Being Precedes Doing

          Recently, I have talked with several people who left their place of work because they were expected to do something that they considered to be unethical or in violation of their values. In one or two cases, the individual felt they were being asked to do something that they knew was illegal. At some point, you have to decide if your core values line up with the values and culture of the organization. You might decide you can live with some minor discrepancies because higher priority values are still being met, but when core values are being violated the time comes when ways must part.

          When my sons were adolescents, whenever they would leave the house to go out with friends I would always say, “Remember who you are and whose you are.” They never asked what I meant by that. They knew that I was trusting them to remember their upbringing and to act according to the values my wife and I had tried to instill in them.

          There was only one caveat to that. I assumed that my values had become their values when, in fact, they were in the process of deciding just what their own values were. So they acted according to their own sense of right and wrong which did not always line up with my sense of right and wrong. Naturally, we had a few clashes when our values were not in alignment with each other’s.

          It would have been easy to say, “My way or the highway.” In fact, I did say a few times, “My roof, my rules,” but I valued the relationship, so we tried to come to terms. Frankly, some of my values needed to be put to the test. And then there were other values—core values—that were non-negotiable. Having teenagers forced me to prioritize some of my values and determine which were negotiable (and to what degree) and which were non-negotiable.

          Our values determine who we are and how we will act. So being really does precede doing. If my values and the values of the organization are in alignment, I should not have much trouble keeping the rules and acting in accordance with the organization’s policies and practices. If, however, the organization allows rules and regulations to be put into place that are not in alignment with its own stated values, then all sorts of problems can result… and will. 

          The official rules and regulations are not the only source of problems. Consider a manager who is allowed (or even encouraged) to continue to practice actions that violate the values and/or rules and regulations that support those values. The people under this manager’s authority and influence will be conflicted with questions:

- Why is this person being allowed to act this way?

- Could it be that the company’s real values are not what they say?

- What should I do about this?

          All too often, individuals and organizations fail to do the most loving thing of all, which is to take corrective action as soon as any behavior is detected which violates any known value. Dissatisfaction will grow until someone finally feels compelled to act—probably by leaving, being encouraged to leave, or flat out being fired. Either way the result will not be uplifting for anyone.

          So how do we turn this around to a positive note?

Hint to the Leader

- Take a hard, critical look at your organization’s core values and compare these to your current policies and regulations. Where do you see misalignment? What can you do to bring these back into alignment?

- What corrective action have you been putting off that should have been taken earlier? What values are being infringed upon by this behavior? What negative consequences are resulting because of your delay to act? What should you do about it? Do you have the will to do it?

Hint to the Follower

           

- Know yourself. Determine your own core values.

- If you are unhappy or dissatisfied with your work, could it possibly be because some personal value is at odds with the policies or practices of your organization? 

- If a manager is demanding something of you that you know to be contrary to the values and culture of the organization, what alternatives to leaving can you see?  With whom should you share your concerns before taking action?

                                                                                                                   

Previous articles on the subject of alignment:

Your Roadmap to More Effective Leadership (Jan 10, 2010);

The Stewardship Factor (May 2, 2010);

Stress and Job Dissatisfaction (April 4, 2010)

Why Vision, Purpose and Values are Still Important

© Copyright 2010, Dr. Larry N. Gay, 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"

Stress and Job Dissatisfaction

(Third in a series on Aligning for Productivity)

One ship sails East, And another West, By the self-same winds that blow, 'Tis the set of the sails And not the gales, That tells the way we go.

(Ella Wheeler Wilcox)

Alex and Kim both work for the same organization, in the same job, with the same title, the same boss, and they receive exactly the same pay. Alex loves this job and has very few complaints about the way things are going. Kim, on the other hand, is growing increasingly dissatisfied with the direction the organization is taking and seems to complain about everything. Kim is so stressed by it all that burnout is just around the corner.

After talking with Alex and Kim you might ask, “Are these two really working at the same job in the same place with the same boss?” How can one person love what the organization is doing and be thrilled with the job, while the other person is convinced the whole organization is going down the drain? What makes the difference?

You Always Have Choices

When we are faced with the stress of organizational change, we basically have three choices: 1) stay and be satisfied, 2) stay and be a problem or 3) leave. The option we choose is largely determined by our sense of satisfaction and fulfillment in the job. Like adding weights in a balance, the decision to stay is based on the weight of positive influences contributing to job satisfaction as opposed to the negative stressors that cause dissatisfaction.

Factors Contributing to Job Satisfaction	Stressors Contributing to Dissatisfaction
( + ) Alignment between personal and organizational vision, purpose, values ( + ) Sense of fulfillment of calling ( + ) Good Relationships ( + ) Appreciation ( + ) Benefits ( + ) “Zapps!” (Encouraging words that build up) [1] ( + ) Helpful Policies ( + ) Empowerment	( - ) Misalignment between personal and organizational vision, purpose, values ( - ) Working outside one’s giftedness or strengths ( - ) Strained relationships ( - ) Rules and regulations that restrict ( - ) Busy work ( - ) Devaluation ( - ) “Saps!” (Discouraging words, criticism that tears down) [2] ( - ) Micro-management
Outcome = Stay and be satisfied	Outcome = Stay and be dissatisfied, unproductive, become a problem, or leave

When the balance tilts to the dissatisfaction side, stress mounts up and can cloud or color the decision-making processes. The longer a person stays in a state of dissatisfaction, the more stress will grow and the more difficult it will be for them to reset their sails—either to realign themselves with the new direction of the organization, or to find a place in another organization that is going their way.

We would like to believe that everyone in the organization is genuinely seeking to be true to their personal vision or sense of calling. For some people, that factor will carry so much weight that it counterbalances all the negative stressors. Other people, however, will come to the point that the only positive factor contributing to their job satisfaction is the personal benefits they receive (including, but not limited to monetary benefits).

‘Tis the Set of the Sails

Grudgingly compliant, noncompliant and apathetic members will exhibit greater levels of stress and job dissatisfaction than will their colleagues who are formally compliant, genuinely compliant, enrolled or committed to the vision. Because their sails are set for a different direction, these individuals will feel their sense of purpose or personal calling is being limited by the organization’s belief system (vision, purpose and values). They will be in a perpetual state of distress that will manifest itself in behaviors that work against the organization’s objectives. In the end, they will be unlikely to reach their personal goals as well.

Leadership Hints:

• What is your assessment of the general morale among the people you lead?
• Look back over the list of factors contributing to job dissatisfaction. If a number of people seem dissatisfied, what common factors can you identify that contribute to the dissatisfaction and stress?
• As you look at the list of factors, what positive actions come to mind that you could take to help people better align with your organization’s vision, purpose and values?
• Are you willing to take action?

Followership Hints:

• How is your sail set?
• As you look back over the list of factors contributing to job satisfaction or dissatisfaction, which way is your balance tilting?
• What steps can you take to improve your own job satisfaction?
• Is there anything you can do to help a co-worker feel more satisfied and fulfilled in their job?
• So, what do you intend to do?

© Dr. Larry N. Gay, April 2010

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

---

[1] [2] William C. Byham, Zapp! The Lightning of Empowerment: How to Improve Productivity, Quality, and Employee Satisfaction (Ballantine Books, 1997). In easy-to-read fable form, this book centers on the concepts of “zapping” people with empowerment or “sapping” them with negative comments. Bynam details what managers and organizations must do to create and maintain an empowered work force that will, in turn, be dedicated to constantly improving the organization.

Organizational Change Stress Syndrome and "Future Shock"

 (First in a series on Aligning for Productivity)

When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.

(Victor Frankl)

The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery.

(Harold Wilson)

Will all your worries add a single moment to your life?

(Jesus, Matthew 6:27)

Whenever any organization makes a major change, many of its workers will experience symptoms of what I call “Organizational Change Stress Syndrome” (OCSS).  Don’t bother looking it up in a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).[1]  The certainty of its existence, nonetheless, is supported by the evidence of increased stress in the lives of people within the organization, from top level management to part-time volunteers and everyone in between.  

Long after the changes are instituted, a number of people within the organization will still seem to be struggling with prevailing questions that are asked in a number of different ways.

                               

• How do we get more people on board with the needed changes?
• If this change was so great, then why are we still floundering in many areas?
• If we all really believe in the vision, why don’t we see significant increases in our effectiveness and productivity?
• Why does it take so long to complete the change?
• Why can’t we go back to the way things were?
• Why do some people have to leave the organization to follow their dreams or calling?
• What are we really here for anyway?
• What will it take to make the vision reality?

Alvin Toffler was the first to describe what he called “future shock” in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Too much change in too short a time produces a shock to the individual’s ability to absorb, assimilate and adapt. As the speed of change increases, individuals experience high levels of stress and the inability to adapt quickly enough. This results in reduced productivity and quality of work. Toffler observed that an extremely high degree of future shock can eventually lead to such symptoms as malicious compliance, overt blocking of the organization’s tasks, covet undermining of organizational leadership, or promotion of negativity among other workers. Toffler also coined the term “information overload,” [2] which can compound OCSS.

OCSS affects people at every level in the organization--even those who initiate the changes. Once the changes begin, there are always unforeseen adjustments that must be made. It can be like remodeling a house: once you start ripping out drywall, floors, and ceilings you never know what you may find underneath. And the cost is always more than you anticipated!

I started tracking the number of changes in personnel that were set in motion once when a mid-level manager was asked to fill a new position. That simple change in structure resulted in a total of at least fourteen individuals changing job assignments or having to move over the course of the next two years before the ripple effect finally subsided. And that’s not counting the number of people the manager moved or reassigned once he started his new position. Scores of people felt some direct effect from that simple change in personnel. Some of them had only been in their positions for as little as six weeks before being asked to make still another change in job assignment or location. When an administrative assistant asked me when all the changes would stop, I answered as honestly as I could, “Never. In fact, expect more changes to come even more rapidly in the future. So get ready.”

Change has both a domino and a ripple effect. A specific change might solve one problem, but then the solution often becomes the new problem, or reveals several new problems. The problem is not just the fact that the rate of change is gaining speed. The problem is in our attitude toward the changes we cannot control.

Your organization must learn to become resilient to change and adapt to its changing environment or it will be doomed to ineffectiveness, irrelevance and (ultimately) extinction. Just telling people to “buck up and get over it” is not enough. The most effective leaders are those who understand and use the principles of basic human patterns in response to change as they help the people they lead become more resilient and less resistant to change.[3]  Building resilience to change will decrease the effects of OCSS and increase the effectiveness and productivity of the entire organization.

The American Psychological Association suggests the following ways to help build resilience:

10 Ways to build resilience

Make connections. Good relationships with close family members, friends, or others are important. Accepting help and support from those who care about you and will listen to you strengthens resilience. Some people find that being active in civic groups, faith-based organizations, or other local groups provides social support and can help with reclaiming hope. Assisting others in their time of need also can benefit the helper.

Avoid seeing crises as insurmountable problems. You can't change the fact that highly stressful events happen, but you can change how you interpret and respond to these events. Try looking beyond the present to how future circumstances may be a little better. Note any subtle ways in which you might already feel somewhat better as you deal with difficult situations.

Accept that change is a part of living. Certain goals may no longer be attainable as a result of adverse situations. Accepting circumstances that cannot be changed can help you focus on circumstances that you can alter.

Move toward your goals. Develop some realistic goals. Do something regularly -- even if it seems like a small accomplishment -- that enables you to move toward your goals. Instead of focusing on tasks that seem unachievable, ask yourself, "What's one thing I know I can accomplish today that helps me move in the direction I want to go?"

Take decisive actions. Act on adverse situations as much as you can. Take decisive actions, rather than detaching completely from problems and stresses and wishing they would just go away.

Look for opportunities for self-discovery. People often learn something about themselves and may find that they have grown in some respect as a result of their struggle with loss. Many people who have experienced tragedies and hardship have reported better relationships, greater sense of strength even while feeling vulnerable, increased sense of self-worth, a more developed spirituality, and heightened appreciation for life.

Nurture a positive view of yourself. Developing confidence in your ability to solve problems and trusting your instincts helps build resilience.

Keep things in perspective. Even when facing very painful events, try to consider the stressful situation in a broader context and keep a long-term perspective. Avoid blowing the event out of proportion.

Maintain a hopeful outlook. An optimistic outlook enables you to expect that good things will happen in your life. Try visualizing what you want, rather than worrying about what you fear.

Take care of yourself. Pay attention to your own needs and feelings. Engage in activities that you enjoy and find relaxing. Exercise regularly. Taking care of yourself helps to keep your mind and body primed to deal with situations that require resilience.

Additional ways of strengthening resilience may be helpful. For example, some people write about their deepest thoughts and feelings related to trauma or other stressful events in their life. Meditation and spiritual practices help some people build connections and restore hope.

The key is to identify ways that are likely to work well for you as part of your own personal strategy for fostering resilience. [4]

Leadership Hints:
            Gather resources you can share with the people you lead to help them build resilience to change (books, pamphlets, websites, or videos).[5]  Schedule times for discussion and dialogue to hear how people are feeling and processing change. Don’t fall into the trap of defending the change, just let people process it.

Followership Hints:

            One solitary life can make a difference.  

• Take an attitude check. Is your negative response to the change related to your self-confidence, self-esteem or self-concept?

• Decide to take a positive step toward being part of the solution and not part of the problem.

(Note: The next articles in this series will describe seven distinct attitudes toward the change and how individuals who demonstrate these attitudes contribute positively or negatively to the effectiveness or productivity of the organization.)

© Dr. Larry N. Gay, March 2010

http://mylead360.blogspot.com/

---

[1]  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV) is a manual published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) that includes all currently recognized mental health disorders.

[2] Alvin Toffler, Future Shock (Random House, 1970).

[3] Daryl R. Conner, Managing at the Speed of Change: How Resilient Managers Succeed and Prosper Where Others Fail (Villard Books, 1993).

[4] American Psychological Association,  http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/road-resilience.aspx accessed March 17, 2010.

[5] Additional resources on building resilience:

http://www.resiliencycenter.com/  -  Several good resources at this site. Be sure to take Dr. Albert Siebert’s Resiliency Quiz.

            Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson (Putnam, 1998). This classic allegory reveals profound truths about how individuals and organizations deal with change and our search for “Cheese,” the things we want in life.

Our Iceberg Is Melting: Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions, by John P. Kotter, Holger Rathgeber, and Peter Mueller (St. Martin's Press, 2006). Another allegory, this fable describes how a colony of penguins faces a threat of survival, teaching business organizations how they can face similar dangers in an eight-step process of change.