Posts Tagged Leadership
6 Shifts Happening in Your Organization
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, Group Life, Leadership, Uncategorized on February 18, 2013
Your organizational culture is shifting – are you prepared to lead in these new realities? The following video discusses the 6 shifts happening in your organization and how you can engage these shifts in your leadership role.
Transcribed
I get to speak with and work with organizations and institutions whether they be larger churches, businesses educational institutions; I’ve observed these institutional and organizational movements over the last few years. Many have been written about, some of already taken place, some are emerging. I’d like to talk about a few of them and maybe some implications for your leadership related to those.
The first is from a focus on the organization to focus on the organism. You see that now with less focus around all the little slots and things that relate to the organization as something in and of itself to be maintained and more emphasis on what is happening inside the culture of where we work or where we minister or where we live. What’s happening with the people, what’s happening with emerging ideas and systems and the integration of those things? So it’s more organism oriented the culture itself the vibe that is coming from within that if you will than around maintaining the organization or putting too much emphasis on the structure of the organization.
That leads to a second one which is instead of being institutionally, driven being institutionally supported. The institutions important but what’s the role of the institution? Is it to drive everything and pass everything down or is it to support emerging ideas, new leadership developing, new teams, new formats, and new engagements? I use to have this mantra still do but for many years the structure serves the people, the people don’t serve the structure and so what we’re seeing is more of a shift to moving structures that can accommodate what’s happening within the organization, so to speak, or for the organization’s mission and shaping the institution to support people versus to make them support the institution.
That’s related to another one I’ve observed and that’s obviously the move from out more of a hierarchical to a flatter structure. I don’t think we’ll ever be totally flat in many institutions and organizations. I don’t want to be overly idealistic about that but I think there definitely is a movement away from strict oppressive sometimes hierarchies where power is centered in only a few and the many are just left as implementers. And you’re going to see a flatter leadership as we become organic as we continue to become more are shared in resources and in other strategies that we have. And frankly a younger emerging leadership corps desires that and I think you need to accommodate that. Another one is what I would call a shift from content to value. In other words it’s not just our message and what we think about it and how we deliver it, but what value we bring and what are the underlying values behind that? It’s more important for us to understand as a working culture, what are the core things at the heart of who we are verses simply what’s the message we’ve given, always given, how do we keep giving it, how to get the same message to more people? There’s truth in some of that and a need for some of that but what are the underlying values behind the message? People need to hear that and be motivated by it. It’s also the sense of a movement from an event to a lifestyle. Whether you’re in business or non-profit or whatever, this is particularly true in I think a lot of ministry situations but it’s not limited to that. Where the event for example in a church, the Sunday service or in a business, the sales transaction perhaps it’s not all about just the event it’s about a lifestyle. In other words we don’t just gear up to present something we’re trying to become something and as leaders and as an organization the emphasis is on how are we living out these values and beliefs that we have?
Another thing I see is a shift from creating just distribution channels, again core product or ideas being disseminated, to what I would call missional hubs, where ideas are being generated all around the organization and out in the culture so that we’re not just a centralized group finding more ways to create more distribution channels, that’s valid when we have a quality product or service, but it’s how do we create more hubs that are themselves generating product and ideas so it’s not always all coming from sort of central base.
And finally, from being more silo to being more integrated. I think we’ve seen that across a number of kinds of institutions and organizations instead of it’s just sales and marketing and distribution and R&D and so on in the corporate areas. Or in education where we just have administration and then there’s faculty and then or the disciplines I teach history you teach science or you teach theology, we don’t talk to each other. That’s breaking down to where we see more integrated aspects because educationally, developmentally we need the integration of ideas, we need to expose people to one another so more and more cross-functional teams, more ad hoc teams, more conversations around the lunch table from people from various disciplines helps each of us grow and develop in our leadership. The implications of these shifts are, as I mentioned, I think a flatter leadership, people who are more relational in their leadership, more able to build teams and connect with them. I think in general people who are more interested in modeling the values than simply disseminating again the information. So I think for us as leaders whatever my organization or institution is I need to embody that first and foremost. It’s more important that I live in the world of being what I am advocating not just doing some things around the principles and values.
And finally I think that we’re seeing ideas come at the core of leadership not just mandates and control and management but ideas. That’s the ideas for the future that will drive the future organization, the future institution.
So these are some of the things I think in our leadership which as it becomes more collaborative the more shared, not without authority, now without power, but I think these movements and shifts demand that kind of leadership.
I’m interested in what you think about these 6 shifts happening in your organization. So let me know, as I work with leadership teams and teach and do conferences I understand that these shifts are happening and I’m trying to help leaders and engage those things.
What are you doing to engage these shifts?
I’d be interested in hearing from you. So have a great day!
The 5 Principles of Ethical Leadership
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, community, Group Life, Leadership on February 15, 2013
I work in two environments – a faith-based graduate institution and in the marketplace. So I help leaders grapple with personal and cultural ethics on a weekly basis. I do this by focusing on 5 core areas that promote ethical leadership.
As you face challenges in areas like decision-making, strategic planning, cultural transformation and leadership development, your ethical framework will reveal itself, particularly under pressure.
I confess that I do not like what I see in the mirror sometimes when I am frustrated, tired and weary of battling the challenges I face in work, life and personal growth. So it is important that I keep exposing myself to resources and people that deepen my ethical foundation and promote character growth. What I read, who I meet with, and how I go about my work all shape my approach to ethical situations.
Whether navigating a consultation, teaching students, or marketing my leadership development services to groups, teams and organizations, how I do this and the motives behind my actions sends signals about what I believe.
Since the time of Aristotle, says Peter Northouse, these discussions have focused on 5 core areas that have been the focus of many ethical systems. These are also described, bolstered or expanded personal beliefs, faith systems, and one’s philosophical or religious worldview.
Here they are: [i]
Respects Others: We might think we have this mastered, but we disrespect others when we interrupt them, show up late to meetings, only seek advice from our kind of people, or ignore the input of people lower in status or rank.
Serves Others: This is the goal of leadership, but many of us subtly exploit others. Some years ago a leader came to the organization I was a part of. He really did not care about the people – he saw us as a platform for his expanding his network, selling his resources, and gaining notoriety. It did not take long for everyone to see it and in a couple years he was gone.
Shows Justice: Justice is about “making things right” and leaders must act justly whenever they notice injustice in the team, community, church or organization. An employee gets overlooked for a raise or promotion because their evaluation was not turned in on time by a supervisor. Make it right. You notice a minority person or woman gets shut down repeatedly in meetings because someone has a cultural bias (perhaps without even being aware of it). Make it right. You see a clear violation of HR practices or basic laws (like a banker I knew who was cleverly skimming fee income into his own personal account). Do the right thing and bring it to light.
Manifests Honesty: This is always a tricky one, particularly in the business world where corners are cut, backroom under-the-table deals are cut, and “bribes” for new business (let’s call it what it is) are routine, tolerated as “just the way things are around here.” Dishonest leaders create a dishonest culture. And a dishonest culture at work or anywhere else is an emotional drain to our people, a black eye on the organization and leaves scars on our families and communities.
Builds Community: This is an area I have devoted much of my life and leadership. Community is the result of shaping an honest, caring, truthful, engaging, fun and authentic culture. We move from narcissism and consumerism to being others-centered and creativity-focused.
Ethics matter. And you and I set the tone and shape the culture.
[i] Diagram can be found in Peter Northouse’s Leadership: Theory & Practice, page 431.
Where do you see ethical breakdown, and how can you be a force for change?
We would like to encourage your feedback as it helps us to identify the issues that are important to you. It also helps others who are searching to develop new creative ways of leading. Thank you in advance for your comments.
Expectation Management
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, community, Group Life, Leadership on February 14, 2013
One of the challenges common to all leaders, I think, is in the area Expectation Management.
I mean we manage resources, we manage time, we manage energy, we do some self-management, we manage people. But one of the things I think we need to pay attention to is expectation management. Not every day is it that the expectations for us and others are put on the table in our organization or on our team, or our relationship with a supervisor or even someone were supervising and I think there’s a few things we need to get focused on around this.
Transcribed:
One of the challenges common to all leaders, I think, is in the area Expectation Management. I mean we manage resources, we manage time, we manage energy, we do some self-management, we manage people. But one of the things I think we need to pay attention to is expectation management. Not every day is it that the expectations for us and others are put on the table in our organization or on our team, or our relationship with a supervisor or even someone were supervising and I think there’s a few things we need to get focused on around this.
First is, are expectations clear? I’ve been in settings where probably like many of you sometimes that’s been true, sometimes it has not been true. I remember working in a banking situation I was new out of the sort of the training department, in commercial lending, and I was down on the lending floor, in a corporate area, new business development, meeting with my supervisor after being there six months. And he said, “Bill I’m kind of frustrated with you because I expected you to be … do more relationship building with CPAs and other financial professionals in the area.” Well I’d only been a year or so at college had just, you know, come through sort of the training program had done very well, but this was never talked about in the training program and those expectations were never placed on the by him. There were a lot of other things I was doing but no one ever told me to go out and have regular lunches with CPAs meet financial professionals in other areas within the city. So I didn’t know what the expectations were so naturally I didn’t meet them. So we had to get clear about that, it’s frustrating when you’re not clear.
The second thing is do the right people know who or do the right kinds of people know what the expectations are for you. Certainly your supervisor needs to know and you need to know, but sometimes there’s others in the organization that need to know. You don’t want to have the conversation with a key board member or a key senior leader who says, “By the way what you do around here?” Now maybe in a very large institution or organization that’s appropriate. But if it’s smaller or if you’re kind of a person that around the organization quite a bit and key people don’t know what you do, why you do it, how you contribute, that some things you need to work on because maybe they don’t know how you make them successful or help make the organization successful.
Another area and probably a final one is just how are the expectations managed or measured? In the sense of how do I know I’m meeting the expectations and when do I know? What kind of rubric is there, what kind of way to know that not just my job description but sort of those the subtle expectations about how I carry myself, how I am in the organization with new people things like that. I just recently had to have a meeting with someone and have kind of a heart to heart about how they carry themselves because they’re an emerging young leader and I wanted them to know that how they present themselves in public and how they engage with people in a public settings says a lot about their leadership, at least as a first impression. Now that’s not written in any documents somewhere but it was one of those things I thought hey that’s an expectation you need to know that’s for me but also from others that are looking at you as a rising young potential leader.
So expectation management .. key thing. Hope this helps you think a little bit more about it and to manage it more effectively with yourself, with others in your team, group or organization.
Do you and and those you lead know what is expected of them?
How can you manage the expectations others have for you and you have for your team?
We would like to encourage your feedback as it helps us to identify the issues that are important to you. It also helps others who are searching to develop new creative ways of leading. Thank you in advance for your comments.
The Power of Gathering
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, Group Life, Leadership, Vision on February 12, 2013
The Power of Gathering is really showing its effectiveness as we gather for a university discussion on economics, we are talking about the culture at large mostly in North America but certainly globally as well.
Well I’m sitting here in a hotel, actually up in Lake Geneva and we are here gathered together as a university to tackle some pretty big issues both internally and externally. We’re talking about economics, we are talking about the culture at large mostly in North America but certainly globally, and we are bringing some experts in to challenge us on how to think about economic realities in light of the new reality of our culture and just the systems of our world. But what I find really powerful here is the power of gathering itself so irrespective of where the content might take us and what we need to talk about related to this, and what some of our scholars are going to be doing to really delve into some of the challenging global economic issues of our world, there’s a power in just gathering. I’m headed off to breakfast in a few minutes with some people and I’m looking forward to that because something happens when a team or a group or an organization gathers. I just want to highlight a few of those to remind us that this is strategic, it’s important, it’s life giving. Now here are a few things to think about first of all clarity I find that when we come together we’re not asking as many how and when questions as we do when we’re sort of in the office, or in the organization. We tend to ask bigger questions sort of the why questions and at a gathering of your core people you get that clarity. Why do we exist? Why are we here? What are some of the big questions we really need to be facing and why should we be facing the now? So the big why questions I think are important for your organization or your group. Another question that you tend to ask when you gather is, “Who are we? What kind of group are we?” And because of the informality that takes place in a setting like this I think it’s, it’s a better opportunity to understand who we are. I think there’s an informality that helps us achieve some relational unity. In our particular case there are three schools in the university represented here the graduate school, the theology school, and the college. The law school is not here it’s in another part of the country. But the those three schools have come together to say let’s get to know each other better, let’s understand how we work better together, let’s see what skills and resources we bring to one another so there is a relational unity, a getting to know each other and that’s really lifted up by the informality. So not only in the formal sessions, the small groups, the strategic sessions, but in the having coffee afterward, the one-off conversations, the meeting after the meeting, the kind of thing we experience around the office sometimes is really lifted to a new level here. And so there’s that informality, that relational piece, that helps us answer that who question. But I think there is also the identity organizationally of; who are we, what kind of place do we want to become, what kind of people do we want to be as we carry forward our mission? So we had the why questions, the who question, and I think alternately we will make that strategic turn, we do that tomorrow morning. But that’s the strategy question of; where do we want to go from here, what do we want to focus on specifically, are there some next steps we need to take? So we will be in groups in teams talking about that as well. So the power of gathering allows us to answer those big questions; why, why are we here, why do we exist, why do we do things the way we do, who are we and who are we becoming and then we really want to go? Hopefully you’ll think about those things as you put some gatherings together and get “off-campus” and do something together in a setting that allows you to really engage these things both in formal an informal ways.
We would like to encourage your feedback as it helps us to identify the issues that are important to you. It also helps others who are searching to develop new creative ways of leading. Thank you in advance for your comments.
The Discerning Leader
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, Group Life, Leadership on February 11, 2013
Some have the gift of being a discerning leader.
Others – like me – learned it in the school of hard knocks and many mistakes. And I need more of it. Maybe you do, too.
In his book Spiritual Influence Mel Lawrence writes, “…leaders with no discernment can do tremendous damage in a short amount of time.” I second that emotion!
Mel says that a discerning leader must be capable of guiding people into clearer understandings and levels of reality. He adds, ”How much we all need incisive leadership today!…The discerning leader approaches challenges and opportunities with a mental and spiritual scalpel. To be discriminating without being discriminatory. To judge without being judgmental. To separate without severing.” Pg. 119
That really is the beauty of discernment. Without it leaders are rash, harsh and impulsive instead of patient, wise and incisive.
And there is the difference. I see it in others. I see it in me.
I need to practice discernment.
For my own leadership to be sharpened I practice discernment in community. The Quakers understood this, and practiced a kind of team discernment back in our pre-revolutionary war days in the late 1600’s. Soon they would be known for “clearness committees” where a person gathered closed friends as they processed a decision. Participants were allowed to ask questions but give no advice. It forced the would be decision-maker to consider all points of an issue, face hard questions and see what could not be see if making choices all alone.
Some today call such a gathering “a personal board of directors.” For others it is a small group or some mentors. Whatever the form, the process teaches each participant to practice the skill of discernment; to reflect, play out possible outcomes, weigh emotions and consider the relational impact of potential decisions.
So who is on your board or sits in your discernment circle?
Who brings unbridled input, mirrors truth and forces you to look at the less desirable components of potential actions and choices?
Who teaches you to practice discernment so that when you must act alone, you have the insight, wisdom and tools to make wise choices?
We would like to encourage your feedback as it helps us to identify the issues that are important to you. It also helps others who are searching to develop new creative ways of leading. Thank you in advance for your comments.
Creating a “Learning Culture” or “Learning Environment”
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, Group Life, Leadership, relationships on February 8, 2013
Creating a “learning culture” or “learning environment.” is what I try to be aware of when working with a group of people.
One of things I realize when I work with a group or team is I don’t want to simply have them connect relationally I want to create an environment where learning is optimized, where people can engage ideas and express truth etcetera. So here are a few things that I try to be aware of and maybe you can as you work with your teams or you teach a group or class, or as you lead your management team.
“I remember taking a group of people to a homeless sort of shelter to spend some time because I couldn’t just teach about it we had actually engage and feel and see it and see the people and see the environment. That was an optimized learning experience so vary your learning styles.”
This image is for illustration purposes only as we did not take actual photos.
Transcription:
Talking about creating a “learning culture” or “learning environment.” One of things I realize when I work with a group or team is I don’t want to simply have them connect relationally I want to create an environment where learning is optimized, where people can engage ideas and express truth etcetera. So here are a few things that I try to be aware of and maybe you can as you work with your teams or you teach a group or class, as you lead your management team whatever. The first is the varied learning styles this is fairly popular teaching around auditory learners and kinesthetic learners and experiential learners. I think we know that and we’ve been exposed to that, many of you know that there are those who learn best by doing or learn best by hearing or by reading or by sort of on the job experiential “gotta get my head and hands around it and try few times and be mentored by someone” each of us has different ways that we prefer to learn. But when a group of people comes together obviously you have a variety of those styles so you need to vary the learning style along the way so whether it’s group interaction or a debate or a case study or a lecture or a teaching moment for a few minutes or something you have everyone read or prepare ahead of time or watch or take them out on an experience. I remember taking a group of people to a homeless sort of shelter to spend some time because I couldn’t just teach about it we had actually engage and feel and see it and see the people and see the environment. That was an optimized learning experience so vary your learning styles. Second thing is don’t be afraid to engage truth, to name reality, to say what needs to be said, whether that’s content that you’re teaching for your particular sort of area of expertise or you’ve got some new data to share with your team engage it, don’t just talk about it, process it, asked the difficult questions, flip it around and look at the opposite point-of-view, do what need to do to engage the truth not simply declare it. It’s one thing to declare it’s another to really get into and engage it and allow others to speak into it, tear it apart whatever they need to do. Another principle to create a learning environment is to seek to understand first. Again it’s common, it’s been said, “Seek first to understand then to be understood.” But I know for me and I’m a person who’s frankly a little too selfish sometimes and is too interested in what I want to say or my point of view and so not really paying attention to you. I’m not paying attention to what you’re saying and how you’re thinking. So, if I seek first to understand I’m going to ask you follow-up questions, clarifying questions, I’m going to get into your world instead of thinking constantly about my world. So that’s another principle I’ve found that is really helpful to draw people out. Finally, I would say really push the idea of putting the truth or the content or the issue into practice, sort of spending enough time in your meeting or with your team to say, “So, what we do with this?” sort of a, “How shall we now live?” Even one of the greatest teachers of all time, Jesus of Nazareth, at the end of his greatest sermon, sermon on the mount, said, “If you don’t take these things I’ve taught and put them into practice you’re a fool, and you’re like a person who builds a house on the beach instead of on solid rock and the storms will come and wash that house away.” So the idea of simply talking about an issue or thinking about an issue isn’t sufficient. It’s important to say, “What are we going to do with this?” I hope that helps as you think about creating a learning culture.
What are some ways you have created a “learning culture” or “learning environment?”
What techniques have you used to get your point across or increase engagement?
We would like to encourage your feedback as it helps us to identify the issues that are important to you. It also helps others who are searching to develop new creative ways of leading. Thank you in advance for your comments.
Competitive VS Cooperative Groups or Teams
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Group Life, Leadership, relationships on February 6, 2013
What is the environment like in your core groups or teams? You can make it function better if you understand the dynamics involved when members are more competitive than cooperative.
Transcription:
I do a lot of work helping organizations with their groups and teams. How they function together, how they work effectively, how people relate within them and I’ve been looking again at some work by Johnson and Johnson who wrote the book Joining Together, which the book is a lot about group theory, group communication, group skills in the context of groups and teams. They had a great section on whether or not the environment in a given group or teams is competitive or cooperative. Competitive versus cooperative and I think it’s a good distinction. They actually refer to some behavioral studies by Jack Gibb in nineteen sixty one who sort of unpacked this a little more. He said there’s a series of cooperative types of behavior, behavior and a series of competitive behaviors in groups and teams and he outlined six of them and puts them in contrast, I’ll touch them briefly. In the competitive environment people are more evaluative and in the cooperative environment more descriptive, in other words you get defensive in your behavior because you’re constantly evaluating others, evaluating ideas, you have the sense that you are right, and they are wrong, So you’re constantly scrutinizing verses describing what you see, describing an idea and letting others in the engaged in it. Competitive environments are more about control. Because I’m right, I want to control the conversation, I want to control the tactics and strategies versus having a problem orientation. A group that’s more cooperative says there’s a problem or issue let’s unpack it, let’s look at it, let’s look at a variety of opinions ideas, ways to solve it. The competitive group is strategically focused verses being open to any spontaneity at all. A cooperative group would have more of a sense of spontaneity and say okay let’s try that or let’s discuss that or let’s put that on the table and really wrestle with it. Versus saying, “No, I’ve got the strategy, it’s right, I know where I’m going, why do we need to brainstorm right now?” You may not say that publicly but team members who communicate bad are basically saying, “I’m right, you’re wrong, why are we having this discussion?” The competitive versus cooperative tension also comes out when we’re looking at neutrality verses empathy. Gibb says that neutrality is something that communicates indifference and indifference creates defensiveness in people in other words your acting like I don’t care, I don’t care how you feel, I don’t care what you think, I’m neutral, I’m placid, I’m calm, I’m straight faced, I show no empathy about you, your idea, your situation, or problem. Because of that it makes people defensive in groups make some posture that way and hold on to control, that kind of thing. Also says that some people in groups see themselves as superior to others verses as equals. See in the competitive environment we see ourselves as above others, and we’re trying to win, and we’re always right, we don’t see people on an equal plain as in the cooperative type group environment I think most teams should strive for. So the idea that my opinion is right, I’m better, I’m higher up the food chain, whatever it is, the sense of superiority starts to have a great impact on the group or team. And finally, they say there’s a comparison between centrality and uh… or I shouldn’t say centrality, it’s more spread out certainty, there’s a sense of certainty in the competitive environment. Again, I know, I had the answer, let’s move ahead with my idea. Versus the sense of what they call, and it’s kind of a more technical were provincia, provincialism in the sense of I can say, hmm that’s an interesting idea let’s talk about that I’m open, I have a point of view, but I’m open to discussion. So I’d ask you to ask your groups and teams, are they more focused on a competitive environment who wins he’s right, what ideas are supreme, who’s in charge, or is it a more cooperative environment where yes we recognize the differences in roles but we want to create an environment where there’s empathy, interaction, a sense of equality, a sense of engagement. How’s your team doing? How are your teams doing where you work? You might want to reflect on that today.
Ladies First – What Happens When More Women Lead
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, Leadership on February 5, 2013
It’s still a man’s world out there. Recent data again affirms that men in comparable positions and with similar expertise and experience are paid 20-60% more than their female counterparts. There has certainly been some progress, but it is still difficult to get a C-suite position if you are a qualified women.
C’mon guys. It is time for US to speak up. This is no longer a woman’s movement – it is a humanity movement. And it is a leadership issue.
It starts early, even as women graduate from college. According to CNN Money, women graduates with the same majors, jobs and hours still get 7% less pay than male graduates. And that can follow them a long time, despite their performance.
If there is one place we should be able to get to some equality it is in the workplace, where we can measure results and performance more easily than in politics or education.
Let’s remember the gross inequalities that abound worldwide, and they are sad (just read Half the Sky if you want to look at some very stark realities for young women). Women worldwide are more likely to be abused, neglected, ignored, and overlooked, and treatment of young girls in many countries remains an atrocity.
But what about closer to home in the good old US of A? How are we doing? More women are going to college than men in many areas now, and more women are stepping into challenging roles in the media, educational leadership, politics and religion. But the marketplace remains largely a male-dominated place.
So, what are we afraid of? What happens when women lead?
When women lead, usually the same things happen that happen when men lead. There are great male leaders and some real duds out there. The same is true of women, but they do not get the slack that men get. When a women falls short in the leadership category she must overcome not simply a poor performance, but also the gender stigma – “she just could not compete with the big boys!”
Really?
I have worked with (and for) strong and weak leaders, men and women. A bad leader is a bad leader, and strong leaders can be found in each gender. But there are not many Meg Whitmans and Carly Fiorinas out there who will really get a chance to lead. Writing in 2011 in the Courier News/Sun Times Dr. Ella Edmondson Bell observes:
This year a record number of women are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies — but you still don’t need all of your fingers and toes to count them. (You don’t even need all of your fingers to count those running Fortune 100s.) Few as they are, they’re doing fine at the top, thank you very much. During the economic storm of 2009, women leaders proved they can be as tough, decisive and competitive as men. USA Today reports that stocks of the 13 Fortune 500 companies run by women for all of 2009 were up an average of 50 percent. The biggest female winner was Mary Sammons, whose Rite Aid stock soared 387 percent!
There’s more and it is worth the quick read.
When women lead they bring all their gifts, insights, experience, stamina, charisma and womanly strengths to the job – just as men bring theirs. I believe men and women are different (not just physically) and that each has great strengths to bring to the table. We need more balance in the boardroom and more ladies at the top of the leadership ladder – but for the right reasons. A token leader is a disaster for everyone, and no woman leader worth her salt wants a handout.
Ideally…
I believe we need more men and women leading together in the marketplace. Women will bring some relational depth that is lacking, typically have greater gut instincts and intuition, and bring a fresh perspective on our clients, customers, parishioners and students.
When men and women lead together with trust and integrity it is effective, efficient, engaging and profitable. Sure, we will still huddle with the guys and gather with the girls because we like to hang out with our own in some settings.
But when it comes to employing gifted, effective leaders, we should not be afraid to shout, “Ladies First!” Not because women are weak, but because they are overlooked and undervalued. Given the chance, they will open doors and build balance sheets with the best of us.
What would the world look like if more women joined the leadership ranks, sharing challenges and opportunities with men as a community of leaders? Wow…I can only imagine.
The Pseudo- Transformational Leader
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, community, Group Life, Leadership on January 31, 2013
Great leaders are not always transformational leaders (think of awful dictators and power mongers). And truly great leaders are real leaders. Unfortunately, real leaders are hard to come by. Being a transformational leader means be a real leader – not a pseudo-leader.
According to Peter Northouse, the term “transformational leadership” was coined by J.V. Downton (no he does not live at Downton Abbey!) in about 1973. It was popularized in 1978 by James MacGregor Burns in his book Leadership (revised in 2010)
Burns said there was a difference between “transactional leadership” (the exchanges between leaders and followers) and transformational leadership.
Transformational leadership is …the process whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower.” – Peter Northouse, Leadership, p. 186
Both kinds of leadership are real and necessary. But transformational leadership is always deeper, lasting and creates are greater sense of team, mutual motivation and joy in the arena of work.
But some leaders could never qualify as “transformational” because of major ethical issues, power mongering, and how they treat employees (sadly, Henry Ford became such a leader when wealth and power got the best of him).
What are the marks of Pseudo-transformational leadership?
Here are signs that you or others are becoming pseudo-transformational in your leadership.
1) You are in it for self-advancement. This is easy to assess. When a leader always cares more about growing their own platform instead of helping others build theirs, it is a telltale sign.
2) Decision-making is always pragmatic. What works for the leader transcends what is best for the team or the organization.
3) Ethical standards are compromised. This may be overt or subtle, or even done out of ignorance or the speed in making a decision. Nonetheless, it is a sign that things are bad. Employees or team members are treated with condescension or ignored, shortcuts are taken and due diligence is ignored, and compliance issues in HR or in legal matters are given lip service.
4) Strategy takes priority over relationship. In other words, regardless of the damage a decision or path may do to the team, as long as we “win” or “realize the vision” or can say “mission accomplished” the collateral relational damage is chalked up simply as the cost of doing business.
5) Everything has a price tag. Pseudo-transformational leaders believe they can “buy” everything – trust, votes, loyalty, performance, followers, relationships, customers, members, silence and compliance with their demands. In some cases money, severance packages (hush money, in some cases), promotions, perks and other “incentives” are used to move people and strategy in the direction the leader desires – even out of the organization.
So we must look at our own leadership habits, choices, motives and ethics.
Who are we in this role for?
What are we leaving behind?
What would others say about my leadership?
It’s time to increase the numbers of real leaders, and say no to the emergence of pseudo-transformational leaders.
How Effective are Your Leadership and Teams
Posted by Dr. Bill Donahue in Business, community, Group Life, Leadership, Vision on January 30, 2013
Today Dr. Bill Donahue discusses Leadership and Teams and how effective you are as a leader to your team at your organization, church or educational institution.
Transcription:
Looking at leadership effectiveness today and how it relates to the working with teams.
Every leader works with teams in one form or another. So as you make decisions as a leader, one of the things that I think very important is how you engage with teams that are part of your organization, your church or educational institution. Some research by McGrath says that there are two factors you really need to pay attention to, is what kind of team leadership and your role as a leader toward that team and that’s whether or not you are simply monitoring and providing feedback to the team or whether you’re going to actually intervene and engage that team. Things you want to monitor are both internal and external. Internal monitoring means looking at the functioning of the team; how does that work relationally, how are decisions made, how are power and authority used, are the inner workings of the team doing well?
The second thing you want to give feedback on is external factors which is; what is the culture in which the team works? Every team functions in an environment and that environment has political or economic or social factors in which the team just has to work. So if you know some things that are external environment you want to pay attention to that as well are there trends, issues, changes, dynamics in the corporation, the organization, the church or whatever that are affecting how the team works? So that’s kind of what you are monitoring. But McGrath says also there’s times to intervene and again internally and externally so to speak. Internally is when the team really is breaking down and there’s dysfunction and you need to step in and lead it, you need to redirect it, you need to bring your leadership into that team and help it realign, refocus and in some cases engage conflict or do things that set the team back on track. But then there’s external ways that you might have to intervene; you may have to change some of the structure around the team, you may have to go to bat for the team in the context of the organization or institution. You may have to make the team aware of external factors they cannot see; social, economic or otherwise. So if you can kind of keep that in mind as you look at decisions related to how your teams are functioning is it something you need to monitor provide feedback to or something you need to intervene into and re-guide, refocus a team structure or strategy.
For more research that cites McGrath’s views you may download this PDF.
Connect with me
