The Certainty of Ambiguity in Leadership

This post is a refreshed version of one written originally in  June, 2009.

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

Anyone who has ever been in a leadership role for longer than, oh, five minutes, knows that leadership is not a prescriptive thing.  As simple as we try to make it with lists of the ten top things to do here or the best five things to do there, it remains rife with complexity.

Part of this complexity lies in the many roles leaders must undertake that, while necessary, seem incompatible with one another.

Here are some examples:

Being conceptual and Tactical

As a leader, it is important for you to be able to rise above the day-to-day mechanics of your operation so you can see where it is all going. This is about having a vision and ideas that give purpose to the work.

There is, however, a limit on the amount of time you should spend at thirty thousand feet without coming down to the ground and working with people to ensure that plans are developed in line with the vision and specific actions are taken to bring it to life.

Leaders who dwell in the land of ideas too long tend to accomplish very little. Alternately, those who keep their noses to the grindstone and never get off the ground might accomplish a lot but chances are, it will be a lot of the wrong thing.

Being a Leader and a Manager

Some people believe that leadership and management are two separate jobs. From where I sit, they’re not.  Both roles belong in the leader’s virtual backpack. Confusion often raises its quizzical head, though, when deciding what to manage; what to lead; and when.

A simple rule of thumb is that you manage things and lead people. However, to add complexity to the mix, you also manage events and happenings that involve people. And that means you must be prepared to manage conflict and other situations that could potentially get in the way of accomplishing the work.

Being a Leader and a Follower

Opportunities for people to show leadership, regardless of their formal status in the organization, are everywhere.  It is a wise leader who will recognize this and make room for it when it serves the organization and supports its goals.  The trick is in knowing when it is appropriate to stand down and become a supportive follower.

In general, allowing someone else to take the lead is a good idea when:

S/he knows more about the specific work involved than you do or;

S/he has demonstrated more skill in a certain area than you have.

This doesn’t mean you abdicate your position.  It does mean that you are leading for a time, by following and supporting someone who can by leading, accomplish the goal better, faster or more efficiently than you can.

To do this effectively, you must first know your own strengths and limitations and also make it a priority to know the capabilities of the people who work with you.

Controlling and Empowering

We all know that empowering others to express themselves and make contributions to the organizational goals is key to creating vibrant, engaged, working environments. And, while this is a leadership responsibility, it is also the job of the leader to create a controlled atmosphere that connects to the demands and goals of the business.

This means finding a fine balance between being autocratic and being liberal. It is where having a fully activated set of organizational values and a comprehensive, well-articulated vision of the future come in handy. They form a framework within which people can be empowered to use their creative abilities and make contributions on their own terms.

There are many other situations where leaders are required to make choices between seemingly contradictory activities.  For instance, when would you encourage individual effort over team development? Under what circumstances might you favour an arbitrary decision over a democratic one?

What comes up for you?

Leadership…And All That Jazz

This week, I’m offering you a refreshed version of a post I wrote in 2010.  Not to be immodest but it is one of my favourites. I love jazz and I think it a perfect metaphor for leadership. I  hope you enjoy reading it as much as I did writing it.  

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

Warren Bennis once said, ‘I used to think that running an organization was equivalent to conducting a symphony orchestra.  But I don’t think that’s quite it.  It’s more like jazz.  There is more improvisation”

I must confess that I really like the symphony orchestra metaphor, simply because it is, well, beautifully uncluttered. But, as much as I would like to think it possible for all things to be in harmony at all times, I know the reality to be a lot messier, or jazzier, metaphorically speaking.

In fact, it is perhaps the jazz of life, (that stuff that requires spontaneity and improvisation), that transforms the vanilla of a well-ordered enterprise into something spiced with possibility and potential for greatness.

So it is with leadership.

In leadership, there are times for following a well-planned strategy.  And, there are times when doing so isn’t going to work.  The landscape has a way of changing rapidly, often requiring leaders, as creative beings, to rely on instinct to successfully navigate unexpected challenges or opportunities and explore unknown places.

At those times, improvisation is a useful tool.  However, as with jazz, improvisation, on its own will not create a joyful noise. It must somehow find its way back to the primary melody no matter how far afield it may go.

In leadership, the primary melody lies in the organizational vision and purpose.  And, how far afield we are willing to go to realize the vision and fulfill the purpose is usually dependent on a number of  things like:

How much we know

The more curious we are and the more we seek to learn about the immediate environment, our markets, our politics and the world, the better equipped we are to make spontaneous decisions that will serve our purpose, either now or in the future.

How much we are willing to risk 

When it comes to risk, those who extend themselves too far, risk losing sight of their core purpose and those who don’t explore at all, risk missing opportunities for growth that go beyond their current expectations. Being clear about how much we are willing to risk can help us determine the extent to which we are willing to improvise.

How much we believe

If we have our organization’s core purpose and future vision etched on our brains and hearts, the likelihood is that we will also feel more at liberty to play with improvisation without fear of getting lost.

How much we imagine

Just as jazz music is highly interpretive, the extent to which we use our imagination in leadership often determines the kind of organizations we build and the ability of the people working in those organizations to improvise effectively.

In short, I think there is a vital role for improvisation in organizations. Our appetite for spontaneity will of course vary but if we are wise, we will allow room for it.  It could make the difference between mediocrity and excellence.

That’s what I think anyway. What do you think?

Oh, and just for fun, here is Oscar Peterson providing a fine example of what can happen when improvisation blends beautifully with the primary melody.

Another Kind of Leadership ~ Lessons from Barbara Ann Scott

I think it safe to say that when we contemplate great leadership, in general, our thoughts tend to drift toward industry and government leaders, people who speak eloquently, act boldly and inspire in a larger-than-life kind of way.

More and more though, I also think that many of us are expanding our vision of what it is to be a leader, to include people who, on first thought, might not fit into that traditional view.

I think Barbara Ann Scott was one such leader.  Ms Scott recently died at the age of 84 leaving behind a legacy of accomplishment and a gentle reminder that being nice does not preclude us from doing great things and inspiring others to do the same.

She was born in Ottawa in 1928 and from the age of seven, trained to be a world-class figure skater.  It is said that she gave up many of the pursuits of a typical young girl to pursue her dream.  And, in 1948 was rewarded for her focus and hard work when she earned a gold medal in the Winter Olympics. It was also in that year that a proud and admiring country bestowed upon her the title “Canada’s Sweetheart”.

Barbara Ann Scott stopped skating professionally after her marriage in 1955 and went to live in the United States.  But she never forgot her roots, making many trips back to the skating club in Ottawa that had trained her so many years before.

Skate Canada President, Benoit Lavoie is quoted as saying, “Every time she attended our events, she inspired our skaters and encouraged them to pursue their dreams”

If you were to listen to her speak, Barbara Ann Scott would not strike you as a particular force to be reckoned with.  Her voice was soft, almost childlike, but based on her accomplishments, her resolve carried with it the strength and maturity that some twice her size and three times as loud would be hard pressed to match.

As leaders, here are a few things I think we might draw from Ms Scott’s example:

Boldness comes in many forms ~ I have been guilty of equating boldness with aggression but more recently am learning that leaders can be very bold when it comes to giving voice to their values, goals, and purpose without having to shout. Leaders like Barbara Ann Scott boldly do and then let their actions speak for them.

Adaptability and focus are essential tools of leadership, no matter what the undertaking ~ In 1948, the Olympic skating rink was outdoors.   This meant that the chances of the ice surface being ideal were not that good.   When it came time for Barbara Ann to deliver her performance, some rough patches were noted on the ice that challenged her ability to skate the program she had rehearsed.  So, at the last minute, and without fanfare, she changed the program to accommodate the conditions.

It’s quite possible to lead and be nice at the same time~ Barbara Ann Scott accomplished many things in her life.  She and her husband raised show horses. She made television commercials, authored two books and even ran a beauty salon.  No matter what her prevailing passion, she was well known for being accessible to others, freely giving her time and energy so they might feel encouraged to keep going after whatever it was that inspired them.

Humility really is a big deal ~ While Barbara Ann was highly lauded and well regarded, each time she made an appearance, she never failed to express her gratitude for the opportunities presented to her and doubtless never left a room without inspiring someone to be just like her.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

A Study in Leader Humility

This is the story of  Colin Jenkins.  Never heard of him?  Well, that’s because Colin, in spite of having made a huge contribution to Canada’s Olympic effort in Beijing in 2008, prefers it that way.

Colin Jenkins is an athlete in his own right.  But, instead of working for himself, he chose to partner with Simon Whitfield, a Canadian Triathlete, with the sole purpose of helping Simon win an Olympic medal for Canada in the 2008 games.

Rick Hansen calls Colin Jenkins a Difference Maker.    Here is his story. (the clip begins with an annoying advertisement but I hope you’ll hang in there. It’s worth the look)

Colin’s story reminds me of the vital role humility can play in leading a business organization.  It also tells me that if there is one Colin, there have to be many more like him, quietly working away, not for the glory, but for the pleasure of being part of something great, something much bigger and more important than themselves.

For some of us, this is hard to imagine.  After all, the human ego being what it is, those who rejoice in the achievement of a collective goal with no expectation of personal accolade seem quite rare.  But is this the case really? Or is it that we are just not looking for these “No glory, all guts” people? Or, really seeing them?

Perhaps it is that we have to stop once in a while and purposefully consider the difference makers in our own lives and organizations.   The question is, how will we recognize them when we come across them, these quiet leaders whose uniform is more Diana Prince than Wonderwoman or Clark Kent than Superman?

Well, maybe we simply have to look for the clues.  What kind of clues? Well, I’m not entirely sure because I rather think difference makers come in many forms.  But perhaps we might start by paying some attention to those who:

• Are generally quiet but not hesitant to speak clearly and succinctly when they see an opportunity to contribute.

• Show enthusiasm for group projects and encourage and support the efforts of others without fanfare.

• Consistently show up and stay the course even when the going gets tough

• Boast about, and celebrate, team accomplishments while downplaying their own.

• Are not reluctant to admit their individual limitations, in service of ensuring the job gets done.

• Value learning as a tool for ramping up their ability to make a meaningful contribution

There are others, of course.  But the point is, humility by its very nature lives quietly.  That doesn’t mean it should go unrecognized.  People who lead from behind, or from within, do indeed make a difference.  I like that Rick Hansen chose to feature Colin Jenkins in his Difference Maker Series.   I expect Colin is very pleased by it too.  But, I doubt that he will allow it to swell his head because, it seems, he just isn’t made that way.

That’s what I think anyway.  What do you think?

P.S. For some reason some people have not been able to access the video. I’m hoping this link will work. Click here

Leadership…What’s Charisma Got To Do With It?

Charisma. It seems to be something we admire in others and wish we had more of in ourselves.  It has drawing power.  When we see it in leaders, that compelling charm inspiring us to listen and follow and emulate, it is easy to envy the apparent ease with which they spin their particular magic.

Charismatic leaders paint the picture of the leader as hero.  These are people who suggest, by their very presence, they can take care of us; cure our ills; make change possible; maybe even be the saviour we have long sought.

In reality, no one can do that single-handedly.  Charisma may deliver the promise of change, growth, fulfillment and even wealth but on its own it will fail in the execution department.  That requires involvement from the rest of us, and a different kind of leadership.

Having said that, let’s face it; having charisma can be very handy.  Can we develop it?  I’m not sure. The word itself comes from the Greek meaning gift.  We know that each of us has gifts.  Not everyone has that particular one.

Nonetheless, I can’t help but feel that what draws us to the charismatic type is not unlike what inspires us to follow leaders with less, um, pizzazz. So from that perspective I think it possible to develop, and use, some of the skills associated with the charismatic personality.

Specifically, here are three traits associated with the charismatic leader that come readily to mind when I think of other, perhaps less charming but equally successful leaders

• Excellent communication skills
• Self-awareness
• Intense focus

These and other elements can indeed be developed even among those of us who have had what Jim Collins describes as a “charisma bypass” because, as he says, charisma is a personality trait and leadership is not about personality.  Here’s what else he has to say.

In my observation, charisma, on its own, tends to burn bright and then burn out. It has a dark side too.  Adolph Hitler had it.  So did The Reverend Jim Jones and Osama bin Laden. All three have had a disastrous impact on humankind. Masses of people, at one time or another, have viewed them with awe, often blindly doing their bidding.  These leaders are people who fed on the hope and despair of others to their own advantage and for their own glorification.  Charisma gave them that opportunity.

So if we strive for anything in leadership, let’s work to transform rather than transfix. Transformational leadership contains an element of charisma but is grounded in a set of high ideals, a solid work ethic and the expectation that all people have the capability to raise themselves up through their own hard work to reach higher ground.

Those who work to transform may share some charismatic traits but differ in these important areas:

They focus on a purpose and vision greater than themselves

Their work is not about them but about something beyond them that serves a greater good.

They engage others in making the vision their own

This comes from the belief that a shared purpose and vision makes the necessity for change clearer and the work it takes to achieve it, more meaningful.

They value learning, creativity and personal growth

Transformational leaders encourage people to challenge what has always been and to explore new possibilities with enthusiasm and without fear.

They carry less mystique and more transparency

To involve everyone in fulfilling the organizational purpose demands a kind of openness that doesn’t exist in an organization whose leader relies solely on the strength of his or her personality to lead.  Mystique may be kind of sexy but it gets in the way of getting the job done.

A lot has been written about charisma.  There are even some articles that attempt to tell you how to become charismatic.  For me, many of them miss the mark, like the one that offers “17 Tips on Becoming a Charismatic Leader”. I particularly question the wisdom of number five on that list which states “ think of something pleasant so you appear to be sincere”. Hmmm.

The bottom line for me is that while we are not all favoured with charisma, we do each have the opportunity to develop drawing power by building leadership skill; being open to learning; focusing on something beyond ourselves and; mustering the courage to challenge and change things.

I think if we can do all that, who needs Charisma?

What do you think?

Closing the Gap between Authority and Power

George Carlin once said, “I have as much authority as the Pope. I just don’t have as many people who believe it”

This started me thinking about what authority and power in organizations really mean. Some people believe these words are synonymous. Well, perhaps, but I’m more inclined to believe that authority and power, while linked, are two different things.

For instance, it is possible for you to have authority without power if you are a newly appointed manager. People reporting to you will likely have little or no experience with you as a leader. As such, they may be reticent to follow your directives. Your authority only carries real power when you have earned their trust and respect and when they can see merit in the direction you want to take them.   In short, the power kicks in when they give it to you.

Conversely, it is possible to have power without authority when as a well informed, competent and reliable team member, people seek out your advice and guidance.  While you may not have the authority to make certain decisions on your own, you influence other team members who have come to respect your judgment and are eager to follow your lead.

Of course, as George Carlin so succinctly reminds us, the challenge is to optimize on the authority we are given by persuading others to not only believe it but also endorse and respect it.  When we have accomplished that, then  words like authority and power become more easily interchangeable.

So how does one go about closing the gap between authority and power?  Well, here are some thoughts about that:

Be yourself

Some people believe that when they are awarded the mantle of authority, they must behave in a certain authoritative way.  However, to me, authority has no particular personality trait.  It is simply a mechanism provided to some people that facilitates decision-making and getting things done.  When you represent yourself honestly, people are more likely to accept and trust you and that’s where the power lies.

Listen and learn

The decisions you make are only as good as the information on which you base them.  Effective decision-making happens when the leader, and those who follow him or her, learn from each other.  Your authority gives you permission to make decisions.  The power behind the authority lies in the willingness of the leader to listen, learn and make informed ones.

Roll up your sleeves and join in

There are times when the leader becomes the ‘servant’.  This is when everyone is clear about what must be accomplished and you, as leader, do whatever you can to support the process.  You may certainly have the authority to command work to be done without participating yourself.  However, sometimes rolling up the sleeves to help is just what is needed to inject enthusiasm into the mix and create positive working relationships. And that can be pretty powerful.

Recognize and Reward good work

If you want to put power behind your authority, good work must never go unrecognized.   As humans, we all need to know that we, and our efforts, are appreciated. And, in the workplace, recognition is very much valued when it comes from a person in authority and is offered with sincerity.  Most of us, when given such recognition, are eager to do more and to do it happily. And that’s where the power comes from.

There are, of course, other ways to close the gap between authority and power and I invite you to share your ideas here too.

In the meantime, I leave you with another thought.  Some people in authority believe they can grab power by using fear as their primary motivator.  It’s a poor and often painful strategy that may work for a while but does not usually stand the test of time.  Even the Wizard of Oz was found out eventually.

So, What do you think?

An Homage to Bossy Women

Women demonstrate leadership every day; in their families, their communities, their businesses and their countries.  This post is a refreshed version of one I wrote in 2010 about women in my family who span three generations.  In acknowledgment of International Women’s Day on March 8^th,  this is a salute to them and to all women who embrace their inner bossiness; focus on what’s important; and make a positive difference in the lives of those around them. 

Growing up, I never considered myself to be bossy, having inherited my father’s more conciliatory disposition, but the older I get, the more like my mother I become.  As a result, my inner bossiness, which once lay dormant, now rises up with greater regularity.

The women in my family are like that…bossy.  They have been bossy for generations in fact.

My great grandmother raised four daughters and, with her husband, ran a dry goods store somewhere in the south of Cornwall, England.  My great grandfather was a handsome devil, with, (I’m told), something of a roving eye and possibly feet to match.  I imagine great grandma must have had to fend for herself on many an occasion.  Being bossy probably came in handy.

My maternal grandmother married a sailor and spent many years raising her three children on her own while my grandfather served in the Merchant Navy. Bossiness, for her, was a necessary skill.

My paternal Grandmother was also a Shopkeeper.  She married a man with little ambition, I’m told, and a penchant for gambling and drink.   Together they had five sons.  During the 1920s and 30s everything was scarce, at least for them.  Grandma was a smart businesswoman though.  Through her hard work, her shop became the mainstay of her family’s livelihood.  And, in her “spare time”, she raised chickens in her back yard.  Dad often said that if not for his mother, they might have starved.  She was determined and focused and yes, probably a little bossy too.

When Dad’s parents both became ill with cancer, my Auntie Ethel took care of them.  Auntie Ethel was a wonderful woman.  On first glance, she might have been described as “homely”.  But in every other sense, she was a beauty.  It was Auntie Ethel who saw the intelligence in my father and insisted he go to high school, in spite of opposition from his brothers and perhaps certain indifference from my grandparents.  Auntie Ethel was a driving force in my father’s life and he loved her even though, or perhaps because, she was bossy.

My mother defied the convention of the early fifties and sixties by working full-time while having a family.  Luckily, my parents had a great and equal partnership.  The rest of the world however, was not particularly approving of her.  When confronted by the Principal of my elementary school about her “duty” to remain home to care for her children, she raised herself up to her greatest height of five foot three and told him to where to go.  She was a force to be reckoned with and one who successfully propelled (and yes, bossed) me through my years of excruciating shyness and self-doubt.

When I reflect on these stories, I am reminded that leadership comes in many forms.  But, throughout, there is an undeniable theme.  It is about leading the way and also pushing through, the hard stuff with determination and heart.  It’s about standing up against unwarranted and unsolicited criticism.  And, it’s about finding ways to make things work in spite of the inevitable obstacles that litter the path to success or, in some cases, survival.  In short, while we often view bossiness in a negative light, there are times when its usefulness should not be underestimated.

So go ahead, tread carefully, but be bossy every now and then.  Just don’t be like my Auntie Flossie.  She crossed the line into the land of tyranny and my uncle Reg no doubt died before his time… just to get some peace.

How about you?  How have the women in your life influenced you?

What do you think?

Command, Control and Authority

I think we can agree that there are a number of leadership styles but the one we love to hate is the Command and Control style.

I once had a boss who was the epitome of command and control, a real “my way or the highway” kind of guy.  He was a stickler for punctuality and his need for control was so strong that he posted one of his managers at the elevators each morning armed with a clipboard and orders to write down the names of all those unsuspecting stragglers who deigned to arrive past the expected starting time.

One morning I peered over the shoulder of one of these hapless managers only to see that, having caught someone alighting from the elevator at 9:02 a.m., he had written, “girl with red hair and green sweater”

I asked him how he expected to create anything that the boss would find useful if he didn’t know the names of the people he was there to “catch”.  He said,

“I have no *f*&*%! idea.  I’m just doing what I’m told”

That is a classic consequence of creating and working in a command and control culture.  It assumes that the person in charge is the holder of all wisdom, skill and experience; a person who knows exactly what they are doing at all times and the Mecca to which everyone bows.  And the rest of us simply do as we are told.

Except we don’t.

In fact, while we are doing as we are told, we are also finding ways to quietly sabotage progress.  We waste time grumbling.  We call in sick when we are just too fed up to go in. We arrive on time but then do nothing for the first hour.  We spend time dreaming up other ways to get around the stringent rules set out for us; and somewhere in all of that, productivity, dignity, a sense of accomplishment, and of purpose, are lost.

So no, command and control in a business or organizational environment is not a leadership style that  serves us any more… at least not in large doses.

Having said that there are situations that will call for an authoritative approach to leadership. For example:

• In times of revolutionary change when the future feels doubtful, this take-charge style is needed, and often appreciated, to help people over the hump of uncertainty.
• When under tight deadlines or in crises, there often just isn’t time for lengthy debate or consensus building.
• When the leader has more knowledge around a certain issue and it just makes sense for him or her to make a decision for everyone.
• When the organization has drifted from its purpose or lost sight of its vision a strong authoritative presence is required to recalibrate organizational focus.

So, in short, while we love to hate command and control, we would be wise to allow that there are times when authoritative leadership is necessary.  The trouble is, if not used well, it can easily morph into something that fails to serve the organization or the greater good.  So, like the delicate balance of a perfect stew, the application of control and authority must be carefully measured and administered to render it both useful and palatable.

What do you think?

Leading By Example and Mistaken Beliefs

This post was originally published in June 2009.  In spite of its length, it is one that I like to come back to from time to time because I strongly believe it is not what we say, or what we intend but what we do that shapes the leader.  What do you think?

According to Albert Schweitzer, “Example is not the main thing in influencing others, it is the only thing”.

If Albert is right about that, then leading by example, although a simple enough concept carries with it a pretty big impact.

On the face of it, to get it right, leaders must exhibit the behaviour they would like to see in others.  To use a well worn expression (that frankly, really belongs in the cliché bin), it’s about “walking the walk and talking the talk”.   What could possibly be complicated about that? Yet, some of us still manage to muck it up.

Perhaps  it is so simple that we often fail to consider it at all.  Or, perhaps it is that some people have mistaken beliefs about what leading by example is really about. Here are a few possibilities that come to mind for me:

•  Mistaken Belief #1 – Leading by Example is a 9-5 pursuit

I suspect that some leaders make leading by example a project rather than a way of being. In other words, they appreciate that in order to engage people at the office they have to serve as a role model and so they create a model of personal behaviour that may have little or no bearing on who they really are. In effect they put on their office persona in the morning along with their business clothes and take it off again when they get home and change into something more comfortable. While this practice may show some positive results in the short term, it is not easily sustainable.  And, I can only imagine how exhausting it must be.

The bottom line: If you don’t represent yourself honestly where ever you are, the example you set will not ring true for those you want to influence the most.

•  Mistaken Belief #2 – You can get people to do as you say, and not as you do, as long as you don’t get caught

In our condominium complex, there is a man on the board who is President of his own company. He serves on our Strata as Chair of the Building Committee, a pretty important role.  This past week he sent out a communication to all owners to advise us that putting weather stripping across our front doors is strongly discouraged because doing so interferes with the flow of air to the suites.  He advised those among us who had installed weather stripping to remove it immediately.

Days later, after receiving this rather forceful message, my husband had cause to place a note concerning condo board business under this man’s door.  He was unsuccessful in doing so because apparently, our Building Chair had installed weather stripping.

The Bottom Line: If you have ever had the idea that you can say one thing and do another and not be found out, think again.   Believe me, you will be busted. And, when you are, the trust and respect that others have for you will be compromised.

• Mistaken Belief #3 – People will only pick up and emulate the behaviours you want them to adopt

No matter who we are, as long as we are alive, someone is looking to us for an example of how to behave. Even if we have never been placed in a formal leadership position, we influence those around us simply by being there. And, being human, we are not always going to act in exemplary fashion. We can only hope to align our behaviour in accordance with what we value most and accept that sometimes others will pick up something from us that we would rather they hadn’t.  It happens.

For example, a long time ago, I was invited to attend a lunch in the Head office executive dining room.  I was very surprised to receive the invitation because as a fairly junior personnel assistant, it was a bit of a lofty thing to happen for me.

The purpose of the lunch was to entertain a party of Chinese students. On meeting them I began to realize why I might have been chosen to participate.  They were all rather small and I, also being rather small, seemed to be the only bank representative who could look them straight in the eye without having to sit down.

The table was beautifully set. However, the  challenge for me and my lunch companions was that it was rather high, and the dining chairs, in contrast, rather low.

In spite of this, the lunch unfolded quite well…until the waiters delivered dessert, strawberries served in a tall stemmed glass, rimmed with sugar. It didn’t take long for me to discover that if I actually wanted to eat these delicious strawberries, I would have to stand up.  The other diminutives around the table seemed to be in the same predicament.  I noticed them looking at each other but none was so brave as to take a chance and grab a strawberry quickly while no one was looking.  And so, at what I considered to be a strategic moment, I took up my spoon, stood up very quickly, popped a strawberry into my mouth and sat down, just as quickly, to chew it.  My new, and equally undersized companions followed my lead until soon, we were all popping up and down until we bore a striking resemblance to an um-pa-pa band.  Needless to say, I was never invited back to the executive dining room.

Bottom line: It is a mistake to expect that people will not, at times, follow an unintended lead. It happens.  Forgive yourself and move on.

What mistaken beliefs come to mind for you?

Caring or Care-taking?~A Fine Distinction

In this blog I write a lot about caring in leadership.  I write about it because I strongly believe that if leaders care about people, their efforts will be rewarded in a multitude of ways, both intrinsically and extrinsically.

In my experience though, ‘caring’ in organizations takes one of two forms.  One provides the best possible opportunity for people to thrive, grow and contribute and the other does just the opposite. The challenge is that not unlike identical twins, each kind of caring, though sounding like the other and looking very much like the other to the naked eye, is not, and has a very different impact when applied to the workplace and the people who work in it.

So, what is the difference between caring and caretaking?

Well, for one thing,there is a difference in the assumptions we work from.

Caretaking assumptions look like this:

• I know what’s best for those who follow me.
• If I take care of them, they owe me.
• My people are not capable of solving their own problems.
• If they do as I ask, I will keep them safe
• As leader, I am also protector.

Caring assumptions look more like this:

• Those I lead know what’s best for them.  They like to have choices.
• If I care for them, they will care for others including those whom the organization serves.
• People I lead are responsible adults
• People are fully capable of solving their own problems
• As leader, I am also facilitator.

For some, the notion of being taken care of can actually be appealing, at least at first.  In this scenario, when I have a particularly sticky problem, I simply have to take it to my boss and s/he will take it off my hands. As well, decisions that affect me are not usually discussed with me and so if things go wrong I feel quite justified in grumbling about it without having to take responsibility for it.  And that can be perversely satisfying.

Eventually though, even people who initially like the idea of being taken care of tire of it and either strain against its limitations or retreat, taking their best game them.

There will be some who believe that creating a caring work environment is akin to the notion of laissez-faire leadership. But really, caring workplaces typically operate from clearly stated boundaries communicated through their organizational purpose and a set of values that provide both focus and a guide for problem solving and decision-making.

Using those boundaries as a guide, organizations and leaders who care will, among other things:

• Hold people accountable for the commitments and decisions they make
• Provide opportunities for learning and growth
• Encourage, coach and challenge people to build capability
• Liberally share problem solving and resist the temptation to “do it themselves”
• Acknowledge and reward fine work regularly
• Create structures and mechanisms that encourage autonomy and allow for help to be available when it is most needed.

There are of course other characteristics associated with leaders who care but the bottom line is this:

Those who caretake exercise power over others and operate from the perspective of ownership.  Those who care are more likely to value collaborative effort and operate from the perspective of shared responsibility.

Given a choice I know which one I’d go for.  What about you?