Pick Your Battles

Great leaders have to be great strategists.  Failure to develop and execute an effective strategy will land you in hot water.  Sometimes it lands you in a sea of crude oil.  British Petroleum’s  colossal failure to cap a leaking oil well 5,000 feet below the water’s surface in the Gulf of Mexico is probably more about corporate greed than anything.  In the end though, it is also about a poor strategy.  In their drilling permit applications they alleged they had the capacity to cap, contain and manage an oil spill at that depth with minimal or no environmental impact.  Unfortunately their strategy to accomplish this appears to have been completely bogus.  It isn’t that their strategy was weak; more like non-existent.  We can only hope this failure will bankrupt BP and teach other oil companies a lesson.

The relationship between leadership and strategy can be elusive.  Organizations often spend an inordinate amount of time with strategic planning only to find external forces have changed the environment or unanticipated events have altered the landscape.  Strategic planning is nothing more than trying to predict the future, which has proven time and time again to be difficult.  Nevertheless, it is foolish not to look ahead and develop plans to guide both yourself and your organization.  A short-sighted approach will inevitably lead to failure.  Successful leaders need to be forward-thinking; they need to see the potential challenges and opportunities that lay ahead.

Strategy and tactics have long been a part of military training and business colleges.  The Art of War is a popular read for military strategists and MBA students alike.  We are all familiar with the phrase, “pick your battles”, but it was Sun Tzu who put it more eloquently when he wrote, “The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.” The lesson here is for leaders to strategically pick the battles they can win while avoiding those they cannot.

This is good advice for leaders in any organization and it is congruent with Fiedler’s contingency model of leadership.  Fiedler basically asserts that successful leaders know their strengths and align those strengths with the right opportunities.  When it comes to leadership and strategy, have a plan that works and be careful to avoid those battles that you cannot win.  Otherwise you could end up the poster boy for environmental disaster.

Death, Taxes and Disagreement?

Benjamin Franklin almost got it right when he said death and taxes were the only things certain in life.  There isn’t enough Botox and liposuction in the world to grant you immortality and the IRS has caught onto offshore banks and Swiss accounts as tax shelters.  Rest assured that Uncle Sam is going to get his and everyone has a date with the Grim Reaper.  The list of life’s certainties truly is short, but if Mr. Franklin were alive today his list might have been longer.

For example, we can be certain someone is going to cry every week on Dancing with the Stars.  Despite her biggest smile and best efforts, it was Kate Gosselin who was sent packing.  America’s love-hate relationship with the Gosselin clan will have to continue through the tabloids until they land their next reality show.  Another certainty is that Matt Stone and Trey Parker are going to offend pretty much everyone in their next episode of South Park.  Their most recent installment is drawing fire for depicting Muhammad in a bear suit.  Never mind that the episode depicts other religious figures in compromising, fictional situations.  To give Matt and Trey credit, they are equal opportunists when it comes to being offensive.

Fortunately, we have the right in America to speak our minds, even if it is unpleasant and distasteful to just about everyone else.   But this is where we come to the item Ben Franklin might have included on his short-list of life’s certainties: death, taxes and disagreement.  So often, we are a people divided.  Differences in ideology and politics are sure to segregate us, but it is also the little things that can sharply divide people within organizations.  If there is one thing we agree on, it’s that we can’t always agree.  More often than not, this leads to conflict and this is where leaders have to make tough decisions.

When is conflict good for the group, and when does it become counter-productive?   How does a leader effectively manage conflict within organizations?  First, you have to recognize that people deal with conflict in different ways.  Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid not only deals with different management styles, it can also offers insight into differing approaches to conflict management.  Some people become more competitive while others are too quick to compromise and yet others are willing to collaborate when conflict arises.  Second, it is important to recognize that conflict is natural.  Bruce Tuckman’s theory on group development provides tremendous insight into the natural conflict process that occurs when new groups or teams are formed.

Based on this information, leaders should understand that conflict is a normal occurrence and while it can be disruptive it can also be very beneficial.  One of the more dangerous scenarios that can happen within an organization is a phenomenon called “Group Think”.  Irving Janis defined this term as, “when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment”.  Conflicting views need to be heard, even if they are unpopular.  People need the opportunity to discuss different ideas, resolve their differences and develop new strategies for success.  Conflict can be the catalyst that starts that process.

When does it go too far?  Typically when it becomes too personal (Muhammad) or when people hit a serious impasse (John and Kate).  Conflict is never an excuse to attack someone on a personal level and groups that flounder too long at a stalemate can lose focus the goals they are trying to accomplish.  This is when the leader needs to step in to mediate and help both sides come to a compromise.  Only then can real progress be made.   As a foreign diplomat and founding father, Ben Franklin probably could teach us a thing or two about leading people through conflict.  South Park and Kate Gosselin on the other hand; well there are some things we can learn from them as well.  Whether or not it is anything of real value is up for debate.  One thing is for sure, conflict happens every day and leaders need to know how to manage it.

The Reality of Leadership

In 1999, the world watched with great anticipation as the first episode of Big Brother aired.  From these humble beginnings a new genre of television was born: Reality TV!  Skip ahead to 2010 and take a look at the Nielson Ratings.  For the week of March 30, three of the top four shows on major networks included: American Idol, Dancing with the Stars and Undercover Boss.  Scroll a little further and you find The Amazing Race, Survivor and the Biggest Loser.  It seems our voyeuristic curiosity simply can’t get enough of this reality TV thing.  Fortunately these top rated shows carry with them a fairly positive message; people trying to overcome the odds to win a contest, get healthy or become a superstar.  Not all reality shows follow this positive template and there are plenty of reasons to be critical of this form of entertainment.

MTV’s popular show Jersey Shore certainly appeals to the darker side.  It receives ongoing criticism for perpetuating Italian-American stereotypes.  The President of the National Italian American Foundation, Andre DiMino, has stated that he finds the show offensive.  Linda Stasi, an Italian-American columnist who works for the New York Post has also been critical of the show.  She feels that producers at MTV are stereotypically portraying Italian-Americans as gel-haired, thuggish, ignoramuses with fake tans, no education and no ambition.  Nevertheless, cast members have gained celebrity status and the show is popular enough for MTV to continue on with a second season.

Reality TV is here to stay and for the most part, the shows can be entertaining.  At times they can even provide insight into leadership.  For example, this week’s episode of Undercover Boss highlighted Roto-Rooter President and Chief Operating Officer Rick Arquilla.  Apparently Rick didn’t really know that working for his company is a hard and dirty business.  It didn’t take him long to figure that out once he got into the field and crawled under a house to snake a drain clogged with raw sewage.  To give Rick credit, he really took his experience to heart and learned a lot about himself and his employees.  This first-hand experience at the front lines is something more leaders should experience.

This particular episode also highlighted the fact that leadership is not necessarily tied to your title.  One of the employees who really stood out at Roto Rooter was a field technician named Henry.  He is the one who helped his undercover boss Rick with the clogged drain under a house.  Once they found the problem, Henry informed the elderly lady that the repair was going to cost $1,200!  The woman seemed devastated at the news and clearly she didn’t have that kind of money.  Henry thought it over and decided to do the job for far less.  At first boss man Rick seemed a little shocked at the discount, but he soon remembered that Henry works on commission and was literally taking money out of his own pocket to help this woman.

After the job was done, Henry started going through the messages on his phone.  It appears Henry is the go to guy for questions.  He returned one call after another to fellow field technicians who needed help on a variety of jobs.  Did we mention that after work Henry and his wife coached a youth basketball team?  Rick Arquilla may be the Chief Operating Officer for Roto Rooter, but he is not the only leader within that company.  Henry reminds us that leadership and titles do not always go hand in hand.  Every organization has informal leaders and it is important to cultivate and support their growth.  When times get tough, these are your go-to people, the ones you can rely on.

Remember that not all reality TV is created equal.  Sure Snooki can take a punch, and you can learn a thing or two about the Jersey Shore club scene from watching JWoww, Pauly D on MTV, but the Surgeon General should consider warning people that this show might actually lower your intelligence.  If you are looking for some entertainment that might actually teach you something about leadership, other reality TV shows seem to have something to offer.  So keep the remote handy and be weary when the new guy shows up for his first day on the job with a camera crew.  You may be the next reality superstar!

Credibility and Confession

This post delves into dangerous territory.  There are two things that people will commonly tell you not to bring up in casual conversation: politics and religion.  Both subjects can quickly touch a nerve.  Think about the most heated debates you have encountered in your own life, and more than likely these topics were at the root of the argument.  People’s opinions on matters of faith and government offer a glimpse into their personal ideals and beliefs.  Unfortunately leaders don’t have the option of checking their individual values at the door when they come to the office, school, or anywhere else.  In Leading with Soul, Bolman and Deal share their idea that leaders should not abandon their personal faith when serving in secular leadership roles.  These personal beliefs are an important part of who leaders are and how they lead.  But, leaders have to be cautious when discussing such matters to avoid permanently alienating others.

So today we carefully examine the issue of credibility and leadership in the Catholic Church.   The approach here is to use a secular lens to examine a powerful organization which has influential leaders, numerous followers and a serious credibility issue.  To put it mildly, the Vatican is wrestling with a bit of an image problem these days.  With what seems to be a never-ending list of scandals, serious questions have been raised regarding the manner in which potentially abusive Priests have been internally managed by Church leaders.  In the latest incident, the Washington Post is reporting, “The Vatican on Thursday strongly defended its decision not to defrock an American priest accused of molesting some 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin and denounced what it called a campaign to smear Pope Benedict XVI and his aides.”

This decision has sparked protest as a group of abuse victims recently staged a press conference outside St. Peter’s Square in Rome to denounce Pope Benedict’s handling of the case.  Regardless of your personal belief system, it should be acknowledged that the Roman Catholic Church is the largest Christian church in the world with an estimated 1 billion members.  Over the centuries, the church has provided both spiritual guidance and humanitarian support around the world.  But, like any organization, the Catholic Church is subject to scrutiny and its leaders are struggling because their credibility has been called into question.  In their book titled, Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People Demand It, Kouzes and Posner emphasize that “credibility is the foundation of leadership”.

They go on to say that leaders must demonstrate values which prospective followers admire.  Value congruence motivates people to trust leaders. When being asked to undertake a difficult journey, followers want to believe in a leader who consistently delivers on promises.  Of course there are times when leaders will let us down; fall short of the high expectations we place upon them.  Everyone makes mistakes and typically leaders can recover.  But, when serious mistakes occur people can lose faith in the leader.  This is a critical moment; a crossroads where trust can be regained or permanently lost.  Regaining trust requires transparency, time and a consistent effort to make up for past transgressions.

The Catholic Church may have expertise on eternal redemption and salvation, but it should not underestimate the damage caused by a lack of credibility in the here and now.  Ongoing accusations and a failure to deal appropriately with allegations of criminal behavior will erode the trust of even the most faithful followers.  The loss of credibility is particularly damaging for churches because such organizations are founded on faith and morality.  But, the lesson here is one that applies to leaders in any organization: Don’t hide your mistakes; confess them and move forward with the healing process.

What’s Your Story?

Pick up the local newspaper or turn on the TV and it seems that there is nothing but tragedy in this world.  So much so, that people’s hearts tend to get a little hard.  But when an 11-year-old boy loses his mother to a serious illness, your heart should break.  If you knew this little boy, no doubt you would give him a big hug and your condolences.  But if he is a stranger, why not exploit him for political gain?  Now who would do something so diabolical you ask?  Well let’s just say Democrats and Republicans finally found some common ground on health care.

Although both parties have a different take on the situation, they are co-conspirators when it comes to drumming up sad stories to swoon the common voter.  Take Marcelas Owens, the 11-year-old boy whose mother got sick, lost her job, lost her health insurance and then died.  This sad, but true story is something that should not happen in America.  So, one side argues that health care reform could have prevented such a needless death while the other argues Mrs. Owens had plenty of other options for health care.  I will let you figure out for yourself which party is arguing which side of this issue.

The tactic of pulling on people’s heart strings is nothing new though.  Remember Joe the Plumber?  In the 2008 Presidential debates, both McCain and Obama made reference to Joe (Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher) and how their respective party had working-class America’s best interests at heart.  In the end, both sides seemed to be genuinely interested in helping the average Joe and Jane, but they couldn’t have been further apart on how to accomplish that.  The point here is not to argue politics, but to highlight a common strategy that leaders use to motivate people.

For centuries leaders have used stories as a way to inspire others.  Even organizations have mythical stories of their own beginnings that typically go something like this: the company or university struggled early on, barely surviving.  Through the hard work and sacrifice of a few people, the organization overcame those challenges and today…..  Well, you get the idea.  Stories such as this one are recited by leaders and passed down as a way to motivate people to persevere and stay committed.  They become a part of the culture and identity of the organization.  Never mind the fact that they are rarely accurate.  These mythical stories tend to exaggerate the direness of the circumstances and assign heroic characteristics to past leaders.

But they are an important representation of the symbolic nature of leadership.  Edgar Schein says that stories and myths are important tools for leaders when trying to shape the culture of their organizations. People need more than just a manager who can sign off on TPS reports and crunch budgets.  They want to be inspired!  If this were not the case, political leaders wouldn’t lean so hard on mourning kids and middle class craftsman for political gain.  No one is saying you have to exploit others or bend the truth, but the next time you want to inspire people, tell them a great story.

Who’s The Real Loser?

Leadership can be very difficult to define. There are so many books and theories on the topic that it is easy to lose sight of what leadership really is. Basically it is nothing more than an ability to motivate others to accomplish a goal. Any individual who can achieve that should be seen as an effective leader regardless of their particular style or methods. Even those who use coercion and force to move people and organizations toward their objectives are leaders. We may not agree with their means, but at times this can be a very effective approach. So really, leadership isn’t that had to define. The real challenge of leadership is figuring out how to motivate people.

One strategy is to make sure people’s individual needs are congruent with the goals of the organization. Identifying those needs may seem difficult, but Abraham Maslow (1934) provides us with a comprehensive and simple view of the basic needs every individual has. Once physical, safety, and psychological needs are met, people typically seek to fulfill their self-esteem needs. Leaders can help develop self-esteem and confidence in others by challenging them to exceed their own expectations while simultaneously providing adequate support. It was Sanford (1967) who first proposed the idea that a proper balance between challenge and support was needed for people to grow developmentally.

This was probably the theory Rex Roland, a 6^th grade teacher at Enka Middle School in North Carolina, was employing when he challenged one of his students.  To convey his challenge, Mr. Roland took the novel approach of writing, “-20% for being a loser” on the student’s paper. In fact, this was not the first time the teacher had resorted to name calling as a way to motivate students. Clearly he feels his students are receiving too much support at home and not enough challenge.  Based on the reaction from this particular student’s mother, we can assume needless coddling has been occurring for some time.  In calling for Mr. Roland to be fired, this mom clearly cannot appreciate the psychological and emotional benefit that comes from being demoralized by an authority figure.

Regardless of how this turns out, I think we all know who the real loser is. School district leaders should return the favor and provide Mr. Roland with a little challenge of his own: unemployment. Whether or not he personally grows from that experience, we can assume his students will be better off without him. So take note.  The next time you need to motivate people, remember to challenge them while providing support and leave the name calling to the kids.

You Rascal

Recently the world had the opportunity to witness history as a coveted trophy was awarded.  No, it isn’t an Oscar; although there were a number of surprises worth mentioning this year.  Congrats to Kathryn Bigelow for becoming the first female to win the award for Best Director.  Sandra Bullock took home her first Oscar for her role in “The Blind Side” just days after being awarded a Razzie for her performance in “All About Steve”.  Needless to say, both were deserving. Kudos to Sandra for being a good sport and picking up BOTH awards in person.  We need more people who can laugh at themselves from time to time.

For those of you who missed “All About Steve”, let’s just say you should keep it that way.  Congrats to all of the winners, but there is a more important award to discuss here.  Drum roll please………. Congratulations to Rascal, a seven-year-old African sand dog who won the annual title of World’s Ugliest Dog in Del Mar, California.  For those unfamiliar with this annual event, the award speaks for itself.  Trust me when I say Rascal is one unsightly pooch – just look at the photo below.  Rascal doesn’t seem to know many tricks.  He just does his thing; which is eat, potty and win awards for being himself.  At seven years of age, it is unlikely Rascal will be able to do much else.  After all, we all know you “Can’t teach a dog new tricks”.

The same might be said about leaders!  What’s that you say?  Didn’t we just talk about situational leadership and the importance of being flexible?  Of course, but there are always other theories!  Fiedler’s Contingency Model can get pretty complicated, but here are the basics.  Fiedler believes that leaders have a natural tendency to be either task or relationship oriented.  He isn’t the first to come up with such a paradigm, that credit goes to Blake and Mouton for their Managerial Grid.  What makes the Contingency Model different is the concept that leadership styles tend to be static.  As a result, the contingency model says leaders should find the situation that best suits their style.  If you’re a square peg, that’s OK.  Just find the square hole because that is obviously what works for you.

In a lot of ways this makes sense.  Some leaders can be flexible, but for most people we tend to operate in the same manner and approach things in the same way.  Just like everyday habits, we develop leadership styles based on what worked for us in previous situations and changing that style can be difficult.  In fact, one of the current rages in leadership development is StrengthsQuest.  This leadership tool utilizes an assessment instrument to identify your strengths.  The strategy then is to focus on further developing those strengths rather than trying to correct your weaknesses.  This strategy is consistent with contingency theory and it supports the idea that leaders might be better off trying to align their individual leadership style with the right opportunities.

So if you are like Rascal and are having a difficult time learning new tricks.  Don’t worry.  Maybe you need to simply focus on your strengths and finding the right place to use them.

Leadership Bugs Me

Ever notice that when times are bad there seems to be a universal game plan for fixing things?  No! Well let me give you two words: Better Leadership.  We hear it all the time.  If you don’t believe me, just search for the word leadership on Google news.  General Motors just “shook up” its executive leadership, AGAIN!  A new candidate for Iowa Governor is claiming there isn’t a financial crisis in that state, but a “leadership vacuum”.  A weaker than expected showing by Russian Athletes at the Vancouver Olympics is being blamed on “Russian leaders”.  Is a lack of leadership really the cause for such problems?  Hard to say, but one thing is for sure.  All of these stories essentially scream the same thing; better leadership can fix the problem.

The reality is that individual leaders do not always have control over the variables that lead to success or failure.  Often there are internal and external environmental factors that are beyond anyone’s control.  The current financial crisis in this country is a good example of the complexity associated with some problems.  It also shows us how no single person can truly be responsible for collective failure.  Nevertheless, it is our natural instinct to place blame and like it or not, the price of leadership is accountability.   It was the great philosopher Hopper who told Princess Atta, “First rule of leadership: everything is your fault.”

That hardly seems fair, but there is certainly an element of truth to the statement.  So what can leaders do to better position themselves for success?  Hershey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership model leads us to believe that success may be tied to flexibility.  Using the same approach to every situation is like putting a square peg into a round hole; it just doesn’t work.  Depending upon the complexity of the tasks and the maturity of the people we are leading, we may need to adjust our leadership style.  Sometimes we can simply delegate and move on, but at other times we need to direct people’s actions or coach them.  Good leaders seem to intuitively know how to evaluate situations and people to determine the best approach.

It is unlikely that a leadership model could have saved us from a national financial crisis, but flexibility certainly worked for Flick when his ant buddies couldn’t adapt.  Remember, as a leader you are ultimately responsible for the success or failure of the group.  Heed Hopper’s words and don’t let yourself get squished by inflexibility.

Bunch of Credibility

It seems that Marcia and Jan still can’t get along.  This time it isn’t a fight over hair brushes or boys, but the ongoing feud between Maureen McCormick and Eve Plumb seems to have put the skids on a planned Brady Bunch reunion.  The source of the tension isn’t clear, but McCormick’s tell-all biography, “Here’s The Story” seems to have ruffled some feathers.  The show has become an icon of American pop culture. Over a five year run, it never reached the top ten in ratings, but it gave us our first look at a blended TV family.  Not to mention fond memories of polyester pants, over sized collars and bad singing.  Those who missed the airing of original episodes were indoctrinated through the massive syndication of reruns.  Today you can purchase the five season DVD set, complete with a shag carpet cover.

While it is easy to poke fun at the Brady Bunch, there were some valuable lessons to be learned from the show.  The series tackled a number of important social issues such as dealing with multiple dates for the dance and how to avoid buying clunker cars – Caveat Emptor!   Emergency planning was also emphasized in an episode where the family got locked in an abandoned town’s jail on the way to the Grand Canyon.  Obviously that is something every parent should be prepared to deal with.  And who can forget, Greg and Marcia’s epic struggle to claim the attic for their own bedroom.  Greg won out because he was the oldest, proving what younger siblings have been screaming for years; life just isn’t fair.

OK, so maybe the show wasn’t as progressive as first thought, but it did occasionally teach us something about leadership.  One of the best examples comes from an episode where Greg and Marcia are competing for class president. As you might expect, rude behavior ensues and dad steps in for a lecture on family unity.  Greg takes those words to heart when his campaign manager Rusty suggests starting a nasty rumor about Marcia.  Greg not only refuses, but fires Rusty.  Marcia overhears the whole thing and because of Greg’s integrity she ultimately decides to concede the race.

Politicians, business leaders and most everyone else could take a lesson from the Brady’s here.  Today a “win at all costs” culture seems to be more prevalent than ever before.  People are willing to cut corners, slander competitors and put others at risk to accomplish their goals.  Leaders have to compete with integrity if they are to maintain their “Credibility”.  There is nothing wrong with trying to find a competitive advantage, but leaders must operate with sense of fair play.  Once your credibility is lost, everything you worked for may follow suit.  Just ask Pete Rose, Bernie Madoff or Jeff Skilling (Enron).

Guess they missed this Brady Bunch episode and had to learn their lesson the hard way.  Make sure you don’t make the same mistake.

Olympic Courage

Every four years we glue ourselves to the television and watch some amazing athletes compete in exciting, and sometimes unusual winter sporting events.  Don’t ask me why, but curling is my favorite.  There is just something truly amazing about people sliding huge stones across a 150 foot long, super-slick sheet of ice and stopping it on a target no bigger than a dinner platter.  And anyone who has watched it has to be fascinated by the furious broom sweeping.  Makes you wonder how fast they could clean your kitchen floor.

As with past Olympics, the games in Vancouver have already brought a myriad of storylines and emotions.  Unfortunately it seems there is always drama around the U.S. Ski Teams.  Last time it was Bode Miller’s off-the-slope antics, and this year it has been the epic saga of Lindsey Vonn and Julia Mancuso. There is nothing like a little junior high drama between teammates to keep things interesting.  Basically both have accused the other of being a media hound and some nasty tweeting between the two has made for icy conditions both on and off the slopes.

But conversations about teamwork and communication will have to wait.  The most inspirational storyline of these games is Canadian figure skater Joannie Rochette.  Her mother passed away unexpectedly on Sunday of an apparent heart attack.  Clearly unsettled and emotional, Joannie took the ice Tuesday night and skated a near flawless routine in the short program.  Her performance was nothing short of courageous.  It remains to be seen whether or not she will continue to perform at such a high level, but if there was a gold medal for courage in these games, I’m confident she has already won it.

Like Joannie, leaders also have to be courageous.  Robert Terry, in his book titled, Authentic Leadership: Courage in Action talks about the relationship between fear and courage.  Leaders must constantly temper their fears and be willing to take risks if they are to lead people and organizations into the future.  Granted, risks must be calculated and fear is a normal response when facing overwhelming challenges.  There will always be things we cannot control, but we must have courage to cut a path where others fear to tread.  So let’s all take a lesson from Joannie Rochette and show our courage the next time we are faced with adversity.