Further Incites Into The Definition Of Leadership

Further Incites into the Definition of Leadership

Not sure how different this is from previous posts. I think I've added a few more things that help clarify leadership.

======

The definition of leadership is “Guiding Intent with Integrity”.  Leaders have followers, non-followers, outsiders, and observers.  Followers follow the leader’s guidance towards the goal / vision.  Non-followers have vehemently opposed to follow the leader or the goal / vision, and may work to undermine the group’s ability to achieve the goal. Outsiders do not care one way or the other about the leader, the groups or the visions.  An observer may be a follower, non-follower, or outsider, their role is to provide feedback on the group’s progress towards their goal / vision.

Guidance is council concerning the steps needed to achieve the goal / vision.  Intent or intentions are the reasons driving each individual to either be part of the group, not part of the group, or work against the group.  These reasons may or may not be expressed.  Integrity is based on the Social Contract or agreement held between the leader and the group.

People choose to follow a goal / vision, due to the Human Condition.  The human condition concerns the plurality of culture and personal values, the standards of evaluation, the satisfaction of basic needs, the maintenance of cultural identity, and reasonable conceptions of well being.  In conjunction with the Change Formula, humans want a better life, and are willing to overcome their dissatisfaction with the status quo, by imagining a future that is better than the present.   In this instance the challenge is convincing others that change is needed, or showing them a path through change that improves their lives. Based on their belief that they can achieve a better life, they will either become leaders of change, follow the guidance and council of others to achieve it, or become part of a movement.

“The true nature of power isn't about strength or control, it’s about relating to people”, Bleach, (Japanese Manga) episode 250.  

In the political arena, how does Obama show positive leadership in handling the fiscal cliff for the benefit of the greater good of all, when the Republican leadership (as well as the Democratic leadership with its principles) refuses to consider any plan that involves raising taxes, or essentially breaking the Norquist Mandate. Does good leadership in this case mean compromising to meet the mandated deadline? Or does it mean sticking to one's principle? Or a combination of both? 3rdmurnau

There are a couple of different things I could talk about concerning this question.  I could talk about the different types of leadership:

Great Leadership, 

Positive Leadership,

Good Leadership,

OK Leadership,

Bad Leadership,

Negative Leadership, and

Dark Leadership

But these styles of leadership are only a method to reaching the goal, they are not the goal in itself.  

The goal as many would have you believe is to fix the fiscal cliff.  But is that really the goal, or is someone just trying to control the conversation?  What is the real problem and is that the goal?

Could the real goal be to move social security and medicare insurance into the private sector?  And what would happen if these organizations were privatized? Why do Republicans want military spending to go up? Why do Republicans believe that too many people are abusing the system - choose your system, including voter fraud. Maybe the real goal is to develop a stable economy, where everyone can prosper? But this goal would require the government to return to it's former practices of redistributing wealth, in order to benefit all, not just a few.

Compromise will come once we understand what the goals are. This is the unfortunate part, since the intent of the Democratic party and the Republican party may not be the same.  And to-date, the Republican party has been unwilling to budge on even those points which they have in common with the Democratic party. It's become an all or nothing atmosphere.

So, how should President Obama lead in this instance. The President has the ability to influence not only the Republicans and the Democrats in the House and Senate, but also those at all levels of government. While the President is charged with upholding the laws passed by Congress, he usually isn't fully funded to administrate all of them.  We saw this when is informed his personnel and the public that certain individuals would no longer be sought after for deportation. 

Another way that the President could lead in this instance is to take his case to the general public.  While most people believe that the President only influences the House and Senate, he has clearly demonstrated that he can influence the general public to "Get Out To Vote!" Through an information campaign, or as  mentioned before, take control of the conversation and reshape how the public perceives the problem, the goal, and the steps towards achieving that goal.

Since, information is power, the President can do what he has been doing all long very well: outline the facts, provide the options, and discuss his plan on how we can pressure the House and the Senate to move.  Letter writing campaigns can be very effective when it comes to getting representatives to move at all levels of government, especially when their whole party is at stake of being overturned.

Now should President Obama allow Norquist Mandate to go into effect?  While at first this might seem like a bad thing, it could also be like a parent telling their children that if they don't straighten up, then the punishment will be a night in their room without dinner.  As harsh as it may seem, children usually get the message the first time around when you stick to your strategy. So, the worst that could happen is that the American public becomes upset with their representatives and decides to vote them out of office.  

And if these groups of people don't want to wait till the next election for that representative's due date, then they can gather the necessary signatures for a petition and vote them out early using a recall election.  I, though, doubt that President Obama would publicly call for this type of grass roots action be taken, but it may be necessary in the next year to adjust the House and Senate to remove the blocks, and get the Republicans to come to the table.

I think right now the Republicans have a very hard decision to make. Stick to their principles and wants, or watch their constituents turn on them and remove them one by one or on mass.  Personally, I'm for the on mass option, as they would get the message that much faster.

The Truth About Leadership - Part 4

Values Drive Commitment

“Energy is neither good nor evil, it is the intent by which it is used that determines it’s helpful or destructive force”, Dungeon Master, Dungeons and Dragons Cartoon Series. I think Albert Einstein was also quoted saying something similar to this, after his discovery that Matter and Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, they just change forms.

Page 39 lists a series of values: success, wealth, family, freedom, growth, love, power, spirituality, trust, wisdom, health, honesty, and integrity. It also asks, “What do you really care about?” This question and these categories are about where you’re willing to place your energy into. Since thought is energy, in the human context, then intentions is the proper word for our actions, which are the physical manifestations of our thoughts.

This chapter argues the case that expressed values drive commitment. This argument is false since unexpressed values can just as easily drive a person’s commitment, just as easily as can expressed values.

In addition, this argument mixes intent and integrity. Intent as I described above is the energy or thoughts we have about different aspects of the human condition. Integrity is whether or not we maintain the social contract with ourselves and others. Or to put it in a context that is closer to what this chapter is discussing, what if everyone had an unwritten, mainly spoken, contract with each other. What would that contract be about? And why would you choose to honor that contract? Now, what if the spoken contract were not the contract you are choosing to follow, but instead have a hidden agenda. Now the difference between intent and integrity becomes clear.

Commitment occurs when two or more parties agree on a verbal social contract. I will commit to working, playing, spending time, and/or being with you, if your intentions at the time are the same as mine. For example, let’s go biking. This is simple enough, until the leader finds that after 6 degrees of separation, their ex-love happens to be a member of the biking group consisting of 200 people. And for the next 5 hours they are going to be touring through some very lovely terrain. Now this is a quandary for the leader of the biking group. Should he lead the group, or leave because someone’s values he can no longer agree with is a member of the group? (Grist for the Mill, or Sauce for the Goose?)

The social contract that the bike leader agreed to was, “To lead the biking group on a tour.” However, if his intentions or positions on his judgments towards his ex-love are made known this may end the biking tour for that day. However, if he withholds these judgments, the biking tour may go forward, everyone may have a great time, and as long as there is physical distance between the two, they may both separately enjoy the tour.

In this case, it is not expressed value that is driving the decision, but unexpressed values, which allows the bike tour guide to remain in integrity to his contractual obligations. Others may be aware of his dis-ease, and feel that he is upholding a great sense of integrity as he leads the tour, all the while knowing the personal emotional strain he is under.

The case that is used here is around an employment opportunity. As “The New Leader’s 100 Day Action Plan” (2009) by George B. Bradt, et. al., ISBN 978-0-470-43984-5, location 533 states, “There are only 3 fundamental questions asked during an interview: 1) Can you do the job? 2) Will you love the job? 3) Can I tolerate working with you?” Or put in other words: Skills, Enthusiasm, and Culture, or Strengths, Motivations, and Fit. Enthusiasm and motivations are forms of intent. Why do you want to be a leader? What motivated you to become a leader? Why did this particular issue cause you to become more engaged and enthusiastic than other people?

If I were to answer my own question, “Why is it important for me to write book reviews on leadership?” I think the answer would be, “Because I found the definition of leadership. I want to share it with people. I want to help foster others who are using the correct techniques to grow and empower positive leaders. I want to help the general public recognize people who are bad, negative, and dark leaders.” This answer demonstrates the three key points George made earlier: skill, motivation and culture.

Staying Motivated?

In Max Muscles February 2014 issue, David Calhoun, describes how he stays motivated and determined.

Set a goal and don't give up Pushing for better Making the right choice from one decision to the next Remember you're being watched Remind yourself every day why you're on this journey Find reasons to keep going on the journey Be proud of the progress Don't be satisfied with status quo Remind yourself that there is another level to reach Make yourself better than you were yesterday You influence people around you by just being present Maintain a positive mental attitude And ... Enter a contest.

Apparently money is a motivational factor. =)

So, how do you stay motivated, excited, determined, and inspired? Do you enter contests?

Measuring Performance

There are many ways to measure performance.  It can be on the task performed or the goal to be reached. How quickly and easily it was reached.  The other measure that could be applied is how quickly customer improvements are applied.  But the best measure is whether or not everyone ... customers, employees, and associates ... would recommend Yahoo on a scale of 1 to 10 and then why.  One provides the quantitative value, while the 2nd question provides a qualitative value which may contain additional information to further improvements.

But let's get back to Goals and Objectives.  What drives these?  A CEO's vision of a better future, or a customers feedback?  Or both?  How do you measure these?  

One of the biggest mistakes that most people make is that they create rules at the 50 yard line.  50% you win, 50% you loose.  But what's at the 100% yard line.  If there was a rule that stated what the best possible outcome could be, wouldn't you prefer to strive for that? 

This objective, the 100 yard line, is more than a fantasy.  It's actually a statistically proven psychological fact.  Two hockey coaches each trained a team. One told his team what not to do. Another told his team what to do.  Each team did exactly what their coach told them to do.  Exactly .. but here's the catch.  The team that was told NOT to do something, did it what they were told not to do.  The team that was told to do something did exactly what they were told to do.

So you can set goals at the 50 yard line or the 100 yard line.  What type of Goals and Objectives would you prefer to set and have set for yourself?

How deep does the lotus blossom's color run through your curiosity?

Dalai Lama

We need to understand the inadequacy of an educational system so slanted towards material values. The solution is not to give an occasional lecture, but to integrate ethics into the educational curriculum. To do this effectively requires a secular ethics, free of religious influence, based on common sense, a realistic view and scientific findings.

-----

I don't believe that this post is from the Dalai Lama. What stands out is that the Dalai Lama is making several judgments, which he would never do. The Dalai Lama projects a vision about what education could be. The judgments are: inadequacy of an educational system, slanted towards material values, not to give an occasional lecture, and secular ethics free of religious influence based on common sense. The vision of a better education system looks at the problem of getting young minds to engage in the process of discovery. For example, how does a lotus blossom's color come to be? What minerals are needed? How do these minerals move through the flower? What role does water, mud, sun, and surrounding environment play?What sounds are made as a lotus grows? What do cross sections of the flower look like if drawn by hand?  If the child were curious about just a flower and nothing else, how could this motivation to learn as much about a flower as possible be used to shoe horn in other subjects needed to study the flower .. like reading, writing, composition, comprehension, science, art, music, competition, ecology, and so on. The vision is to improve education. How then does judging and deeming it inadequate help? This creates two, separate, and unequal parts. It is better to point towards the flower, and say, "There is only 1, when two are of the same mind".  The master guides the student's curiosity and discovery.