The Sucking Sound of the Leadership Vacuum in Alberta

A leader is one who knows the way, goes the way, and shows the way. - John C. Maxwell

The quality of a leader is reflected in the standards they set for themselves. - Ray Kroc

I was amused and disappointed the other day when it was announced that 1700 private jets were being used by attendees of the upcoming Davos conference on global warming and income inequality.  The disconnect between the verbally stated intentions of the attendees and their demonstrated actions sharply demonstrates the old adage:

Let my actions speak so loudly that you can’t hear what I am saying.

When one wonders why such an obvious disconnect can take place for a conference so important, it is important to realize that such leadership (or demonstrated lack thereof) starts on a much smaller, local scale.

The roots of leadership capability start at home and with that I turned to examples of local leadership in the Province of Alberta to observe leadership in its incubation stages.

After all, the leaders on the local scene eventually become our global leaders.

After taking a quick scan of the leaders on a local scale, it is easy to see why leadership by example is missing in Davos.

It’s because it doesn’t exist at the local levels either.

Last week, Mayor Nenshi of Calgary allowed Councillor Druh Farrell to make unsubstantiated, unverified claims of alleged wild, alcohol-fuelled parties by councillors at City events.

A real leader recognizes that unsubstantiated claims should never be made in public.  A real leader also doesn’t allow his or her colleagues to be skewered publicly with such unsubstantiated claims.  There is a time and a place for such claims and action is taken using facts that allow corrective action to be taken if necessary.  If unsubstantiated, such allegations never see the light of day.

The Mayor not only allowed Councillor Farrell to make such vague, unsubstantiated claims, he exacerbated the situation with his own references to councillors getting “blotto” at community events, to inappropriate drinking by councillors in their offices and to the use of illegal drugs by councillors.

By his own admission, he has no evidence or proof.  He claims he was merely reporting what he had heard and in doing so, he as the leader of City Council invited and encouraged an unfair, unprofessional, public smearing of many hard working councillors who sacrifice everything in order to serve their community.

In other words, he threw his colleagues under the bus without facts of any kind and he doesn’t seem to care.

It appears that he enjoys the merits of being the Mayor when it is convenient and he often plays the card of “I’m just one vote of many on council” but for some reason, he is unable or unwilling to assume the position of the leader of the City Council when the presence of such a leader is critical.

It is a sad reality that politicians are rarely real leaders and this smear probably serves a political need of his.  Well ….. that is giving him the benefit of the doubt and is assuming that he is an astute strategist.  It is a known strategy for those who don’t know what they are doing to encourage disagreement amongst their colleagues to keep them distracted from recognizing the lack of leadership at the top.

Then again, maybe he or his advisors just don’t know any better. 

In the real world, such allegations without merit or proof get a “leader” fired or potentially sued for slander.

But the world of politics is not the real world and therefore, such unprofessional, unethical behavior is rarely punished.

A real leader also knows how to apologize and regain control of matters when things get out of control under their watch.  At the time this was written, no such apology is forthcoming from the Mayor.  He has informed some councillors that as far as he is concerned, this is a dead issue but if they wish, they can call a point of privilege to pursue.

So instead of apologizing to the people who have been unfairly smeared and instead of killing the issue once and for all in the absence of facts, he is letting allegations stand while more fuel is poured on the fire.

If he put as much effort into leading as he does with meaningless, fluffy tweets, maybe Council could spend more time addressing important concerns such as the economic downturn that is coming due to collapsing oil prices. 

Tens of thousands of layoffs are expected. 

I wonder what his strategy is for this.

Maybe it will fall out during one of the alleged wild, alcohol-fueled parties.

And speaking of apologies …

Danielle Smith, the former Wildrose Party leader and now opportunistic PC Party ladder-climber, apologized on her Facebook page about the decision she made in leaving the Wildrose Party of Alberta. Intriguingly enough, she apologized for angering people with her decision but then went on to criticize the people who allegedly forced her hand.

It sounded like “I’m really sorry but it was someone else’s fault anyway so …..”.  Sounds like an authentic apology to me.  It is generally accepted that the “take action and beg for forgiveness later” apology is never authentic since the original intention was still achieved while the underhandedness and dishonor behind it falls into the shadows and is soon forgotten.

She went on to say how she would be honored to serve her community if elected as an MLA again.

Translation: Having demonstrated that she can dishonor the many who supported her in the past, she would like the opportunity to pull the wool over a whole new group of supporters.

It’s pretty easy to see whose interests she is serving.

Can you guess?

I’ll make it easy for you.  The list is very short.

The fact that she didn’t see betrayal as something that would upset many speaks volumes of either her intelligence to understand the will of the people or her belief that the people are not very intelligent.

Neither reflect well on her as an alleged leader in her community and province.

Goals: It's best to avoid standing directly between a competitive jerk and his goals.

Accepting people like this as a senior player in the PC Party speaks volumes of Premier Prentice’s character as well but that’s a subject for another day.  Alberta will get a taste of his character in the next year or so as difficult times engulf the Province with the recession that has been predicted.

But it’s not just in Alberta ….

Last week in the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature, a member of the Official Opposition made a comment during Question Period that Minister Judy Manning’s best position when it came to cost cutting was “under the table”. 

I’m surprised that women’s groups didn’t storm the legislature as a result but then again, they choose fights that suit their own needs, motives and timing.

It’s hard to believe that in the 21st century that we could have such derogatory comments made by a government official who alleges to serve as a servant to the public and as a role model to many.

What does that tell you about the state of government these days?

The Bottom Line

The world has reached a juncture where real leadership is needed to solve challenges in the areas of government spending, the economy, climate control, arms control, terrorism and other areas.

Is it any wonder that the leaders at the global level can’t seem get it done when one sees what we have at home in the form of leadership (or lack thereof)?

Do we care that such leaders form role models for our children?

Do we care that as the world burns in certain areas, that our leaders are the best we can come up with when it comes to guiding us out of difficulty and towards our unlimited potential or do we merely accept the message they are constantly espousing?

Excuses: If you keep asking others to give you the benefit of the doubt, they'll eventually start to doubt your benefit.

I think we should expect and demand better before things really hit the fan locally and globally (if it’s not too late already).

I also think we need leaders who serve the people and are not merely mouthpieces who serve their own interests or the interests of those who use them in return.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood.

Harry

Classifieds: Wanted (Needed) Desperately - New Leaders

A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves. - Lao Tzu

Sharing a musing from the great servant leader, Jack King.  His website can be found here – Walnut Ridge Consulting.

The wise words that follow are his, unedited, and are shared with his permission.

--------------------------------------------------

Calling All Leaders

What do you get when you take an empty box, wrap it, and put a pretty bow on top? Why, an empty box, of course. Sadly, many so-called leaders are not unlike that empty box. What do I mean? It’s simple really. Do elections make us leaders? Does the march of time (e.g., 4-year terms, 20 years on the job) make us a leader? How about credentials and college degrees? Do they make us leaders? How about divinity school, excelling in a particular sport, starring in a block-buster movie, or capturing the essence of life in a magnificent work of art? Do these activities somehow make us leaders? Pretty packaging or not, the only thing that can make us a leader is the condition of our heart.

You see, leadership, of any sort, is not about leading. It's not even about wanting to lead; instead, it’s about being followed. If you are to lead, it is because the people want you to lead; it is because they want to follow you. If you are to lead, it is because you have something of great worth that will build up the hearts of the people. Those who will lead us must first earn the people’s respect, for it is the leader who is empowered, not the other way around. After all, you can only lead as long as the people will follow. So it is, good leaders will not fight to become your leader. They will not ask for your vote. They will not put others down or demand your allegiance. They will not throw shadows of fear over your path. But they will not hide from you, either. Want to find them? That's easy. They're the ones serving others without fame or fanfare.

Find them, and you've found a leader worthy to follow.

--------------------------------------------------

Sometimes the wise words we need to hear do not come in lengthy tomes or need to be accompanied with heavy analysis.

Their beauty and power lies in their simplicity.

Thank you, Jack, for sharing your powerful words.  You are a true servant leader.

Where are the leaders we need today?

We need them now, while we still have something worth leading.

Are you one of those leaders?

Are you sure?

How do you know?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

9/11–What Have We Learned After 12 Years?

“There is something fundamentally unfair about a government that takes away so much of people's money, power, and personal control while telling them that life will be better as a result.” - Steve Forbes

“Remember the hours after September 11th when we came together as one to answer the attack against our homeland. We drew strength when our firefighters ran upstairs and risked their lives so that others might live; when rescuers rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon; when the men and women of Flight 93 sacrificed themselves to save our nation’s Capitol; when flags were hanging from front porches all across America, and strangers became friends. It was the worst day we have ever seen, but it brought out the best in all of us.” –Sen. John Kerry

As I took my morning walk this morning, I stopped and watched some young children playing at a local playground.

It is a beautiful sunny Tuesday morning and I am reminded that it is almost identical to a beautiful sunny Tuesday morning 12 years ago that became the worst nightmare in US history.

As I watched the children play and my mind replayed the events of 9/11, I reflected on what has changed since then.

And I wonder what we have learned.

Airline Security

Despite the billions we have spent on airline security, including advanced screening equipment and reinforced cockpit doors, there are still easy ways to get bombs on planes as well as techniques that can force pilots to open the cockpit door and give up control of their aircraft.

Our invasion of Libya also caused the “accidental misplacement” of thousands of shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles capable of downing commercial aircraft.  Many of these missiles are believed to now be in the hands of Al Qaeda-friendly forces.

Ok … so we’re not doing so well there.

International Relations

On the international front, we continue to try random experiments with diplomacy in the hope that things will just work out perfectly by accident, with little or no knowledge or care of the downstream effects of our actions.

Examples ….

We embraced and even promoted the Arab Spring movement and watched it destroy proud nations like Egypt.

Iraq and Afghanistan are no more stable now than ever and in fact, in some parts of those countries, they are more lawless and dangerous now than they ever were.  What did our brave servicemen and women accomplish there despite the great sacrifices they made for themselves and their families?

Libya is now considered to be lawless and in ruin since we removed Gadhafi, with thousands of armed militants roaming the countryside and providing a training ground for tomorrow’s terrorist generation.

The complexities of Syria continue to simmer, with the US government willing to engage in a military strike even before evidence was available as to who “the enemy” was and with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff admitting that he had no idea what the objective would be or what the downstream effect of a military strike would be.  Let’s not forget also that with Russia sending in defensive forces to back Syria, it wouldn’t take much to accidentally create a larger global conflagration.

And so our random experiments with diplomacy are doing little outside of creating more countries that are unstable, something proven to be a breeding ground for terrorists.

Hmmmm … we’re not doing so well there either.

Meanwhile back home

Meanwhile back home, our political leaders continue to brew a dangerous concoction that brings no peace to the world nor does it bring additional security to the citizens whom they claim to serve.

And just to complicate things, the threat of domestic terror along the lines of the Boston Marathon Bombing is something that many enforcement officials have indicated is practically unpreventable with current laws.

John Kerry’s 9/11 quote when he was Senator is wonderfully patriotic and yet conveniently glosses over the truth that decisions that he and his colleagues made helped draw the ire of terrorists in our direction in the first place.

It would be like a fireman setting fire to a building and then running inside, saving the occupants and proclaiming himself to be a hero.

The people who participated in the events that led up to 9/11 and who play games of random diplomacy get to enjoy security for themselves and their families for life while innocent civilians who care little for political, diplomatic and military tit for tat exercises pay the ultimate price.

I think of my friends who died that day in the World Trade Center, including but not limited to:

- Narender Nath, who saw the best in everyone.

- Stephen Fiorelli, a Port Authority engineer who stayed behind to guide the brave first responders.

- Eric Bennett, who was constantly helping and serving others as much as he could.

I think of my neighbor’s brother who died on Flight 93.

I think of my other neighbor whose office was across the street from the World Trade Center and who watched many of the people jump from the towers.  He was deeply impacted by the event and 6 months later was dead, having been so traumatized by what he saw that the images that replayed in his mind eventually took his Life.

These wonderful citizens, fathers, husbands and Life partners didn’t give a rats behind about what our diplomats and politicians did abroad and in fact, because of national security constraints, couldn’t have known even if they wanted to.

They didn’t sign up to fight any wars.

They didn’t volunteer to be sent into harm’s way.

And yet they paid the ultimate sacrifice anyway but have “the honor” of being publicly named at patriotic memorials every year.

I wonder if part of the problem is that once our leaders transformed from being those who lead people into battle into those who send people into battle, they become less aware of the real impact of their choices on the innocent.

If our leaders started losing their own loved ones as a direct result of their actions, perhaps they might have an incentive to think and act differently when it comes to the decisions they make. << Dear NSA.  That is an observation and not a threat. Stand down. >>

Perhaps.

Why we remember 9/11

Someone asked me recently why we bother to remember the events of 9/11 and suggested that perhaps we should let it fade into the past and allow healing to take place.

The problem is that when we forget the events that led up to 9/11, we release from accountability those who have helped create it and those who continue to stoke the fire for the next big event.

An event that will probably once again exempt those who helped architect or contribute to it while sacrificing those who have nothing to do with it.

An event that we will claim took us by surprise.

An event that will draw a revenge response on our part.

An event that will add more names of the innocent to the lists that we read during patriotic memorial events.

We all play a role in this

We are not without responsibility in how 9/11 came to pass nor are we without responsibility for preventing such events from occurring in the future.

How we responded to Syria is an indicator that we haven’t learned a damned thing .… yet.

And until we start learning something from that painful day on 9/11, we must accept that the lives of those lost were indeed sacrificed in vain and that we are potentially worse off and in a more precarious situation than ever.

Meanwhile back at the playground

As my mind returns to the children in the playground, I think about the people who worry about the color of their next iPhone or whether their designer coffee has a little too much “whatever” in it and I wonder.

If we spent more time focusing on what is right for the next generation and not what is right for ourselves, I think we would realize the right thing to do, whether it’s in the selection of our leaders or how we hold our leaders to be accountable  in regards to domestic and foreign policy.  We would also know what our own responsibilities are for co-creating a stronger potential for future generations.

I think that the events of the world, while seeming to be chaotic and disturbing, are that way because someone benefits from allowing this to happen or from creating such an environment.  Sometimes the list of those who benefit is not always obvious as Esquire magazine generated extra web traffic this morning by showing this outrageous picture.  The picture is of an unknown man falling to his death from the World Trade Center on 9/11 accentuated with tasteless text added by Esquire.

I think that we need to work harder to be the voice for those who don’t have one (or don’t believe they do), to offer a hand-up to those who have stumbled, to show love to those who feel that love has abandoned them, to stand up for those who feel overcome by the world and to be the champion for those who seek someone to look up to.

I think that we need to work harder at being the light that lights someone else’s path.

I think that we need to work harder at being the salt that seasons the Earth and the great variety of Life that exists on it.

I think that we need to share more with those who have less.

I think that we need to help others follow their dreams as we need others to help us follow ours.

I think that we need to move beyond labels that differentiate us and seek the things that unify and unite us.

I think that we need to model the behavior that we want to see in future generations.

I think that we need to try harder to live every day as if it might be our last …. because eventually that does become our reality.

And finally, even as an optimist I think that the world only gets better when we make a choice to make it that way, that a world of unlimited potential doesn’t happen by accident. 

While it would be great to write a heart-tugging, peace-and-love-overcomes-everything blog, history teaches us that the world and humanity don’t work this way.

Or can I be proven wrong?

I would like to be.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum – September 11, 2013

In the days that followed 9/11, I found myself repeatedly playing a song by Styx.

The song came to mind again this morning.  Here it is …. “Show Me the Way”.

Politics and the Fortuitousness of Calamity

Many have conjectured that Hurricane Sandy was the best thing that could have happened for President Obama’s re-election bid.  Some claim that his committed support to help the hurricane victims just as the national election in the US was rolling around tipped many on-the-fence voters over to the Democrat side.

People forget that this is what Presidents should do – show support in the time of need.

And if it serves a political need without making it look overly obvious, I’m sure some political pundits would say “Life does have its bonuses”.

The one thing that I appreciated about the President at the time was that he didn’t make his support a Democrat versus Republican thing.

It was the right thing to do as an American and as a human being.

I’m not so certain I see the same level of magnanimity in the actions of Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Party.

The town of High River is in the middle of challenges, heroics, difficulties, frustrations and the complexities of rebuilding.

The official website for High River has been an excellent source of information for the residents as they rise again and move past the disaster that knocked them down momentarily.

The official disaster recovery website for the Alberta Government is also an excellent source of information, providing both its own information as well as links to other sources of information such as the High River site.

And yet I find it intriguing that Ms. Smith is promoting a different site as shown by a tweet she issued yesterday.

When one clicks on highriverflood.info (at least at the time this blog was written), one is redirected to Ms. Smith’s political page.

Now it’s true that when one scrolls down, one can see some of the same information that is available on other official sites.

However, the first thing one notes when going to the page Ms. Smith promotes is that it is heavily branded as a Wildrose site whereas the other official sites are politics-neutral.

Also, one’s eye is immediately drawn to the menu on the left.

Now one could assume that the links are for donating to the victims, volunteering to help out people in need during the flood, etc.

However, the donate link takes you here, requesting donations to the Wildrose Constituency Association:

And the volunteer link invites you to volunteer for the Wildrose Party for party events.

I guess people could click on the “reserve a sign” link, to reserve a lawn sign for the next election, but that implies that people have a lawn in High River to stick a sign on or that such things matter at a time when some people face a total loss, including irreplaceable items of family importance.

Ms. Smith is also suggesting on her Facebook page  that people should check out her coverage on Instagram  ….

so I popped over there.

The scrolling images at the top of her Instagram page included some for High River and two criticizing the government and Alberta Health Services as shown above.

Perhaps a new, fresh Instagram account would have been more appropriate that wasn’t bashing the government trying to help the people in need (note the comment on the Facebook page from a Facebook user concerned about Ms. Smith promoting a political and personal agenda and “Danielle Days”).

There’s a dirty little secret buried in this technique

It is a known psychological phenomenon that when one exposes people to specific information when those people are under duress, they are more susceptible to the information they are receiving and can be convinced to be in resonance with said information when they may not have been before.

Variants of this phenomenon, including capture–bonding psychological mechanisms, Stockholm Syndrome, military basic training and other concepts  illustrate the power of this type of technique.

Is the Wildrose Party intentionally using one of these techniques or a variant of them?

I guess it depends on how much credit one wishes to give them.

Maybe they just don’t know the difference.

Neither choice is very complimentary.

What’s sauce for the goose ….

Some Wildrose Party supporters have cried foul when their leader’s actions have been criticized in the last week.  Some have claimed that when she has taken actions that appear politically motivated and other people have pointed this out, that the people pointing it out should be criticized for making this a political event.

I don’t buy that at all.

It’s like saying that when a bully picks on a victim, the victim stands up to the bully and the bully runs around exclaiming that now they being picked on as a result.

Challenges doesn’t change people’s character – it reveals it

Events such as what is happening in Alberta and in especially hard hit areas like High River demonstrate the type of character that our society’s leaders are made of.

When I see grandstanding against groups like the RCMP when they were doing the best they could at the moment, when I see promotion of “the political colors”, etc., I see the creation of divisiveness and the promotion of self over service to others.

And I don’t think that is what anyone needs right now.

For people who claim that for me to say this is in fact creating divisiveness, I refer them back to my bully analogy.

I think that regardless of what a person tells us about their potential as a leader and what their ability / capability to lead is, the truth of the matter is that their actions speak so loudly that we often can’t hear what they say.

I think such actions clearly demonstrate whether a leader actually serves their constituents or pretends to with the intention of self-promotion / self-realization.

I also think these actions and not the words we are spoon fed during election campaigns are what we should use as the basis for choosing the leaders of our society.

And finally, I think that when people fall for empty words instead of making choices based on the actions of others, it  may also be a poor reflection on the people who follow their “leader” blindly.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum – Canada Day - 2013

My final observation on Ms, Smith, leaving her to her self-promotion in the midst of the suffering of so many.  People can and should make their own informed decisions regarding the leadership potential of Ms. Smith.

Checking her tweets this morning produces this fascinating mix of tweets.

From top to bottom:

- a bashing of Alberta Health Services for doing their job of ensuring that proper food handling practices are in place (a violation of which could create a MUCH bigger problem in an already bad situation)

- a celebration of Canada Day to show she is patriotic

- a bashing of the RCMP for doing their job of confiscating firearms left abandoned and unsecured (and complaining to the Prime Minister about it)

- a tweet telling people that the website highriver.info contains today’s important announcements (along with a promotion of the Wildrose Party and an opportunity to donate financially to the Wildrose Party).

While she would never admit it publicly, the disaster in Alberta will serve Ms. Smith nicely when the legislature reopens for its next sitting.

Unfortunately, I’m not sure if the gains for her constituents in High River will be as personally satisfying or useful for them as the gains will be for Ms. Smith personally and professionally.

And when people don’t see the connection between a politician’s personal opportunity development on the backs of one’s constituents, it proves the old adage that voters get the representation that they deserve.

Today, we Canadians celebrate our freedoms and our democracy.  Actions such as hers, anti-police, anti-government (including when she suggested to striking corrections officers earlier this year to defy a government back-to-work order) and other such actions look like democracy to some but in some nations appear as an attempt to promote a different form of government.

But I’ll leave that to the conspiracy folks.

Happy Canada Day – better days are ahead for the great people of Alberta!

Addendum – July 4, 2013

I am delighted to see that Ms. Smith’s recent social media posts are now focused on recovery and rebuilding for the great people in High River and less on self promotion.  Whether she changed her messages for political reasons or she and / or her staff realized that earlier messages were inappropriate, the focus has returned to helping the people of High River build a stronger future.  Either way, my concerns as well as the concerns expressed by others probably had some influence, a demonstration that exercising one’s voice in a democracy still works.

Addendum – July 28, 2013

The flooding may be the best thing that ever happened to Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Party.  While the party would deny that they are taking advantage of the situation on the backs of citizens who got wiped out, any political strategist would call them foolhardy for not taking advantage of the situation.

In a time of fiscal challenge in Alberta, Ms. Smith is walking the difficult walk of insisting that the government not spend money it doesn’t have while insisting that citizens demand the right to be relocated by the government.

Hypocrite or hero?

Astute or asinine?

Politically savvy or stupid?

We will only know upon historical reflection.

And the history books are written by the victors.

Why Do Heroes Stand Out?

Over the weekend, the Nebraska Cornhuskers moved into what I call the “Hero Club” when they allowed a 7 year old boy, also a member of the Hero Club in my mind as he struggles with brain cancer, to score a touchdown for the Cornhuskers.

The powerful moment is captured here.

As I marvelled at this powerful moment, I realized why such moments grab our hearts, cause our eyes to mist up and inspire us.

I refer to it as shark attack syndrome.

Shark attacks make the news because they are vivid, raw and rare and because of this, we are captivated when news of such an attack splashes across the media.

Moments like the one in this video are similar, grabbing our hearts because:

1. The powerful moment, in its spontaneity, is all the more heart-gripping because it is so vivid in contrast to what we see in day-to-day life.

But they are rare because:

2. Such events don’t happen as often as they should

or

3. We don’t share awareness of them as much as we should

In a world caught in the crossfire of unlimited potential versus unlimited greed, apathy, indifference and yes, stupidity, I think we need to work harder at either creating more of these moments or work harder at creating awareness of them.

I also think it would be amazing if moments like the one captured above were so common that they were considered to be almost mundane.

Although I suspect such a world would never be considered mundane.

What do you think?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Damaged Teams–A Product of Broken Leaders

Some years ago after a woman by the name of Heather joined our organization, I noticed that an air of disrespect started growing within her business unit.  Her team quickly went from a tight-knit, respectful one to one where the individuals members were practically killing each other.

While it’s not my business to tell others how to run theirs, when they adopted this approach in how they interacted with my business units, I took action and asked Heather why her team now worked completely differently than before.  They were much less respectful, much less collaborative and as a result they were much less productive and much less happy as individuals.

She informed me that she ruled by fear.  If she could instill enough fear and disrespect in her team, then the team would be perpetually off balance, would be easier to control and would serve her needs better.  She did this through a number of techniques including but not limited to showing disrespect to her peers, sowing seeds of discontent and distrust amongst her team members, allowing team members to fight over things that she could have resolved quickly, allowing team members to aggressively interact with people outside of her team and withholding information from others.

Encouraging respect and leading by example were not part of her repertoire.  In fact, she seemed happiest when everything around her was “up in flames” all the while remaining unaccountable to those whom she served. 

Well, she thought she was unaccountable to anyone.

We never did discover what “her needs” were as her office was blissfully silent before the end of the week and her team returned to its natural state of respect-based, trust-based collaboration.

Despite all the best practices we have in business and government, we haven’t stamped out obvious ignorance yet.

If we had, the world would be a better place, wouldn’t it? :-)

I am reminded of Heather when I make requests of the Wildrose Party for clarity, data, facts and the like.

Asking questions in private produces no response at all.

But asking questions in the public space is like chumming, the art of attracting sharks by pouring blood and animal carcases into the water and watching as the sharks arrive, blinded by their instinctive, insatiable hunger and desire to share in “the kill”.

As the sharks circle with their best but weak-minded efforts at taunts, insults, intimidation, crass language and the like, the leadership fades into the background, probably sighing with relief that they ducked another difficult question.

What the “sharks” don’t realize is that for their actions to be actively encouraged (or not strongly discouraged) by their “leaders” is very revealing about the leaders themselves.

Leaders who lead in this way, who hide behind bullies and intimidators, are not leaders.  They have forgotten that to be a leader is more than just holding a title or to be positioned at the top of an org chart.

To be a leader is to lead by example, demonstrating that high levels of ethics, morals, principles, character, respect, transparency, servanthood and authenticity are required of a true leader.

And such leaders hold anyone that serves with them or speaks / acts on their behalf to the same high standards.

True leaders build a legacy that enables the people they serve for many years - long after that leader has moved on.

The rest of the so-called leaders strive to serve their own purpose, often with mixed results, a lot of wreckage in their wake and a lot of people left to pay the price for their “leadership”.

The world needs more authentic leadership soon

We are heading towards interesting times that go far beyond what this year’s budget looks like, how the stock market is doing, who the next Pope will be and the like.

These interesting times will test our leaders in ways that they haven't been tested before.

And whether our leaders are successful or not (and whether we as a society will successfully overcome the challenges or not) will in large part be determined by the nature of the leaders we select to guide us through these difficulties.

What about the “sharks” that inauthentic leaders like to hide behind?

As someone who has sat in on a number of emergency preparedness meetings on a national and international scale, I can say that it doesn’t look for good for people who dedicate themselves to tearing others down instead of striving to lift themselves and others up to create a stronger society.

Mathematically, the odds are against them.  Strategically, they are considered a burden by many planners.  Tactically, emergency planners are focused more on how to minimize the impact of those people on those considered “worthy” of moving forward in society.

After all, you can’t save everyone, can you?

I’m not judging them. I’m merely sharing how they are perceived by others.

In the meantime, inauthentic leaders and sharks are a perfect match for each other.

The leaders give the sharks a sense of purpose, leveraging the shark’s self-perceived disempowerment, frustration, pent-up anger and lack of purpose.

And the sharks inflate the egos of the leaders and help them feel like what they are doing and how they are doing it serves everyone’s needs.

For both sides, ignorance is bliss.

For now.

As for the rest of us?

Are you an enabled leader, encouraging respect, transparency and collaboration amongst your teams?  Do you see your role as one of servant leader, serving your team, lifting them to their greatest potential and creating an even more enabled leadership in future generations of your organization or government?

Are you a team member or citizen striving for the same ideals while holding your leaders accountable to the principles that you hold to be important?

Perhaps you are both and don’t realize it.

Or do you?

A better future is waiting for each one of us but it requires that we step up and be the stronger leaders we are capable of being.

What are we waiting for?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS For those readers who feel themselves growing angry after reading this post, I would recommend that they read this post (Anger: Setting Yourself Up For Manipulation) before responding. :-)

Addendum: In fairness, there are many Wildrose supporters who are good people.  However, the sharks remind me of the Quebec separatist movement in the 1970’s.  The loud, bullying, intimidating pro-separatist movement claimed to be representing everyone and from the volume of their rhetoric, always appeared to represent the majority until referendums and such proved otherwise. 

Weak leaders rely not only on sharks but also on good people remaining silent.  Unfortunately as Edmund Burke noted:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Addendum: April 12, 2013

You know you’ve hit a nerve when a political party leader and an Opposition House Leader block you on Twitter as Ms. Smith and Mr. Anderson respectively have blocked me (an example shown below).

They break four cardinal rules of politics.

1. Don’t shy away from requests for data / evidence to back up one’s assertions / statements (especially assertions that appear to be over the top or inaccurate).

2. Never let someone see you sweat (or cause you to appear to be hiding behind something).

3. Don’t intentionally provide fodder for more concerns about transparency, credibility and authenticity.

4. Don’t promote the importance of being able to critique others in a democracy while fearing the same process when directed back at one’s self.  We have a word for that in the English dictionary.  It is hypocrite.

All four become inconvenient when election time rolls around.  I understand blocking taunters and the ignorant.  But blocking someone who merely asks for data to support assertions is different altogether.  To block me suggests they are no different than the politicians they claim to be better than.

The other thing of interest to me is that such a defensive action causes people like me to take another look at a group that I had made an observation about and moved on.  When such an action is brought to my attention, the action cries “Don’t leave yet – take a closer look because you may be onto something”.

And that’s the last thing most politicians want.

Wanted: Leaders For Immediate Hire

As I read the news, I have this thought running through my head about a classified ad that we need to run in papers around the world.  It looks something like this:

Skimming over some headlines reveals some alarming trends in regards to some of our leadership.

In Canada this week, the CRTC (the body that regulates the broadcast industry in Canada), banned the Dire Straits song “Money For Nothing” because it used the word “faggot” three times.  They banned the song based on the complaint of one individual who felt the song was demeaning to gay people.

Meanwhile, the song “Grenade” by Bruno Mars is soaring high in the charts with graphic lyrics about someone who is willing to do anything for someone, including:

I'd catch a grenade for ya
Throw my head on a blade for ya
I'd jump in front of a train for ya
You know I'd do anything for ya
I would go through all this pain
Take a bullet straight through my brain

The singer indicates they would do anything for this person, even though this person claimed that the other person beat them:

Black, black, black and blue, beat me 'til I'm numb

With all the violence in the world today, especially with suicide being one of the top killers of young people, the continued high occurrence of domestic violence and the shooting incident in Tucson, Arizona last week, these lyrics are not entertaining. 

But where is the outcry?

Speaking of Tucson, Arizona, it is disappointing to see leaders of the NRA and other pro-weapons organizations step forward to champion the right for every American to own any type of gun, including people-killers such as glocks and such.  One pro-weapons advocate in Arizona even said it is human nature to be armed.  Legislators are also VERY quick to continue to champion the need for people to possess these weapons. 

I wonder how Congresswoman Giffords, a pro-weapons advocate herself, will feel when she has recovered and discovers that a 9-year-old girl was killed as a result of Ms. Giffords being targeted.

Despite this, the annual gun show in Tucson this weekend (one week after the shooting) is expecting record sales of weapons.

Meanwhile, people who need access to mental health care struggle to make their way through the red tape, cost and excessive wait times so that they can receive the treatment they need.  These people deal with the pain they are enduring and the stigma that unfortunately accompanies mental health concerns while it takes forever for legislators to find solutions.

President Obama said in his speech “We can do better”.

I should be inspired by such a statement but I am not, especially since the people who are in government today have the authority to create a better result but choose not to.

The guy who buys the gun, then buys his ammo at Wal-Mart and proceeds to kill people is only half the picture.

Enabling him with the right to purchase such weapons indicts the people who embrace the laws that provide him with this right.

Which causes me to think …..

We all own the inconsistency of leadership that we see around us.

We like to lament about how government, or certain corporations or other leaders aren’t getting the job done.

The truth is that they will get it done when we demand it – not before.

We know that such inspiring, intelligent, transparent, values-based leaders are out there.  If they weren’t, the world would be in much worse shape.

We see many examples of inspiring leaders throughout history, including many today.

However, we need more of them – a LOT more of them.

The world is on the cusp – balanced precariously between a future of difficulty and pain and one of amazing potential.

Given this, consider that the classified ad above has been posted.

Will you or someone you know answer the call?

Will you encourage others to answer the call?

I hope so.

The world is ready for the next generation of leaders who will make a positive difference.

It doesn’t need people who assume power under the guise of “we can fix things in the future”.

It needs people who demonstrate that “we are fixing things now”.

And it needs such people NOW.

As Plato once said (substituting the word “leadership” where he used the word “politics”):

"The penalty that good men pay for not being interested in leadership is to be governed by men worse than themselves."

In service and servanthood,

Harry

My Musings-in-a-Minute blog contains the same entry and can be found here.

Leaders Serve Others–Not Themselves

Another mid-term election has come and gone in the US and amongst all the celebration, lamentations over losses and talk of change, there is another dialogue that is less exciting to hear.

It is the dialogue focused around “We the insert party name here Party will focus on the next two years in preparation for the next election”.

They are focused on future events that are critical to their personal needs instead of focusing on the important tasks at hand that are key to the futures of those whom they serve.

Leaders, whether they be within corporations, governments or any other institution, exist to serve others and to exert appropriate levels of influence in the course of serving others.  They serve others in order to maximize the potential of their organization and the team members within the organization and in turn, to maximize the product or service that their organization provides.  They also exist to represent the needs of others.  In the case of the US, 330 million people cannot fit into the Capitol Building.

When a leader is more focused on the leadership position itself and not on the people they serve, then they are merely self-serving individuals who seek the position for their own gain at the detriment of others. 

After the mid-term election, the Democrats are expressing concern about President Obama’s chances for winning re-election in 2012.

What they should be focused on is the state that the country is in.  The US, a great nation with unlimited potential, is mired down with a number of challenges that are a millstone around its neck, preventing it from reaching it greatest potential.

To the Democrats, I say “show us that you care about the country and can put the country before your own personal needs”.

As I am an equal opportunity critic, Sen. Mitch McConnell, leader of the Senate Republicans, recently said: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

To the Republicans, I say “You’ve got a lot to address within the nation – focus on that and worry less about who you think should sit in the President’s chair”.

Neither side seems focused on what they should be focused on – serving the people.  It appears that they are focused on their own needs.

If a leader’s focus becomes entirely centered around the needs of the leader; attaining power, keeping it or getting it back if lost, then we need to find new leaders.

When it comes to attaining and retaining the title of “leader”, we must let their time in office be based on their actions on behalf of those whom they serve and not allow them to be focused on actions solely focused on retaining the title.

Let their actions speak so loudly that we cannot hear what they are saying.

When this happens and they truly serve others, they win and so do we.

And so we support them as we should ….

…. as long as we see them serve the needs of those whom they exist to serve.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

For my Musings-in-a-Minute version of “Leaders Serve Others – Not Themselves”, please click here.

Strong Leaders Ignore The Small Stuff

I’ve been observing the goings-on in my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Eastern Canada, specifically the actions of Premier Danny Williams as of late.

Premier Williams has been in the press a few times in the last week, commenting on an inappropriately worded e-mail to him from journalist (and now Liberal party mouthpiece) Craig Westcott who wondered whether some of the Premier’s actions were as a result of a mental illness or an STD.

Last week, volunteer Pamela Pardy Ghent made what could be interpreted as an inappropriate comment about the dimensions of the Premier’s privates.

In both situations, Premier Williams (or people acting on his behalf) responded swiftly and strongly, making the events very personal ones.

If I could offer Premier Williams a piece of advice, it would be this:

Don’t let them see you sweat.

There are professional who help us discover what lies beneath the surface of the earth by intentionally setting off explosive charges and studying the data that is captured as energy waves from the explosion travel through the earth.

By the same token, if I want to understand what makes up someone’s character, I might lob “explosive” comments to them to see how they react.

How they respond tells us a lot about their strengths and weaknesses.  Equipped with such knowledge, another political party can exploit the identified weaknesses for their own gain (if any are found).

If no information comes back as a result of the “explosion”, then one has no data to review and thus no insight regarding these strengths and weaknesses can be gleaned.

If a plethora of data is returned and the analyst doesn’t know how to read the information, then the opportunity to exploit these weaknesses is lost.

However, if an intelligent person receives a lot of data, then much can be gleaned for their own benefit.

So I don’t know what is more amusing to observe:

1. That Mr. Williams continues to reveal his leadership weaknesses by taking everything personal instead of allowing things to slide off him.

2. That the Liberals continue to miss opportunities laid before them in broad daylight.

Dear Mr. Premier – ignore the small stuff.  As a leader, you should be aware of this rule of leadership.

Dear Opposition Parties – you are missing phenomenal opportunities to exploit for your benefit.  It’s time to sit up and take notice.

Regardless of what side you are on, it’s good to see that the religion of politics is healthy in my home province.

In service and servanthood.

Harry

PS Gary Moore (http://www.facebook.com/foggygary) just made this interesting observation on Facebook (reprinted with permission):

I do disagree with his comment that "Regardless of what side you are on, it’s good to see that the religion of politics is healthy in my home province." I haven't seen this level of paranoia since the dying days of JRS's years in power.

My response:

Gary ... an interesting observation - thanks for sharing it. You make an interesting and valid point. :-)

I felt his response represented an interesting viewpoint that was worthy of sharing.

Wanted For Hire: Not Too Smart or Too Stupid

I was recently helping a friend of a friend whose son was in the process of moving from Europe to Canada.  This young man had an insightful mind, a strong academic background and an excellent attitude and ethic.

In the particular market and geographical area he was hoping to find a position in, he looked for over a year and came up empty-handed, finally deciding to move on to another part of the world.

With such a background, he should have been a shoe-in for a job but he couldn’t find one.  What held him back?

It seems that in the marketplace he had targeted, there were additional criteria that he couldn’t meet; a secret, fuzzy criteria that was impossible to study for or anticipate.

The people he had approached didn’t want him to be too smart.  In essence, they didn’t want him to be smarter than they are (by their own definition and judgment) because it left their ego with a sense of being threatened.

So my response to them was “so you need this person to be not as smart as you” to which the response was “well, we won’t invest in him if he is too stupid either”.

So the final criteria for this enterprising individual was that he had to be less intelligent than the hiring person but not too stupid either – a nebulous range that would vary from one hiring individual to another and a range that would be impossible to anticipate on an interview-by-interview basis.

A Blessing in Disguise?

To not be hired by these people is actually a blessing in disguise for this young man.  Who would want to work for such narrow-minded, ego-centric leaders?

True leaders want and need to find people who are as smart or preferably, smarter than they are.  True leaders know they are tasked with leading individuals and groups to produce exceptional results and in the process, create leaders who are more knowledgeable than they are.

When leaders can adjust their ego such that they have enough to be confident but not so much that they forget their purpose, to create results as well as the leaders of tomorrow, then we will finally be on the road to a balanced, exceptional future – in business, in government, in institutions and in society.

Such results are resilient, long-lasting, extensible and empower the next generation of leaders to go far beyond the previous generation.

I know what kind of leader this young man is.  I also know he will connect with other insightful leaders who understand and embrace his gifts and together they will create some amazing things.

Strong leadership and strong ego are both accelerants – one accelerates results and growth for everyone and one accelerates the demise of everyone.

When you are hiring, are you looking to create a legacy of results and strong leadership in your teams or are you hiring to fuel your own ego?

Which attribute do you exhibit more – strong leadership or strong ego?

How do you know?

In service and servanthood.

Harry

For my Musings-in-a-Minute version of “Wanted For Hire: Not Too Smart or Too Stupid”, please click here.

Everyone is talking - is anyone listening?

Or better yet, is anyone taking real action?

I have just received an invite from an associate who asked me to join him in a particular online social network.  While he is a good friend, I turned him down.

I denied his request for the simple reason that this is the 15th or 20th business network that he has become a member of and which he has asked me to join.

One of the social networks was particularly humorous, suggesting that membership was extremely exclusive.  I found the claim to be interesting, until I turned down invitations from approximately 1,000 people over a two week period from the same exclusive network.  Exclusive indeed!

Online social networks can be incredibly empowering when used appropriately.  However, when one becomes the member of so many social groups that they spend more time maintaining memberships in them (or joining new ones) instead of contributing to their network, harvesting results from the network or living a productive life that makes a difference, then something dysfunctional is in progress.  Many partners of such people have become "social network widows", as their significant other spends more time joining the latest social network or inviting everyone they know to the latest network rather than spending time working towards their purpose and passion with the people who really matter.

I overheard with amusement and sadness recently as two people compared notes on which social networks each belonged to and why the other person simply had to join networks "x, y and z".  As they each suggested the reasons for being part of these networks (friendship, romance, learning, etc), it became clear that maintaining the networks had become so complex that they were not obtaining and value from nor contributing any value to the networks that they belonged to.  The number of networks and the number of connections within the network had become more important than the reason you network in the first place - for collaboration through knowledge and contact sharing.

Occasionally, you see contests where people are striving to get "x" thousand new contacts the fastest.  Once they have reached the number, the network offers little of substance, outside of an ego boost.

Today we can even get software to help us manage all of our social networks.  It reminds me of the experts who come in and optimize your closet space, to help you find better ways to organize your "stuff".  Maybe instead of finding ways to store more stuff, we just need less of it in our lives in the first place.

I think the same thing applies to a number of conversations around leadership that I have listened to lately.

Some have conjectured lately that the reason so many challenges have arisen in our world (whether ecological, social, economic, governmental, etc) is that our leadership inventory is not as strong as it used to be.

People are also talking about the need to get back to classic values - a sense of purpose, vision, trust, respect and collaboration.

I believe that our leadership inventory is as strong as ever and that the "classic" leadership values are as prolific as ever, but we are spending too much time talking about them and for a variety of reasons, we are not taking action.

If you follow groups like Twitter, there is a lot of chatter about leadership principles.  If you are a member of LinkedIn, there are an incredible number of leadership experts.  Surely with 30 million (the number of LinkedIn members) leadership experts sharing their knowledge, the problems of the world must be practically solved by now.  :-)

Conversation around leadership is excellent and necessary.  However, when the conversation becomes a circular, never-ending conversation where the knowledge of 10,20,50,100 or more years ago keeps being released by the "experts" as the "be-all, end-all secret just discovered", one has to wonder if the greatest challenge in leadership is not a lack of leaders and the knowledge of how to lead but just a lack of execution.

So while there is an incredible amount of wonderful dialog taking place about leadership principle, skills, knowledge, etc., I think we need stop hoping things get better by merely talking about it and instead, let's focus on achieving results through action.

Even if the action produces a less than desirable result, it will at least teach you something you need do address differently the next time.

True leadership is difficult.  It takes courage, perseverance, purpose, mission and a willingness to sometimes swim against the tide of commonly accepted thought.  Leadership also requires humility, diplomacy (most times), dictatorial decision making (sometimes) and a knowledge of knowing when to lead and when to relinquish command to a more enabled individual.

However, when the true leaders don't stand up and the void is filled with the leader-wannabes who fill the gap with self-proclaimed "secrets to leadership", we can get overwhelmed with too much informational noise.  Such noise causes us to forget that while knowledge is important, at some point, we have to say "I know enough to at least get started" and take our first tentative steps towards our purpose, vision, mission and goals.  This applies to us personally as well as professionally.

We are all leaders with different levels of capability and leadership maturity.  Many of us would be surprised to realize that we have a lot more knowledge about being leaders than we give ourselves credit for.

Let's apply that knowledge in our environment, whether it be the workplace, the home, the community or the planet and start making a difference. 

If you think you need more leadership knowledge, you will discover you learn a lot more through application and collaboration than you do from just studying the experts.

What will separate people and organizations who are successful in our interesting times will be those who embrace proper leadership values, collaborate with others who are similar and take action. 

Are you ready to be successful (however you measure success)?  Do you have a passion for manifesting your purpose?  Do you have the drive to push forward and the humility to know when to relinquish control?

Do want to accomplish something so badly, you will do whatever it takes to get it done?

Excellent - then please stand up and start executing.  The world is eagerly awaiting "your arrival".

In service and servanthood.

Harry

Going for the Gold - the Leadership Difference

I was taking inventory today of smaller information technology companies that I have come in contact with up to the end of 2007 and where they are on the track towards success and some interesting items came to light.  The most interesting thing was that while I believed they all had potential for success, the ones that were most successful now aren't the ones I thought would be most successful when I was first introduced to them.

In fact, some of the ones with the greatest potential are now in various stages of a death spiral that they are in denial of while some of companies that seemed to have less potential are now driving towards success.

When I examine the different companies carefully, I noticed that all things being equal, including size of market, size of competitive space, client size, quality and quantity, availability of execution capital, etc., the companies all seemed to have equal access to success.

However, the one glaring item that stood out between the successful and less than successful companies was in fact the difference in leadership.

The leaders of the unsuccessful companies seemed to share a shortage in some common traits:

• Courage

Unwillingness to take risk, to differentiate themselves from their crowded competitive space - I'll make plans to spend money only if I currently have it in hand.

• Vision

Unwillingness or inability to proactively rally their teams around mission, vision, values, purpose and goals - Why should I have to motivate them any further - I am paying them already - that should be enough.

• Humility

Inability to learn by acknowledging that other people have knowledge that can be leveraged for their success - I am a business owner therefore I am already successful and have nothing to learn from others.

• Greed

Unwillingness to share the pie - I'd rather have all of a small pie than 90% of a much larger pie - I'd rather have my company collapse then give up x% to an investor who could make my company much larger.

• Human Relationship Management

Lack of insight into leveraging the strengths of team members - They will do what I tell them - I don't care if they are happy about it or using their talents.  I just want them to work harder.

• Responsibility

Refusal to take responsibility for mistakes made in the company - If my team has made a mistake, what is most important for me is ferreting out the culprit, not in solving and learning from the event.

• Business acumen

Failure to observe the landscape and adjust accordingly, whether it be in technology, competitors, new opportunities, etc. - My company will be successful irrespective of what the industry calls for, what my competitors are doing, what new technology exists to empower the company, etc.

• Stubbornness

Inability to leverage people who have "been there" - if I do this, then there may be an expectation that I will have to do what someone else tells me or worse, may have to share in the reward. I'd rather go it alone than do that - sheer brute force has and will continue to make me successful.

• Wastefulness of time

Unwillingness to utilize networks containing new clients, industry experts, etc. - I can build my own network when I need it - that way it is mine to control and I don't need to share the rewards.

• Strategy

Lack of interest in or commitment to spending time to be strategic in sales and marketing, competitive analysis, appropriate team building and motivation, partner collaboration, honest corporate self-assessment, articulation of strategy, internal / external communication, etc. (this one shocked me at the scale and commonality of the lack of strategy) - I don't have time for all of that stuff.  If I am planning then I am not executing and if I am not executing, I must be failing.

• Passion (or lack of)

These leaders say all the right things, how they empower their staff, their staff is their first priority, they do all the right things, strategy is critical, etc - but you discover that it's all talk.- If I pretend to do the right things, then everything will correct itself and in the meantime, I buy time by getting the respect of those around me.

Conversely, the successful companies exhibit the following expressions of the same attributes in their leaders:

• Courage

Smart risk is key to my success - I won't waste my money but smart risk will propel me past my competitor and will allow me to establish a beachhead before they do.  I'll find creative ways to generate the income needed to drive this behavior and to mitigate the risk.

• Vision

I promote and live by messages centered around mission, vision, values, purpose and goals - If I don't provide my team with something to rally around, provide opportunities for individual contribution and success and provide a model that establishes our execution standard, why would they even care about contributing to the greater success (and how do they know in what direction they should be moving)?

• Humility

There is much to learn from others who have "been there" - I acquire new knowledge every day from people who are helping me and my company grow.

• Generosity (reverse of greed)

The bigger the success, the more there is to share with everyone - I'd rather have 90% of $100 than 100% of $50.  This empowers me and my team to live more fulfilling personal and professional lives.  If this means venture capital or some other investment vehicle, so be it.

• Human Relationship Management

A critical success factor for success is the ability to obtain optimum results from each team member by tapping into the strengths and passions of each team member -  I understand the passion, talent, strengths and knowledge of each team member and look for ways to get them engaged such that they learn constantly, they are happy and passionate about success and about themselves, they are fully engaged in the big picture and we are mutually successful.  If we are not all winning, then none of us are winning.

• Responsibility

Accepting responsibility for mistakes made in the company - any mistake made is a reflection, directly or indirectly on my choice of leaders, my growth of leaders, my own personal leadership capability, style and execution and the decisions made as a result of all of these.  For this reason, any failure is a direct reflection on me and therefore I own responsibility to produce optimal result at all levels of the organization.

• Business acumen

Strong leaders observe the landscape and adjust accordingly, whether it be in technology, competitors, new opportunities, etc. - my business execution skills will create success or failure.  If I and the leaders that work for me do not have the necessary business acumen for success, I will find or hire the necessary people who bring essential business knowledge to my company.  Our success is more important than our pride.

• Pride (reverse of stubbornness)

Successful people leverage and model people who have "been there" - success is something I am proud of.  If I don't have the experience I need, I will find people who have the experience, even if they are smarter than I am.  Pride in a successful company is far more desirable than failure created through stubbornness.

• Leverage (opposite of wastefulness)

Utilizing networks containing new clients, industry experts, etc. - A strong network can take a lifetime to build.  My window of success doesn't provide a lifetime - why build what exists through other contacts and can be tapped immediately?

• Strategy

Total recognition for the importance of strategy and commitment to building strategic plans, revising them where appropriate and executing faithfully in areas of sales and marketing, competitive analysis, appropriate team building and motivation, partner collaboration, honest corporate self-assessment, articulation of strategy, internal / external communication, etc. - If I can't articulate my strategic intentions, how will I ever translate my corporate purpose into tactical roadmaps.  Failing to plan truly means planning to fail.

• Passion

These leaders model passion in everything they do.  They have a passion for excellence, for commitment, for focus, for mutual winning, for team collaboration, for ongoing learning, etc.- Passion is not something I can fake. I'm either all in it or I am not in the game at all and everyone is clear where I stand by observing what I do and not just listening to what I say.  Success depends on passion throughout the ranks.

I know this is old hat for people who have been there.  My thought is that if knowledge of this is so common these days, why are leaders continuing to make these fundamental mistakes and why aren't they willing to do what it takes to correct them before they and their organizations fail?

I will post my thoughts on that shortly.

In the meantime, where are you as a leader and a person of influence in your company?  Is your company successful?  If so, what can you do to make it more successful and to be a model for other companies to follow?

If not, do you have the courage to do what it takes to take corrective action?

It comes down to how badly you desire success.

As Bob Proctor quoted me in his daily "Insight of the Day" in February of 2007.

"Everyone's life is under someone's control - it might as well be under your own so that you can direct your destiny."

Click here to listen to Bob.

Do you want success in your organization?  If so, get stoked up about it and drive towards it.  Otherwise, everything you are doing is just entertainment.

Yours in leadership service.

Harry

John Maxwell's Laws of Leadership

In a previous book review, I noted that John Maxwell's books regarding the laws of teamwork were essential reading to any leader (defined as anyone in a position of influence, which includes pretty much all of us).

By the same token, Maxwell's book "The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership" http://www.amazon.com/21-Irrefutable-Laws-Leadership-Follow/dp/0785288376/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214673844&sr=1-1 is also a profound read for any leader.  I have listed the original 21 laws below.  Note that if you are able to obtain the newest version of his book, there are two laws that are different than my notes below.  The "Law of the Picture" replaces the "Law of E.F. Hutton" and the "Law of Addition" replaces the "Law of Reproduction".

Those interested in this book and looking for ways for their personal and spiritual life to co-exist may also be interested in "The Maxwell Leadership Bible" http://www.amazon.com/Maxwell-Leadership-Bible-Revised-Updated/dp/0718020154/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214674560&sr=1-1, where Maxwell overlays his laws over the Bible.  It is an equally powerful read.

This book, with all of John Maxwell's other books, are powerful tools for today's leaders.

To your leadership success.

Harry

1. “The Law of the Lid: Leadership Ability Determines a Person’s Level of Effectiveness”

Brothers Dick and Maurice McDonald had a talent for the restaurant business. As American culture became dependent on cars, they developed methods to serve food to customers on the run. They eventually streamlined their business, and primarily sold hamburgers. People in the restaurant business traveled to their hamburger joint to learn their efficient methods. Yet, the McDonald brothers failed when they attempted to franchise their idea. Why? Because they lacked overarching leadership ability. Their partner, Ray Kroc, had the vision and skill to make McDonald’s a marketplace phenomenon. Dedication to success is important, and so is talent and intelligence, but without leadership ability, you’ll only get so far.

2. “The Law of Influence: The True Measure of Leadership Is Influence – Nothing More, Nothing Less”

True leadership cannot be bestowed, it must be earned. In 1996, a London Daily Mail poll showed that the public considered Mother Teresa and Princess Diana to be the most caring two people in the world, though neither held political office. People listened to them, and they used their influence to accomplish great things. Leading and managing are two different tasks, but the idea that good managers make good leaders is a common misconception. Leaders influence people while managers focus on running smooth operations. Entrepreneurs are not necessarily leaders. Even innovators may lack the ability to build organizations. Another misconception is that being first, being given a leadership job, or having great knowledge makes you a leader. Only hard work and dedication can do that.

3. “The Law of Process: Leadership Develops Daily, Not in a Day”

If you cannot identify the subjects you’re ignorant about, you won’t know what you need to learn. Once you figure that out, you can begin to develop your leadership skills by filling in the gaps in your knowledge. As your knowledge grows, so will your leadership ability. As you absorb leadership lessons, leading will become second nature. Real success comes from building your enterprise day by day.

4. “The Law of Navigation: Anyone Can Steer the Ship, But It Takes a Leader to Chart the Course”

Leadership requires planning and forethought. Consider what you are asking others to follow you into doing. Preparedness is the main secret of this law. Decide what you’re going to do, and tell key staff members your goals. Allow time for them to accept the course you’ve proposed. Be prepared for problems, but always highlight their successes. Each day, review the course you’ve set.

5. “The Law of E.F. Hutton: When the Real Leader Speaks, People Listen”

The person with the title, the one running the meeting, may not be the real leader. True leadership depends on influence. The man or woman to whom people listen is the actual leader. Real leaders have strength of character, build good relationships and know a lot about their work. They have strong intuition and plain, raw talent.

6. “The Law of Solid Ground: Trust Is the Foundation of Leadership”

The trust of your followers is your most valuable asset as a leader. People want to believe in your character. If you make a mistake and don’t acknowledge it, you will breed mistrust.

7. “The Law of Respect: People Naturally Follow Leaders Stronger than Themselves”

Strong people look for strong leaders, based on respect and depth of character. Harriet Tubman, an African-American abolitionist, was very short, she lacked two front teeth and she never dressed well. Despite her appearance, people respected her enormously. In time, some of the country’s most important people invited her into their homes to seek her counsel.

8. “The Law of Intuition: Leaders Evaluate Everything with a Leadership Bias”

Intuition is a difficult quality to define. You develop intuition over time, through experience, but you must be ready to implement it in a heartbeat. Intuition enables leaders to read their circumstances, other people and available resources, and to integrate that understanding so they can act specifically within a broader context. Intuition offers a creative way to connect problems with solutions by viewing every situation through the lens of leadership. Apple’s Steve Jobs is an excellent intuitive leader. He has an uncanny ability to present innovations that capture consumers’ imagination. He views every technology, every partnership and every employee as a resource he can use as he leads his company into new markets.

9. “The Law of Magnetism: Who You Are Is Who You Attract”

Generally the people you attract will have qualities that are similar to yours. They will generally share your attitudes, values, abilities and life experiences. If you’re not attracting the people you want, examine your leadership skills to find any areas that need improvement.

10. “The Law of Connection: Leaders Touch a Heart Before They Ask for a Hand”

To communicate your message, you need to connect with people on an emotional level. Even when you face a room full of people, remember that they are individuals; connect with them as separate people. Some of the greatest military leaders made it their business to connect individually with their troops. Robert E. Lee spent time around the campfires with his men on nights before big battles. General Norman Schwarzkopf said in his autobiography that one Christmas during the Persian Gulf War, he “must have shaken 4,000 hands.” By taking the trouble to connect with their soldiers individually, these leaders ensured that they had their followers’ support.

11. “The Law of the Inner Circle: A Leader’s Potential Is Determined by Those Closest to Him”

To make your organization more effective, seek strong leadership potential among the people who form your inner circle. Don’t devote your time to trying to convince or inspire people who have a negative attitude. Invest your energy in those who share your vision. Populate your inner circle with individuals who boost morale and help make your load lighter.

12. “The Law of Empowerment: Only Secure Leaders Give Power to Others”

Henry Ford had an incredible vision. The car he manufactured changed modern life. And yet, he was so personally insecure that he could not keep himself from undermining the other executives at the Ford Motor Company. He would empower subordinates only to cripple their authority later. Worries about job security usually prevent leaders from empowering other people, but the ability to develop other leaders makes you invaluable to your organization. Abraham Lincoln named his political rivals and critics to his cabinet because he wanted the benefit of advice from leaders as strong or stronger than he was. When you empower others, you lift them up and, in the process, you elevate yourself.

13. “The Law of Reproduction: It Takes a Leader to Raise Up a Leader”

Some leaders are naturally gifted. Others rise to the occasion in response to crisis. However, the vast majority of leaders are inspired and mentored by other leaders. The best mentors for potential leaders are experienced leaders. You can only give to others what you already possess. Many leaders don’t see the value of generating other leaders, and may try to hold other people down at lower ranks. Be careful; the only way to limit or demote others is to lower yourself. Raising new leaders is essential for the full development of your organization. The more leaders your company has, the stronger it is, but that requires careful nurturing. As Ross Perot once said: “Leaders don’t flock. You have to find them one at a time.”

14. “The Law of Buy-In: People Buy into the Leader, then the Vision”

Mahatma Gandhi was one of the greatest leaders of all time. He led his native India to independence. He advocated nonviolence as the most effective weapon against oppression. Convincing people of this idea was terribly difficult, and yet millions followed him. Why? Because they believed in him as a leader, so they adopted his vision and his plan. Many people think vision comes first, but it doesn’t. When followers are making up their minds, the leader comes first. Build your credibility as a leader and then work on persuading others to share your vision.

15. “The Law of Victory: Leaders Find a Way for the Team to Win”

Winston Churchill spoke out against the Nazis as early as 1932, but those who led England at that time decided to pursue a reconciliatory path. When Churchill became Prime Minister in 1940, he plainly stated his position against Nazism. He made it clear that he intended to lead England to victory and that defeating Hitler was the only acceptable outcome. Despite incredible odds, Churchill did not give up until the Allies were victorious. Even a leader who is dedicated to victory must realize that winning is usually a team endeavor. Improving the team’s play leads to victory. Achieving victory requires a cohesive vision, a variety of skills and a dedicated leader exhorting his team to leave it all on the field.

16. “The Law of the Big Mo: Momentum Is a Leader’s Best Friend”

To go anywhere, you must be in motion. Ongoing momentum makes it easier to overcome challenges and obstacles when they occur. A leader must generate momentum, but once it starts, it is hard to stop. Momentum inspires followers to perform.

17. “The Law of Priorities: Leaders Understand that Activity Is Not Necessarily Accomplishment”

First analyze your obligations. Identify those areas where your strengths are greatest and, as much as possible, delegate the rest. Understand where your greatest passions reside, because they provide your motivation. Being active doesn’t necessarily mean you are accomplishing the right things, so setting priorities is crucial. Ideally, each action you execute will satisfy more than one priority. To prioritize, determine what you absolutely must do, what activity generates the largest gain and “what brings the greatest reward.” To maximize your effort, focus on the most productive areas.

18. “The Law of Sacrifice: A Leader Must Give Up to Go Up”

Sometimes you have to be willing to give something up so you can move ahead. You may be forced to take one step back in order to take two steps forward. Often that means working around the clock without compensation or appreciation. Sometimes the sacrifice is even greater. When Lee Iacocca took over Chrysler, he couldn’t stop the company’s downward trend toward bankruptcy without drastic action. As a last resort, he asked the federal government to bail out the company. He opened himself and Chrysler up to attack and ridicule. To set an example, he reduced his yearly salary to one dollar. He asked Chrysler’s executives to sacrifice as well. Because of that mutual sacrifice, they turned Chrysler around together. Getting where you’re going will require sacrifice. Staying there requires even more sacrifice.

19. “The Law of Timing: When to Lead Is as Important as What to Do and Where to Go”

So often, timing has a tremendous impact on the outcome of a battle. Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter was elected president in 1976 because voters identified with him as a Washington outsider. It was “the right time” in U.S. history for an outsider to win. The country was wary, disillusioned by Vietnam and Watergate. Chances are that Carter would not have been elected at any other time, but timing favored the underdog in 1976.

20. “The Law of Explosive Growth: To Add Growth, Lead Followers – To Multiply, Lead Leaders”

Leaders who develop other leaders multiply their own potential and activate the law of explosive growth. John Schnatter, founder of Papa John’s Pizza, explains, “It’s my job to build the company.” His COO, Wade Oney, adds, “The key is to develop leaders. You do that by building up people.” You can groom leaders one by one, but for faster growth you can also enlist leaders who will bring their followers along, multiplying your growth.

21. “The Law of Legacy: A Leader’s Lasting Value Is Measured by Succession”

In 1997, Coca-Cola’s CEO Roberto Goizueta died unexpectedly. This kind of crisis is often hugely destabilizing, but Goizueta had prepared for his company’s welfare in the event of his absence. As a result, Coca-Cola remained strong. By growing leaders, you amplify your company’s potential today and provide for its sustained success in the future.