As organizational and leadership consultants, we strive to nudge leaders and teams towards the extraordinary category, using useful and practical processes, teachings and events to demonstrate the power of acting from a place of authentic power.

Enjoy the article and share your own extraordinary stories! 

=======================================================================================

8 Core Beliefs of Extraordinary Bosses, By Geoffrey James, Inc Magazine, April 23, 2012

The best managers have a fundamentally different understanding of workplace, company, and team dynamics. See what they get right.

A few years back, I interviewed some of the most successful CEOs in the world in order to discover their management secrets. I learned that the "best of the best" tend to share the following eight core beliefs.

1. Business is an ecosystem, not a battlefield.

Average bosses see business as a conflict between companies, departments and groups. They build huge armies of "troops" to order about, demonize competitors as "enemies," and treat customers as "territory" to be conquered.

Extraordinary bosses see business as a symbiosis where the most diverse firm is most likely to survive and thrive. They naturally create teams that adapt easily to new markets and can quickly form partnerships with other companies, customers ... and even competitors.

2. A company is a community, not a machine.

Average bosses consider their company to be a machine with employees as cogs. They create rigid structures with rigid rules and then try to maintain control by "pulling levers" and "steering the ship."

Extraordinary bosses see their company as a collection of individual hopes and dreams, all connected to a higher purpose. They inspire employees to dedicate themselves to the success of their peers and therefore to the community–and company–at large.

3. Management is service, not control.

Average bosses want employees to do exactly what they're told. They're hyper-aware of anything that smacks of insubordination and create environments where individual initiative is squelched by the "wait and see what the boss says" mentality.

Extraordinary bosses set a general direction and then commit themselves to obtaining the resources that their employees need to get the job done. They push decision making downward, allowing teams to form their own rules and intervening only in emergencies.

4. My employees are my peers, not my children.

Average bosses see employees as inferior, immature beings who simply can't be trusted if not overseen by a patriarchal management. Employees take their cues from this attitude, expend energy on looking busy and covering their behinds.

Extraordinary bosses treat every employee as if he or she were the most important person in the firm. Excellence is expected everywhere, from the loading dock to the boardroom. As a result, employees at all levels take charge of their own destinies.

5. Motivation comes from vision, not from fear.

Average bosses see fear--of getting fired, of ridicule, of loss of privilege--as a crucial way to motivate people.  As a result, employees and managers alike become paralyzed and unable to make risky decisions.

Extraordinary bosses inspire people to see a better future and how they'll be a part of it.  As a result, employees work harder because they believe in the organization's goals, truly enjoy what they're doing and (of course) know they'll share in the rewards.

6. Change equals growth, not pain.

Average bosses see change as both complicated and threatening, something to be endured only when a firm is in desperate shape. They subconsciously torpedo change ... until it's too late.

Extraordinary bosses see change as an inevitable part of life. While they don't value change for its own sake, they know that success is only possible if employees and organization embrace new ideas and new ways of doing business.

7. Technology offers empowerment, not automation.

Average bosses adhere to the old IT-centric view that technology is primarily a way to strengthen management control and increase predictability. They install centralized computer systems that dehumanize and antagonize employees.

Extraordinary bosses see technology as a way to free human beings to be creative and to build better relationships. They adapt their back-office systems to the tools, like smartphones and tablets, that people actually want to use.

8. Work should be fun, not mere toil.

Average bosses buy into the notion that work is, at best, a necessary evil. They fully expect employees to resent having to work, and therefore tend to subconsciously define themselves as oppressors and their employees as victims. Everyone then behaves accordingly.

Extraordinary bosses see work as something that should be inherently enjoyable–and believe therefore that the most important job of manager is, as far as possible, to put people in jobs that can and will make them truly happy.

We are spending more and more time helping groups learn to experiment with new ways of doing things in order to find the solutions that work, and I was struck at how this was precisely how serial entrepreneurs thought.

The following summary offers an excellent perspective for leaders and influencers seeking to “start something new” within the current climate of uncertainty.

**********************

Adapted from “New Project? Don’t Analyze—Act,” by L. Schlesinger, C. Kiefer & P. Brown; Harvard Business Review, March 2012

Traditional process for new projects in a predictable world:

• Analyze
• Predict/Forecast
• Plan/Model
• Implement

Different thinking of serial entrepreneurs in an unpredictable world:

• Act —before analysis,; quick, small, inexpensive steps
• Learn —instead of predicting
• Build —scale up from what works

Entrepreneurial Rules of Thumb

1. Use the means at hand: use the people you know, the budget you have
2. Stay within your acceptable loss: at each step determine how much you can afford to loose if this step should fail? Include dedicated time and reputation as “costs.” Whatever is at risk could be safely lost.
3. Secure only the commitment you need for the next step: four types of people; those who want your project to happen, those who will help make your project happen, those who will let it happen, and those who will keep it from happening. Don’t waste your time getting buy in from last two categories. Ask: what is the least amount of commitment I need to act? Go for just enough freedom within the boundaries of your organization.
4. Bring along only volunteers: look for volunteers only from the first two groups identified above. You can’t compel innovation, only invite it. Share your passion and desire, act honestly, be transparent about the plan as well as good and bad news, demonstrate willingness to collaborate by offering real work to do.
5. Link first steps to a broader organizational imperative: produce early results, demonstrate how first steps can make a difference, and build from there. If the risks are too high, scale back to a smaller step.
6. Manage expectations: don’t over promise! These are just exploratory steps to generate evidence that will inform the next step.
7. Move quickly in the face of positive results: and embrace even negative results as information to improve idea or as a means of pointing to a new opportunity all together before resources are wasted.
8. Understand when and how to use prediction: forecast, plan and model where you can, using the evidence created to inform next steps. Augment traditional process rather than replace it
9. Know when to fold ‘em: get clear on when to cut your losses and walk away. There is always another day!

• People want a clear vision and direction, yet they want autonomy to do what they think is most important
• There is a need for greater risk taking and experimentation in environments that have no tolerance for failure
• There is a growing expectation and need for greater collaboration both internally and externally, requiring more time and greater levels of buy-in among stakeholders, yet there is still the expectation that leaders make quick decisions and provide direction within tight timeframes and deadlines
• Budget and resource stresses are slamming head long into increased expectations of productivity; in government, public resources are on a steep decline while public expectations of service are higher than ever
• In our efforts to solve big challenges we are torn between doing small, easily actionable tasks to get things moving versus embarking on larger, more systemic initiatives that take longer and require more time, resources and stakeholder buy in

Paradox, in and of itself, can be cause for anxiety.  We tend to crave a clear sense of order and solid understanding of the world around us, and our role in it.  Perhaps it has always been a hallmark of effective leadership that one navigates paradox to accomplish goals.  But our current era is presenting highly complex paradoxical challenges to all of us, and leaders are in the unenviable spot of balancing and negotiating these tensions.

There is another, very human component, which elevates the difficulty-scale of “solving” these complex, paradoxical challenges—people are having strong emotional reactions and demonstrating counter-productive behaviors as they grapple with an uncertain and complex reality. For example, we observe people experiencing:

• Fear and anxiety
• Distrust and cynicism towards institutions and leaders in general
• Higher levels of inter-personal conflict with peers
• Overall decrease in morale and camaraderie

Navigating Paradox is about exploring the grey area – not the clear, certain black and white of either extreme. Its about discovering something in between, maybe doing “a little of this, a little of that.” It requires experimentation and some kind of collective unity for trying something new. And therein lies the rub. The obvious challenge for leaders is that they need enough people to begin to align around trying a new way of working to tip the scale.  They need more people to change their current behavior/thinking and embrace a new mode.  They need people to cooperate, to work together. How do you get people to do this? To try new things? To change?

The paradoxes we face are hinged on our ability to cooperate. Yet, people are often entrenched in their silos of subject matter expertise or oversight authority and frequently resist working more cooperatively with those outside their unit of influence. How does a leader change this dynamic?

The answer isn’t easy, but there is one. As humans, we are hard wired to cooperate, particularly when challenges are greater than what any one of us can address alone. But it requires pausing— no actually halting—the treadmill of “the way its always been” long enough to let the dilemma sink in, to let our minds embrace the whole picture, not just our small perspective; to acknowledge the futility of doing the same thing again and again, hoping, praying for different results; to see the paradox that surrounds us. Can any one of us really solve these issues alone? Can our leader? Really?

We believe leaders have an important role in helping others to navigate paradox, one that may require some personal shifts and possibly a few courageous acts. Yet leaders can take heart that they have the human capacity to bond in the face of adversity on their side. Below are some steps leaders can take that we’ve seen produce valuable results:  

• Embrace and accept the reality of paradox: as a leader I cannot do all things, I am torn and do not have a clear, easy solution to implement
• Invite others into the task of grappling with the paradox collectively: once I take off the yoke of believing that I need to have the solution, the next step is to ask others to help me think about it
• Manage the process: when I invite people to think with me about a situation, I need to focus on having a good process with enough structure to manage chaos, and include all voices; where the right questions get asked and answered by all; where ideas get thrown around and recorded vs. lost in the ether.  I am responsible for creating engaging environments where people feel safe and respected enough to be honest with others and with me.  I cannot control or dictate what they will say, but I can offer ways for them to say it to reduce friction and increase relational strength
• Make meaning of the information: I’ve asked the questions, I’ve gotten the perspectives of others, now I have to synthesize and make meaning of what I’ve heard (I might have to invite others to help me with this, as well as manage the process… see above)
• Act where you can, empower what you can: if I learn about things that I have the control and authority to implement and it aligns with what I want, then do it.  If I see places where others need to be more empowered to act, then grant them permission to do what they can
• Communicate, communicate, communicate: I need to: reiterate what is important, what is commonly shared, what is happening, what needs to happen, who is doing what, what we are learning from our efforts (good and bad), what else we can be doing, what is our priority, what’s happening next, what role can you play, what is needed now, etc. And I do this regularly, transparently, clearly, redundantly.
• Continue to engage: it would be nice if we could get away with a one time “engagement event” that solved all of our problems, but the reality of our time and the challenges we face is that this process is iterative and looks more like a spiral than a line

If all of this seems cumbersome, time and resource intensive, murky, etc., you’re right, it is.  But what other choices do we have?  How much are we spending or losing by holding the course with our current approaches?  We are human, after all — what else can we do? 

As a leadership business dedicated to helping leaders and people embrace a more hopeful future, we see no other path.  It is our deep passion and intention to make this "collaborative path" less murky, less cumbersome, and as efficient as possible.  Our aim is to demystify working in this realm of paradox, and make it more accessible for leaders and influencers at every level so you can:

“Start where you are, use what you have, and do what you can.” (Arthur Ashe)

Click here to see an example of an open enrollment learning program we are running for Forest Service Leaders that exemplifies our commitment.  We can do this and things like this for anyone who is grappling with paradox.  Contact us to learn more.

Ever watch someone new to wielding a hammer?  Typically they choke up on the handle, which gives them more control and costs them more effort.  Not letting the head swing freely and do the work for them, they have to employ more muscle to drive the nail home.  Often "control"--of the type I mean--requires two things: exerting unnecessary effort and forfeiting the benefits of momentum.

My personal mantra for 2012 is more momentum, less effort.  I'm wanting more trust and less "control," more swing and less struggle, more grace and less death-grip in my life.  I want to be more like a compact fluorescent bulb: putting out the same light with less unnecessary heat while requiring a lot less energy. 

Shedding Effort, Building Trust

Sometime last year I watched the movie, The Pianist, and was astonished by the last few minutes of the film, where the frame zoomed in on the hands of the pianist performing the final movement of a concerto.  Though the piece was technically strenuous, if not grueling, there was--and this is what stunnedme--an utter absence of tension in the hands of the player.  He could have been cooling his fingers in lake water on a hot summer day.   I turned off the movie and went to the piano, myself, to explore just how much effort and tension I might winnow from my playing--even (or especially) during the most difficult passages.

Trusting momentum, like letting the hammer swing, is an act of surrender.  It's risky: I could miss the nail and whack my thumb.  How exhilarating, though, to sink a 16-penny nail in four strokes, feeling all that unimpeded momentum pouring into the head.  A dance teacher (of a form of postmodern dance I practice called Contact Improvisation) once said to me, "Use ten percent of the effort you've been using."  This was profoundly accurate and helpful advice--both on and off the dance floor.  Effort often strangles momentum.  Momentum demands trust.  Trust that I will know what to do and be able to do it if I let momentum move me.  If I "lose my balance" will I know how to land with grace?  Will I hurt myself or someone else?  

Receiving Grace

A Taoist story depicts a master's body snaking down a white water river, just allowing the currents to take him, never hitting a rock.  Going with the flow.  The recovering perfectionist in me knows all-too-well how to choke up on life and peck away--and how unfulfilling that is.  The pianist knows how deeply thrilling it is to play without a trace of unnecessary effort--with lightness, grace, speed and limitless energy.  Not to mention the beauty.  Control deadens what's most alive.  Playing with surrender allows me to enter the arc of a phrase, to hear the notes that want to sing out, to savor the beauty of the note, itself.

I want that in my life: more beauty, more deep thrill, more being moved.  More momentum, less effort.

Genius In Our Midst

I sense wider applications.  In the realm of leadership development, effort is "training" leaders with books, manuals, DVDs and a day or more of instruction in skills HR has determined they need.  Momentum is giving leaders a chance to talk to one another about what matters to them, then using that shared information as the basis of their own self-designed leadership practices—and using the deepened relationships as the basis of ongoing peer support.

Sharing "best practices" is a kind of momentum--adapting the success of another instead of reinventing the wheel.  Biomimicry is a discipline that seeks to learn from nature's best practices.  For example, learning that it may be possible to design bio-batteries to power implants like artificial retinas by studying how an Amazonian eel is able to produce 600 volts instantly.  Or Mercedes-Benz being mentored by the coral reef box fish in their design concept for a new automobile with an extremely low-friction shape and surface.

To listen and learn in this way we may need to let fall away "the entrancement of the last 350 years of western science, where somehow we convinced ourselves that we're the only one with the answers, and go outside and realize that we're surrounded by genius." Genius—whether in our guts, our groups or what's growing around us--is a kind of momentum.  Recognizing it is the first step to harnessing it.

Wind in the Sail, Tiller in Hand 

To come back to the idea of control, I'm not saying give up all control and let the winds take you where they may; I'm saying notice how and where there is already energy moving that you could use, and before you rev your engine try adjusting the sails.  One can sail north in a westerly wind--using both tiller and sail, provided a deep enough keel. 

He began by telling a story about a study in which heart patients were told by their doctors that they needed to change their habits and take daily medication in order to live — yet only one in seven was able to do so successfully. An extreme example, it tells of how we humans tend to struggle with changing, even when it could be a matter of life and death.

Kegan asks: why does this happen? It seems so illogical, so counter-evolutionary, yet haven’t we all seen this? Haven’t we lived it?  

This is a question that has always intrigued me and I believe is at the root of the work we do at GLI. How do we change—adapt—when we tend to resist the process of changing, even when it’s a change we claim to want? Or, we garner our willpower and with all good intentions, engage in new behaviors that we believe will lead to the changes we want, yet more often than not, fall back to business as usual, eradicating any progress toward our espoused goals. He calls it a natural “immunity to change,” one that serves us as much as it may undermine.

Together with possibly 60 to 70 others, Kegan proceeded to lead us through his process for understanding and overcoming our own immunity to change. Here’s the punch line: there are reasons—real, heart-felt, survival-oriented reasons—for not changing, and these reasons, often hidden, are worth our attention. More to the point, the “Big Assumptions” behind these reasons deserve thoughtful exploration and often some earnest testing as to their continued validity at this time in our lives. So easy to say, so hard to do!

One concept in particular caught my attention: Kegan talked of two types of learning: Informative and Transformative. Informative learning refers to the taking in of valuable, new content (i.e. his theory, this blog) that while useful or thought provoking, is easily contained within the existing “vessel” of our minds. Transformative learning, on the other hand, actually requires our minds to change and grow—we are obliged to step out “beyond the established mind,” a process that can feel unfamiliar, even risky. It causes us to alter our understanding of ourselves and the perceptions or beliefs we have about the world. Transformative learning is called for when addressing adaptive challenges, solutions to which require we change the way we think, feel or act. It comes about when our Big Assumptions are tested and altered, and is key to circumventing our immunity to change.

Transformative learning does not happen frequently for adults. It often occurs as a result of a “disorienting dilemma,” triggered by a life crisis or major transition, impacting both the analytical and emotional realms of our psyche—head and heart. It can also occur over time due to a series of experiences that culminate into a new outlook or perspective. And it can happen at an individual and a collective scale. Furthermore, transformative learning environments can be intentionally created – think Outward Bound and other notable experiential education models. This is a good thing, especially for leaders and their organizations, many of whom are collectively facing “disorienting dilemmas” that will require people to change—to adapt.

Adapting in order to respond to changing reality is a growing challenge for many organizations today. Yet efforts to seek greater collaborative, innovative, and efficient outcomes often bump up against countermanding (and often hidden) psychological, convictional and behavioral conditions that are deeply ingrained in an organization’s culture. Kegan's work suggests that to overcome their organization’s immunity to change, leaders will have to create transformative learning environments that enable people to clarify the goal, identify the barriers, illuminate the competing commitments and dilemmas that exist, and test the Big Assumptions behind them. Only then will we start to discover the adaptive solutions we seek and make the sustainable changes required to realize our goals.

This is the work we love to do - we continually experiment and refine our approach to creating transformative learning experiences that help groups tackle the adaptive challenges they face! Contact us to learn more.

If you like the sound of Robert Kegan’s work, check out his most recent book, co-written with Lisa Lahey: Immunity to Change: How to Overcome it and Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organization. 

It is hard not to feel uplifted and a sense of deep pride and hope as you watch this video that dynamically tells a story about human improvement at a fundamental level.

How many teachers like Stephen Ritz would it take to initiate a sea change in our educational approaches?  I would argue, not that many.

Enjoy this presentation.

As a result, the obvious and subtler aspects of invitations have been on my mind lately. Perhaps to some, focusing on an invitation may sound overly formal, even fussy. However, as leader, convener, and hostess, I have found that taking some thoughtful time with this first step to planning a meaningful gathering can do much to set the tone, attract the desired participants, and manage expectations — all of which can make a meeting, a workshop, a retreat or a party more successful. To me, success means that the purpose of the gathering has been met —the meeting was productive and satisfying; participants got real value from the workshop; the retreat was fruitful and energizing for the group; or the party was fun, inclusive, maybe even magical.

An invitation is more than an agenda; it is an offer, and right off the bat this makes it more risky to the convener. An offer is an opening that leaves one vulnerable to rejection. What if people don’t want to come? What if they don’t want what I am offering? However, an invitation is also a form of generosity, both a gift of inclusion—signaling to others that they are wanted—and a gift of communication, providing insight into the purpose of the gathering and how participants might benefit.

At a recent meeting called to talk about a somewhat controversial aspect of youth programming, an invitation had been sent to a broad group of interested adults, some of whom had been critical of those responsible for the programming, or had expressed conflicting points of view. The email invitation was short and simple, but intentionally written to sound open, respectful, and neutral as to outcomes. The invitation assumed that we all have good intentions and could come together on this issue.  During an introduction round asking what brought us to this meeting, one man replied, “Because I was invited – and that felt good.” Fears of contention dissipated in that moment, and the meeting was highly productive. The invitation had helped to reset how we discussed this important topic, opening up the capacity for adults with strong opinions to unify around what was best for the youth.

I often wrestle with how to use invitations to capture a glimpse of what the gathering could be. There is an art to defining the purpose without predetermining the experience, to create interest, intrigue, even excitement about what might occur. Consider the everyday meeting, mandatory, a regular gathering where work is discussed and perhaps decisions get made. This is a practical kind of gathering, and yet it can be more. What meeting convener has not wished on occasion for a more engaging and stimulating discussion that results in greater understanding of an issue and perhaps a wiser decision? How might an invitation change the dynamic?

A friend told me a story about how she had used an invitation to completely shift the way she did performance reviews with her staff. Meetings were typically one-on-one, and my friend and her employee would go over the performance review paper work together. Often the employee was nervous or defensive, even when the feedback was primarily positive, and this had a dampening effect on my friend’s ability to have a constructive discussion. While the task was accomplished, she rarely felt satisfied with the experience.

This time, she created an invitation that offered: “Join me for a conversation celebrating the accomplishments and performance of the past year! We’ll discuss what worked well, what could change, and put together a plan for the next year. Please bring your earnest feedback for both of us. I’ll provide the paperwork.” The card was simple but hand-written, and had enough light humor to set the tone for a more relaxed, honest conversation between her and her employee. She told me afterwards that many commented during the review how much they appreciated her invitation – how far it went to allaying their fears about being criticized.

As we enter the age of convening – where complex challenges, adaptive change, hard times, and the thirst for deeper meaning and connection draw us to together – we will need to pause and remember the value of this type of “nicety.” Whether to accelerate productivity, build community or just celebrate, I believe we cannot overlook the value and power of invitations in helping to shape and influence the gatherings we initiate.

At one point, Gross asked Waters, "What's a dish you came up with that you're particularly proud of?"  Alice said the fruit bowl.  For the last fifteen years she's asked the pastry department to put together a bowl of fruit to round out their dessert offerings.  She spoke of the discernment required on the part of the cooks: "...choosing just the right moment for that fruit and connecting with the farmers at the last minute to bring just the most beautiful taste to the table."

Terry then quoted Michael Pollan (a renowned writer on food and other topics) who ate at Chez Panisse and ordered the fruit for dessert, "not quite sure whether a plain bowl of fruit on a restaurant menu was best interpreted as an expression of culinary modesty or culinary audacity [my emphasis]."  Terry asked Alice which she thought it was.

Ms Waters: "I think it's both, you know, in a way.  You just want to bring people into something that's unintimidating [my emphasis]."

I was wowed by that exchange.  Here's a leader in her field, commanding a prix fixe of about $100 at her world-famous, French cuisine-inspired restaurant, choosing to offer fresh, ripe, local fruit on her dessert menu.  I loved Pollan's wondering, Terry's question, and--most of all--Alice Waters' answer: it's both modest and audacious. 

And I think it's a sweet little object lesson on leadership for our times. 

Intimate Leadership

In my work with my clients I think I am at my best when I aim for the "plain bowl of fruit."  When I ask, "What is ripe?"— as in, "What is most alive and ready to be discovered and metabolized?"  Or, "How can I guide people into something—their insides or their aspirations—in a way that is 'unintimidating?'"  The "audacity" of this approach is perhaps the faith—earned over decades of practice—that all I have to do is be present and work with what shows up.  Because we can't really ever know what will be "ripe."  What's audacious is the nakedness—like playing Mozart vs. Rachmaninoff (there's no hiding behind the notes).  The "modesty," on the other hand, is quite simply not showing off: not pretending to know what I don't know, not trying to impress with what I do know, being genuinely curious, down-to-earth, real.  

I want to encourage us leaders (of organizations, communities, movements, groups, families--or simply our own lives) to lead with more of Waters' blend of modesty and audacity.  The alchemy of these—which we could also call humility and courage, presence and play, curiosity and confidence—in my opinion (and personal experience) evokes genuine followership and draws energy and ideas from the people around us.

Embodied Truth

In the body, I locate these qualities—I'll call them humility and courage—in the feet and the heart, respectively.  Years ago while leading a workshop on facilitation skills I invited the participants to open the soles of their feet and feel the connection to the earth beneath them.  One man in the group had a profound shift: he got out of his head, where he'd been worrying about 'getting it right' and 'looking good', and became more present and connected to his partner and to his own intuition.  This led to a relaxed confidence and sudden joy in his ability to facilitate.  Humility—from the same root as humus (the soil layer not the dip)—is our ability to remain 'down-to-earth' even as we assume higher status roles of leadership.

Courage and the heart are linked—even linguistically, coeur being the French for heart.  A metaphor I love (though I can't for the life of me recall where I came across it) is opening the portcullis.  A portcullis is the heavy wooden or iron gate, often on the castle side of a drawbridge, that is raised and lowered by means of a winch.  Our breastbone--and the ribs connected to it--can be thought of in the same way: guarding or allowing entrance to the realm of our hearts.  Closing off our hearts by collapsing our chest also cramps our breathing, making us less alive.  Lifting the breastbone is not the same as puffing out the chest in bravado (which I did nearly every time I walked the halls between classes in tenth grade, trying to look bigger and tougher than I felt).  An act of true courage, it is not about showing off but about showing up: opening ourselves, our hearts, to life, to the present.  Not about trying to impress, but about disarming and allowing life to touch us.  Not about intimidation, but intimacy--connecting authentically with what's alive in the moment.

Post-Heroic  

A fancy French restaurant—as Garrison Keillor likes to point out—can be intimidating (making us timid).  Afraid we'll use the wrong fork or mispronounce the entrée, we get uptight, careful, less joyful, less alive.  Leaders can do the same; instill timidity, merely with their outsized presence.  Or not.  Malcolm Gladwell, in What the Dog Saw, talks about presence in the title essay.  He portrays a 'dog whisperer' calming violent dogs and a movement therapist working with an autistic boy.  Commenting on their grace and effectiveness, he says this about their presence:  "Certain people, we say, 'command our attention,' but the verb is all wrong.  There is no commanding, only soliciting." This is presence without intimidation; power without domination.

The terms "facilitative leadership" and "leader-as-convener" have emerged recently in leadership consulting circles to describe a shift from the heroic leader archetype to a more relational, empowering, galvanizing role.  Where the heroic leader has the answers, the facilitative leader has the questions that evoke the group's interest and intelligence.  Where the heroic leader instills fear and sets a high bar for performance, the facilitative leader builds trust and invites authentic engagement.  The terms point to a leadership that "...link[s] rather than rank[s]..."; that uses presence to invite rather than cow.

A Different World

When Alice Waters puts a fruit bowl out for her clients, she is not commanding their attention, but soliciting it, using what's most alive and ripe in the environment.  She has the confidence and courage not to try to impress but simply to get out of the way and present something that's honest, fresh and satisfying.  

In doing so, she evokes the freedom in her patrons simply to say yes to what is delicious.  In doing so, she is practicing not intimidation but intimacy; a quiet vulnerability and sensuous contact with what nourishes her people and brings them pleasure.  

I believe this alchemy of humility and courage makes Alice Waters a great chef—and makes for good teachers, therapists, consultants, corporate leaders, parents and artists.  I like to imagine our world with our leaders leading from this stance.  

Where could you lead with more modesty-and-audacity?  What would change in your life/work/world if you did?

If you want to catch up, you can read about the first community meeting held in September using the World Café conversation process, and the second held in early October. 

One of the characteristics of the Town’s process that has made this a story worth telling is the fact that community leaders did not jump to solutions in meeting one, despite the public appetite for answers. Rather, they created an opportunity for the public to take the time needed — and employed good process — to explore the problem, get clear about the impacts on the community, and absorb the facts about teen substance abuse in Reading. As a result, we had our eyes opened to the depth, complexity and adult complicity that are fundamentally a part of this challenge here and possibly everywhere. No simple solutions—not just about more enforcement or “bad” kids, not something that happens “in other towns.”

The third meeting was billed as the time to talk about solutions. It was held in late October, and consisted of short presentations by panelists that included: Reading Police Chief, Assistant District Attorney, Reading Schools Superintendent, and Director of Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA).  Each presenter responded to the questions they had been receiving from the public – they were honest and clear about what they were doing about the issue, what they could do more of, and what they could not do. And they asked for help.

What struck me was how earnest and transparent the presenters were. They clearly cared about this problem as much as we did, and owned up to their frustration about their limitations in solving it. There was only so much a police department, a DA, school staff, or a coalition could do — this was a true community problem, and by now, most of the 180 or so of us in the audience were starting to understand this.

They also shared more information, the crime statistics, the impact of “see something, say something,” the results of a recent behavioral health assessment of the schools, facts about teen substance abuse.  After each presentation, there was time for questions, and at the end the community (seated at round tables) had time to talk together about what we could do. While there were no silver bullet solutions, many of us walked away with more clarity about steps we could take as parents and residents.

The leadership stance I witnessed that night was a shift from what I’ve experienced in the past. No one played the Hero – no promises were made to control or fix this problem, to “clean up” Reading. The issues were not candy-coated or minimized, and answers weren’t simplified into digestible sound bites. Yet these leaders showed a refreshing courage, making apparent the stark truth of this challenge and its community-wide, systemic implications. The RCASA director pulled no punches when she told the audience, “We need to ask ourselves about our own behavior, our own history and experience with substance abuse. Are we being honest with ourselves?”

In our work with leaders we often talk about the need for this kind of "post-heroic" leadership mind-set in our times. This term was originally coined by David Bradford and Allan Cohen in their book Power Up: Transforming Organizations Through Shared Leadership. Today, many leadership scholars, theorists and practitioners emphasize the need for leaders to shift away from controlling, expertise-driven or “heroic” stances, to more facilitative approaches aimed at developing highly participatory teams, organizations and stakeholders, who share commitment and leadership for the challenges they collectively face. And we are told this form of leadership is rare – there are few examples to point to.

So what happened in Reading? Are these humble local leaders really pioneering a new era of leadership? I’m not sure they would think so, but they nonetheless took the risk to try something different. They knew the nature of teen substance abuse was not going to be solved under their authority alone. Rather than pander to a naive and angry public, these local leaders made time and space for people to explore the problem together and come to see its facets of complexity. They made the choice to be transparent, to share all that they knew, and were able to take ownership for what they could and could not do. They asked for help.  They became “post-heroic” in this effort because they had few options, and it made practical sense. 

So will this stick? Will this new form of leadership transcend into other aspects of their work? Will our town slip back into a haze of denial? Hard to tell, but in my experience there will always be some back sliding. But seeds have been planted and successful experiences have been had. It was the closing question to the audience by the Town Manager, however, that really gives me hope: “How many of you would like us to have more conversations like this about important local issues?” We all raised our hands.

*****

A comment from Karen about my blog of the first meeting asked: When and how should leaders make the investment (time, money) needed to stage this kind of community engagement?

This is my answer: If the challenges your department, organization, and/or community are complex; and, if as a leader you have no obvious answers, or if solutions require others to play a role, to adapt or change, then the time is NOW.  And as to HOW, call a professional who knows the processes that help people to discover their collective investment in the challenge and take shared leadership for the solution. Call us.

Town leadership, however, employed a strategy for addressing community concerns that departed from more traditional approaches – rather than hold a public meeting where people come to demand “solutions” from local officials and experts, leaders decided to slow down and take the time to help the community explore together the nature of substance abuse and violence in Reading, before addressing what is being/can be done.  

The first meeting was a World Café-style community conversation that I blogged about several weeks ago. The participants talked together about the impacts of substance abuse on our community, and explored what some root causes might be. The conversations and “harvest” (output) began to illuminate the depth and complexity of the issue and the wide variety of perspectives, concerns and dilemmas that exist—this is not a challenge with a silver bullet solution. 

A few weeks ago, the Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse (RCASA), a grant-funded organization that works on this issue with the community and our youth, hosted the 2nd meeting. The purpose of this event was to increase our understanding of this problem with data from the source—our youth. Information included: highlights from the latest Reading High Youth Risk Behavior Survey; personal stories from a local mother and daughter who have been battling the daughter’s 8-year heroine addiction that started in high school; and lastly, a presentation by the RCASA “Youth Crew” of a series of projects they were undertaking in response to what they have been learning, asking for adult volunteers to help with specific components. With over 150 people in attendance, the event was engaging, eye opening, and moving.

Eye opening—yes, we need our eyes opened. I noted after the World Café conversation how naïve our community is about this pervasive, equal opportunity issue. And yet people came to that meeting with such strong and widely divergent convictions about what they thought the problem was and the solution should be. This behavior is not limited to my town – this is what we do as humans when we are trying to make sense of complex issues. We tend to block out what we don’t want to know, or can’t quite wrap our heads around, or that which fails to comport with our own personal experience or sense of the world. This can be both a survival tool, when simplification keeps us from becoming overwhelmed, and a survival roadblock, when simplification keeps us from seeing the whole. And this response can create Blind Spots.

We were confronted with some of our blind spots at the RCASA meeting. The heroine addict’s mother, who could have been any of us, saying, “I just didn’t want to believe she was that kind of girl, I wanted to believe our family was the one in our Christmas cards, smiling, happy, whole.” Our small, well-to-do community that wants our children to have the best, yet 30% of Reading High students (an all time high) report feelings of stress and anxiety to such a degree that they experience clinical depression and thoughts of suicide, have attempted suicide, and/or practiced “cutting” and other self-mutilating behaviors. The fact that most Reading teens get their first drugs from our medicine cabinets – our painkillers, our alcohol – and 90% of their use occurs in our homes. Blind spots.

So how do we to illuminate blind spots in our world? How do we really start to see the whole issue, challenge, or system? Because if we can’t see it, how can we possibly address, solve, adapt, change…for the better?

These community meetings are providing some clues. We need to include the people with X-ray vision, those who don’t share our perspectives or experiences, our blind spots. These people can be anywhere: the heroine addict’s friend who finally called the mother and told her the truth; the Reading high students and their collective survey responses about their own behavioral health; the RCASA youth crew who are looking for ways to create purpose and meaning in their lives – wanting to be contributors to solving the problems we want to avoid or foist upon others. X-ray vision is critical to helping us — communities, organizations, nations — start to illuminate the blind spots that keep us from understanding the whole of what confronts us.

When we engage stakeholders — those who are impacted by the adaptive challenges ahead — in a strategic, meaningful process of dialog and communication, we make room for those who may have X-ray vision, who can see what others may not. And if we don’t, if we keep thinking our own “expertise” or experience is enough, we will continue to breathe our own exhaust and ultimately fail to understand the totality of the challenge or glimpse the possibilities of a better way.

The last meeting in Reading is the time to start talking about action steps. What is being done, what else can we do? We will both hear from a panel of local leaders and talk amongst ourselves about these questions. Armed with a new collective appreciation of this challenging issue, I am looking forward to what might be next, as we continue to learn together. Stay tuned…