A633.9.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

Changing Leaders and Leaving Legacies

Most leadership models have the assumption of oligarchy – leadership is done by a few leaders over many followers. If polyarchy is fast replacing the old oligarchy assumptions does this make these old leadership models redundant? 

Barbara Kellerman (2012), Harvard professor, author, Forbes top 50 business thinker, and one of the best leadership minds of our day, wrote in her book The End of Leadership, “Everything is vulnerable to the vicissitudes of change—a general rule to which leadership is no exception” (p. xv).  With that said, she continued, “It was presumed until only recently that leaders should dominate and followers defer.  Leaders were generally expected to tell followers what to do, and followers were generally expected to do as they were told.  No longer.  Now followers are far sturdier than they used to be, stronger and more independent” (p. xvii).

In explaining the growth of polyarchy and confirming Kellerman’s words, Obolensky (2010) said, “The ‘death of deference’ seems sharper today than ever before.  We hold our leaders to account more now than we have done” (p. 4).  He explains this is a result of, “structures becoming more fluid and traditional boundaries becoming more dynamic.” Moreover, “knowledge and wisdom are becoming wider spread, and this means that leadership needs to be more dynamic and honest” (p. 6).

With leadership being redefined and becoming more personal than corporate, this shift does not negate or eliminate the traditional models of leadership.  Rather, it recognizes and respects their insights and builds upon them instead of replacing them.  Obolensky (2010) agrees and stated, “Traditional leadership models can be seen in a new light using different assumptions” (p. 195).

Reflecting on traditional leadership from the perspective of complex adaptive leadership, address the implications and how they will affect you as a leader in the future. 

One of my favorite books is Alan Deutschman’s (2007) Change or Die in which he said, “Experts identified the odds of people changing are nine to one” (p. 2).  In other words, only one person out of ten actually changes.  The other 9 (or 90 percent) choose to remain on the same course while ignoring the facts around them.  Deutschman discusses change in the area of health care, the criminal justice system, and autoworkers.  Three areas ripe with leaders and followers.  And though most of the statistics showed people couldn’t change, there were leaders within each industry that showed people can change—and would change—with the right leaders in place.

By studying complex adaptive leadership, the reality of complexity and adaptability was enforced, then reinforced, and then reinforced again.  Comfortable is easy.  Change is hard.  Obolensky’s text and the Strategic Leadership course has encouraged and inspired me to learn the traditional models of leadership theory while adding and building upon them with a polyarchic perspective.

I entered this program 9-weeks ago with a view of leadership that generally had a hierarchical and oligarchic concept but still believed in the power of the people.  Being raised in the military will do that to a person.  However, like Kellerman, Deutschman, and Obolensky have stated, times have changed and leadership has changed with it.  By understanding the shift, I have been positioned to empower others in a more pronounced fashion and recognized that the process is the point and path of leadership influence.

What impact will they have on your future strategy?

Being equipped and empowered as a complex adaptive leader, my actions and strategy going forward will be more fluid and flexible.  Rigidity stifles creativity and in the process, a leaders potential as well.  By flowing rather than directing, my leadership has become more guide than director; more coach than title. 

Marcus Buckingham (2012), in Leadership Development In the Age of The Algorithm said, “Virtually every corporate and academic leadership development program is founded on the same formulaic model.  It tries to collect all the various approaches to leadership, shaves off the weird outliers, and packages the rest into a formula” (p. 88).  My strategy will not only be flexible but more personal.  Rather than fitting people into processes, I believe we can build processes from the people. 

We are in the age of individualism.  And while that can carry some social and moral challenges, it also brings with it a spirit of innovation and creativity as the world has never seen.  Technological breakthroughs, cross-cultural relationships, and a global marketplace have created a virtual playground of possibilities.  My strategy will open the door for people to explore and create opportunities for them to connect with a larger crowd.

I use a lot of quotes from other people as I have great respect for those whose words I repeat.  

So, with that, I’ll finish my last Embry Riddle blog with an excerpt from Seth Godin’s book, Tribes.

Godin (2008) said all you need to know is two things (p. 71).

1. Individuals have far more power than ever before in history.  One person can change an industry.  One person can declare a war.  One person can reinvent science or politics or technology.
2. The only thing holding you back from becoming the kind of person who changes things is this: lack of faith.  Faith that you can do it.  Faith that it’s worth doing.  Faith that failure won’t destroy you.

Change without faith is scary.  Change without knowledge is deadly.  Fortunately, I have grown in faith and knowledge over the past two years.  I am leaving this course and this program with a desire to be better.  To make a difference.  To leave a legacy. And for that I am eternally grateful. 

Steve

References:

Buckingham, M. (2012). Leadership Development in the Age of the Algorithm. Harvard

            Business Review, 90(6), 86-94.

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

Godin, S. (2008). Tribes. New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.

Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing.

A633.8.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                       Coaching: Success on the Ground and in the Air

 “In the future, people who are not coaches will not be promoted.”

                 --Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric

In the 1950s, the word coach described a horse-drawn vehicle that would get people from where they were to where they wanted to be.  Many years later, big buses with rows of seats were called coaches, and their purpose was the same: to get people to where they wanted to go.  As time rolled by, the term “coaching” made its way into the sport’s arena where it became known for people who help athletes move from one place to another.

Today, as businesses are faced with the unsettling impact of sweeping changes, rapid technological advances, and tidal waves of information, leaders are beginning to see that no one person can keep abreast of everything (Collins, 2002, p.12).  Therefore, having a consultant—or in this case, a coach—can be the difference between overcoming present-day hurdles and fading into obscurity or becoming a thriving organization that shapes the future.

We all get stuck at one time or another.  There are times when we need fresh eyes on a situation, encouragement when the road gets tough, and someone to help us unearth a solution clouded by the fog of uncertainty.  And, even though coaching programs are gaining momentum in the world of nutrition, fitness, finance, business, and even “life” coaches, it is still relatively unknown and underutilized due to a lack of quantitative data.

In complex situations, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed and even slightly disoriented.  In those moments, leadership coaches come alongside decision makers to keep hope alive. Dr. Gary Collins (2002) said, “The coach does not impart wisdom or give direction. Instead, the coach’s job is to help clients articulate their dreams, desires, and aspirations, help them clarify their mission, purpose, and goals, and help them achieve that outcome” (p. 84).

What is it that coaches do to provide value to their clients?

Constantine von Hoffman (1999), in dispelling coaching myths, defined coaching as, “helping people define clear goals and set a specific time frame in which to meet them” (p. 4).  Along those same lines, Dr. Collins (2002) said, “Coaching is the art and practice of enabling individuals and groups to move from where they are to where they want to be.  Coaching helps people expand their visions, build their confidence, unlock their potential, increase their skills, and take practical steps toward their goal” (p. 14).

One of the key values of coaching is that it places the responsibility for growth on the individual.  The coach may guide, lead, and enlighten; but, the coachee is in the driver’s seat and will move forward only as far as they are willing to pursue change or overcome an obstacle.  James Flaherty (1998) said, “Coaching is a way of working with people that leaves them more competent and more fulfilled so that they are able to contribute to their organizations and find meaning in what they do” (p. 1).

Moreover, von Hoffman (1999) said, “Coaching produces more consistent, replicable results than a lot of other management approaches.  Coaching taps people’s creativity.  It encourages them to be more flexible and adaptable.  That kind of response from employees can have a substantial effect on the bottom line” (p. 5).  Better employees produce better results.  Value flows from several tributaries.  Focused employees, clear directives, and overcoming challenges are just a few of the values resulting from effective coaching techniques.

 Why is coaching a vital aspect of both leadership and strategy? 

Alan Nelson (2007), coach and editor of Rev! Magazine said, “One might think with the plethora of leadership resources available, these would be sufficient to create more and better leaders.  If literature were enough to ‘unstick’ leaders, we’d be in great shape but no book contains the silver bullet.  The primary reason is that books and conferences tend to be impersonal and one-way communication.  However, when a coach comes into the picture, that person helps the leader translate the salient points in a book, conference, or consultation into the language of his or her specific context and skills” (. 30).  In a whirlwind of organizational complexity, leaders can be caught blind and unaware.  Coaches help leaders maintain momentum and increase situational awareness.

Whetten & Cameron (2011) said, “In coaching, managers pass along advice and information, or they set standards to help others improve their work skills.  Skillful coaching is especially important when (1) rewarding positive performance and (2) correcting problem behaviors or attitudes” (p. 244).  Proper coaching helps leaders maintain proper priorities while sustaining a competitive edge.

 

How can it make a difference in an organization?

Diane Coutu (2009) said, “The reasons companies engage coaches have changed.  Ten years ago, most companies engaged a coach to help fix toxic behavior at the top.  Today, most coaching is about developing the capabilities of high-potential performers” (p. 1).  Organizations and their leaders are learning and experiencing the long-term benefits of developing their employees.  Rather than push for profits, they invest in their people and as a result, the people commit to the vision and invest in the organization. 

As noted above, coaching techniques have proven to be useful tools in developing people. Obolensky (2010) said, “Coaching is a good technique to bridge the divide, as well as move an individual toward Level 5 Followership which entails followers getting-on with their tasks and reporting progress to leaders in routine ways” (p 171).

What does this mean to you and your organization?

The Air Force has a rich tradition of leading and developing young men and women.  Though they have not fully implemented a “coaching” culture by way of an Air Force regulation, they have created a mentoring policy for their enlisted force.  From imparting pride and patriotism to ensuring adherence to customs and courtesies, Air Force non-commissioned officers (NCOs) are known as “the backbone” of the Air Force. 

These men and women are trained and qualified to lead, develop, and mentor new, junior, or career NCOs.  The Air Force defines a mentor as “a trusted counselor or guide.”  Mentoring is slightly different than coaching and usually carries a longer commitment.  However, there are some similarities in that another person acts as a guide to lead another to develop both personally and professionally.  Over the years, mentoring has broadened to look more and more like coaching.  A major difference, however, is that the mentor works as an expert, while the coach assumes that the client is the one best able and most likely to find direction and move forward” (Collins, 2002).  In the Air Force, coaching could benefit both the enlisted and the officer corps by allowing skilled men and women to help military leaders find elusive solutions and goals hidden within themselves.

Steve

References

Collins, G. (2002). Christian coaching. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.

Coutu, D. (2009). What Can Coaches Do For You? Retrieved from

http://hbr.org/2009/01/what-can-coaches-do-for-you/ar/1

Flaherty, J. (1998). Coaching: Evoking Excellence in Others. Retrieved from

www.frumi.com

Nelson, A. (2007). Rev! Magazine’s Bathroom Guide to Leadership. Loveland, CO:

            Group Publishing.

von Hoffman, C. (1999). Coaching: The ten killer myths. Harvard Management Update,

 4(1), 4.

Whetton, D.A., & Cameron, K.S. (2011). Developing management skills. Upper Saddle

            River, NJ: Pearson.

A633.7.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

Leadership: The Inner Voice of Change

Dan Cathy (2011) said, “Being a leader means being able to help others discover and then live out their potential by inspiring them to seek it every day” (p. 27).  Inspiration must be accompanied by practical application.  My passion to inspire followers flows from one of my core principles of leadership: Continuous growth.

            My life and leadership are anchored in the belief that I must maintain a state of learning and intellectual exploration.  Obolensky’s (2010) survey/test of my leadership in light of his Telling, Selling, Involve, and Devolve matrix highlighted two areas of potential improvement.

            First, the test determined that I currently lead from an Involve/Sell perspective in which it is harder for me to “let go and allow follower’s room for growth,” and secondly, I may be “working harder than necessary.”  Delegating was a difficult challenge for me early in my leadership.  Over the years it has become easier although it rears its ugly head at time.  By establishing trusting relationships, I have been able to delegate more often and in the process, avoid micromanaging. Moreover, the survey identified that I may also be using too direct of an approach in my leadership.  

            Operating from a place of continuous growth and improvement, these insights have helped me create an atmosphere where followers can lead and grow along with me. I’ve found that one of my greatest achievements is sharing in the successful maturation and development of those that I lead.  Watching younger men and women take the initiative and demonstrate courage in leadership has become the most satisfying aspect of leadership.

Has your thinking changed over the course of the past six weeks, if so; why, and, if not; why?

            The Strategic Leadership course and Obolensky’s Complex Adaptive Leadership have equipped me with the tools necessary to face and direct complex situations.  In the military, complexity is ubiquitous.  Traditionally, leaders were taught to understand the intricacies of each situation, to understand the enemy, and to lead with directness—believing the mission must always come first.  However, the military has changed, warfare and strategy has changed, and I have changed. 

            This course has caused me to look at every situation and realize there will be uncontrollable dynamics hidden within each one.  With countless leadership books in my office, Obolensky’s desire to “build on and not replace” them has equipped me to integrate his teachings into the writings of other great authors like Kouzes, Posner, Heifetz, Godin, Maxwell, Collins, and Kellerman.  Obolensky (2010) said, “Complex Adaptive Leadership is not about throwing away traditional leadership wisdom.  It is about challenging the underlying assumptions of leadership and seeing leadership in a different way, which means letting go (but not necessarily abandoning) some long held beliefs” (p. xiv).

            This course and assignments have pushed me to implement new interpersonal strategies, pause before acting, and release control to both the situation and the people.  With these tactics, I’ve been educated in the potential of people and the power of the process.

What is the significance of this in the context of your future leadership goals and objectives?

            In an article titled, Change Starts at 4 A.M., Tim Willard (2011) said, “As leaders, we are often pressured to stay ahead of the pack.  In order to do so we set out to be razor sharp.  We seek to grow our influence; we pride ourselves in our professional acumen and our ability to see beyond the status quo.  And, in the right order and context, these things are fine” (p. 97).  Recognizing the value and power of change, Tim continued and added, “But if we truly desire to be a voice of change, industry standard is not enough.  As we peer into the rich concept of change we come face to face with a definition of leadership that will, if we let it, change us” (p. 97).

This class, the discussions, Obolensky’s text, and the assignments have all impacted my definition and understanding of leadership.  But, the greatest change and the deepest challenge came as I sat alone and reflected upon my life and my leadership.  Am I making a difference?  Are people better because of me?  Are my motives clear, and more importantly, pure?  Have I become a better employee, pastor, husband, father, and friend?  These are the true metrics.  Like Willard said above, industry standards and bottom line profits cannot be the sole litmus test of our effectiveness as leaders.  The true test is, “Have I helped others become better?”  I believe I have.

My present and future leadership and influence will be determined not only by the immediate result but the long term—and sometimes painstakingly slow—changing of those whom have allowed me access to influence.  This course has helped me become a guide: One that is confident in complexity and adaptive in attitude.

Steve

Cathy, D. (2011). Chick-Fil-A Leadercast Journal. Voices of Change, 1-134.
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing.

Willard, T. (2011). Chick-Fil-A Leadercast Journal. Voices of Change, 1-134.

A633.6.5.RB_RuggerioSteven

Crutch or Coach: The Leaders Follower Dilemma

            Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will 

            carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6, NIV).

We are failing.  Failing as leaders and failing as followers of Christ.  Dr. Richard Krejcir (2005) said, “Growing in Christ is the key to growing a church; following up, teaching, and mentoring new and seasoned Christians are the keys to spiritual growth” (p. 1).  The process of discipleship, aka mentoring, training, coaching, and developing individuals into mature Christians, has taken a backseat to the visually stunning and exciting moments of “altar-call” conversions.  As a result, the difficult, yet irreplaceable, task of leading and developing people has been lost.  

The art of discipleship swings back-and-forth like a pendulum from being an absentee leader to one creating complete dependence.  Obolensky’s “vicious circle for leaders” highlights a systemic problem leader’s face when discipling men and women in the church in the area of dependence.  Rather than empowering and facilitating independence, interdependence, and self-confidence, leaders have made themselves indispensable and, in the process, have become more of a crutch than a coach.  

Obolensky’s (2010) “vicious circle for leaders” describes the process in which follower’s continually check with leaders for approval.  The leader’s response either encourages or dissuades follower behavior.  The model demonstrates over time, that the follower’s confidence and development become dependent on the leader’s instruction thereby inhibiting self-confidence and courage.  This vicious circle consists of five steps set in a continual loop. 

Step one begins when the follower “asks for advice and demonstrates a low skill to the leader.”  Step two happens when the leader “gets concerned” and step three when the leader “takes a more hands-on approach.”  After that, step four occurs when “the follower’s confidence grows in connection to the leader” and finally, as a result, step five solidifies the dependence when “followers thinks they must defer more.”

Does this happen in your organization? 

Church culture speaks, encourages, and promotes discipleship.  Jesus said, “Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19, NIV).  In the process of making disciples, ministry leaders are often caught up into an endless and “vicious circle” of care.  The circle in ministry looks similar to Obolensky in that a church member expresses a need; the ministry leader is pulled into the individual’s struggle; the leader offers encouragement and advice; and the individual then applies it and things begin to look up.  Experiencing a breakthrough, the individual then leans heavily on the leader for additional struggles and help. 

As stated earlier, church leaders are in the “people-business” and their hearts genuinely want to help.  This is encouraged.  However, this compassion and empathy must be tempered with boundaries and wisdom.  Church leaders and pastors are not to step-in and stand-in for every problem a member may face.  Rather, they should help them understand it is their “personal relationship” with God and the strength of their faith that should help them mature and make right decisions. 

 What are the effects on the organization?

The Bible regularly refers to people being like sheep.  The Apostle Peter said, “For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls” (1 Peter 2:25, NIV).  In his article In Praise of Followers, Robert E. Kelley (2001) said, “Sheep are passive and uncritical, lacking in initiative and sense of responsibility.  They perform the tasks given them and stop.  Yes, people are a livelier but equally unenterprising group.  Dependent on a leader for inspiration, they can be aggressively deferential, even servile” (p. 143).

Too often, church leaders create people dependent on pastors and leaders.  Rather than being conduits for people to find their individual strength and purpose, pastors and leaders answer every call, provide every answer, and rescue members from every trouble.  To be sure, leaders often assist out of a pure motives.  They desire to help and to care for one another.  And, they should!  However, it is incumbent for leaders to know when to lean in and when to pull back.  

This vicious circle of dependency creates a church of immature Christians.  Lacking spiritual self-confidence and an ability to seek answers and solutions for themselves, men and women flounder in the face of difficulties and their faith weakens in the process.  

Create a new circle that would promote strong followership and even leadership at the lower levels of the organization.

A leader never stops learning.  In a healthy environment, both leader and follower are learning together; absent power, intimidation, and insecurity.  One of the most successful models and circles of discipleship that I have used extensively is Rick Warren’s model from Saddleback Church. 

It is formed like a baseball diamond with four stages.  

They are:

1. Committed to Membership – Knowing Christ.  At this stage, new believers and members attend a course that helps them understand their recent conversion and the structure of the church.

2. Committed to Maturity – Growing in Christ.  At this stage, members begin to pursue and develop in spiritual maturity.  They study the Bible, attend community groups, and meet regularly with a spiritual mentor and coach.

3. Committed to Ministry – Serving Christ.  At stage three, members have made their commitment a steady and disciplined part of their life.  They begin to step into leadership positions, delve deeper into their faith, and most importantly, they start focusing on intentionally serving others.

4. Committed to Missions – Sharing Christ.  The final stage is a place where mature Christian begin to actively disciple and lead others.  This is where their life purpose and activities begin to flourish and take form. 

The title “final stage” is somewhat of a misnomer because a disciple never completes the growth process.  However, they are less and less dependent on others for their spiritual growth and have matured to a place of self-sufficiency, i.e., they no longer depend on pastors and leaders for their spiritual “nourishment” but have taken responsibility for their own progress.

Steve

References:

Kelley, R.E. (1998). In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.

Krejcir, R.J. (2005). The Importance of Discipleship and Growth. Retrieved from

http://www.churchleadership.org/apps/articles/default.asp?articleid=42814&columnid=4543

Warren, R. (1995). Purpose driven church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.