A633.1.2.RB_RuggerioSteven

Closing the Leadership Gap

Has your own attitude to leaders changed in your life, and if so, how?

When I joined the Air Force in 1984, the concept of leadership was much different than it is today.  At 19-years old, my view of leadership consisted of my parents, the best athlete on our sports teams, and my shift supervisor at McDonalds.  That would all change the minute I stepped off the bus at 2300 hours at Lackland AFB in Texas for Basic Training.  I knew right away who was the leader and who wasn’t. 

The Air Force quickly presented me with facts and expectations.  From team exercises to classroom training, the first few weeks of Air Force life cleared demonstrated the importance of awareness and knowing one’s place in a larger mission.  As time progressed in my career, I began studying leadership primarily for promotional opportunities.  Leadership was clearly a military imperative and they had their historical share of great leaders.  I studied names like Billy Mitchell, General Henry “Hap” Arnold, the Wright brothers, and the first enlisted man to win the Medal of Honor, John Levitow.  The Air Force described these leaders in great detail and in the process I couldn’t help but notice many of the people that I worked for did not resemble the people I was studying. 

It was during my first enlistment that I realized the leadership learning process would teach me how to lead but also how “not to” lead.  With real-life experiences, hours of study, and the onset of a strong desire and ability to lead, my perspective, style, and influence was beginning to grow. 

What started as studying leadership for promotion has become a desire to help others.  The more I have learned about leadership, the more I have become focused on helping others.  In the early years, my leadership was more about my career, my reputation, and me. Thirty years later, my leadership is based on authentic character and compassion for others.

If we take as a starting point the attitude to those in authority/leaders as held by your grandparents, and then look at those attitudes held by your parents, and then by you, and then by the younger generation, is there a changing trend? If so, what is it?

As I stated earlier, leadership has evolved from a one-man-show into a more holistic approach with leaders identified throughout the chain-of-command.  Traditionally, leadership was reserved for those at the top of the organization chart with a corner office.  Over the years, it has slowly moved down to take a collective perspective with strong leaders at each level.

From the quality initiatives to organizational innovation, the trend of leadership is sliding away from singular individuals and to teams and work groups.  While the benefits of teams and delegation have always been known, it has only been in the past twenty-years that it has been respected as its own entity rather than something the “top leader” recommends. 

Why do you think that this has occurred?

In 1980, the General Motors plant in Fremont, CA closed its doors.  High levels of animosity existed between workers and managers.  Eventually, five thousand workers were laid off and managers had lost all faith in their ability to motivate and inspire their workforce. 

Part of the problem dates back to the early 1930s with fear and intimidation ruled the workforce.  And reeling from the Great Depression, workers would stand for almost anything to get a paycheck.  In the 1950s, American workers began to unite and form unions.  While these factions protected the workers, they did little to mend management and labor relations.  The Fremont plant seemed an unpleasant extension of the distrust and ill will that seemed to permeate the American workforce.

In Change or Die, Alan Deutschman (2007) describes how Toyota stepped in with a plan to revive the operation.  By establishing trust and treating workers with respect, Toyota chief’s changed the hearts and minds of the former employees.  They hired back nearly all of the 5,000 workers and turned the plant around.  Toyota’s philosophy was based on two ideas and this is one of the reasons we have seen a leadership change over the years.  Deutschman stated, “The first was that the average worker is motivated by a desire to do a job that enhances his self-worth and earns the respect of other workers.  The second premise was that the worker is inspired by an employer who places value in the worker’s input” (p. 107). 

MacGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y in the 1950s began to highlight a new way of thinking and in the process created a new way of leading.  Seeing value in people, giving them room to grow, and encouraging them rather than abusing them has produced greater results, more innovation, and fewer turnovers.  It works in the office, at home, on the ball field, and in the boardroom. 

Additionally, while we live in a world with more information about leadership and leadership practices, why is it that we have an apparent gap in the quality of our leaders?

In their book Why Are We Bad At Picking Good Leaders? Cohn and Moran (2011) started their introduction by stating, “Let’s face it, we are lousy at picking leaders.  Why does this happen? Why don’t’ we do a better job of picking effective leaders? For starters, because sleeking the right people can be very, very hard” (p. 1).  Our society is a performance-based arena where the best and brightest individuals sit atop an empire saturated in media coverage and fanfare.  As history has shown, most people don’t care how they got there. 

I believe Bill George (2007) said it best in his book True North, “Under pressure from Wall Street to maximize short-term earnings, board of directors frequently chose leaders for their charisma instead of character, their style rather than their substance, and their image instead of their integrity” (p. xxv). 

When current leaders and large groups of people select leaders without considering the person’s emotional intelligence or their inner qualities of integrity, character, and compassion, they are taking a significant risk with their business, their team, and their organization. 

How do you think we can close this gap?

From personal relationship to professional assignments, if we hope to minimize the quality gap in leaders than we must focus on the internal attributes before we are blinded by the external possibilities.  Cohn & Moran (2011) identify seven leadership attributes of integrity, empathy, emotional intelligence, vision, judgment, courage, and passion.”  They said, “These seven qualities must be taken as a whole to capture the essence of leadership” (p. 8).

From Kouzes & Posner to Jack Welch and John Maxwell, it is incumbent on today’s leaders to look deeper than a sales report by placing more value on the how and not merely the what.  I think Stephen M.R. Covey (2006) said it best in his book The Speed of Trust when he said, “The ability to establish, grow, extend, and restore trust with all stakeholders—customers, business partners, investors, and coworkers—is the key leadership competency of the new global economy” (p. 21).  And then, most importantly, he highlights that trust is a function of two things: character and competence. 

Competence is extremely important in leaders. However, if we ignore a leader’s character, we do so at our own peril.

Steve

References:

Cohn, J., & Moran, J. (2011). Why are we bad at picking good leaders? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Covey, S.M. (2006). The speed of trust. New York, NY: Free Press.

Deutschman, A. (2007). Change or die. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

A520.9.5.RB_RuggerioSteven

Trust is Power

If you can inspire 30 men to get up at 8:00 am on a Saturday to sit in a circle and share their dreams, fears, and struggles, you must be doing something right.  Every second and fourth Saturday, I lead a Christian men’s group that focuses on developing integrity and character with the purpose of creating better husbands, fathers, employers, employees, sons, brothers, and friends.  The group consists of a NASA engineer, a handful of Air Force officers, and members of the U.S. Navy; there are teachers, students, program managers, and the unemployed.  The ages range from 21 to 61 and encompass married, single, divorced, and engaged.  To be sure, if one ever hopes to make a difference in the lives of such an eclectic group of men, one better understand the power of influence, the influence of power, and the importance of trust.

Mary Kay Whitaker, (2008) in her book It All Starts With You said, “To build a foundation of trust, managers must match their actions to their words” (p. 8).  In a world of camouflage and power struggles, men want authenticity.  When it comes to personal growth, real-life issues at home, the vulnerable landscape of their marriage, and the treacherous terrain of parenting, men can sense fake, manipulative, and selfish motives.  The old adage, “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care” is never more true than dealing with men.  Hidden behind rough exteriors and buried beneath years of machismo are men looking to find a meaning for their life.  Something deeper than an office cubicle.  Something richer than a roommate with a wedding ring.  They want their life to count.  My calling and purpose is to help them find it by clearing away the debris of bad decisions and incorrect assumptions.  The avenue I use to do this is trust.

Are you comfortable developing sources of personal influence to gain power?

Whetten & Cameron (2011) take a detour from the traditional view of power.  Mostly perceived as controlling and manipulative, they shift the definition from “having authority over others to being able to get things done” (p. 286).  One of my favorite gifts working with men are the emails I receive from wives and children.  Leading a men’s ministry takes great sacrifice, perseverance, time, and hope.  Lots and lots of hope.  There have been more than a few times that I’ve thought of “throwing in the towel” and moving on to easier pastures.  But, without fail, I’ll receive a new (or remember an old) email from a wife thanking me for investing in her husband.  Hearing her say, “I don’t know what you’re doing on Saturday or what you tell him when you have coffee with him but he is changing.  He spends more time with us, takes our children out more, has become more romantic, and is responding in a kind and gentle way.”  Those comments confirm Whetten & Cameron’s power definition of “getting it done.” Stephen M.R. Covey (2006) said, “People trust people who make things happen” (p. 30). 

Whetten & Cameron identified the sources of personal influence as expertise, personal attraction, effort, and legitimacy.  Each is a critical component of leading and challenging followers.  Leaders should seek these qualities regardless of their current position or leadership role.   In his book The Speed of Trust, Covey (2006) said, “Trust is a function of two things: character and competence” (p. 30).  These four sources of personal power are elements of both character and competence.  Developing them is the key to leadership and success.  At the end of the day it comes down to motive.  Consistent and life-changing power and influence is bestowed rather than demanded.

Do you embody the characteristics of likeable people depicted in Table 5.4 (p. 290)?

            

         Whetten & Cameron (2011) identified six characteristics of likeable people.  I am often referred to as having charisma and strong social abilities.  In the process of fine tuning them and learning about the dynamics of social exchanges, I often hear, “one can’t fake charisma and force themselves to be socially successful.”  While charisma is an embedded element of one’s personality; likeability is not.  If you want to influence: be nice!  Likeability can be learned.  Everyone can increase their influence by practicing these six skills:

• Support and open, honest, and loyal relationship
• Foster intimacy by being emotionally accessible
• Provide unconditional, positive regard and acceptance
• Endure some sacrifices if the relationship should demand them
• Provide social reinforcement in the form of sympathy and empathy
• Engage in the social exchanges necessary to sustain a relationship

After reading these characteristics, I sent the list to my core men’s group leaders.  I concluded the email by saying, “We can only take men as far as we’ve gone. Go further.”  If bosses and leaders ever hope to succeed, they must practice the six behaviors of likeable people.  I understand anything can be taken to an extreme.  This is not meant for supervisors or CEOs to be “best-friends” with their employees but in the same vein, the traditional, hard-driving autocratic and impersonal boss is counterproductive as well. 

Fortunately for me (and those I come in contact with), I have incorporated the six characteristics into my relational repertoire.  However, they are not used as tools to influence and manipulate as much as they are integral elements of who I am.  By regularly practicing these behaviors and having a strong sense of my own identity, I can be open, honest, and empathic without feeling threatened.

Are you able to use influence both up and down your organization considering the information in Table 5.5 (p. 293)

            

          Trust and respect is a two-way street.  Credibility crashes when leaders demand follower’s respect and adherence without offering it to their leaders.  Everyone works for someone.  CEOs are accountable to shareholders and shareholders are accountable to society.  In the military, authority and respect still operate under a strong hierarchy.  Regardless of rank, respect, trust, and followership are ubiquitous traits that make for effective organizations.  One of the ways I protect my integrity and credibility is by “practicing what I preach.”  In other words, am I offering the same investment and respect to my boss that I am expecting from my followers? 

            

           Whetten & Cameron (2011) highlighted ways to manage and nurture one’s relationship with their boss.  They stated, “Understand your boss’s goals; the pressure they are under; and their blind spots.” Moreover, “assess your own strengths and weaknesses; your perception of authority; and always, always, keep your boss informed” (p. 291).  While I have a great amount of autonomy in my current position with Lockheed Martin, I make it a regular practice to keep my boss up-to-date either through emails or daily phone calls.  Another way to strengthen our relationship is through regular conversations about work processes and also personal challenges.  Through honest and open discussions, my boss and I have developed a strong relationship.  One of the most important principles of my leadership is “in order to be a good leader, you must first be a good follower.”

Steve

References:

Covey, S.M. (2006). The speed of trust. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Whetten, D.A., & Cameron, K.S. (2011). Developing management skills. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Whitaker, M.K., & Whitaker, R. (2008). It all starts with you. Kansas City, MO: Xcelogic, Inc.