The Truth About Leadership - Part 2

The Truth About Leadership - Part 2

You Make a Difference

This truth presumes that only leaders make a difference.  The problem with this truth is that it’s too narrow.  The definition of leadership allows everyone to be a leader at one moment or another.  In addition it doesn’t recognize personal leadership, “You leading yourself.”

A simple street cleaner being asked for directions suddenly becomes is a leader, as easily as the waitress who is asked how they would prepare a dish to their liking.  Even athletes who recognize that they are giving up on their training because it’s too hot and muggy suddenly step into their own leadership roles.  Why do leaders have to be people who motivate and guide 100’s of people to do something that improves the lives of others?

There is a question posed in this chapter, “What difference will I make?”  This question opens the discussion about intent.  While this is an interesting question for someone who is actively engaged in leadership, most leaders don’t consciously realize that this question is occurring.  Take for example the street cleaner that was asked about directions.  What difference is he making in the lives of the individuals who are asking for directions?  He is not consciously thinking about how his guidance will affect anyone else, and just as easily those asking for directions may not realized the release in anxiety.  But it happens.  The difference is small.

Most of this chapter is dedicated to demonstrating how positive leadership can improve an organization’s inner levels of piece and throughput. It fails to examine the affects negative leadership has on similar organizations.  For example, several positive leadership roles are: Modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, encouraging the heart.  While Negative Leadership would: discourage reviewing models, disparage a shared vision and focus on a singular vision, it may challenge the process only to prove that the new process is worse than the existing process, allow others to act and fail as a way to demonstrate how the current process is better, and discourage people from caring about clients and customers as a level of separation is needed in order to respond objectively.

Page 13, the discussion turns to: “Improving the Quality of Life”, “The Social Contract”, or put another way, “Whose responsibility it is anyway?”  This discussion opens into the integrity of leadership. A second question is posed on page 14, “If you are not willing to follow yourself, why would anyone else want to?”  This is a question posed in “Leadership 101” (2002) by John C Maxwell, ISBN 0-7852-6419-1, chapter 3, page 25.

As the story goes, Jerry Rice was in high school practicing football. The last exercise that his coach assigned to the team was to sprint up and down a forty yard hill 20 times. On a particularly hot and muggy Mississippi day, Rice was ready to give up after eleven trips.  As he sneaked toward the locker room, he realized what he was doing.  He returned to the hill and continued to sprint up it.  Rice realized that if he quit, he would get into the mode of quitting again and again. 

This is what personal integrity is, “Holding your self accountable.” 

Definition of Leadership

The definition of leadership is "Guiding Intent with Integrity".  

I found the definition back in 2007 while working on my Masters of Science in Business Management, and working with the Man Kind Project. Over the years I've  collected information to help prove the definition. But this blog is not about proving the definition, but helping you understand how to use the definition to help yourself.

So, what does it mean to guide?  How does intent affect this guidance?  And, why does whether or not a person has integrity affect their ability to lead people?  

To guide someone could be as simple as providing advice, or providing directions, or doing nothing at all while that person struggles to figure something out.

Intent is the reason why that person is doing what they are doing. Is there guidance to help or hurt the person?  

Integrity is the hardest part of this equation to understand, until you understand how integrity and the social contract are intertwined.  The social contract or the gentleman's agreement is the understanding between two people on what is expected from the agreement.

And what is the goal?  Why do you need someone to lead you? If there is no place to go? That place to go is your goal.

Now comes the hardest part of the definition. There are many ways to guide, many versions of intent, and just as many people with different levels of integrity. How can all these people be leaders?

There is another set of questions that must be asked about leadership.

Who is guiding who? 

Where are they guiding you?

Why are they guiding you?

What will they get in return for guiding you?

How are they guiding you?

What purpose does this guiding serve?

Or put another way:

The Guide

The Guiding

Where

How

Reasons

Purpose

These six (6) different categories create 1000's of different types of leadership styles. Which is why after decades of searching for a definition of leadership many scientists gave up.  No plausible pattern emerged that described what a leader was, since just about everyone can be a leader at any point in their life.

While the general understanding of a leader was someone that lead a group of people, a simple store clerk leading you to a can of tomatoes is just as much a leader. This flies in the face of what many people understand about leadership, since they expect a leader to be in a position of power, but isn't that what's happening with the store clerk?  Have you given them control of your life for just a moment to guide you to that can of tomatoes?

As I mentioned at the beginning of this blog, the purpose of this article is to help you understand what leadership is.  So in the blogs that follow, hopefully I can provide additional detail into the nuances of leadership.  There's a lot to talk about, and most of that research that scientists have collected can now be reviewed in light of this definition.  Maybe along the way, we'll find a way to prove the definition as well.

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.

Can Leadership be Taught?

Leadership is not an innate trait built into genetic code, nor is leadership provided through the "Divine Right of Gaud".  No instead it is a natural phenomena that can be nurtured and taught.  There are many reasons why some people seem to become great leaders and others don't become leaders at all.  But that is for another article, in this article I'd like to discuss the topic of teaching individuals how to become leaders.

Leadership is guiding intent with integrity. These three qualitative values "Guiding", "Intent", and "Integrity" work together to help people choose a style of leadership that works for them personally as well as works for the group they are guiding.  The first step in teaching someone to be a leader is to help them see the vast range of methods used to guide.

Guiding someone is not an art.  Someone asks a question, you give an answer.  You point them in a direction.  You provide them with feedback on what has happened.  You console them.  The guidance provided though is based on your intent.

Your partner asks you if this looks good, how do you respond and why do you respond in that manner?  Do you tell them that they look good even when they don't?  Do you tell them that they don't look good in that outfit?  Is the outfit appropriate for the environment you are going to attend?  Or do you find another way to help them towards their goal?

Intent isn't just about your intent, it's also about their intent.  What is it that they intended for themselves.  If your partner wants to look good, then the language you use will help guide them to a better choice.  Or the language you use will trigger an emotional episode.  Is your intent to make them emotionally dependent on you, or emotionally dependent?

Finally there is integrity.  Integrity has many different synonyms that mean roughly the same thing:  accountability, ethics, morality, virtue, sound, honest, chaste, and so on.  In the sense that we will use integrity here, it is in relation to the social contract.

The social contract is the written or verbal agreement made between the leader and the follower.  The accountability determines whether or not the leader and the follower are following this social contract, and if not how are they correcting each others deviation from the contract?  Are they demanding that the contract be adhered to, are they  penalizing each other for not holding to the contract, are they talking about the contract as malleable  or are they looking at the social contract as the target they want to reach?

There are many different things that the social contract can become.  It can become a beacon of hope, or a weapon to beat each other up with.  It depends on how the contract is designed and what it is designed to do.  As this is an agreement between two people, the contract can always be re-evaluated and adjusted as needed.  But, in order for that to occur, both parties need to be willing to examine how the contract is affecting themselves and see how the contract is affecting others.

A good question to determine if the social contract or integrity of the people involved is in line, is to ask, "What is the goal?"  Many people use rules that determine a persons integrity.  Above 50% and you're good, below 50% and you're bad.  However, in many games there is the goal at end of the field.  In order to reach that goal all parties have to work together to reach it. So, if the social contract is written at the 50 yard line, then the parties involved are constantly battling over who is in integrity.  But if the social contract is written with a focus on the goal, then every play that helps everyone move towards the 100 yard becomes a positive reinforcing step in the right direction.

While the short answer is that leadership can be taught, there is a lot to learn about what affects leadership.  While looking at Guiding, Intent, Integrity, and the Goal we also learned that language and the social contract play an important role in the guidance given. We can make people dependent on us or independent on us. We can celebrate the small victories or fight over the small upsets, the question is what is used to measure progress, and where is the goal marker?

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.  

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?