Today, there is a crisis of leadership integrity that is widely discussed and documented, but there is little being done about it.  In fact, one of the biggest stories written in the last four years is the lack of consequence for Boards and C-Suites (offices of the corporate Chief executives) that have behaved in a sociopathic fashion.

When the early luminaries of the field variously called “organizational effectiveness” (OE) or “organizational development” (OD) or “leadership development” (LD) initially asserted themselves, they were action researchers, developing their concepts for assessing organizational effectiveness and for improving the effectiveness of organizations.  Greater organizational effectiveness was a good investment, it was reasoned. Constructive impertinence was their brilliance brand, and they focused on business and military organizations with a certain righteousness.  Among those who articulated OE/OD/LD thinking were Chris Argyris (double-loop learning and organizational learning), Len Nadler (mentoring, workstyles and life styles), and Warren Bennis (ethical influencing, and change leadership). They were not intending to serve a sort of impermanent Lego Capitalism.

Their perspective was highly responsible: To influence C-Suites and entire organizations to consciously maintain core civil values as the lodge pole of any organization’s effectiveness. Core civil values were regarded as the responsibility of the leaders of the organization. Leaders, it was held, had a serious responsibility to civilization and the community, and shareholders would profit from this. The corrupting theory that shareholder value was paramount did not occur until the 1980s, as MBA programs proliferated.

But the challenge of upholding core civil values paled in the competition with personal wealth building — an intrigue that increasingly infected corporate C-Suites and Corporate Boardrooms.

That the field of OE/OD/LD changed significantly in the last 30-years is obvious. It was one of the few developments where the C-Suite did not demand more. The field failed at its original nobel goal, overdosing instead on subordination and an addiction to “group process.”

The process of superficiality and greed-socialization implied by the widening pay gap between the average CEO compensation and the average hourly worker wages has informed the growth of anxiety, fear, and mediocrity in organizations. This is widely known, but it has not appeared to inspire an effective reaction from the OE/OD/LD field.

To be effective, the practitioners of organizational effectiveness, organizational development, and leadership development must become:

• More strategically related to the growth and success of the organization.
• Less oriented to tactics, manipulation and intervention  process.
• More responsible for core civil values of the C-Suite, the organization, and Civilization.
• Higher profile – less contract and project-oriented – more mission-oriented.
• Less a subsidiary of HR.
• More of a Conscience of the Corporation.
• More tested for budget and technique.
• More accountable for courage and moral imperative.

OE/OD/LD has not had its intended impact – and in essence, the impact has not been strategic and lasting.  In the process, billions of dollars have been wasted. It is not likely that this will change for the better without persistent and brilliant change within the community.  It’s time for the practitioners of organizational effectiveness, organizational development, and leadership development to transform — becoming conscious, brilliant and persistent in finding ways to achieve the goal of effecting this change, transforming the quality of leadership, innovation and culture of American organizations.

If you think this crisis will pass like a Veterans’ Day Parade where you watch and thank God you are not marching, think again! If you don’t understand your stake in this opportunity, call me. Let’s have a conversation.

No Comments

I enjoy holidays, and Thanksgiving is my favorite! It is a day for gratitude and good conversation, sincerity and reflection. Born out of Early American multi-cultural history, it is simultaneously universal, and it supports our global appetite for right action. I am with family and fun in Vail, Colorado, this year. As I recall, each of my Thanksgiving holidays have been loving and wonderful, and I am truly thankful in my heart.

The ability of a person to emanate from a space of compassion, wisdom and strategic boundaries is a hallmark of the adult. The adult resides in each of us, more remotely in some than others.

It is our dharma to do the work of being our adult selves in the world…of standing to our full height…of being human beings. The Native Americans use that phrase as an honor, not as an excuse. For example, they confer on certain elders the title of true human being, or great human being. It honors the adult state — distinct from the adolescent — as the ultimate prize of contentment and happiness goes to the adult.

Among all of the tools in your “medicine bag,” the most essential are respect for your Self and respect for your Life.

What we are doing here on Earth is about personal growth and significant contribution to the container that is civilization. Here, we add value in two ways: (1) directly, by our actions every day, and (2) indirectly, by the example we set for others to emulate — profoundly, for our children and grandchildren and others do emulate. So, action supports emulation, and these yield civilization. We have a lot of choice in the quality of civilization that evolves.

In many ways, the legacy you leave lives in those who take inspiration for how they can act every day – when they see their possibilities reflected in the mirror you represent.

Be adult. Practice non-violence. Be clear about boundaries and goals. The Natural Force that aids truth and leadership and core values will be there to support you, illumining your actions. May the Force Be with You.

Are you consciously living with purpose and joy, with faith and contentment? Be thankful for that. Happy Thanksgiving!

No Comments

There are people who are remarkable, core-values-oriented, inspirational leader-activists — and yet most people are not.  Humanitarian leader-activists are the ones who keep the fabric of civilization skillfully repaired. More so, at times, they weave it artfully, with new strengths, advanced patterns and compelling textures. They are human beings, and humanity depends on them.

Some are famous, including Ghandi, Angelou, Lincoln, Franklin, Teresa, Carter, Clinton. (Hardly an exhaustive list.) Thank goodness for them, and for the example they set. Knowing them enables us to emulate their actions. Civilization grows by such emulation.

You have heard of others who are private and humble, yet their impact exceeds their fame. One remarkably effective humanitarian we would be smart to emulate is Molly Barker, Founder and Vision Keeper of Girls On The Run International.

Girls on the Run® is a non-profit prevention program educating and preparing preteen girls for a lifetime of self-respect and healthy living through running. Their curricula addresses all aspects of girls’ development — their physical, emotional, mental, social and spiritual well-being.  It is a lot more than a running program.

One of Molly B’s sayings is, “ The only requirement of having a dream is believing in it.” This artful leader runs her talk, weaving happy colors and genuine confidence into the fabric of civilization. In a few years, this four-time Hawiaii Ironman triathlete will have elevated the lives of millions of girls, and with this each of us!

I have no interest in calling someone a leader simply because they are in a position of authority. Given the state of the world today, we need leaders who have a constructive impact on civilization — an impact that supersedes greed.

It is remarkable how humanitarian leaders can proceed from dissimilar backgrounds — with dissimilar training, and dissimilar resources, and vastly dissimilar appearances — yet, similarly show signs of inner synchronicity and obvious inspiration. We know each is too rare. We group them, aware that the groupings are very, very small. Then, we ask what makes them do what they do: “What makes them tick?” …as we warm in the light of their aspiration.

It is so interesting to me to witness humanitarian leaders invariably holding the same reverence for humanitarian leadership. Same respect. Similar awe. Identical naive inquiry: “Isn’t it great! Thank God! What makes them tick?” You see, being such a human being does not proceed from heavy thinking — isn’t it more in the generous acting. We are left to use metaphoric language and imagery, dumb-struck as we are by their energy, persistence and vision, and often by their sacrifice, too.

As a student of leadership, I am not quick to explain their trick. After years of inquiry, I feel they each has a very special inner algorithm, the rhythm of which each must follow — for it is their inner program that makes them tick.

What are the signs of your inner program ticking generatively. Are you self-conscious with my question. Despite this, do you take a licking and keep on ticking, generously?

No Comments

It’s refreshing when a business owner’s ego remains in check, even as his business grows. That’s exactly what we see with Hil Davis and Veeral Rathod, owners of J. Hilburn, luxury men’s clothing brand headquartered in Dallas. The fashion company was profiled in the New York Times recently.

Davis and Rathod were forthcoming about the mistakes they’ve made as entrepreneurs: They put too much trust in the Chinese factories that produce their shirts. They chose fabric suppliers who struggled to accommodate their small-batch orders.

What’s most astonishing is how willing Davis and Rathod are to shoulder responsibility for those early mistakes.

Today, though, the business is growing. The firm grew from $1 million in sales in 2008 to $3.25 million in 2009 and $8 million in 2010, according to the New York Times. J. Hilburn now has 1,000 “style advisers” — direct sales reps who earn commissions on their sales.

Just as remarkable: J. Hilbrun is looking out for the interests of those sales reps. While the firm would like to expand into online sales, style advisers are concerned the online sales model would cut into their earning potential. And Hilbrun is listening.

Will Hilbrun stick to the direct sales model it was built on, thus earning the loyalty of its sales team? Or will it go after the vast market potential of the Internet in a way that improves margins (Translation: cuts out style advisers)? Or is there a third option — a hybrid?

J. Hilbrun’s next move remains to be seen. For now, the company’s mindfulness of the best interests of its human assets is a positive example for executives in all industries.

Does your team know that you have their back? Can they continue to have that confident security? 

No Comments

Can I give you some unsolicited feedback? You’re doing something wrong. It’s really holding you back. I think you know what I’m talking about.

How did those words make you feel? Irritated? Defensive? Humbled? Eager to improve and learn more?

Critical feedback is vital to leadership improvement. Leading effectively is just too difficult without effective feedback flowing your way. Your ability to attract such feedback is determined, in large measure, by how well you’ve responded to past criticism.

If others willingly give you critical feedback, well done: You’ve fostered a culture of respect. If they don’t, however, there are ways you can invite more honest feedback.

3 Tips to Welcome Critical Feedback

Here are three easy tips to encourage constructive critical feedback:

1. Really Listen. The #1 mistake when receiving feedback is speaking too much. Sincerely absorb what your audience is saying and give them room to elaborate. Don’t jump to a rebuttal. An easy way to show you’re listening is to repeat it back: “What I hear you saying is…”

2. Make a Change. When you make a change based on constructive feedback – and clearly communicate that change – it sends a signal you value critical input. Even a modest change tells team members, critics or customers their feedback matters to you.

3. Give Thanks. Getting critical feedback isn’t easy, but isn’t it amazing how much easier it is to stomach when you accept it as a gift. Remember two powerful words: “Thank you.”  Consider rewarding brutally honest feedback with sincere generosity. A small token of appreciation – a gift certificate for a customer or a team-building day for employees – goes a long way.

What If You Get NO Feedback?

One of the biggest fears effective leaders have is being isolated from the truth.

If you find yourself getting no feedback, contact me. Let’s diagnose why that is and how to get the feedback flowing. 

 

No Comments

In the realm of business, risk is seen as something to be managed, mitigated, or carefully leveraged. Accountants and actuaries quantify the risk factor and associate it with financial loss. Derivatives traders hedge against it elaborately, with obfuscation. Lawyers construct elaborate (and burdensome) defenses against it. CEOs eye it apprehensively.

Yet, as leadership is about change, risk is a staple of leadership. Take away the financial conception of risk and leadership is the courage to stand where few will stand, in pursuit of aspiration. It requires a certain amount of chutzpah. It’s a rare trait, yet so vital to business growth.

Not all risks are financial. Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who’s untimely passing at 56 fills the news today, had a vision of technical possibilities that translated into hope and aspiration in the space of learning, enabling, being…brilliance. His ability to conceive of ways, and to lead the enabling wave time after time, is historic and profoundly exemplary.

Jobs’ risk was not so much financial; it was a risk of personal responsibility to not emphatically lead forward to achieve what one could so hopefully conceive. Awareness of the aspiration was motivation and burden to Jobs, and he succeeded – inspiringly so.

Of what hopeful possibility are you aware, the failure of which would be unaccountable? Are you putting yourself to that task, or are you waiting for others to take the risk, invite you and empower you? What is your unacceptable risk of underachievement?

1 Comment

Can you imagine a combat leader telling his troops to starve while he dines on char-grilled filet mignon? Yet, haven’t we all witnessed the dishonorable situational leadership of C-Suites that chose to downsize some while privileging others? There’s a better way.

As a leader, what’s your value scheme for teamwork and loyalty? How far would you go to preserve the jobs of your employees? Would you cut out luxuries like corporate golf outings (unless, perhaps  you drive the PGA), first class travel (unless you captain American Airlines), or corporate jets (unless you pilot Cessna)? Reduce expenses by delaying cash bonuses? Move to less costly office space? Or, do you wish to rationalize these cost saving measures while downsizing? What’s the size of the situational ethic in your employee loyalty strategy?

Well… what about firing yourself?

That’s what Lola Gonzalez, CEO of Accurate Background Check (ABC), did when the economic downturn cost the firm its biggest clients and she was faced with possible layoffs. Adam Skolnick, writing in the Fiscal Times, described the sacrifice she made.

Or, consider Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, where the 12 medical department chiefs each took a pay cut of about $27,000 to save 10 jobs two years ago. In 2010, Forbes.com columnist Shaun Rein reported the entire organization voted to take pay cuts or freeze their salaries to save co-workers’ jobs.

These examples stand in stark contrast to escalating executive salaries and the sickening gap between CEO pay and the average pay of working Americans.

Gonzalez of Accurate Background Check and the department chiefs of Beth Israel each realized something visionary: Retaining the employees on whose shoulders you build your business is vital to your survival. If you get that, it is very hard to rationalize redecorating your office while handing out pink slips.

I’ve remarked often that we need better leadership. We need more brilliance, bravery and benevolence. Ruthless job slashing may be propped up by short term rationalizations to satisfy investors, but it takes courage like that shown by Gonzalez or Beth Israel to create a high-performing legacy.

What did you think of the C-Suites at big American TARP-supported financial institutions giving record bonuses to their “leaders” while kicking employees to the curb? Seems we couldn’t trust those board directors for core-values-guided leadership, could we? How American is that? Did you speak out about it, or just shake your head and return to your business? 

Who’s business is it when lousy “leadership” lingers? 

No Comments

If shareholder value is paramount and corporate executives are shareholders, what ensues is an absorbing conflict of interest.  The greed in C-Suites and Boards gets fed like confinement lot cattle. From the 1980’s onward, reliance on personal credit debt and the pressure to earn and own more grew ravenously in America. With the added fuel of increasing personal debt, the dharma of upholding core civil values competed with the intrigue of personal wealth building, and the gap grew ever wider.

As reported in earlier posts, 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.

The process of socialization implied by these statistics has worked to justify greed, fear, and mediocrity in organizations. This is widely known, but it has not appeared to inspire an effective reaction internally from the organizational effectiveness field (organizational development and leadership development practitioners), or externally from C-Suite associations like The Conference Board (“Trusted Insights for Business Worldwide”) or Business Roundtable (“More Than Leaders. Leadership.”) or The Chief Executive Officers’ Clubs (“CEOs Making Money And Having Fun While Learning”).

Are you stuck in bottom-up versus top-down arguments for organizational change? How do you think core civil values will regain prominence without truly effective leadership at all levels?

1 Comment

How long do you think it would take to change the world if enough people acted effectively? Four decades? A lifetime?

What if it could be done in four years?

FOUR YEARS. GO. is a campaign “to shift humanity’s course toward a just, fulfilling and sustainable future by the end of 2014.” Why the four-year timeframe? The organization’s supporters believe we need to stop waiting for someone else to fix humanity’s future, and four years is sufficient time to affect meaningful change.

I applaud FOUR YEARS. GO. as a departure from the rut we’ve sunk into – economically, politically and socially. In an era when the world’s political powers-that-be can’t find agreement even on modest, incremental improvements, we need leaders who dare to think big.

If four years is too far in the future for you to imagine, could you give me four minutes?

Take 3 minutes right now to watch the video above. Learn about FOUR YEARS. GO. Then take 60 seconds to visit FourYearsGo.org and click “Get Involved.” Make a commitment. Take a stand. Change the course of history.

Too idealistic? Perhaps, but not by the standard of need. Maybe a healthy dose of good-for-the-earth idealism is what leaders could propose right now. It’s a small price to pay for a much-needed course correction for our planet.

Watch the video. Get involved. Make a difference. Shape a worthy mission for the next four years.

Are you a pragmatist with ideals? Good. Lead on!

No Comments

Photography is fun filled with graphic potential, appealing to people of all ages. Just to hold a camera offers intriguing possibilities! One can capture this moment… or that one. Any moment so captured documents life and offers opportunities to illustrate what happened.

The best photo images capture a subject at an intersection in time. These are magic moments. We know these photos instinctively by the look in the person’s eye, or the moisture collected at the edge of the leaf… the ageless wisdom in the child’s face, or the message of the morning light.

Consider this: We are—everything is—moving continuously in time. Most photos by amateurs and professionals are images of things still moving, even minutely. Yet, a great photograph reveals an exact moment of consequence. It is the moment when the subject, traveling through time, pierces the center of a target of meaning, and time stops momentarily. In such moments, pauses in an intersection of time, consequence is revealed. It is a moment of truth, as if predestined.

You witness these moments of time-pausing consequence in the work of Diane Arbus, Annie Leibovitz, and Ansel Adams—and, in the work of nature and wildlife photographer, Richard Bernabe. Still, each of us can capture such a moment, and this prospect makes photography constantly compelling.

Within each of us is the mechanism for judging truth. The truth meter—known in various cultures as the hare or tan tien—is familiar to the martial artist. It is what we refer to when we say a person is “gutsy,” or when we refer to our “gut instinct.” By the hare we judge truth and truthfulness.

Just as it’s the photographer’s responsibility to capture a visual moment of truth, it is the leader’s responsibility to create sufficient truthful moments upon which culture can rely.

Today, we experience a crisis of leadership in the world. Yet, by hare and heart, each of us can act sufficiently, and our collective acts with insight can heal the world.

However, like the aspiring photographer, we need to get clicking. Wait, and you risk loosing the light!

Does your conversation include thoughtful compromise? Will your leadership create moments of truth?

No Comments