A630.3.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

Southwest Airlines - Leadership by Example

Leadership is dangerous.   In Leadership on the Line, Heifetz & Linsky (2002) said, “To lead is to live dangerously because when leadership counts, when you lead people through difficult change, you challenge what people hold dear—their daily habits, tools, loyalties, and ways of thinking—with nothing more to offer perhaps than a possibility” (p. 2).  Lead anyway.

In the commercial aviation market, competition is fierce.  Surrounded by big names, thousands of jumbo aircraft, and unimaginable growth, Herb Kelleher found a niche with air transportation that, in many ways, has brought much larger companies to their knees.  And, he did it with humility, grace, care, and the power of personal relationships. 

In a 1997 edition of Leader to Leader magazine, Kelleher described some of his leadership and cultural concepts.  What seemed to be another rich CEOs version of what it takes to succeed was instead a heartfelt account of one man’s desire to believe.  In the article, Kelleher shared about the importance of quality and reliability.  No big surprise.  He then spoke of financial discipline and market awareness.  Sure, that’s to be expected.  But then, he opened up and let the readers into his true motivation: the power of being yourself.

In the article, Kelleher said, “Culture defines personality.”  He believes in releasing control to his employees and that the best leaders serve.  As a result, his employees enjoy freedom, informality, and an interplay that motivates them to work in the best interest of the company.  He said, “If you take an ongoing, genuine interest in the well-being of your people, outside as well as inside the workplace, you eventually create trust.”  As a result, Southwest has created a culture of trust, camaraderie, and focus that has not been replicated. 

As a result of Southwest’s success, competitors have tried humor, delegation, and various methods of inspiration.  They quickly found out that authenticity and vision cannot be faked.  You can’t create a culture that you don’t believe in.  Kelleher believes in the people at Southwest.  He believes in a better flying experience for customers.  And, he believes that people shine when they are loved and treated with respect.  Unlike the CEO sharks circling prey and intimidating employees, Kelleher shows vulnerability when he says, “We are not afraid to talk to our people with emotion. We’re not afraid to tell them, ‘We love you.’ Because we do.”  Not many leaders speak like that.  As a result, not many leaders have employees like those at Southwest.

For a class assignment, I was asked to watch a You Tube video titled “A Day in the Life of the Culture Committee by Southwest Airlines.”  It was a four-minute window into the life and culture of Southwest.  Kelleher’s heart and insights were highlighted in this short snippet of film.  The following are my responses to the assignment: 

Is the Culture Committee at Southwest effective in establishing cultural norms?

            Brown (2011) said, “The values and behaviors of every organization are unique” (p. 10).  Kelleher has made it very clear that his organization values integrity, respect, hard work, and fun!  Too many organizations leave their values hanging on office walls.  At Southwest, they live them out every day.  By demonstrating their appreciation, the employee-to-employee enthusiasm inspires people toward unity and generosity.  The norms are contagious and effective.  They have spread through management, the employees, and as earnings per share show – the customers as well!

From what you can tell, what is the purpose of the Culture Committee at Southwest?

            The Culture Committee is more than a “feel-good” surprise at the end of the day.  They are genuinely pursuing the organization’s vision and mission.  Southwest’s new CEO, Gary Kelly said, “Our people are our single greatest strength and most enduring long term competitive advantage.”  The Culture Committee all wear the same shirts on “hokey” day highlighting three core components of the culture at Southwest: Warrior Spirit, Servant’s Heart, and a Fun-Loving Attitude.  These are not merely work place slogans; rather, they are foundational beliefs and purpose of the leadership and employees at Southwest. 

            The motivation behind the Culture Committee is to take an extra step toward employee appreciation.  Flights are not always easy.  Unruly passengers, tight quarters, and lots of time away from home can cause even the best employee to get tired.  Opening the cabin door and being told to “sit back, take it easy, get something to eat, and let the Culture Committee clean up your plane” is a profound way to show appreciation.  In short, it’s love in action.

What would you see as a viable mission for a culture committee in your place of work (or your last place of work if you are not currently working)?

Most of my day is spent staring at emails and solving problems.  I rarely take lunch and without windows in my office, I often don’t know what the weather is like outside.  Personally, I would be extremely happy if the Culture Committee showed up at my office around lunchtime and told me, “Come with us outside for a nice lunch!”  Showing up on a busy day with lunch and going outside to enjoy the day would be a great break from the computer and constant phone calls. 

Fortunately, my supervisor keeps his finger on the pulse of his employees.  He schedules regular meetings to ensure communication is open.  He promotes monthly team lunches at a restaurant in the local area.  And, he often calls just to ask how we’re doing.  Furthermore, he remembers and rewards people with special recognition awards to let them know they are appreciated.

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

From Herb Kelleher to Gary Kelly and to my supervisor, there is an important take-away from this assignment: Employees want to know they are appreciated.  Acknowledging someone’s hard work with a pat on the back, a hokey-day, or a team lunch are all ways in which CEOs and supervisors say, “Thank you for a job well done.”  One more thing: We spend most of our lives at work. We might as well have fun!

Steve

References

Brown, D.R. (2011). An experiential approach to organizational development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Heifetz, R.A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

A630.2.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

Review of Taylor's - 21st Century Enlightenment

This is the best time in history to be alive.  Though not yet universal, freedom is advancing.  Individuals are given the space to wrestle with their thoughts and test various value systems.  Religion is allowing more personal interpretations while politicians are loosening their grip on constituents.  People are no longer being forced to think one way; rather, creativity, innovation, and a new enlightenment are being accepted and promoted.  The historical Age of Reason, otherwise referred to as the Enlightenment, questioned traditional authority and embraced the notion that humanity could be improved through rational change” (History.com, 2013). 

Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufacture, and Commerce (RSA) summarized the next period of enlightenment.  His video RSA: The 21^st Century Enlightenment, explores some of the key ideas of the Enlightenment, suggesting we might both rethink the interpretation we have come to place on previous beliefs toward human progress and develop perspectives more relevant to today.  At the heart of the RSA’s contemporary mission and public debates about the future prospects for the human race is the question: ‘Can we go on like this?’  Will the ideas and values which transformed our world in the last two centuries be sufficient to find solutions to the challenges we now face or do we need new ways of thinking? (RSA, 2013).  

The following seven questions that challenged my thinking while watching Taylor’s video.

Why do you think the talk is titled 21st Century Enlightenment?

Taylor purports that we must champion a more self-aware, socially embedded autonomy.  In the seventh century, people did a lot of talking; today, we must have action.  It is not enough to know why someone deserves to be free; steps must be taken to free men and women.  Taylor’s tagline is referred to as the 21^st Century Enlightenment because he is challenging today’s human race to rethink past foundations of values and principles and weigh them against the challenges we face today and will face in the future.

What does Matthew Taylor mean when he says "to live differently, you have to think differently"?

Rather than always looking outward, we must look inward.  Daniel Goleman (1995) refers to this state as self-awareness.  He defined it as, “continually paying attention to one’s internal states” (p. 46).  If the first enlightenment promoted our individual strengths and abilities, the new enlightenment must build on that by recognizing our frailties and limitations.  In short, we need a new way of thinking. 

The 21^st Century Enlightenment “requires us to see past simplistic ideas and inadequate perceptions of freedom, justice, and progress.”  Moreover, Taylor said, “we must get away from abstractions and reconnect a concrete understanding of who we are, who we need to be, and more importantly, who we aspire to be.”

  

At one point in the video (4:10), Taylor argues that we need "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange". What is he talking about?                

Before we submit our loyalties to an easy or familiar path, we should investigate its premise and how it aligns with what we believe and value.  Relying on what we’ve been told or witnessed should not be the basis for making decisions.  In the video, Taylor quoted Robert Kegan as “successfully functioning in society with its diverse values, traditions, and lifestyles requires us to have a relationship to our own reactions rather than be captive by them.” 

Governing our responses by first filtering input through our value systems creates a level of self-awareness and self-control that strengthens an individual and in turn, strengthens the society.  Robert Kegan (2009) said, “The challenge to change and improve is often misunderstood as a need to better “deal with” or “cope with” the greater complexity of the world.  Coping and dealing involve adding new skills or widening our repertoire of responses” (p. 11)

Can you think of an example within your company or your life that supports this point?

As a minister of the Gospel, my faith leads me to depend on God for divine guidance, encouragement, and direction.  While I do not espouse to follow the theory of humanism in its entirety, I do respect the motivations behind personal responsibility and accountability.  Two key verses speak of the importance, in Luke 6:45 Jesus said, “Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks” and in Proverbs 18:21 that says, “There is life and death in the power of the tongue.”  If I am to control my responses rather than be captive by them, I must be able to control what I say and then allow God to help me change with how I think. 

I often talk about the truth of our responses and our actions.  We can speak of love all day long; but without showing love for each other—especially those who are different—than what we are demonstrating isn’t really love at all.  Jesus also said, “They will know you are my children by the love you show for one another” (John 13:35, NIV).  If the new enlightenment is about empathy, then we must work together to demonstrate care, concern, and love for one another.  In the Age of Reason, men sat around for hours discussing the power of the mind and a myriad of philosophical ideas and motivations.  Again, the new enlightenment must be manifested through action.

Taylor argues that our society should eschew elements of pop culture that degrade people and that we should spend more time looking into what develops empathetic citizens. Would this be possible?

Possible? Yes. Probable? No.  Media influence and pop culture is a money machine getting rich of the ills of its consumers.  Pathetic and selfish husbands are portrayed on numerous sitcoms, violence is celebrated on every channel, and the push to accept open sexuality on television and in music has reached an all time high.  The minute one think it can’t get any worse, another song comes out degrading women ort a primetime television show exposes more flesh.

Even with the onslaught of degradation, empathy and respect is possible.  As citizens, we must remember that pop culture does not represent the majority; only the most vocal.  Behind the degrading music video and violent video game are millions of people loving each other and communicating with respect and empathy.  Our challenge is to continue to report it and share it.  Even more, to show it.

At the end of the video, Taylor talks about atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect on their growth. What is the implication of these comments for organizational change efforts?

One of my favorite books read during this Leadership curriculum is Stewart Levine’s (2009) Getting to Resolution: Turning Conflict into Collaboration.  In it he said, “How did we get here, and how can we get out of here? I believe that as a civilization we are tottering on a dangerous precipice. To resolve many of our great challenges we must be able to engage in thoughtful and authentic dialogue. We have conquered outer space; our biggest challenge is conquering “inner space.”

Taylor implores us to rethink freedom, justice, and progress. 

My cousin watched political television every chance he gets.  As a result, every time I speak to him his response is always the same, “Society is sleeping! People must wake up! Our country and our freedom are being taken form us and no one is doing anything about it!” 

I often assure him I am not sleeping but am also not defaulting to a Chicken Little persona.

Even so, it would behoove us all to understand the direction of our society rather than ignore the flow and one day wake up unaware of your surroundings.

Levine (2009) finished the above comment with, “Given our current military capacity for destruction, if we cannot make the mental shift to fully engage in authentic conversation we risk the end of life as we know it” (p. xxii).

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Taylor’s video so eloquently presented the importance and responsibility of every citizen to “own” empathy.  To pursue a genuine concern for others.  To look at life through the lenses of unity, equality, and compassion.  It isn’t enough to understand the need for empathy; rather, we must extend it and activate it.  Everyday. Everywhere.

In 10 hours I’ll be sitting at my desk on a Monday morning.  I’ve watched Taylor’s video no less than five times (listened to it twice while driving).  I am impressed with his grasp on the human condition and the present state of society.  At the end of the day though, I am not motivated by his talk as much as I am “enlightened.”  My motivation comes from another kind of Light.  It inspires me to love radically, to serve selflessly, and to give unabashedly.  My empathy flows from a divine source.  It is not a cause; it’s a cross.

Steve

References:

Goleman, D. (1994). Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Dell

Kegan, R., & Laskow, L.L. (2009). Immunity to change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School

Publishing Company.

Levine, S. (2009). Getting to Resolution. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Taylor, M. (2010). RSA Animate: The 21^st Century Enlightenment. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be

A630.1.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

Fly, Fight, and...Centralize?

My son keeps two old and dirty stuffed animals in the top drawer of his dresser.  They are held together by thin lines of thread. Normally, this wouldn’t surprise anyone except my son is nineteen and in college.  He also has his first skateboard, pieces of his first bike, and clothes he has long outgrown.  My son struggles with change.  It seems he’s not alone.

It’s one of the most publicized challenges in business.  It echoes in the halls of our government and is forced down the throat of commoners. It’s witnessed up close as a baby grows and perceived through tears when a loved one dies.  There is no getting around it.  And, planning for it can feel futile: Change.

The Center for Creative Leadership said, “Today there seems to be very little business as usual. Turbulence is common, with organizations facing a dizzying array of changes. Your success as a leader will very likely depend on how well you deal with such change.”

In the United States Air Force (USAF), change is a constant.  It begins with changing your identity (basic training), changing your location (orders), and changing your job (policy and promotions). One of the most significant changes I experienced in twenty years of active service in the USAF occurred from 1997 through 2000. 

Prior to 1997, USAF logistics operated under a decentralized concept.  In short, supply-related support functions were managed and conducted at base-level by large supply squadrons.  However, in 1997 Air Combat Command (ACC) directed all combat-coded bases to centralize their supply functions to one location.  That meant, the primary support functions normally conducted by hundreds of AF men, women, and civilians would be transferred to a central location (out of their control and off their base) and managed via Internet, email, and a centralized computer operating center.  Supply personnel were speechless while maintenance leadership was screaming. 

ACC stood up a supply center known as the Regional Supply Squadron (RSS) at Langley AFB in Virginia.  With one-third of the personnel, the RSS assumed responsibility for the bulk of supply tasks at 19 active bases.  I was a member of the “advon-team” and acted as “practitioner” visiting each bases and briefing senior leadership on the transition.  Our motto hitting the ground was, “We promise as good or better support.”

Transferring all supply functions to another location meant senior leadership at the Air Force bases would not have access to a “warm body” and would be unable to reach out and touch when support was less than expected.  Most metrics and measurement tools would be viewed and accessed over a central database.  Leaders struggled with the concept of dedicated support, sortie-generation success, and the lack of loyalty focused on their local needs. 

As practitioner, developing the relationship with senior leaders during the visits and assuaging their fears proved to be an important determinant of our success or failure in regionalizing supply processes.  Brown (2011) stated, “The exchange of expectations and obligations (the formation of a psychological contract) depends to a great degree upon a good first impression or match between the client (AF base) and the practitioner (ACC)” (p. 15).

In discussing the action research model, Brown (2011) said, “The manager also needs to be aware of the processes that should be considered when one is attempting to create change” (p. 15).  As we demonstrated how the new processes would function, we maintained sensitive to their fears and concerns.  Little by little, both senior leaders and younger airmen began to accept the regionalization concept and even believe it may work.

However, even though many began to believe, many more remained pessimistic.  We heard comments such as, “It will never work.” “The aircraft will be grounded all over the country.” “How will anyone get answers?” “The project is going to fail!” We continued to demonstrate an empathic resolve and identified that the process was already working on a smaller scale at Langley by supporting deployed locations overseas.

While the pessimist was unwilling to give the idea credence, the pragmatist tried to dissect the concept by picking apart the processes. They refused to envision any possibilities that operations could function at heightened levels from a central location. Brown (2011) said, “Question the client’s diagnosis of the problem, because the client’s perspective may be biased” (p. 16).  As a result of the pessimism and pragmatism, we continued to move forward with vision of a streamlined operations promising exceptional support.  With strong leadership from headquarters, a governmental directive to reduce personnel and money, the regional concept proved to be the best way forward.

So we proceeded.  One base a month.  The RSS assumed responsibility for all routine and priority orders.  They inherited the functions of records maintenance, stock control, funds, and the most critical supply function at a base: Mission Capability Section responsible for chasing parts for grounded aircraft.  It wasn’t easy.  There were hour-long phone calls and daily video teleconferences.  In the end, it worked.  Air Force logistics support is now managed by two regional supply centers.

Change started with a command from the Pentagon: reduce defense spending and service manpower. Over 15 years later the RSS has evolved into a central supply center housing over 200 people responsible for managing aircraft all over the globe.  What started as a practitioner and client discussion for streamlining supply functions has grown into a global logistics supercenter. 

Retired for nearly a decade and working alongside supply people as a Lockheed contractor, I still get to witness the continuing change of USAF supply.  It’s funny, young supply airmen often come into my office and talk about how their jobs have changed in the past year.  Leaning back in my chair I smile and ask, “Is that right? Please, tell me about it.”

Legacy evolves.

Steve

References:

Brown, D. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organizational Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Center for Creative Leadership. (2013). Adapting to Organizational Change. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.