Do what is right because it is right

How often do you vote for someone who has a reputation for being corrupt?  We try to elect people who we think will be men and women of integrity. Then we are often disappointed when our elected officials do not behave as we had expected. Politicians have no problem making promises about how they intend to make changes if they are elected to office. In fact, they probably really do believe they will behave differently than their predecessors when they come into office. All too often, however, something happens when they get to Washington, the state capital, or City Hall. They discover that the view from inside the office is not the same as it was from outside and, instead of changing things for the better, they seem to change.

But do they really change, or are they just acting like the person they really are?

The 2010 mid-term elections in the USA saw a large number of turnovers in national, state and local elections. Many of the elected officials promised to clean up, make reforms or otherwise change things for the better. While that all sounds very good, I am waiting to see if a king-sized HOWEVER spoils their good intentions. I know some of them will do good things, but they could do so much more if they would be true to values on which they campaigned.

In the First and Second Books of Kings and the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah and Israel, history records how every few generations a king would come to the throne with very good intentions. He would make decrees and reestablish the order of law according to the principles and promises God had made to his ancestors. In a few cases, it looked as if a man of integrity had come to the throne. Sadly, there would always be a big “HOWEVER” following all the accomplishments of these kings who set out to be faithful and trustworthy leaders.

What happened? Why do people who show such promise fail to follow through to the end? Because they reach the limits of their integrity. That’s when you can see the person’s true character. Even the great king Solomon failed the integrity test. He made some astute political allies by marrying many foreign wives, but did so in direct violation of clear restrictions God had established. Ultimately, he lost the majority of his kingdom for his descendants because of his lack of integrity and failure to be true to the values he originally espoused.  (See 1 Kings 11)

Leaders show their true colors when they come into position and power.  Integrity is not something that can be ordered, regulated, regimented or legislated. It also is not something you can switch on or off. Either you have it, or you don’t. 

Hint to the Leader:

Do what is right because it is right. Stand by your convictions, regardless of the political outcome. Someone is always watching and following your example.

Hint to the Follower:

Don’t fall into the trap of trying to climb the political ladder by compromising your values. Some hills are worth dying on. Some are not. Learn the difference.

© Copyright 2010, Dr. Larry N. Gay http://mylead360.blogspot.com/
“Lessons on Leadership and Followership”

(You can see some of the “Howevers” from the Kings in:
1 Kings 3:2-3; 1 Kings 11:1-6; 1 Kings 22:41-43; 2 Kings 10:28-29; 2 Kings 12:1-3; 2 Kings 14:1-4; 2 Kings 15:1-4; 2 Kings 15:32-35)

Lessons on Sticking it Out

"Tell me what it takes to make you leave
and I'll tell you how committed you are."

(Doug Sager)

“Let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us.”

(Hebrews 12:1)

          Comedian Mrs. Hughes, says people ask her what's the secret to a long and happy marriage. "Well, I can tell you how to have a long one," she replies. "Children. Neither of us wanted custody."

          What about the happy part? Years ago I helped organize family life conferences where our main presenter would ask participants, "How many of you got married because you wanted to be unhappy?" Of course, no one raised their hands.

          Long marriages and long careers have a lot in common. So what makes the difference between a long and happy relationship or career and a short or dissatisfying one?

          Over the last 30 years I have interviewed at least 100 retiring personnel who have completed 30, 40 or 45 years of service with the same organization. I always ask two questions:
          1) How did you stay so long? and
          2) If you had it all to do over again, what would you do exactly the same?"
NOT what would you do differently. I wanted to learn what worked. What made for a long and successful career?


1. How did you stay so long?

          Every long-term retiring person I have interviewed has mentioned the words "commitment" and "calling." They all expressed a strong sense of calling to their profession and recalled having made a commitment to follow that calling. Commitment seems to be a dirty word to many people today. When someone says, "I will," they really mean, "...if a better offer doesn't come along." In the case of these people, however, a commitment was something to be honored and fulfilled. For these people the old expression "My word is my bond" is not just an expression. It is a matter of integrity.

         All of the people I interviewed talked about moments when they felt like throwing in the towel. Many of them mentioned having to deal with difficult people, difficult changes, difficult supervisors, difficult circumstances, crises, discouragement, or even threats of danger. In such moments when doubt set in, they returned to their original sense of call and commitment and, having "stuck it out" through the difficult times, found fulfillment in realizing a sense of purpose and accomplishment.

2. If you had it all to do over again, what would you do exactly the same?

          On this question I have heard a variety of answers, but everyone I have interviewed who went the distance mentioned something about the relationships they built with the people with whom they worked. Sometimes they talk about pouring their lives into the next generation. Sometimes it has to do with friends they made along the way. Often they mention life-long relationships that began because of a shared crisis, or lives that were changed because they had stayed. One thing they all agree on: if they had it to do all over again, they would build relationships with the same people in the same places.

          Methods and programs come and go, but the relationships we build are what make a lasting difference in the world.


How Committed Are You?

          Lieutenant Norman A. Stapp was scheduled to retire from the Irondale(Alabama) Police Department in May 2010 after more than 40 years of service in law enforcement. When asked the best advice he had ever heard and from whom, he responded: "An older police officer told me, 'Don't ever let one man cause you to quit your job.' I ran into that one man many times, but I remembered what that older officer told me." (quoted by Victoria L. Coman in The Birmingham News)

           Whenever major organizational changes have come or whenever I have met "that one man" (or woman) who seemed to make my life miserable at work, I try to remember this: I never joined an organization because of the way it was organized and I never joined because of one person. So, why would l quit just because the organizational structure is changing or because I disagree with one person in the organization? Am I really willing to let them have that much power over me?

Leadership Hints
     • What are you doing to build up the next generation of leaders?
     • What legacy will you leave behind in your relationships?

     • What kind of example are you setting in the way you honor your commitments?

Followership Hints

If you are thinking about quitting, put things in the balance: 

     • Do the changes outweigh your commitment
     • Does one difficult relationship outweigh all the good ones?

     • If you leave, are you running toward a new challenge or away from a current one?

(c) Dr. Larry N. Gay, May 2010

http://mylead360.blogspot.com/ "Lessons on Leadership and Followership"

The Stewardship Factor

 (Fifth in a series on Aligning for Productivity)

"It is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy."

(The Apostle Paul, First Epistle to the Corinthians 4:2)

"Leaders may start by pursuing their own vision, but they begin to see that their own personal vision is part of something larger."

 (Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline, p.352)

During major organizational changes, we spend a lot of time and energy trying to "bring people along," help them to "get on board," or "buy into the vision." We might even talk about wanting everyone to "own" the vision. While such efforts might be well-intentioned, they might also be expending unnecessary energy toward an unreachable goal. In fact, no one really "owns" the organization's vision. We are not owners of the vision; we are merely stewards.

Stew·ard (noun)  [stoo´ ərd]

2. property manager – somebody who manages somebody else's property, finances, or household.

(Encarta Dictionary)

For the organizational vision to be realized, leaders must recognize their stewardship responsibilities. The most effective leaders are good stewards of both the vision and the people they lead. Leaders who exhibit an attitude of stewardship can make a significant difference in the general attitude or morale of the people they lead.

Consider the difference between two types of leaders. At least twice in my career I have worked with a supervisor/leader who personalized everything: "my team, my staff, my people, my project—my, my, my!" Each of these leaders was insecure and felt threatened by anyone who took any personal initiative beyond the bounds of their specific written job descriptions. When any subordinate received any word of praise from a constituent, they would take such a compliment to be a threat to them as if someone were going to take away their position of authority. Each of these supervisors eventually had some serious crises in their leadership because of their insecurities and inability to let go of things that really were not theirs to hold on to.

I also have had the privilege of working with some very excellent and effective leaders in my career. These men did not feel threatened when they heard someone compliment a subordinate. In fact, they expressed joy and appreciation for such comments. On one occasion, early in my career, my supervisor called me into his office and asked me to close the door. I could not imagine what I had done to deserve a reprimand and I could think of no other reason for him to call me in. "I just received a phone call about you," he said. "It was a constituent telling me what a good job they thought you were doing." He went on to say he considered a compliment to anyone on his team to be a compliment to the whole team. So he felt complimented too!  "And by the way," he ended, "keep up the good work!"

Now, which of these do you think inspired me to contribute more effectively to the organization for which I worked?

In my experience, effective leaders who are good stewards learn to talk more in the first person plural and less in the first personal singular. They use a lot more "we, our and ours" and lot less "I, my and mine."  Such a stewardship attitude builds loyalty and commitment. It inspires people to more effective followership. And effective followership is a requirement for effective leadership.

Effective stewards also avoid talking about "they, their or them" when communicating vision, direction, policies or principles. Even though stewards are not owners, they do have an obligation to represent the interests of the owner.  Stewards are regarded as trustworthy to act on behalf of the owner with all the authority of the owner. Regardless of whether the steward has actively participated in the formulation of policy, procedure or direction, they will communicate with confidence what we must do to reach our goals in pursuit of our vision. (I suppose that starts to sound like taking ownership, doesn't it?)

The organization can realize its vision only to the extent that individuals connect and contribute to the corporate vision with their personal visions. Rather than spending time and energy trying to make people feel ownership for the organization's vision, leaders should help the people they lead find greater affinity and alignment of their individual sense of calling and personal values with the belief system of the organization as defined by its vision, purpose and values. If we can see that our personal sense of purpose, calling and vision are being realized by contributing to the corporate vision and purpose, then we will begin to feel that the corporate vision is, indeed, our own.  The closer the alignment between individuals' personal sense of calling, purpose and vision with the belief system of the organization, the more they will believe in what the organization is striving for. The more they believe in it, the harder they will work to make it succeed. 

The truth of the matter is, your organization cannot reach its maximum potential without every member's participation.  Being honest with personnel to say, "we need your support to reach this vision," can go a long way toward gaining followership once the leaders have demonstrated their own personal trustworthiness as good stewards.

Leadership Hints

• It is appropriate to use the first person singular when you are taking responsibility for an action (e.g., "I made that decision.") Otherwise, and especially when giving credit, use the plural (e.g., "Our team did a great job!")
• Evaluate how you use inclusive language and how your form of communication conveys your underlying values.
• Help your followers evaluate how their personal vision and values are realized through meeting the organizational vision and values. This can be done as a part of regular performance evaluations.

Followership Hints

• Followers are stewards, too. While you might not feel you have influence over the entire organization, you have been given some measure of responsibility for a portion of the organization's success. Treat that portion as if it were your own, because it is!

© Dr. Larry N. Gay, April 2010

http://mylead360.blogspot.com/ "Lessons on Leadership and Followership"

Attitude: The Life or Death of a Vision

(Second in a series on Aligning for Productivity)

“So we rebuilt the wall…for the people worked with all their heart.”

(Nehemiah 4:6)

          The organizational vision can only be realized by the individuals working within the organization. Regardless of all the organizational changes that might be made, if you want happy, productive workers, you must help them to see what they will gain from helping the company to reach its objectives.

          A plethora of books, essays and articles have addressed the need for any organization to have clearly stated vision, purpose and values. Of all these, Peter Senge’s book The Fifth Discipline (Doubleday, 1990) is still a seminal work for understanding systems thinking and how the pillars of vision, purpose and values work together within an organization. Senge describes five general responses or attitudes toward the organization’s vision: commitment, enrollment, compliance, noncompliance, or apathy. Compliance, however, can take one of three distinct forms, making a total of seven attitudes that individuals within the organization can demonstrate.

          While Senge accurately described the seven attitudes, he did not expand on why people react in these specific ways. This can best be understood by two areas of personal need we seek to satisfy in our employment: 1) personal benefit which includes salary, insurance, pension plans, position, recognition, or other non-tangible benefits; and 2) a personal sense of fulfillment of a life purpose, vision, or calling. The degree to which both areas are aligned with, supported by, and fulfilled by working within the company’s vision, purpose and values will affect each individual’s attitude and the degree to which each member contributes effectively toward the company’s goals or objectives. On the negative side, the degree to which an individual’s need for personal benefit and/or personal sense of fulfillment are not met will also determine the degree to which the individual will become unproductive or even counterproductive to the organization’s goals and objectives. Personal benefit and a personal sense of fulfillment will, in large part, determine the individual’s attitude toward the company in general and his or her work specifically.

          The following paragraphs and illustrations describe the seven attitudes identified by Senge and how these are affected by the individual’s need for personal benefit and personal sense of fulfillment. In a future article, we will examine more in depth how different personalities place different values on these two needs.

1. Committed

          The first group is made up of the few people who are truly committed to the vision. These few want it and are consumed with a desire to see it become reality. They will do whatever they possibly can to make it happen. Only a few people are truly committed to the organizational vision. These might include the founder or originator of the vision and a few people who join in because they recognize in it something that they have already been longing to see before.

2. Enrolled
          Another few people will be enrolled. They also want it and will work to make it happen, but they might not feel the same level of ownership as those who are committed. Enrolled individuals find their personal vision can easily fit within the organization’s vision with very little or no adaptation. These might be the “early adopters” of a new paradigm. They do not “live, eat, sleep and breathe” the vision as the committed do. They do, however, truly desire to see the vision realized and will give above and beyond the call of duty to make it happen.


          While it would be wonderful to have everyone in the organization fully committed or enrolled and in perfect alignment with the vision, that is very unlikely to happen, except, perhaps, in a very small company where everyone is a full partner. The large majority of people in any organization most likely have an attitude of compliance, which is defined by three distinct categories.

3. Genuinely Compliant

          Genuine compliance might look like enrollment or commitment in that the genuinely compliant person sees the benefits of the vision and does everything expected and more. All or almost all of the genuinely compliant’s personal vision can be realized in the context of the organization’s vision without having to make major adjustments. These “good soldiers” follow the letter of the law and are often tapped for leadership based on their above average performance. The genuinely compliant person often can quote the vision to the letter and might even support the vision energetically. This, however, is not because they have tremendous personal desires to see the vision fulfilled as the committed or enrolled do. Genuinely compliant people accept the vision, though they do not truly own it.

4. Formally Compliant

          Another group demonstrates formal compliance. These are what Senge calls “pretty good soldiers.” They do what is expected and no more. They might support the vision to some degree, but they are primarily “going along” and not making waves. On the whole, they see the benefits of the vision, but they do not take initiative to push the vision into reality. They can adapt to realize their personal vision, some of which may have to be achieved outside the organization, or at a later time.




5. Grudgingly Compliant

          Some people will display a grudging compliance. The grudgingly compliant person’s personal vision overlaps very little, if at all, with the organizational vision. In fact, this person probably sees the organization’s vision as opposed to his or her personal vision. They will do what is expected because they feel obligated, but they do not see the value of the direction in which the organization is moving and are still opposed to changes that have already taken place. Perhaps only to “keep their jobs” or because they see some other benefit outside the real vision, they do whatever is required of them, but nothing more. At best, such compliance is really more accurately described as passive-aggressive behavior. They stay on and do enough to get by while letting it be known that they really are not on board. While they may not lead an open rebellion, they are, in effect, hoping that the vision will not become reality.

          Grudgingly compliant people can be the most destructive force in the organization. Such people only remain with the organization because of the tangible benefits they receive (medical, retirement benefits, inability to find other employment, etc.). Grudgingly compliant people will tend to blame the organizational changes for their lack of productivity and inability to fulfill their own personal vision. (See more on this below.)

6. Noncompliant

          Apart from the committed, the enrolled and the compliant people, there are also two other groups that must be dealt with concerning the organization’s vision. A certain number of people will be noncompliant. Their attitude toward the vision is negative to the point of “I won’t do it and you can’t make me.” Since they see no benefit in the vision, they may actively seek to undermine it or change it to a completely different direction.
          Even after they leave the organization, the noncompliant people often have a lasting influence on some of those who are grudgingly compliant, many of whom might remain with the organization for quite long tenures as they continue to express their passive-resistance to the forward motion toward the vision.

7. Apathetic

          People in the last group demonstrate apathy for the vision. They are neither for it nor against it. They are simply along for the ride and waiting for the end of their shift or term. Like the noncompliant people, apathetic people are outside the circle of the organizational vision. While they are not actively pulling against the direction of the vision, they are simply dead weight being dragged along without contributing significantly to the advancement of the organization to meet its objectives.

 
Leadership Hints:

• Are you a committed, enrolled or compliant leader?

• How does this affect your servant/leadership?

• As you look at the people you lead, what attitudes do you think each of them demonstrates?


Followership Hints: 
• Time for another attitude check! Review the seven attitudes and try to identify which best describes your attitude toward your present organization and your current job assignment within it.

• If you continue in this attitude, will you contribute to the successful accomplishment of your personal life goals and also help the organization to reach its objectives?


Note: In next week’s article I’ll talk more about leading people to the next levels of compliance, enrollment or commitment.

© Dr. Larry N. Gay, March 2010
http://mylead360.blogspot.com/  “Lessons in Leadership and Followership”