TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP & Learn how Steve Jobs was a great leader because he let his subordinates change his mind. #HBR

“Persuading the Unpersuadable” by Adam Grant, Harvard Business Review Magazine (March–April 2021)

…The legend of Steve Jobs is that he transformed our lives with the strength of his convictions. The key to his greatness, the story goes, was his ability to bend the world to his vision. The reality is that much of Apple’s success came from his team’s pushing him to rethink his positions. If Jobs hadn’t surrounded himself with people who knew how to change his mind, he might not have changed the world.

For years Jobs insisted he would never make a phone. After his team finally persuaded him to reconsider, he banned outside apps; it took another year to get him to reverse that stance. Within nine months the App Store had a billion downloads, and a decade later the iPhone had generated more than $1 trillion in revenue.

Almost every leader has studied the genius of Jobs, but surprisingly few have studied the genius of those who managed to influence him. As an organizational psychologist, I’ve spent time with a number of people who succeeded in motivating him to think again, and I’ve analyzed the science behind their techniques. The bad news is that plenty of leaders are so sure of themselves that they reject worthy opinions and ideas from others and refuse to abandon their own bad ones. The good news is that it is possible to get even the most overconfident, stubborn, narcissistic, and disagreeable people to open their minds.

… Here are some approaches that can help you encourage a know-it-all to recognize when there’s something to be learned, a stubborn colleague to make a U-turn, a narcissist to show humility, and a disagreeable boss to agree with you.

Ask a Know-It-All to Explain How Things Work

The first barrier to changing someone’s view is arrogance. We’ve all encountered leaders who are overconfident: They don’t know what they don’t know. If you call out their ignorance directly, they may get defensive. A better approach is to let them recognize the gaps in their own understanding…

Let a Stubborn Person Seize the Reins

A second obstacle to changing people’s opinions is stubbornness. Intractable people see consistency and certainty as virtues. Once made up, their minds seem to be set in stone. But their views become more pliable if you hand them a chisel…

A solution to this problem comes from a study of Hollywood screenwriters. Those who pitched fully formed concepts to executives right out of the gate struggled to get their ideas accepted. Successful screenwriters, by contrast, understood that Hollywood executives like to shape stories. Those writers treated the pitch more like a game of catch, tossing an idea over to the suits, who would build on it and throw it back…

Find the Right Way to Praise a Narcissist

A third hurdle in the way of changing minds is narcissism. Narcissistic leaders believe they’re superior and special, and they don’t take kindly to being told they’re wrong. But with careful framing, you can coax them toward acknowledging that they’re flawed and fallible.

It’s often said that bullies and narcissists have low self-esteem. But research paints a different picture: Narcissists actually have high but unstable self-esteem. They crave status and approval and become hostile when their fragile egos are threatened—when they’re insulted, rejected, or shamed. By appealing to their desire to be admired, you can counteract their knee-jerk tendency to reject a difference of opinion as criticism. Indeed, studies in both the United States and China have shown that narcissistic leaders are capable of demonstrating humility: They can believe they’re gifted while acknowledging their imperfections. To nudge them in that direction, affirm your respect for them.

In 1997, not long after returning to Apple as CEO, Jobs was discussing a new suite of technology at the company’s global developer conference. During the audience Q&A, one man harshly criticized the software and Jobs himself. “It’s sad and clear that on several counts you’ve discussed, you don’t know what you’re talking about,” he said. (Ouch.)

You might assume that Jobs went on the attack, got defensive, or maybe even threw the man out of the room. Instead he showed humility: “One of the hardest things when you’re trying to effect change is that people like this gentleman are right in some areas,” he exclaimed, adding: “I readily admit there are many things in life that I don’t have the faintest idea what I’m talking about. So I apologize for that….We’ll find the mistakes; we’ll fix them.” The crowd erupted into applause.

How did the critic elicit such a calm reaction? He kicked his comments off with a compliment: “Mr. Jobs, you’re a bright and influential man.” As the audience laughed, Jobs replied, “Here it comes.”

As this story shows, a dash of acclaim can be a powerful antidote to a narcissist’s insecurity.

Read more at … https://hbr.org/2021/03/persuading-the-unpersuadable?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=hbr&utm_source=twitter&tpcc=orgsocial_edit

LEADERSHIP & An Overview of Max DePree’s book “Leadership Is An Art”

by ViaDialogue, 9/5/2005.

Max DePree. Leadership Is An Art. Dell Trade Paperback, 1989.

… The art of leadership, as Max says, is “liberating people to do what is required of them in the most effective and humane way possible.” To do this effectively requires clear thinking about their own beliefs: They must have thought through their assumptions about human nature, the role of the organization, the measurement of performance (and the host of other issues…) (xx)

In short, the true leader is a listener. The leader listens to the ideas, needs, aspirations, and wishes of the followers and then — within the context of his or her own well-developed system of beliefs — responds to these in an appropriate fashion. That is why the leader must know his own mind. That is why leadership requires ideas. And that is what this book is: a compendium of ideas about organizational leadership. (xxi)

INTRODUCTION

The book is about the art of leadership: liberating people to do what is required of them in the most effective and humane way possible. (1)

…Charles Eames taught me the usefulness of repetition. I often repeat myself, by design, to establish something and then connect it to something else. (3)

Leadership is an art, something to be learned over time, not simply by reading books. Leadership is more tribal than scientific, more a weaving of relationships than an amassing of information, and, in that sense, I don’t know how to pin it down in every detail. (3)…

THE MILWRIGHT DIED

…it is fundamental that leaders endorse a concept of persons. This begins with an understanding of the diversity of people’s gifts and talents and skills. Understanding and accepting diversity enables us to see that each of us is needed. (39) It also helps us to understand that for many of us there is a fundamental difference between goals and rewards. (10)

WHAT IS LEADERSHIP?

The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the two, the leader must become a servant and a debtor. That sums up the progress of an artful leader. (11)

“Leaders don’t inflict pain; they bear pain.” (11)

The measure of leadership is not the quality of the head, but the tone of the body. The signs of outstanding leadership appear primarily among the followers. Are the followers reaching their potential? Are they learning? Serving? Do they achieve the required results? Do they change with grace? Manage conflict? (12)

… People are the heart and spirit of all that counts. (13)

Leaders need to be concerned with the institutional value system which, after all, leads to the principles and standards that guide the practices of the people in the institution. (14)

Leaders owe a covenant to the corporation or institution, which is, after all, a group of people. Leaders owe the organization a new reference point for what caring, purposeful, committed people can be in the institutional setting. Notice I did not say what people can do — what we can do is merely a consequence of what we can be. (15)…

Leaders are obligated to provide and maintain momentum. (17)

Leaders are responsible for effectiveness. …efficiency is doing the thing right, but effectiveness is doing the right thing. …effectiveness comes about through enabling others to reach their potential… (19)

A leader must be a judge of people. For leaders choose a person, not a position. (20)

Leaders must take a role in developing, expressing, and defending civility and values. (21)

PARTICIPATIVE PREMISES

What is it most of us really want from work? …to find the most effective, most productive, most rewarding way of working together. …to know that our work process uses all of the appropriate and pertinent resources: human, physical, financial …a work process and relationships that meet our personal needs for belonging, for contributing, for meaningful work, for the opportunity to make a commitment, for the opportunity to grow and be at least reasonably in control of our own destinies. Finally we’d like someone to say “Thank you!” (23)

I believe that the most effective contemporary management process is participative management. (24) Participative management guarantees that decisions will not be arbitrary, secret, or closed to questioning. participative management is not democratic. Having a say differs from having a vote. (25)

Leaders need to foster environments and work processes within which people can develop high-quality relationships… (25)

  • Respect people.
  • Understand that what we believe precedes policy and practice. As practice is to policy, so style is to belief.
  • Agree on the rights of work.
  • Understand the respective role and relationship of contractual agreements and covenants. Volunteers do not need contracts, they need covanants.
  • Understand that relationships count more than structure.

Finally, one question: Would you rather work as a part of an outstanding group or be a part of a group of outstanding individuals? This may be the key question in thinking about the premises behind participation. (29)…

ROVING LEADERSHIP

Roving leaders are those indispensable people in our lives who are there when we need them. Roving leaders take charge, in varying degrees, in a lot of companies every day. (48)

In many organizations there are two kinds of leaders — both hierarchical leaders and roving leaders. In special situations, the hierarchical leader is obliged to identify the roving leader, then to support and follow him or her, and also to exhibit the grace that enables the roving leader to lead. (49)

Roving leadership is an issue-oriented idea. Roving leadership is the expression of the ability of hierarchical leaders to permit others to share ownership of problems — in effect, to take possession of a situation. (49)

INTIMACY

Intimacy is at the heart of competence. It has to do with understanding, with believing, and with practice. (53)

Beliefs are connected to intimacy. Beliefs come before policies or standards or practices. Practice without belief is a forlorn existence. Managers who have no beliefs but only understand methodology and quantification are modern-day eunuchs. (55)

Intimacy is betrayed by the inability of our leaders to focus and provide continuity and momentum. It is betrayed by finding complexity where simplicity ought to be. (56)

We do not grow by knowing all of the answers, but rather by living with the questions. (58)

Broadly speaking, there are two types of relationships in industry. The first and most easily understood is the contractual, …[which] covers the quid pro quo of working together. (58) Three of the key elements in the art of working together are how to deal with change, how to deal with conflict, and how to reach our potential.

A society based on the letter of the law and never reaching any higher, fails to take advantage of the full range of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relationships, this creates an atmosphere of spiritual mediocrity that paralyzes men’s noblest impulses. – Alexander Solzhenitsyn, speaking to the 1978 graduating class of Harvard College.

Covenantal relationships, on the other hand, induce freedom, not paralysis. A covenantal relationship rests on shared commitment to ideas, to issues, to values, to goals, and to management processes. Words such as love, warmth, personal chemistry are certainly pertinent. Covenantal relationships are open to influence. They fill deep needs and they enable work to have meaning and to be fulfilling. Covenantal relationships reflect unity and grace and poise. They are an expression of the sacred nature of relationships. (60)…

WHITHER CAPITALISM?

In our effort to understand the capitalist system and its future, what should we keep in mind? We should begin with a concept of persons. (63)

First, as a Christian, I believe each person is made in the image of God. (63) Second, God has given people a great diversity of gifts. (63) Third, for reasons that we may not always understand, God has provided us a population mix. … This concept of persons within the capitalist system holds important implications for everybody — Christian or not. (64)

Therefore, we reject exclusivity. We covet inclusiveness. (66)

An inclusive system requires us to be insiders. We are interdependent, really unable to be productive by ourselves. Interdependency requires lavish communications. Lavish communications and an exclusive process are contradictory.

One can define this inclusive approach in three ways.

First, there are always certain marks of being included:

  • being needed
  • being involved
  • being cared about as an individual
  • fair wages and benefits
  • having the opportunity to do one’s best (Only leaders willing to take risks can give this opportunity.)
  • having the opportunity to understand
  • having a piece of the action — productivity gains, profit sharing, ownership appreciation, seniority bonus

Second, the inclusive approach makes me think of a corporation or business or institution as a place of fulfilled potential. … Leadership is a conidtion of indebtedness. Leaders who have an inclusive attitude think of  themselves as owing, at the very least, the following:

  • space: a gift to be what I can be
  • the opportunity to serve
  • the gift of challenge: we don’t grow unless we’re tested (constraints, like facts, are enabling friends)
  • the gift of meaning: not superfluous, but worthy; not superficial, but integral; not disposable, but permanent

Finally, here is a third way to understand and define an inclusive approach. Inclusive capitalism requires something from everyone. People must respond actively to inclusiveness. Naturally, there is a cost to belonging.

  • Being faithful is more important than being successful. If we are successful in the world’s eyes but unfaithful in terms of what we believe, then we fail in our efforts at insidership.
  • Corporations can and should have a redemptive purpose. We need to weigh the pragmatic in the clarifying light of the moral. We must understand that reaching our potential is more important than reaching our goals.
  • We need to become vulnerable to each other. We owe each other the chance to reach our potential.
  • Belonging requires us to be willing and ready to risk. Risk is like change; it’s not a choice.
  • Belonging requires intimacy. Being an insider is not a spectator sport. It means adding value. It means being fully and personally accountable. It means forgoing superficiality.
  • Last, we need to be learners together. The steady process of becoming goes on in most of us throughout our lifetime. We need to be searching for maturity, openness, and sensitivity.

GIANT TALES

Giants see opportunity where others see trouble.

Giants give others the gift of space, space in both the personal and the corporate sense, space to be what one can be.

Giants catch fastballs.

Giants have special gifts.

Giants enable others to express their own gifts.

TRIBAL STORYTELLING

The penalty for failing to listen is to lose one’s history, one’s historical context, one’s binding values. (82)

Herman Miller’s stock of values is an example of the continuity I’m talking about.

  • We are a research-driven product company.
  • We intend to make a contribution to society.
  • We are dedicated to quality.
  • We must become, for all who are involved, a place of realized potential. Herman Miller population must be a reflection of God’s diversity, not of our choices. We are committed to a high sense of initiative in doing everything we can to make capitalism an inclusive system of relationships, not an exclusive structure of barriers.
  • We are committed to using responsibly our environment and our finite resources.
  • We commit voluntarily our energy and talent, as well as our financial resources, to those agencies and institutions whose purpose is the common good.
  • It is essential to us that we preserve our future economically. Profit, like breathing, is indispensable.
  • We at Herman Miller acknowledge that issues of the heart and spirit matter to each of us.
  • We are deeply committed to the Scanlon idea. [TIME]

Tribal storytellers, the tribe’s elders, must insistently work at the process of corporate renewal. They must preserve and revitalize the values of the tribe. (91)

WHO OWNS THIS PLACE?

Love is an undefinalbe term, and its manifestations are both subtle and infinite. – Robert Greenleaf, Servant Leadership.

The capitalist system cannot avoid being better off by having more employees who act as if they own the place. (100)

COMMUNICATE!

The best way to communicate the basis of a corporation’s or institution’s common bods and values is through behavior. (101)

What is good communication? What does it accomplish? It is a prerequisite for teaching and learning. It is the way people can bridge the gaps. … Communication clarifies the vision. … Good communication is not simply sending and receiving. Nor is good communication simply a mechanical exchange of data. No matter how good the communication, if no one listens all is lost. The best communication forces you to listen. (102)

Among a leader’s most trusted and familiar tools are communication skills. (104)

…muddy language usually means muddy thinking… (105)

Communication performs two functions, described by two “action-prone” words: educate and liberate.

A corporation’s values are its life’s blood. Without effective communication, actively practiced, without the art of scrutiny, those values will disappear in a sea of trivial memos and impertinent reports. There may be no single thing more important in our efforts to achieve meaningful work and fulfilling relationships than to learn and practice the art of communication. (108)

PINK ICE IN THE URINAL

“What is one of the most difficult things that you personally need to work on?” “The interception of entropy.” (110)

…leaders need to learn to recognize the signals of impending deterioration.

  • a tendency toward superficiality
  • a dark tension among key people
  • no longer having time for celebration and ritual
  • a growing feeling that rewards and goals are the same thing
  • when people stop telling tribal stories or cannot understand them
  • a recurring effort by some to convince others that business is, after all, quite simple (The acceptance of complexity and ambiguity and the ability to deal with them constructively are essential.)
  • when people begin to have different understandings of words like “responsibility” or “service” or “trust”
  • when problem-makers outnumber problem-solvers
  • when folks confuse heroes and celebrities
  • leaders who seek to control rather than liberate
  • when the pressures of day-to-day operations push aside our concern for vision and risk (I think you know that vision and risk can never be separated.)
  • an orientation toward the dry rules of business school rather than a value orientation that takes into account such things as contribution, spirit, excellence, beauty, and joy
  • when people speak of customers as impositions on their time rather than as opportunities to serve
  • manuals
  • a growing urge to quantify both history and one’s thoughts about the future (You may be familiar with people who take a look at a prototype and say, “In 1990 we’ll sell $6 million worth” — nothing is more devastating because then you plan either to make that happen or to avoid it.)
  • the urge to establish ratios
  • leaders who rely on structures instead of people
  • a loss of confidence in judgment, experience, and wisdom
  • a loss of grace and style and civility
  • a loss of respect for the English language

WHAT’S NEXT?

Leaders, in a special way, are liable for what happens in the future, rather than what is happening day to day. (114)

…it just is not possible for everybody to know everything and understand everything. The following is essential: We must trust one another to be accountable for our own assignments. When that kind of trust is present, it is a beautifully liberating thing. (116)

Mahatma Gandhi once wrote that there were seven sins in the world:

  1. wealth without work
  2. pleasure without conscience
  3. knowledge without character
  4. commerce without morality
  5. science without humanity
  6. worship without sacrifice
  7. politics without principle

SOME THOUGHTS FOR CEOS WHO BUILD BUILDINGS

Facilities can aspire to certain qualities as an expression of a civilization. (124)

Facilities should enable and empower people to do their best. (125)

We should make it our goal to create an environment that

  • encourages an open community and fortuitous encounter
  • welcomes all
  • is kind to the user
  • changes with grace
  • is person-scaled
  • is subservient to human activity
  • forgives mistakes in planning
  • enables this community (in the sense that an environment can) to reach continually toward its potential
  • is a contribution to the landscape as an aesthetic and human value
  • meets the needs we can perceive
  • is open to surprise
  • is comfortable with conflict
  • has flexibility, is non-precious and nonmonumental

TO MAKE ONE VICE PRESIDENT, MIX WELL…

A future leader

  • has consistent and dependable integrity
  • cherishes heterogeneity and diversity
  • searches out competence
  • is open to contrary opinion
  • communicates easily at all levels
  • understands the concept of equity and consistently advocates it
  • leads through serving
  • is vulnerable to the skills and talents of others
  • is intimate with the organization and its work
  • is able to see the broad picture (beyond his own area of focus)
  • is a spokesperson and diplomat
  • can be a tribal storyteller (an important way of transmitting our corporate culture)
  • tells why rather than how

Further observations

  • The only kind of leadership worth following is based on vision.
  • Personal character must be uppermost.
  • If we are going to ask a person to lead, can we determine ahead of time whether he or she has gaps between belief and practice, between work and family?
  • When talking about leadership, one always ends up talking about the future, about leaving a legacy, about followers. In other words, leadership intertwines the most important aspects of an organization: its people and its future. We need, therefore, to proceed very slowly and carefully.
  • When choosing officers, provide for possible failure and a graceful withdrawal. Promotion to officership should be decided in a group, with no slim majority. The process should include complete commitment and no reservations. After all, the way we move managers around, you may inherit a work team that you cannot, or will not want to lead.
  • What does the company physician say about the candidate?
  • What do the person’s peers have to say?
  • Would you seek out this person as a key resource on an important task force?

WHY SHOULD I WEEP?

Anyone in touch with reality in this world knows there are lots of reasons to weep. (135)

What do we weep over? What should we weep over?

  • superficiality
  • a lack of dignity
  • injustice, the flaws that prevents equity
  • great news!
  • tenderness
  • a word of thanks
  • separation
  • arrogance
  • betrayal of ideas, of principles, of quality
  • jargon, because it confuses rather than clarifies
  • looking at customers as interruptions
  • leaders who watch bottom lines without watching behavior
  • the inability of folks to tell the difference between heroes and celebrities
  • confusing pleasure with meaning
  • leaders who never say “Thank you
    having to work in a job where you are not free to do your best
  • good people trying to follow leaders who depend on politics and hierarchy rather than on trust and competence
  • people who are gifts to the spirit

THE MARKS OF ELEGANCE

A friend of mine described a colleague as great at running the “ninety-five-yard dash.” …serious runners think of it as a 110-yard-dash so that no one will beat you in the last few yards. That completes this idea nicely. Think beyond the whole. (143)

Elegant leaders always reach for completeness What are some of the marks of elegance? What should leaders be searching for in their efforts to liberate people of high potential?

A complete relationship needs a covenant. (144)

Intelligence and education can ascertain the facts. Wisdom can discover the truth. The life of a corporation needs both. (144)

To give one’s time doesn’t always mean giving one’s involvement. (144)

Hierarchy and equality are not mutually exclusive. Hierarchy provides connections. Equality makes hierarchy responsive and responsible. (145)

Without forgiveness there can be no real freedom to act within a group. (145)

Opportunity must always be connected to accountability. (145)

A whale is as unique as a cactus. But don’t ask a whale to survive Death Valley. We all have special gifts. Where we use them and how determines whether we actually complete something. (145)

Goals and rewards are only parts, different parts, of human activity. When rewards become our goals, we are only pursuing part of our work. Goals are to be pursued. In healthy relationships, rewards complete the process by bringing joy. Joy is an essential ingredient of leadership. Leaders are obligated to provide it. (145-6)

Read more at … https://vialogue.wordpress.com/2005/09/04/leadership-is-an-art-notes-review/

FREE WILL & How To Run an Organization With (Almost) No Rules & Avoid “Boarding School Aspects” of Leadership

Commentary by Dr. Whitesel: I’ve analyzed/advised mega-churches to micro-churches.  Among the recurring themes in healthy churches is the leader’s ability to encourage the Holy Spirit to develop in volunteers, staff and congregants.  This doesn’t mean an organization devoid of rules, but rather an environment where the Holy Spirit is encouraged to direct Christians rather than the organization directing them.

For example, I worked for an organization that dictated (but eventually only strongly urged) its employees to dress up when at work. While the outside world saw a nicely dressed and united workforce, among the employees there was almost universal contempt and disconnection with the administration.  Semler points out such policies reflect “boarding schools aspects” of leadership rather than.  Watch this insightful TED talk to understand why and then consider a more Spirit-led alternative.

Ricardo Semler, “How To Run A Company With (Almost) No Rules” (by , Forbes Magazine, 6/30/18).

  • Brazilian CEO Ricardo Semler doesn’t believe in rules. At least, he doesn’t believe companies need to impose a host of strict guidelines in order to run efficiently. In fact, he thinks employees will work better if they don’t have to report their vacation days or be told what to wear. He wants to dissolve what he calls the “boarding school aspects” of business, just to see what happens. In his TED talk, Semler dives into what a company with fewer rules would look like, and how it would affect corporate and employee success.

Watch more at … https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinecomaford/2018/06/30/7-ted-talks-that-will-inspire-you-to-be-a-better-leader

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP & Lead Like A Gardener, Not A Commander

by Steve Denning, Forbes Magazine, 6/17/18. 

In Team of Teams, by General Stanley McChrystal and his colleagues (2015, Penguin Publishing Group), McChrystal explains had to unlearn what it means to be a leader. A great deal of what he thought he knew about how the world worked and his role as a commander had to be discarded.

I began to view effective leadership in the new environment as more akin to gardening than chess,” he writes. “The move-by-move control that seemed natural to military operations proved less effective than nurturing the organization— its structure, processes, and culture— to enable the subordinate components to function with ‘smart autonomy.’ It wasn’t total autonomy, because the efforts of every part of the team were tightly linked to a common concept for the fight, but it allowed those forces to be enabled with a constant flow of ‘shared consciousness’ from across the force, and it freed them to execute actions in pursuit of the overall strategy as best they saw fit. Within our Task Force, as in a garden, the outcome was less dependent on the initial planting than on consistent maintenance. Watering, weeding, and protecting plants from rabbits and disease are essential for success. The gardener cannot actually ‘grow’ tomatoes, squash, or beans— she can only foster an environment in which the plants do so.”

Read more at … https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2018/06/17/ten-agile-axioms-that-make-managers-anxious/#51ae8abc4619

#DMin

STYLES OF LEADERSHIP & Finding Your Preferred Leadership Style Will Make You a Better Leader. Here’s How.

by Chris McGoff, Inc. Magazine, 2/8/18

… peak performance leaders give up the right to play to their strength. They have discovered, usually painfully, the truth about leadership styles. They know that leadership styles cross a spectrum bounded on one side by “collaborative leadership” and on the other by “command and control leadership.” They know that there styles in the middle of the extremes that blend to two at different levels.

More than knowing that the spectrum exists, peak performance leaders know that to lead anything, they have to be committed to mastering the leadership styles across the spectrum. Perhaps they are more comfortable with one style than the others, but they also know that any strength taken to an extreme becomes a weakness…

How do you know which leadership style to use in which situation? Here are some leadership styles to use in the four primary decision-making processes.

Command and Control – Use this style in urgent, high-stakes situations when you need to make a quick decision.

Informed Command and Control – Use this style for lower-stakes, but still urgent decisions. An example is if your company needs a meeting venue and you have hours to make the decision. You need some input, but ultimately you need to make a decision quickly.

Limited Consensus – This style is appropriate in low-stakes strategic planning, like when you’re deciding on your company’s benefits package for the year.

Consensus – This is when collaborative leadership comes into play. Use this style for high-stakes strategic planning and visioning when you need the group to come to an agreement on a long-term idea.

Read more at … https://www.inc.com/chris-mcgoff/why-you-need-to-master-multiple-leadership-styles.html

COLLABORATIVE LEADERSHIP & You’ll Never Get a Group to Agree on a Decision. Here’s What to Do Instead

by Chris McGoff, Inc. Magazine, 6/20/17.

… Trying to get everybody to agree on something gives way too much power to the 16 percent of the people who are ninjas at disrupting agreement to draw attention to themselves. These ninjas are known as laggards, according to The Innovation Adoption Curve.

When you ask the group to come to consensus on something, you empower the laggards. They use a variety of tools like “we tried that before,” or they inject information into the process at the worst possible time. You know who they are. They suck the life out of possibility for sport.

No matter how many of their questions you answer they always have more questions. Every time you get close to a decision, laggards bring up a new argument that will make the group hesitate. The way to avoid this pitfall is to rethink the traditional definition of consensus and start using a working definition of consensus.

Next time you have a meeting and need to make a decision, write the following three statements in a prominent place before the meeting begins. Let everyone know that a decision will be made according to the following working definition of consensus:

  1. The process we use will be explicit, rational, and fair.
  2. Each participant will be treated honorably as we go through the process.
  3. We can all “live with and commit to” the outcome.

Let’s dive into what each of those three statements means …

Read more at … https://www.inc.com/chris-mcgoff/youre-wasting-time-trying-to-get-your-team-to-agree-on-a-decision.html

COLLABORATIVE LIFESTYLES & How they are on the rise

by Ray Williams, “Why We Need Collaborative Not Competitive Leaders,” Psychology Today, 7/29/13.

…collaborative lifestyles, where people with similar needs or interests band together to share and exchange less-tangible assets such as time, space, skills and money. The exchanges happen mostly on a local or neighborhood level, as people share working spaces (e.g.: Citizen Space or Hub Culture), urban gardens (eg: SharedEarth or Landshare), parking spots (eg: ParkatmyHouse). This includes other exchanges such as peer-to-peer lending  (Zopa and Lending Club) and peer-to-peer travel (Airbnb and Roomorama).

Read more at … https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201307/why-we-need-collaborative-not-competitive-leaders

COLLABORATIVE LEADERSHIP & Why A Flat Organization is Better Than a Hierarchy for the Small & Midsized Org.

Commentary by Dr. Whitesel: Most nonprofits and churches, with under 50 full time employees, work better as a “flat organization.” Read this comparison between the creativity and speed created in the flat organization vs. the typical hierarchal model. Moving to a hierarchical model when a church or nonprofit is small is one of the main factors that holds back their creativity and growth (ORGANIX: Signs of Leadership in a Changing Church, chpt. “N: Networked“).

Research: Narcissists Don’t Like Flat Organizations

by Emily Zitek and Alex Jordan, Harvard Business Review, 7/27/16.

Flat organizations are having a moment. Research has shown that reducing hierarchy can lead to more satisfied employees and speedier decision making, and some companies have concluded that flatter structures would work better. Zappos, for example, became a “holocracy” in order to empower employees to act like entrepreneurs. Similarly, Treehouse eliminated managers after noticing that “people had really great ideas but were powerless to implement them.”

But hierarchy does have its merits. It helps people learn relationships in the organization and satisfies a psychological need for order. Moreover, hierarchies perform well when the product requires coordination

We wanted to know how hierarchy might influence the type of talent organizations can attract and retain. Our forthcoming paper in Social Psychological and Personality Science shows hierarchies and flat organizations attract different kinds of workers. We conducted a series of studies to understand how narcissism—a personality trait involving exaggerated self-worth, a sense of entitlement, and a desire for authority—relates to people’s organizational preference.

In our research, people’s level of narcissism was measured by their agreement or disagreement with a series of statements such as “I will be a success” and “I think I am a special person.” Participants then answered questions about how much they would want to work in a hierarchical organization.

Our research shows that people with narcissistic traits had a stronger desire to work in a hierarchical organization, compared to less narcissistic people. Why? They believed they would perform well and thus rise to the top. However, after learning about a hierarchical organization in which none of the high ranking people would be leaving the organization anytime soon, narcissists actually wanted to work there less than non-narcissistic participants did.

Thus, narcissists like hierarchical organizations because they think they will rise to high ranks and reap status and power. Narcissists are less interested in hierarchies where there is little opportunity for upward mobility. The same goes for flatter organizations, where there are fewer high ranks to attain…

Is it good or bad to have narcissistic employees?

That depends on your company. When negotiating with a client, do you just want to make the most money, or do you also care about maintaining a good relationship? Narcissists win more in negotiations, but they are also disliked by the other party. Do you value creativity? If so, it might be good to have some narcissists (not too few and not too many) because groups generate more creative ideas this way. Are you working in an industry where seeking risk is rewarded, or one where risk aversion is more valuable? Studies of CEOs have demonstrated that more narcissistic leaders show a greater bias toward action and more aggressive pursuit of potential rewards, and they pay less attention to mitigating risk.

Read more at … https://hbr.org/2016/07/research-narcissists-dont-like-flat-organizations

CONFLICT & Research Finds 2 Tools that Promote Intellectual Humilty & Resolve Conflict

by David Briggs, Huffington Post, 6/1/16.

Humility. Intellectual humility in particular.

New research projects are finding the more pastors are perceived to be intellectually humble, the more likely they are to be forgiven by people who took offense at something they said or did.

This was especially the case in one study for perceived transgressions in the area of religious beliefs, values or convictions, core areas of religious identity that have the potential to tear asunder congregations.

All congregations are going to go through “relational wear and tear,” and the tension can be particularly high when strongly held religious beliefs are threatened, researchers said.

But humble clergy who model openness and mutual respect may provide the “social oil” that keeps the congregation from overheating and breaking under the strain, new research indicates.

Listening to others

…Humility involves being other-oriented and having an accurate view of your own strengths and weaknesses.

Intellectual humility includes being open to new ideas and being able to regulate arrogance. Thus, intellectually humble individuals are able to present their own ideas “in a nonoffensive manner and receive contrary ideas without taking offense,” said researchers reporting on studies of intellectual humility and religious leadership. The team, led by researchers from Georgia State University, found intellectual humility was associated with higher levels of trust, openness and agreeableness.

“…The more victims perceived the religious leader to have intellectual humility, the more they reported being able to forgive him or her,” reported the study’s researchers, led by Joshua Hook of the University of North Texas.

Modelling Respect

It is the unusual congregation that can avoid internal tensions for too long.

More than six in 10 congregations reported some kind of conflict in the past five years, according to the 2015 Faith Communities Today study.

…More than a quarter of all congregations experienced a conflict in the last two years that led some people to leave the congregation, according to the 2006-2007 National Congregations Study. Nine percent of congregations experienced a conflict that led to the departure of a clergyperson or other religious leader.

Findings from the studies on religious leaders are consistent with a developing body of research that indicate perceived humility can help repair social bonds. In one study, college students who had been hurt in a romantic relationship within the last two months were more likely to forgive an offender they perceived as being humble…

Read more at … http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-briggs/saving-grace-the-leadersh_b_10209548.html?utm_hp_ref=religion&ir=Religion

LEADERSHIP & Research Shows Bottom Up ‘New Power Change” Works and Leader-driven Change Doesn’t #ForbesMagazine

Commentary by Dr. Whitesel; “Much of the old church growth thinking about leadership was that it is hierarchal driven by a senior pastor (called ‘old power leadership,’ Heimams & Timms, 2014). But research has proven through study after study that top-down leaership to be ineffective (Scott Wilcher, 2001). So how do you bring about change leadership? By using transformational change leadership like Jesus did: where you ’empower’ rather than coerce employees.

Here is a quote: ‘In the past few years we’ve witnessed a major shift from old power, where control was being held by a few individuals (often characterized as inaccessible and leader-driven) to new power, held by many in an open, participatory, and peer-driven way.’

Read this helpful Forbes magazine article for more info:

CEOs and Employees Want Change. So Why Isn’t It Happening?

…A study of more than 36,000 employees by advisory services firm LRN found that 97% experience either autocratic or coercive management or, at the least, hierarchical command-and-control.

So despite a “push for change” from the top, senior leadership’s words fall on deaf ears. Employees just aren’t feeling it (as evident by stagnating engagement scores). This only causes things to get worse. When management feels they are not being heard, they assert even more command and control, forcing change, inciting fear and even the occasional “public execution”. (and there goes that vicious circle again)…

So how do we stop the madness?…

The answer may be rooted in a notion that’s been rapidly spreading around the world and has likely already impacted most of us in one way or another.

Power is shifting in our world in ways that are unimaginable. In the past few years we’ve witnessed a major shift from old power, where control was being held by a few individuals (often characterized as inaccessible and leader-driven) to new power, held by many in an open, participatory, and peer-driven way.

This drastic shift is behind many of the phenomenons that once took tremendous effort and resources to create. They are now cheap and scalable in part due to a tremendously networked society.

We see signs of new power everywhere, including major scale political protests being organized and growing in matters of minutes (Occupy Wall Street, Arab Spring, Ferguson, to name a few), to upstart businesses upending traditional industries and rapidly taking market share in a matter of months. New business models such as the ones behind Facebook, Youtube, Uber, AirBNB and Etsy are built on new power. Everyone can be a creator of content, goods, or services. Barriers to entry have been blown to bits as it is no longer just major corporations with vast resources who can run and scale global businesses.

newpower_640

Organix_final.ai(Adapted from “This is New Power” by Jeremy Heimans & Henry Timms, HBR 2014.)

This shift in power transcends right down to an employee, creating a networked and socially empowered workforce that can operate and execute change outside the borders of traditional organizational silos. More so, it can execute change organically, without seeking permission from senior management or other authorities that we would typically find in old power models.

Employees now have a new-found voice. One that was very difficult to unleash and scale before, as it would take navigating through a maze of organizational charts and gate-keepers to get to a decision-maker. Entire movements are being created from the bottom-up. These movements are not demanding change. They drive change – from the bottom up…

Read more at … http://www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2015/06/13/culture-hacking/

Speaking Hashtags: #BreakForth16

AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP & Why Collaborate Leadership is Replacing It #HarvardBusinessReview

Commentary by Dr. Whitesel: “Directive or autocratic leadership is shown in this research to be less effective today than a teambuilding, collaborative approach to leadership. The church leadership model, where the senior pastor makes most of the major decisions and is viewed as the expert, is according to this article less effective. See several charts that depict how today leaders value ‘discovery, collaboration, acting as an equals’.”

Read more at … http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/07/most-managers-think-of-themselves-as-coaches/