Bad Leaders Fail 75% Of The Time

Bad Leaders Fail 75% of the time

One of the points I made earlier in this conversation was the Bad Leaders make bad choices 75% of the time. Two (2) of those choices are not building coalitions and not looking at how the change will playout like a stage play. Leaders that neglect to build alliances in various the groups - peers, followers, non-followers, outsiders and observers - make the of becoming the issue, instead of leading the change. Organizational members can then ignore the need for change by getting rid of the leader that represents the issue. However, if there are several people trumpeting the same message for change, it is harder to marginalize and get rid of them. The message is usually about what change is needed to the organizational structure in order to accommodate the new world order being brought about by other elements and forces outside the organization. An organization that does not adapt to these changes will eventually die out. However, leaders face a tougher challenge when changing organizational elements because people like certainty. They know where their next meal is coming from now. If you change the rules, they don't know if they will get fed. Change can also affect many other aspects of the organizations psychie, but that discussion is too broad to cover in one paragraph. To summarize, an organization has a history, culture, rituals, pride, and many other facets that need to be accounted for in order to instigate change. If a leader neglects any portion of this, they may be unwittingly building a coalition against them. To understand this last point, leaders need to look at the change process as a play being produced. There is the author who wrote a message into the story, the actors portraying characters in the story, there is the director who is adding and deleting scenes to help focus a message in the story, and then there is the audience who is watching the play. Add scenery, lighting and music to spice up the drama, and you have a play. A leader that can step into all these roles as well as step out and watch how all these roles affect each other, can more accurately tailor their corrective actions. Stories are adapted all the time to summarize longer stories. For example, ReBoot ends with a rendition of "I'm a modern major general".

How do you overcome doubt?

How do you overcome doubt?

While the phrase, "Think Positive" comes to mind, it doesn't convey the right meaning of what I would prefer you to focus on. Yes, the Republican's are about smaller government, apparently limited if not incapable of doing anything government, it will eventually back fire on them. No, instead, what I would prefer that you think about is a future where issues are raised, addressed, and dealt with in a positive context.

  If you ever get the chance, watch the first episode of, "How to get away with murder". There they show how court room debates work. Bury the Evidence, Discredit the Witnesses, Provide an Alternative Killer, and finally ... Leave the Jury with an OVERWHELMING Sense of DOUBT.

  DOUBT leaves you dead locked in 2 fears. Damn'd if I do. Damn'd if I don't. What doubt takes away from you, is your ability to see a positive future outcome. A point where the issue can be addressed and resolved.

The problem of the uncomfortable!

The problem of the uncomfortable, is not the goal, it is the journey. Even in project management, there is a lot of energy put towards identifying risks and mitigating them. Another metaphor for this same journey is a Dungeons and Dragons quest.

The Man Kind Project looks at the uncomfortable through many processes, but one identified in the article is "Stretches". Stretches, or SMART Goals, are the steps in the project plan to walking the journey and achieve the goal.

Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic Time Bound

While these steps, ask you to look at the best case scenario outcome, we often forget to examine the worst case scenario outcomes, that most project managers look at on a daily basis.

Dependencies Risks Issues Assumptions Unknowns

For many people, the only worst case scenario they consider is, "Being hit by a train!" They never consider that they might be hit by a body part of someone else's worst case scenario. Or even worse, someone's best case scenario being to push someone into their worst case scenario. (- Sorry, it's a little gruesome for role playing effect! -)

"No strategy survives contact with the enemy.", Helmuth von Moltke the Elder. It is only in recognizing patterns that we find the path of least resistance to the goal. Many Jujitsu students study how to navigate their partners counters to eventually submit them. Chess students also study chess patterns to build strategies.

Like Jujitsu students, members of the Man Kind Project, study processes that help men explore their worst case scenarios. Processes for looking at risks. Holding men accountable to agreements. Ways to cleanly express upset and wants, while acknowledging why those things are important. Seeing judgement and beliefs for what they are .. walls. Understanding that sometimes we have to give up something to get something. and more ...

A process I use and can share from Directed Dreaming, is this: What is the issue? What is causing the issue? What are solutions for this issue? How do I feel about this issue? What do I do when this issue comes up? Can I live with this issue? What am I getting now with things unchanged? What would I get if things changed? What would I have to give up if things changed? What do I want?

The Journey. Not the goal is where the uncomfortable lies. Crossing the mountain through mud and snow. Over treacherous bridges and glide lines. Climbing sheer faces with 1000 foot drops, or being chased by a bear. These are all possibilities on a journey through a mountain pass. Until you meet a troll under a bridge. Or come a cross a home that smells of candied cakes. Or maybe a something else from the Grimm Fairy Tales.

Face your fears and you will conquer the world.

Do you agree?

A strong, positive leadership style is crucial because destructive criticism and bullying does little to motivate people; in fact, it often causes people to shut down and stop trying.

Why do Supervisors Plans Fail?

This is in response to Chris Swains article on "Why Supervisor's Plans Fail!" (http://bnetworking.info/?p=1652)

Chris, the article provides an interesting perspective, but the perspective is too narrow. It should also account for the global calendar and leadership.  Organizations could have a global calendar from which all departmental calendars are synchronized to. In addition, the organizational calendar could be synchronized with events outside the organization, such as trade shows and economic events, like Christmas, tax season, and major holidays. The unfortunate part for most organizations is that there is no physical global calendar for organization members to refer to. Thus the global calendar is cerebral.  While organizations and teams have their own calendars, individuals have their own personal calendars. Personal events may or may not interfere with the organizations calendar, and the teams calendar. What is not conveyed to the calendar though are intentions, otherwise known as "Hidden Agendas". These intentions, for example, don't provide time to adjust the project plan and account for success.  Which brings me to my next point in the perspective. Leadership is "Guiding Intent with Integrity" towards a goal. The article was written from the perspective of a Supervisor relying on their project plan / time table to drive results. The problem with this perspective is that it suggests that the motivational methods for driving the project are based on reminding employees that there is a dead line.  The goal should be the motivational drive here, not the time table. Individual employees should see how their enthusiasm for this work builds commitment to this part of the project and helps drive other team members through external motivation. It's also known as "Motivation From Without." And is often written about in health magazines, as people use other people to motivate them to go to the gym and keep going.  The piece that most supervisors fail to realize and understand, that team leaders study, is now to motivate people through many different methods. As mentioned, one source of motivation is from within, an employee's personal drive to solve a particular humanistic problem. And, motivation from without, where employees are motivated by seeing someone else's dedication to solving this problem.  This is what really distinguishes a organization at Stage 2 & 3 vs an organization at Stage 4 or 5.

Chris Swain (https://www.linkedin.com/groups?viewMemberFeed=&gid=2355813&memberID=227104845)

Getting Off Stage!

Expanding on your point - Reflection.

A similar example uses the perspective of a stage. The leader needed to be: part of the play, part of the audience, and the director. While the leader is taking action steps within the play, he also needs to step out into the audience to see how things look. Who is coming on stage, who is leaving, what parts are they playing, ... and How is the story being told, what is adding to the story, what is distracting from the story.

One problem that can occur with leadership, is that while a leader trumpets the message of his followers, he becomes the message. Eventually people they network with become jaded against the messenger, "Oh, it's Joe. All he ever speaks about is 'Saving the Rain Forest' ! " Leaders need to avoid this delema by networking with with liked minded peers to build a chorus for the message.

Another point leaders can reflect on by watching as a director / audience (observer's) perspective, is how the antagonist and protagonist are using the actors to motivate people. How is drama being created? How are characters being moved around the stage.? How are are characters being brought together? How are characters being separated? How are characters being attacked? Which story is more interesting, the story about Alice falling down the rabbit hole, or the story about the Rabbit creating holes?

While there are many other questions concerning this perspective that could be addressed, I'll leave the audience here with one last thought. All the actors on stage, while a chorus, are singing the same song eventually, in their own unique way. How does the song change as the story proceeds? Does it change? And when does it change?

One of the greatest triumphs a leader has is finding a way to bring two diverse groups together through a common cause, problem, or solution. Sometimes this is call innovative, sometimes it's considered just a logical progression of how technology should have progressed. When the chorus refuses to change their minds about how the song could be sung, or their stance on an issue, makes the leader's job of finding like minded peers to network with.

An interesting play on this theme is, "You're not a true Christian!". 200 Christians are placed on stage with Jesus.  The antagonist starts by differentiating himself from Jesus.  And, the process continues as eventually all 200 Christians are all claiming that they are a True Christian, while stating that everyone else is not.  As a space alien cartoon portrayed, "They are all fighting over which religion is the most peaceful!"