This method of handling employees may be expensive in its early stages, but it is the only proper schooling for a position. 

No man can learn to be a "crack shot" unless he wastes some ammunition. The employer should stand the expense of the experiments made by a new man who shows ability; it will pay in the long run. If mistakes continue and positive results do not come the man must go. But, on the other hand, if after trial of this kind a man's caliber is determined, then the time for promotion and increase of salary is at hand.

The great advantage of this method is that it inspires in the employee confidence in himself, without which he can make no success for himself or for his firm. It cultivates the quality of initiative, which means business creation and profits for the firm.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

Empowerment: Self-mastery

The surest way to gain the unswerving loyalty of employees is to show them from the start that they will be allowed to make the most of themselves. A man want to stay with the firm with which he can reach his greatest efficiency. And where these relations exist, the employee never leaves to seek a better place if he is he right kind. Occasionally a firm may have a man who will reach his limit; he only has a certain capacity and certain restricted capabilities. When he reaches this stage he will remain stationary.

The head of a concern often talks to his men about the methods they use. Yet methods are minor considerations. It is the sum total—the actual results—that we want in business. I do not care what method a man uses in any department of a business so long as he "makes good."

The matter of success should be put up to the pride of the individual. He should be made to understand that his development depends upon himself and the quality of his work. If a salesman can show an increase of three per cent in the sales of his territory or department in a given period he has proved his right to remain a part of a business organization regardless of his methods for achieving these results.

Following out this same idea, I believe that too many instructions to employees are often fatal. Don't be too specific; such an attitude makes a man into a machine. When sending a man on a certain duty it is never best to say, "do exactly this," or "don't do that." The proper course is to say "go and look into this matter to the best of your ability."

The employee, if he is the right kind, will then, as a matter of course, do his best. Following out this policy, our firm has never had any specific rule for employees, but has made the business and personal conduct of each individual a matter for each to look after.

We never use verbal praise with employees, nor reprimand. We often tell a man that he is working too hard or that he is underpaid; but in this case we add that he is being paid the limit that his position is worth and that he will be advanced as soon as an opening offers itself, if he is capable. The raise in salary or the promotion always comes to the individual without asking. Not that it would be very proper for the employee to ask for a raise, but, basing our attitude toward employees upon these principles, we soon discover whether a man is doing more than he is paid for and reward him because it pays us as a matter of business.

It is the man who, in the position that he holds temporarily, does more than is expected of him, that gets the increase in salary or the higher position. Anything like special rewards, presents or bonuses are wholly out of place in a system of handling employees such as this. Men working on this basis would consider anything of the kind an insult. It would imply that they were not doing their best—it would be in the nature of a bribe. The giving of prizes for special effort, which is considered so effective in enthusing men in some organization, would fail to have the desired effect in an organization where every man is given free reign.

This method of handling subordinates accomplishes all the usual results of the most highly developed system of choosing, training and retaining employees. It tries them out thoroughly —it finds the right man for the right place, and the right place for the right man. In enthuses the worker and inspires in him loyalty to the firm. a course through this complex age.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

TIME MANAGEMENT: WHY IT SHOULD BE LEARNED

If you've been living in the corporate world for some time, you've probably attended a training session where one of the exercises was to conduct a "time spent" analysis in order to increase your efficiency. You cracked open your calendar, reviewed how you spent your time for the past week, and identified black holes that were wasting your energy. Maybe you even went so far as to break your activities into categories, separating the "urgent" things from the "important" things and both of these from the "insignificant" things.

Time management studies like these can be interesting, but the findings are almost always the same. Virtually every manager who works through the exercises discovers that he or she is spending too much time on "putting out fires" -- dealing with the daily dramas and emergencies around the office -- and not enough time thinking and planning for long-term projects that really matter. E-mails, instant messages, phone calls, and that guy from Purchasing who drops in "just for a second" and chews the fat for 45 minutes undo our best-laid plans -- not to mention the endless, interminable, usually pointless meetings.

We know all this. Why doesn't it ever change?

The problem lies in our approach. Time management programs usually focus on your personal productivity, analyzing how you choose to spend your time. This is all fine and dandy, but it misses one essential truth: In an organization that's devoted to banging pots, you better bang pots or have a damn good reason for not banging them.

That's why, after the PowerPoint presentation had ended and the trainer went home, you fell back into your old, unproductive rhythms -- not because you didn't agree with the time management expert's analysis, but because you returned to normal life in the world of The Middle . . . which means doing what you think your boss wants you to do. Bang! Bang! Bang!

Managing Your Managers

In order to take back your time, your life, and your career, you need to make a new kind of change in your approach to self-management. You must step into the realm of managing your managers and thereby altering their expectations related to your time. The goal is to achieve complete alignment between what your bosses want (and perhaps need) you to do and what you believe you really should do.

In the same way that you coordinate the schedule in your PDA and your laptop with the one in your desktop computer, you need to continually coordinate with your bosses to ensure that you are clear, on track, and working from the same plan.

All of this starts with having a happy and supportive boss. And that means a successful boss. Your boss has to be successful. For if he is not, his failure may cast a negative light on everyone on his team. Many potentially great careers have been stalled, not because of the effort of the individual, but because of a boss who failed to make an impact, who failed to demonstrate his own value and the value of those on his team.

The first step in managing your manager is to move beyond your own needs to examine your bosses' needs. Sounds reasonable -- but understanding those needs and figuring out what to do to meet them isn't usually straightforward. In fact, it's a challenge in itself, requiring a whole new set of skills most people have never thought about.

Needs Explicit and Needs Implicit

Let's start by dispelling a common misunderstanding. Lots of people in business assume that "meeting the boss's needs" means doing exactly what the boss wants them to do -- accepting the boss's vision and direction wholesale. Wrong! This assumption is simple-minded and inaccurate. It leads to managers in The Middle focusing on aligning their lips with their boss's backsides rather than meeting anyone's actual needs.

Real "managing upward" demands a more serious and subtle analysis of human needs, which starts with the realization that needs come in two forms -- explicit needs and implicit needs.

Explicit needs are easier to understand. They may be stated in the strategic plan promulgated by the company or the division, or they may be announced by your boss whenever the team gets together for the usual pep talk/torture session. They may sound something like this:

"We need to expand our business internationally!"

"We need to create a shipping policy that will save us some money and keep the administrative assistants from running around the office like decapitated chickens every afternoon at 4 p.m. when the FedEx guy makes his last pickup."

"We need to commerce-enable our Web site before Amazon.com decides to start selling the same kinds of widgets we sell and drives us out of business."

"We need to hire two more designers, fast, so we'll have a prayer of getting the fall product line into the stores sometime this year."

Explicit needs are the kinds of things that make it into the lists of goals you write every year at objective-setting time. They're the things you tell people you're working on when they ask. They tend to be the things you are proud of accomplishing (if and when you happen to accomplish one of them).

Implicit needs are more subtle. People don't talk about them. Sometimes they're not even aware of them. Most of the time they are things that people would deny if confronted with them. They sound like this:

"Make me look good in front of my boss so that when he gets kicked upstairs he'll recommend me for his job."

"Help me demonstrate my creativity by coming up with some ideas for next year's marketing campaign that I can tweak a little and show off at the next divisional conference as if they were mine.

"Help me feel more like a leader and less like the kid who was always picked last in the schoolyard basketball games."

"Figure out some way to keep the department running when I'm not around so I can go on vacation for ten days in a row without having to call the office every two hours to make sure the damned place isn't on fire."

While explicit needs tend to run a linear path, implicit needs tend be random, triggered by emotion and circumstance. But don't think of them as flighty and certainly not as insignificant. They are ever-present, tenacious, and can overrule the explicit needs with a swiftness and power that can be awe-inspiring.

It's a fun exercise to sit down with a sheet of paper and try listing your boss's implicit needs. It's also deadly serious. From the first day you meet your new boss through the last day you work together, you need to devote a portion of your time and energy to scoping out his or her implicit needs and defining them with as much precision as possible. Then measure whatever you do against those needs. (Your boss certainly will.)

One implicit need that virtually every boss has (and therefore belongs on the to-do list of every ignited manager) is the need for confidence. Your boss must have confidence that you are working in his best interest and that you are capable of delivering what he needs (both explicitly and implicitly). Fail to maintain this confidence and your boss will most likely drive you crazy -- and will often drive you out.

We've all been there. The boss who last week simply set a goal and gave us the freedom to carry it out suddenly wants to micromanage every phone call we make this week. Sometimes it's because they've lost confidence in us; other times it's because their bosses have lost confidence in them, producing a sort of trickle-down anxiety that may end up with you being hypercritical of the dinosaur diorama your nine-year-old makes for science class. Giving your boss a sense of confidence in you is perhaps the most fundamental of all the implicit needs and the one without which no managerial relationship can succeed.

Understanding the implicit and explicit needs of your boss and his bosses sets a course by which you can align your own efforts. When that alignment is clear and accurate, you're on track to creating an environment in which traction is possible.

Management Value Added

The concept of Management Value Added (MVA) is based on a simple question that you should ask whenever you're making a decision about how to invest your time and energy: "What value does management add?" And how can your actions "add value" to any situation in business? That's right -- by helping to meet your bosses' needs.

One way to start using the concept of MVA is by sitting down with your boss to discuss his or her explicit needs (the ones written down as part of the company's strategy or the division's official mandate). It shouldn't take long for the two of you to agree on what they are and to prioritize them appropriately. Then ask your boss, "How do you feel I can add the most value?" If your boss responds, "Huh?" you can flesh out the question with additional questions like these:

"What are the activities I am engaged in when I am contributing the most?"

"What are the activities that you and the company most need me to do?"

"What do you consider to be the best and most productive use of my time?"

"What do you think is the special contribution that I am best positioned to offer to you and the company?"

"Of all the things that I'm engaged in on behalf of this company, what are the three areas where you believe that I can contribute the most?"

Listen carefully to your boss's answers. Using them as a guide, you can begin to understand exactly how your boss views your contributions. It's quite likely that the way he or she measures your MVA is different from the way you might measure it.

Here's what one of my bosses had to say when I asked him to define my most important areas for MVA:

1. "Hiring, nurturing, and guiding talent; putting the right people in the right jobs with the right goals."

2. "Building capability; teaching my team members and creating an environment conducive to challenging thought and growth:"

3. "Staying close to the customers -- understanding what's important to them, what their challenges are, and how our company can provide them with solutions."

Of course, this exercise will relate only to your boss's explicit needs. (Don't try to engage him in a discussion of his implicit needs. There's a good reason why they're implicit.) Having these priorities clearly defined is an enormous step forward and an advantage that surprisingly few managers enjoy. It provides you with a framework you can share with others on your team and allows you to use the test of MVA in your quest to get past pot banging.

You can use MVA to help you determine how to spend your time, which projects to support, and which meetings to attend. In my case, before committing energy to any new activity, I ask myself: "Will this activity help me achieve my priorities? Will it help me put the right people in the right jobs? Will it help me build capability? Will it help me know and connect with our customers?" If the answer is no, I avoid the activity -- even if it sounds otherwise interesting, appealing, or fun.
MVA helps you maintain a focus on the things that matter while earning the support of those you serve. When your boss or someone else in the organization asks you to commit time or energy to an area that falls outside of the MVA priorities you've established, you can talk about how new commitment may affect your main goals and reach a joint decision as to whether a shift in priorities is warranted.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT: BECOMING A GREAT LEADER

People have paid me a lot of money over the years to answer the following question for them: How do I become a great Leader? I will often answer them with the following questions:

Q: How do you become a great parent?
A: Do great parenting, day in, day out, over a sustained period of time.

Q: How do you become a great consultant?
A: Do great consulting, day in, day out, etc.

So, how do you become a great Leader? You guessed it, do great Leadership, day in, day out, over a sustained period of time!

The field of Leadership Development, with its plethora of books, seminars, courses, videos, and executive coaches, has become a billion dollar industry. Unfortunately, I believe that much of what is embodied within the industry is simply misleading and deceptive. Books such as ‘Leadership for Dummies’, ‘The Idiots Guide to Leading’, and ‘Leadership Made Easy’, all capitalize on the fact that many want to be a leader, but few are actually able, or want to put forth the effort required to really become one. (How would you feel about a book entitled “Brain Surgery for Dummies”?) At one point, we need to get real about leadership. Like diet programs that claim you can eat all you want and still lose 20 pounds in a week, leadership “products”, make similar claims, and therefore resort to oversimplified theories and falsehoods that invite leader want-to-be’s to consume anything that looks like a magic pill to Leadership. Well, unfortunately, there are no magic pills to becoming a Leader, just like there are no magic pills to losing weight, getting fit, making a million dollars, or shaving 10 strokes off your handicap in golf. Simply stated, becoming a Leader occurs when one exercises the arduous process of effective Leadership, day after day, week after week, and year after year.

Q: So, what is Leadership you ask?
A: Leadership is a process (not a position) whereby an individual works through a series of iterative stages by;

Stage 1
creating a vision,
establishing an objective and set of goals,
setting direction,
Stage 2
and following through by intentionally seeking to influence followers (both established and potential),
to perform the various tasks needed to realize the vision,
to their full potential,
for as long as possible,
Stage 3
until the vision and goals are realized.
One can look at this definition as a “check-list” to Leadership; Do I have a vision; a picture of a desired end state that is compelling to others? Are people performing to their full potential? Who do I need to help me realize this vision? Am I intentionally seeking to influence people to perform their best? What else needs to be done, and who should do it?

Now, I realize individuals may find themselves at various points in a given stage, before they choose to engage in the process of leadership. For instance, one may be working in a division, or an organization, that already has a clearly established vision, set goals, etc. In such a case, assuming that the individual agrees with the vision, the leadership process begins at Stage 2. We all must realize that part of the difficulty of leadership is that some people are great visionaries, but lack the competence and EQ to influence others to rally around their vision. Others, may not be great visionaries, but are very influential and inspirational to those around them.
What I have observed in my years of studying leaders, is that very few have all the gifts and talents themselves; what many of the great ones do have, is a self awareness of what talents they do have, and the self confidence and security to surround themselves with others who can compliment them, and compensate for their own lack of skills.

In closing, let me make one point clear; it is my intent to encourage as many people as possible to exercise leadership as often as they possibly can, for as long as they can!

When people are lost because they lack a “vision”, and you happen to “see” an end goal that they can not see, then at least exercise Stage 1 of leadership. By doing so, it doesn’t necessarily mean you will emerge as their “leader”, but you will have engaged in “leadership.” If one of your colleagues is not performing to their “full potential”, intervene and intentionally try to influence them to raise their performance. Remember, human performance is nothing more than the function of one’s skill and will to perform a task; therefore, if one is not performing to their potential, it is either because they lack the skill, or the will, to do their job. Figure out what is impeding their performance and try to either coach them to build their skills, or inspire, challenge, and motivate them to raise their will to perform. Let’s be clear;

Everyone can not become a leader, but every one can engage in a lot more leadership!

When I wrote my book, The Taboos of Leadership; The Ten Secrets That No One Will Tell You About Leaders and What They Really Think, I was accused by some that by “revealing” the un-savory aspects of leadership, I was discouraging many from wanting to lead. Unfortunately, they missed my message. As I state in my book, if we are serious about trying to build the Skill and Will of future leaders, we owe it to them to disclose the truth, as difficult as they may be, so that they may be better prepared to engage in leadership, day in, and day out, over a sustained period of time, thus increasing the probability that one day they will indeed become great leaders themselves.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

WHY TO MAKE YOUR FOLLOWERS TRUST YOU AS A LEADER AND WHY

Almost everywhere we turn, trust is on the decline. Trust in our culture at large, in our institutions, and in our companies is significantly lower than a generation ago. Research shows that only 49% of employees trust senior management, and only 28% believe CEOs are a credible source of information. Consider the loss of trust and confidence in the financial markets today. Indeed, "trust makes the world go 'round," and right now we're experiencing a crisis of trust. This crisis compels us to ask three questions. First, is there a measurable cost to low trust? Second, is there a tangible benefit to high trust? Third, how can the best leaders build trust in and within their organizations to reap the benefits of high trust?

Most people don't know how to think about the organizational and societal consequences of low trust because they don't know how to quantify or measure the costs of such a so-called "soft" factor as trust. For many, trust is intangible, ethereal, unquantifiable. If it remains that way, then people don't know how to get their arms around it or how to improve it. But the fact is, the costs of low trust are very real, they are quantifiable, and they are staggering.

In 2004, one estimate put the cost of complying with federal rules and regulations alone in the United States -- put in place essentially due to lack of trust -- at $1.1 trillion, which is more than 10% of the gross domestic product. A recent study conducted by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners estimated that the average American company lost 6% of its annual revenue to some sort of fraudulent activity. Research shows similar effects for the other disguised low-trust taxes as well.

Think about it this way: When trust is low, in a company or in a relationship, it places a hidden "tax" on every transaction: every communication, every interaction, every strategy, every decision is taxed, bringing speed down and sending costs up. My experience is that significant distrust doubles the cost of doing business and triples the time it takes to get things done.

By contrast, individuals and organizations that have earned and operate with high trust experience the opposite of a tax -- a "dividend" that is like a performance multiplier, enabling them to succeed in their communications, interactions, and decisions, and to move with incredible speed. A recent Watson Wyatt study showed that high trust companies outperform low trust companies by nearly 300%!

I contend that the ability to establish, grow, extend, and (where needed) restore trust among stakeholders is the critical competency of leadership needed today. It is needed more than any other competency. Engendering trust is, in fact, a competency that can be learned, applied, and understood. It is something that you can get good at, something you can measure and improve, something for which you can "move the needle." You cannot be an effective leader without trust. As Warren Bennis put it, "Leadership without mutual trust is a contradiction in terms."

How do the best leaders build trust?

The first job of any leader is to inspire trust. Trust is confidence born of two dimensions: character and competence. Character includes your integrity, motive, and intent with people. Competence includes your capabilities, skills, results, and track record. Both dimensions are vital.

With the increasing focus on ethics in our society, the character side of trust is fast becoming the price of entry in the new global economy. However, the differentiating and often ignored side of trust -- competence -- is equally essential. You might think a person is sincere, even honest, but you won't trust that person fully if he or she doesn't get results. And the opposite is true. A person might have great skills and talents and a good track record, but if he or she is not honest, you're not going to trust that person either.

The best leaders begin by framing trust in economic terms for their companies. When an organization recognizes that it has low trust, huge economic consequences can be expected. Everything will take longer and everything will cost more because of the steps organizations will need to take to compensate for their lack of trust. These costs can be quantified and, when they are, suddenly leaders recognize how low trust is not merely a social issue, but that it is an economic matter. The dividends of high trust can be similarly quantified, enabling leaders to make a compelling business case for trust.

The best leaders then focus on making the creation of trust an explicit objective. It must become like any other goal that is focused on, measured, and improved. It must be communicated that trust matters to management and leadership. It must be expressed that it is the right thing to do and it is the economic thing to do. One of the best ways to do this is to make an initial baseline measurement of organizational trust and then to track improvements over time.

The true transformation starts with building credibility at the personal level. The foundation of trust is your own credibility, and it can be a real differentiator for any leader. A person's reputation is a direct reflection of their credibility, and it precedes them in any interactions or negotiations they might have. When a leader's credibility and reputation are high, it enables them to establish trust fast -- speed goes up, cost goes down.

There are 4 Cores of Credibility, and it's about all 4 Cores working in tandem—Integrity, Intent, Capabilities, and Results. Part of building trust is understanding -- clarifying -- what the organization wants and what you can offer them. Be the one that does that best. Then add to your credibility the kind of behavior that builds trust. (see the 13 high trust behaviors below). Next, take it beyond just you as the leader and extend it to your entire organization. The combination of that type of credibility and behavior and organizational alignment results in a culture of high trust.

Consider the example of Warren Buffett -- CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (and generally considered one of the most trusted leaders in the world) -- who completed a major acquisition of McLane Distribution (a $23 billion company) from Wal-Mart. As public companies, both Berkshire Hathaway and Wal-Mart are subject to all kinds of market and regulatory scrutiny. Typically, a merger of this size would take several months to complete and cost several million dollars to pay for accountants, auditors, and attorneys to verify and validate all kinds of information. But in this instance, because both parties operated with high trust, the deal was made with one two-hour meeting and a handshake. In less than a month, it was completed. High trust, high speed, low cost.

13 Behaviors of High-Trust Leaders Worldwide

I approach this strategy primarily as a practitioner, both in my own experience and in my extensive work with other organizations. Throughout this learning process, have identified 13 common behaviors of trusted leaders around the world that build -- and allow you to maintain -- trust. When you adopt these ways of behaving, it's like making deposits into a "trust account" of another party.

1. Talk Straight
2. Demonstrate Respect
3. Create Transparency
4. Right Wrongs
5. Show Loyalty
6. Deliver Results
7. Get Better
8. Confront Reality
9. Clarify Expectation
10. Practice Accountability
11. Listen First
12. Keep Commitments
13. Extend Trust

Remember that the 13 Behaviors always need to be balanced by each other (e.g., Talk Straight needs to be balanced by Demonstrate Respect) and that any behavior pushed to the extreme can become a weakness.

Depending on your roles and responsibilities, you may have more or less influence on others. However, you can always have extraordinary influence on your starting points: Self-Trust (the confidence you have in yourself -- in your ability to set and achieve goals, to keep commitments, to walk your talk, and also with your ability to inspire trust in others) and Relationship Trust (how to establish and increase the trust accounts we have with others).

The job of a leader is to go first, to extend trust first. Not a blind trust without expectations and accountability, but rather a "smart trust" with clear expectations and strong accountability built into the process. The best leaders always lead out with a decided propensity to trust, as opposed to a propensity not to trust. As Craig Weatherup, former CEO of PepsiCo said, "Trust cannot become a performance multiplier unless the leader is prepared to go first."

The best leaders recognize that trust impacts us 24/7, 365 days a year. It undergirds and affects the quality of every relationship, every communication, every work project, every business venture, every effort in which we are engaged. It changes the quality of every present moment and alters the trajectory and outcome of every future moment of our lives -- both personally and professionally. I am convinced that in every situation, nothing is as fast as the speed of trust.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!

DONT FAIL AS A LEADER, READ THIS!

Donald Trump, paragon of the real estate world, files for bankruptcy. Richard Nixon, 37th U.S. President, resigns the presidency over the Watergate scandal. Jennifer Capriati, rising tennis star, enters a rehabilitation center for drug addicts. Jim Bakker, renowned televangelist, is convicted of fraud.

In the recent past, we've witnessed the public downfall of leaders from almost every area of endeavor—business, politics, religion, and sports. One day they're on top of the heap, the next, the heap's on top of them.

Of course, we think that such catastrophic failure could never happen to us. We've worked hard to achieve our well-deserved positions of leadership—and we won't give them up for anything! The bad news is: the distance between beloved leader and despised failure is shorter than we think.

Ken Maupin, a practicing psychotherapist and colleague, has built his practice on working with high-performance personalities, including leaders in business, religion, and sports. Ken and I have often discussed why leaders fail. Our discussions have led to the following "warning signs" of impending failure.

WARNING SIGN #1: A Shift in Focus

This shift can occur in several ways. Often, leaders simply lose sight of what's important. The laser-like focus that catapulted them to the top disappears, and they become distracted by the trappings of leadership, such as wealth and notoriety.

Leaders are usually distinguished by their ability to "think big." But when their focus shifts, they suddenly start thinking small. They micro manage, they get caught up in details better left to others, they become consumed with the trivial and unimportant. And to make matters worse, this tendency can be exacerbated by an inclination toward perfectionism.

A more subtle leadership derailer is an obsession with "doing" rather than "becoming." The good work of leadership is usually a result of who the leader is. What the leader does then flows naturally from inner vision and character. It is possible for a leader to become too action oriented and, in the process, lose touch with the more important development of self.

What is your primary focus right now? If you can't write it on the back of your business card, then it's a sure bet that your leadership is suffering from a lack of clarity. Take the time necessary to get your focus back on what's important.

Further, would you describe your thinking as expansive or contractive? Of course, you always should be willing to do whatever it takes to get the job done, but try never to take on what others can do as well as you. In short, make sure that your focus is on leading rather than doing.

WARNING SIGN #2: Poor Communication

A lack of focus and its resulting disorientation typically lead to poor communication. Followers can't possibly understand a leader's intent when the leader him- or herself isn't sure what it is! And when leaders are unclear about their own purpose, they often hide their confusion and uncertainty in ambiguous communication.

Sometimes, leaders fall into the clairvoyance trap. In other words, they begin to believe that truly committed followers automatically sense their goals and know what they want without being told. Misunderstanding is seen by such managers as a lack of effort (or commitment) on the listener's part, rather than their own communication negligence.

"Say what you mean, and mean what you say" is timeless advice, but it must be preceded by knowing what you mean! An underlying clarity of purpose is the starting point for all effective communication. It's only when you're absolutely clear about what you want to convey that the hard work of communicating pays dividends.

WARNING SIGN #3: Risk Aversion

Third, leaders at risk often begin to be driven by a fear of failure rather than the desire to succeed. Past successes create pressure for leaders: "Will I be able to sustain outstanding performance?" "What will I do for an encore?" In fact, the longer a leader is successful, the higher his or her perceived cost of failure.

When driven by the fear of failure, leaders are unable to take reasonable risks. They want to do only the tried and proven; attempts at innovation—typically a key to their initial success—diminish and eventually disappear.

Which is more important to you: the attempt or the outcome? Are you still taking reasonable risks? Prudent leadership never takes reckless chances that risk the destruction of what has been achieved, but neither is it paralyzed by fear. Often the dance of leadership is two steps forward, one step back.

WARNING SIGN #4: Ethics Slip

A leader's credibility is the result of two aspects: what he or she does (competency) and who he or she is (character). A discrepancy between these two aspects creates an integrity problem.

The highest principle of leadership is integrity. When integrity ceases to be a leader's top priority, when a compromise of ethics is rationalized away as necessary for the "greater good," when achieving results becomes more important than the means to their achievement—that is the moment when a leader steps onto the slippery slop of failure.

Often such leaders see their followers as pawns, a mere means to an end, thus confusing manipulation with leadership. These leaders lose empathy. They cease to be people "perceivers" and become people "pleasers," using popularity to ease the guilt of lapsed integrity.

It is imperative to your leadership that you constantly subject your life and work to the highest scrutiny. Are there areas of conflict between what you believe and how you behave? Has compromise crept into your operational tool kit? One way to find out is to ask the people you depend on if they ever feel used or taken for granted.

WARNING SIGN #5: Poor Self Management

Tragically, if a leader doesn't take care of him- or herself, no one else will. Unless a leader is blessed to be surrounded by more-sensitive-than-normal followers, nobody will pick up on the signs of fatigue and stress. Leaders are often perceived to be superhuman, running on unlimited energy.

While leadership is invigorating, it is also tiring. Leaders who fail to take care of their physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual needs are headed for disaster. Think of having a gauge for each of these four areas of your life—and check them often! When a gauge reaches the "empty" point, make time for refreshment and replenishment. Clear your schedule and take care of yourself—it's absolutely vital to your leadership that you continue to grow and develop, a task that can be accomplished only when your tanks are full.

WARNING SIGN #6: Lost Love

The last warning sign of impending disaster that leaders need to heed is a move away from their first love and dream. Paradoxically, the hard work of leadership should be fulfilling and even fun. But when leaders lose sight of the dream that compelled them to accept the responsibility of leadership, they can find themselves working for causes that mean little to them. They must stick to what they love, what motivated them at the first, to maintain the fulfillment of leadership.

To make sure that you stay on the track of following your first love, frequently ask yourself these three questions: Why did I initially assume leadership? Have those reasons changed? Do I still want to lead?

The warning signs in life—from stop lights to prescription labels—are there for our good. They protect us from disaster, and we would be foolish to ignore them. As you consider the six warning signs of leadership failure, don't be afraid to take an honest look at yourself. If any of the warnings ring true, take action today! The good news is: by paying attention to these signs and heeding their warnings, you can avoid disaster and sustain the kind of leadership that is healthy and fulfilling for both yourself and your followers.

Please follow us by email to get updates on our articles on leadership and other topics. Thanks!