The Truth About Leadership - Part 4

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.

The "Belief about how things should be" - How should Leaders address this?

I'd like to expound on another area of communication I thought about while at the gym today. It's with the "Belief about how things should be".  Most project managers build project plans that account for tasks, risks, dependencies, issues, unknowns and assumptions. The plan builds mitigations for each of these that are identified. Basically, in short, the plan covers the best case through the worst case scenarios.  When changes occur, members of each of the groups .. enthusiasts, visionaries, pragmatists, conservatives and laggards have these same scenarios running in their Synthetic Experience Generator (aka head) (this term comes from a TedTalk). A good sales person will identify all these worst case scenarios and address them up front.  As Scott pointed out, a Good Leader, will develop a communications plan tailored specifically to each group that addresses the scenarios. The idea is that a leader cannot run from controversy, he must face it head on.  In change management, this is a given. Users are usually grouped into 4 categories: eager to adopt, willing to adopt, need assistance to adopt and those that refuse to adopt. As you can see, these categories are the same as "Crossing the Chasms" categories.

What do you see as the difference between leading leaders and leading followers?

There are four (4) groups surrounding leaders: Followers, Non-Followers, Outsiders, and Observers. Your question focuses on breaking down followers into five (5) categories: enthusiasts, visionaries, pragmatists, conservatives, and laggards. ("Crossing the Chasm", Geoffrey A. Moore) Based on the definition of leadership, "Guiding Intent with Integrity" there should be no difference in leading Leaders vs Followers. However, as described above, there are different types of followers, as well as three (3) additional groups, that require different types of handling.

The terms Scott mentioned: [accountability, empowerment, innovation, collaboration, trying and learning, straight communication, supporting intentions, [assessment], projection, and blame] concern integrity. And, he split them into two (2) groups based on proximity to the leader - closest and farthest.

Integrity's unwritten rule is called a, "Social Contract". The expectations that all parties have against each other. When unwritten it's "word of mouth" or an "Understanding". When written it's a contract.

Exceptions on outcomes, drives the group to accomplish something, or resolve a problem. The question now is, "How much have various individuals bought into this outcome?" The answer indicates their level of participation, motivation and excitement. Participation, motivation and excitement levels diminishes the farther from the leader.

In the five (5) groups of followers: enthusiasts, visionaries, pragmatists, conservatives, and laggards a pattern emerges around expectations and willingness to change. Enthusiasts and Visionaries look for new innovative ways to merge ideas and craft unique solutions to the "Human Condition" or Business Problem. Pragmatists want something that will give them a leg up. Conservatives don't care where the solution comes from, it's foot cream, any will do as long as it does the job. And, laggards, refuse to use new tools until it's so entrenched into society that they have no other choice.

Now we can measure the level of effort needed to interact with each group. Enthusiasts and Visionaries talk in broad terms, are excited and motivated about you're work, and in return excite and motivate you to continue researching bigger, better solutions. Pragmatists only believe what other pragmatists say, thus your conversation dynamic has to change. The amount of energy to convince someone to "Try the New" increases. Conservatives require your product to be main stream, mature and in full competition before they will look at it. This requires a tremendous amount of energy, which few entrepreneurs are capable of providing. And, there is no amount of energy that will move a laggard.

Each group assess change differently as well. This is based on their judgments triggered by beliefs "On how things should be". "Shared Visions" play an important rule in motivating followers. This is where followers migrate to non-followers and outsiders depending on whether or not they share your vision. Thus when employees can't see the vision, or understand how they are part of a larger whole, and are treated as a commodity (foot cream), they loose motivation, excitement, creativity, enthusiasm, and so on.

As such, when searching for the right people for the right roles, leaders are looking for excited people who can motivate others through a shared vision of a better world. Thus the mission of the organization is to achieve this vision, and it has to flow out from the Board down to every member in the organization.

The Truth About Leadership - Part 3

Credibility is the Foundation of Leadership

Credibility is NOT the foundation of Leadership, this is a lie. The lie is supported further by the supposition that “You have to believe in yourself” to be a leader. (page 15). In looking at the definition of leadership, “Guiding Intent with Integrity”, there is no need for belief. It is a scientific formula. As you learn to guide people, depending on your intent and integrity, they will either follow you or they won’t. And eventually you will understand when people will following you or won’t. Either you won’t have the right guidance, won’t have the right intent, or won’t have the right integrity based on what they are looking for.

No, credibility is not the foundation of leadership; it is a part of leadership, but not the foundation. Another name for credibility is integrity. And as the definition suggests, leadership cannot stand on integrity alone. It requires providing guidance towards a goal. And it requires a reason for providing that guidance - intent. Without these three points, leadership does not exist.

Mind you, you can misguide people on purpose for their own good. Or you can guide them toward decisions that they would otherwise not make and still thank you for your help. While your intentions mislead them, because you wanted someone to take their place, they may still feel you have integrity. Guiding, Intent and Integrity are both positive and negative terms. The skill of their use depends on how well they are mastered, as the historical French Courts attest to.

Page 16 supports this conclusion that credibility cannot be the foundation of leadership, as they point out, “It turns out that the believability of the leader determines whether people will give more other time, talent, energy, experience, intelligence, creativity, and support.” The observation from an outside observer’s perspective is that time and attention increase as follower’s belief in the leader increases. They have completely forgotten that the followers and the leaders have to have a common goal in mind. For example a foot ball coach cannot conduct an orchestra using football training programs. Nor can a conductor lead a football team. The guidance would be all wrong. The intent may be positive and the integrity may be positive, but nothing good will be achieved.

On Page 17, the book does a bate and switch from Integrity to Intentions to demonstrate how Credibility is important by listing characteristics of leaders people hold most dear: Honesty, forward thinking, inspiring, competent, intelligent, broad minded, dependable, supportive, fair minded, straight forward, determined, ambitious, courageous, caring, loyal, imaginative, mature, self controlled, and independent. The problem with this switch is that their understanding of Integrity and Intentions are completely wrong.

These characteristics are about intentions. And while most people will categorize intentions as an onion, that would be incorrect as well. Intentions are like strands of wave stretching, ballooning rising and falling in a lava lamp. No one intention is at the top or bottom, left or right. Some times they are layered and shift. They are forever mixing and matching as the moment requires.

On Page 19, the assumption is made, that “Before anyone is going to be willing to follow you, you have to be honest, forward thinking, inspiring and competent”. This seems simple enough, until you look at the couple who asked the waitress for her opinion about how to prepare a steak. What was their intention about asking that question? Do they really want to know? Or are they seeing how competent she is? Who is really leading who at that moment? The goal may be to get the best steak possible – forward thinking – but whose route will be there the fastest and produce the desired results. Does the garbage man have to be inspiring to give directions to the local CVS Pharmacy? And what about yourself, do you have to be competent to know that the method you’re using needs to change in order to achieve the results you want?

Page 22 identifies that this idea that credibility is the foundation of leadership comes from marketing and communication. In general people reviewing news determine its believability based on the source of the communication. So, referring back to the definition of leadership, we can ask: “Is the article believable because of the information (guidance) provided?”, “What is the intent of the author?”, and “What is the integrity of the author?”

Page 25 uses credibility incorrectly again to look at the question of referrals. “When people say their immediate manager exhibits credibility, they are significantly more likely to tell others they are part of the organization”. “Ultimate Question” (2011) by Fred Reichheld, ISBN 978-4-1-4221-7335-0, examines the question, “Would you refer this [Individual, Product, or Service] on a scale of 0 to 10? Why or Why Not?” Why do people become attached to a product or service? Is it because of Leadership? Or is it that the product or service is filling a need? Or in other words, the guidance provided, the intent it’s presented with, and the integrity it has fills the needs of the followers, so much so that they are willing to refer it to their friends who may benefit from this guidance as well.

On Page 26, an MBA student, James Stout, “realized that leadership was a reciprocal relationship”. When was providing guidance towards a goal not a reciprocal relationship? Those seeking guidance have to ask you. And those providing guidance have to give it. If those two groups of people don’t meet then leadership doesn’t exist. Nor is the relationship reciprocal.

Page 27 offers a major misunderstanding of leadership, “Leadership means being absolutely honest and helping others to do as I do, not simply to do what I say.” WRONG! Guiding, Intent with Integrity says nothing about that at all. At no time does anyone ever have to be honest about why they are seeking or providing guidance. In fact every single sale is based on the premise, “The Buyer Beware!” Don’t buy into this stupidity.

Why do people need guidance?

The most prominent reason why people need guidance is because they don't know everything.  Think about that for a moment.  How much do you know, and how much do you not know?  And who is out there to take advantage of that, and who's out there to help you not be taken advantage of?

If you need something to really help you understand this point, "How much don't you know?", open a yellow pages phone book and look at all the categories that products and services are grouped into.  How many could you do and how many can't you do?

Now, let's assume that you have all the time in the world to learn every single thing there is that a human can do.  Would you want to? Or would you choose instead to spend your time doing some of the things that were the most fun for you to do?  For example, would you really want to be a mortician?  Or would you want to be a pilot of the space shuttle?  Or would you want to teach people how to be better leaders?

It is this every reason, that we can't know everything, that there we need leaders.  That at any moment you could step into an auto-mechanics shop and ask, "What's wrong with my car?"  In that very moment, the auto-mechanic has become a leader. He is explaining to you what is wrong with your care, providing you with information about what is needed to fix your car, and helping you make informed decision that require a balance between cost and long term reliability.

But not all guidance is equal, the same, or even meant to be guidance. Some people who are seeking guidance some times come in contact with people who wish to take advantage of their innocence. These people misdirect those looking for guidance.  Just as easily there are those looking for guidance who are doing so under false pretenses.  In either case this is where the intentions are not congruent with your understanding of their intentions.  And, in addition, there are others who see a benefit to helping some people with achieving their goal, because it will help them achieve a larger goal afterwards.

There are many examples of people seeking guidance only to be swindled by con-artists. The con-artists watch for people seeking guidance, and misdirect them into all kinds of trouble for their own personal gain.  While, one image of a con-artists comes from street gambling, others could be bank fraud, unnecessary car repairs, or dental work, or so forth.  Things that you are told you need to have in order to get your car, computer, plumbing, money, safety, or other category in order, but that you really don't need.

Then there are people seeking guidance from honest people providing it only to have the guidance misused.  Examples of this behavior would be to learn to do a medical procedure, and then perform the medical procedure even though they are not licensed to perform it. Or they are representing themselves as the owner of a bank account. The bank teller helps them, only to find out later, that they were misrepresenting themselves and the bank teller helped them commit fraud.

The third kind is the person who provides guidance but seeks a bigger reward beyond the initial help provided.  Take for example an individual who joins a trail blazing team. He helps finance the trip, and at the end goes on his way to claim a buried treasure, open gold mine, dig for precious metals, or find rare artifacts. If their intentions were known upfront, the acceptance of their support may be rejected on various moral grounds.

This is why, in a free market society, the slogan has always been, "The Buyer Be Ware!"  You may think you're getting a bargain, but what you might be getting is a piece of crap.  And, since such might be the case, there are many checks and balances to insuring that the people seeking guidance and the people giving guidance are certified.

Certified guides come with a higher level of assurance that what they are providing is reputable.  And that the people who are seeking their guidance are actually seeking it, able to afford it, and are going to use it within the initial expectations for the information.  They are more expensive, since they are paying due to various organizations that audit and confirm their good behavior, as well as mediate with disgruntled clients.

A good example of a certified group is the BAR, which certifies lawyers.  If a lawyer is practicing unethically, and the BAR determines such is occurring, the lawyer will loose their law license, and be prevented from providing legal representation.  The same holds true with a medical license, a radio frequency license, and a 501c3 non-profit status.

So how do you tell if someone is telling the truth or not?  One way to determine the truth is to ask 3 independent sources.  This method is the same method used in scientific testing.  A scientist performs an experiment 3 times and gets the same results.  Then 3 other scientists perform the same experiment 3 times. If their results are the same as the first scientist, then it's probably a good bet that the original test is correct.  However, if at any time the test results are different, then the scientists have to look hard at what the differences are.

This is where the adage comes from, "An informed consumer is not fooled easily."

So the next time you ask for guidance, or are asked for guidance, consider the source of the question.  

Why are you asking for help? 

Why are you being asked for help?

What is their intention with this information?

What is the intention of the individual helping you?

Are there benefits unknown to you?

Have you asked 3 independent sources?

Become an informed consumer?

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.