The recent ouster of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt has been dubbed a “leaderless revolution.” In Jordan, Bahrain, and elsewhere in the Arab world, similar “leaderless” protests are leading to regime changes or reform.

In America, well-established businesses plunge toward collapse with well-compensated decision-makers at the helm, and we appear ignorant or powerless while witnessing the corruption, decadence and despair? So, how is it possible that in Egypt people oppressed by political dictatorship can hold a leaderless revolution – and achieve monumental historic change?

The difference, in my view, is the priority for personal honor.

The people of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and the rest are driven not by politics, greed, or power. They’re concerned principally with human rights, dignity, and justice. They garner support because their protests focus not on the aspirations of a few, but on the inherent rights of all. The organizers of Egypt’s protest – such that there were organizers – eschewed the spotlight and focused on the objective: Liberty.

In my post about the four dimensions of extraordinary leadership, I discuss the importance of worthy goals and values. Even the Harvard Business School has recognized business school value systems are out of whack. A revolution is underway – and deeply needed. True, a business revolution lacks the geopolitical significance of events in the Middle East. But the shift in business culture now afoot is just as human, just as historic, and just as vital to global stability.

Look within your organization. What motivates your people? What drives them? Is it simply a paycheck? The risk of unresolved indebtedness? Or something greater? Does your business have, at its core, values that inspire every stakeholder – uniting associates, customers, suppliers and community? If you were gone tomorrow – if your people were leaderless – would they continue the revolution? Or would they pack up and go home?

Successful companies aren’t successful because of commanding figureheads, shrewd go-to-market models, or bold tactics. They’re successful because they harness the generative energy of their stakeholders. Such companies stand for something intrinsic and worthy, and people are proud to stand with them.

How does honor relate to leadership?  For what principles do you stand?

The leadership and organizational effectiveness I experienced in the U.S. Navy were extraordinary.  From Officer Candidate School to shipboard responsibilities to duty as admiral’s aide, my training and development was reinforced by laser-like alignment from the top of the command to the newest member of the organization, of values—mission—vision—goals—strategies—tactics.

It was purposeful, focused, clear, and apolitical. The intelligence and work hard ethic was very similar to what I witness in profitable commercial enterprise.  Yet, there was very little psychology distorting the field.  The general lack of fear and anxiety in the Navy’s mission-oriented culture promoted brilliance and insight with efficiency throughout the day.  In the Navy, people spent time being effective in the context of the worthy mission, not being self-absorbed, politically correct or personally greedy.

In a word, it was adult.

There was such a lack of adolescent psychology in the mission-driven Navy workday that I was completely surprised to run into it in commercial business life when I departed active duty. The prevalence of adolescent thinking in medium-to-large American business organizations is in stark contrast to what I saw in the Navy, yet there is little to justify this gap.

A friend once observed that my post-Navy career is based on my ability to bring adult perspectives and performance into the wealth-and-status-driven adolescent culture in business organizations.  My response was that I am lucky to do what I do, namely to work with unselfish people who insist that their customers and social values are strategic priorities; thus, I work with adults. Remarkably, I also find that the adult can be led forward from the adolescent. People can learn to discern, particularly around points of honor and social values, to stand to their full height as adults in the workplace.

Each of us has a responsibility to align our respective organization for optimum performance in the global community.  What are you doing to lead the laser-like alignment of core civil values—mission—strategic vision—strategic goals—guiding strategies—and tactical acts (see Strategic Terminology)?   Do you know how to lead and manage this alignment?  Share your perspective in the comments.

The preeminent American M.B.A. schools are doing a course correction, informed by the navigational data of core civil values.  Harvard University, U.C.-Berkley’s Haas School of Business, the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania, and others aim to reform their business-school cultures with increased emphasis on ethics and teamwork.  They appear to observe that a certain corruption occurs for some people at the intersection of power, greed and rationalization.

The Wall Street Journal reported this news recently: “Harvard Changes Course,” (Feb. 3, 2011).  It quoted Dean Nitin Nohria: “The public lost trust in business, and some of our graduates seem to be responsible for that.”  Nohria was appointed to be the 10^th dean of the Harvard Business School in July 2010.  His credentials are magnificent.  Harvard University President Drew Faust chose him for his position.  Ms. Faust and Mr. Nohria are praiseworthy.  Let’s hope they can back up their belated strategy with insightful organizational development planning and execution.

The gap between least paid and most paid in America shows a very interesting relationship.  One cited study compares average income for hourly workers and CEOs.  The trend is remarkable.  “In 1970, the average CEO compensation was 11 times the average hourly worker wages. In 1980 the gap was 42 times, and in 1990 CEO compensation was 85 times greater than average hourly wages. CEO compensation in 2000 demonstrates a pay gap of over 531 times the average hourly worker wage.”  Since then, the disproportional pay gap has widened.

Professor Peter F. Drucker, outspoken in his concern for how public and private organizations operate morally and ethically within society, pointed out that the purpose of business is, simply, to create and keep customers.  Curiously, it appears most M.B.A. schools in the past 30-years deviated, insisting that the purpose of business is more simplistic, to maximize shareholder value.  For many executives, this provided a convenient rationalization for making stock price Job #1, and sadly many board members conspired.  Since stock options are the largest part of executive pay, for some there seems to be a sociopathic response (i.e., manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience; here, don’t look at executive charity contributions – look at the level of despair, resentment and anxiety in the corporate culture of the organization the executive leads – oh yes, and that disproportionate pay gap).

Hence, the consciousness-raising that is now being proposed by the most contemporary thinkers and executives at M.B.A. schools.  I think they could use our help.

So, what’s your course?  How are you navigating?  Talk it up!

Many knowledgeable people offer perspectives about strategy discussions. I find the most useful perspectives keep us grounded and practical. For a good example, see Seth Godin’s post explaining why all abstract strategy discussions are useless.

One of the power secrets of strategic leadership is this: Once the organization understands its mission, strategic vision, strategic goals and guiding strategies, the entire organization can employ this knowledge in dialogue and decision-making daily.

But what do these terms mean? How is a “mission” different from a “strategic vision,” for example?

Glossary of Strategic Terms for Highly Differentiated Organizations

I’ve created a glossary, of sorts, to help my clients understand the critical terms. Here are five key definitions:

Mission: The mission states the difference the organization intends to make in the lives of those it serves. By its nature, mission is simple, directional, differentiating and relational.

Strategic Vision: A vision statement is a set or summary of descriptions that express how the world will be when the mission is fully and competently operating. The descriptions may be written from the perspective of the various stakeholders. Vision is developed with “future perfect” thinking and it serves as a check on mission clarity. By its nature, vision is generative and inspirational.

Strategic Goals: Strategic goals identify the major achievement targets or results the organization must attain, consistent with the mission.

Guiding Strategies: Strategies express how the organization must operate in alignment with its mission. Strategies are keys to success, rules to live by …wisdom for creating the desired future (e.g., vision).

Guiding strategies are developed for the priority activities needed to achieve the mission (e.g., principle virtues or values, customer relations, quality of service, training and development, communications, teamwork, recruiting, compensation, marketing, product development, performance measurement, financial resources, public relations, and decision making).

Strategies are put into place – strategic goals are accomplished, mission and vision are fulfilled – through a series of tactical actions.

Tactics: These are the specific investments, action steps or programs that the organization chooses to take: to accomplish its goals, in accordance with the strategies, in pursuit of its mission and strategic vision. Exceptional leadership, project management and teamwork are required to translate a list of priority tactics into accountable, implementable endeavor.

What are your wisdoms about being strategic, focused and practical? I’d like to know.