Leadership and Sense of Self

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

Contemporary leadership literature favors bodies of thought emphasizing knowing and understanding followers, addressing their needs, and conducting the leadership role in a selfless manner. These are sound principles. Leadership is an other-oriented enterprise. Selflessness is preferable to selfishness. While most leaders have strong egos, narcissistic personalities are rarely recognized for excellence in leadership.

Strategic introspection, which consists of purposely examining one’s own motivations, personality traits, strengths, weaknesses, and emotional triggers, is a crucial element of leadership development, In fact, sense of self should be the first step in leadership development. It is common to hear leaders ask “Why does my staff or team member behave this way?” It is less common to hear leaders ask “How does my behavior manifest in this organization?”

It’s Me, Not You?

Who among us is free of emotions and experiences that can sabotage our own effectiveness? Or, more casually stated, if everyone around me is annoying, it’s probably me, not them. The bottom line is that serving others begins with a thorough understanding of self.

Understanding self is not a new concept. Warren Bennis wrote of management of self as one of four foundational leadership skills. The popular concept of emotional intelligence is rooted in understanding one’s own emotions and how they impact others. These skills are often referred to (slightly disparagingly) as soft skills. These soft skills, though, prove surprisingly hard for many of us to master.

Find Your Spots

To begin the hard work of better understanding and managing your sense of self, examine both brights spots and dark clouds in your day. Do positive outcomes more closely correlate with a specific emotional state? Do problematic outcomes correlate with a different emotional state? Can staff or team members predict with high reliability your response in a given situation? Does that response give them energy or take energy away from the task? Are you able to anticipate situations that may bring out your less productive self? Are you able to prepare for those situations and mitigate negative behavior? Do you do a post-mortem after both routine and crucial encounters? Was I at my best? If so, why? If not, why not? How can I learn from the experience and replicate the good while adjusting the bad?

Seek Feedback (More Than Once)

As part of your quest to be a superior leader, you also must go beyond self-assessments. Ask others for honest feedback in a safe space. Engage in 360 evaluation. Consider how your personal life and professional life merge. Few people are different at home than they are at work. Your emotional triggers don’t stay at home in the morning or remain in the office in the evening.

Understanding yourself is the first step to effectively leading others. Understand that developing your leadership ability and the ability of the people around you is a process that is never completed, not a task to be checked off your to-do list.

Next – Leadership and Sense of Place – www.msstrategy.com

Innovation and the Adjacent Possible

By | Strategy

In his book, How We Got to Now, Steven Johnson describes six innovations that “made the modern world.” Johnson chronicles how these innovations were often the result of networks of people pursuing the same invention. He describes many innovations occurring nearly simultaneously from people who are not connected, but who were pursuing the same course because advances in thought made something new possible. Johnson employs legendary complexity theorist Stuart Kauffman’s term “the adjacent possible.” In simple terms, advances in thinking make possible today that which was not possible yesterday. This could also be described as the penumbra, the future that is partially visible but also partially obscured. That which is visible provides the foundation for the many alternative futures that are not quite, yet within our sight.

Contrast this with our fascination with stories of inventors who come upon a brilliant idea and parlay it into breakthrough innovation that changes lives, particularly the life of the entrepreneur. In that narrative, the inventor always becomes wealthy and celebrated. This fable captures our fancy. We dream of being Gates, Jobs, or Zuckerberg. We view innovation as a sentinel event, a single occurrence that changes everything, rather than what innovation more often is: an iterative process that builds upon the successes and failures of yesterday, resulting in something new that is possible today, and that will make something even greater possible tomorrow. We seek breakthrough without understanding that breakthrough rarely happens immediately and spontaneously.

Innovation can be characterized as intellectual crowd-sourcing. It is the sum of dozens or even hundreds of small steps, none of which were a breakthrough in their own right, but when totaled result in seemingly sudden change. Instead, think developing a culture of innovation by:

  • identifying sources of innovative ideas and focusing on cultivating a constant stream of ideas both large and small
  • identifying obstacles to new thinking and innovative action and removing those barriers
  • intentionally building into the organizational culture intrinsic and extrinsic rewards for innovation

Reframing the way you look at innovation can be powerful. Focusing on the glory of the breakthrough undermines the value of the small victories and defeats that are foundational. Incremental change should not be looked upon as inadequate and uninspired. Rather it should be celebrated as the next step on the ladder, the step that takes us closer and closer to the adjacent possible.

In my next post, we’ll explore in greater detail how to develop a culture of innovation. What ideas and experiences do you have that should be a part of our conversation? Send me your thoughts.

Empathy v. Sympathy

By | Strategy

Recently, in a graduate school course focusing on emotional intelligence and critical thinking in leadership, I used a powerful Ted Talk by Sam Richards titled “A Radical Experiment in Empathy.” The talk challenges us to empathize with Iraqi insurgents and apply the lessons of empathy to our lives in more ordinary ways. The talk is controversial and compelling. Two lessons emerged from our subsequent discussion: 1) many can not distinguish between the concepts of empathy and sympathy, and 2) a lack of empathy is an obstacle to effective leadership.

Empathy describes the vicarious experiencing of another’s feelings. Sympathy implies harmony or agreement of feelings. These are distinctly different concepts. It’s possible to understand the feelings of another person while still rejecting the actions manifested by those feelings.

Why is this distinction important? With an understanding of the feelings that underlie actions, we are able to interact in a way that may alter those actions in a lasting way. This use of empathy as a tool of organizational health can work at all levels. Empathy can clear the way for productive and harmonious working relationships throughout an organization. Leaders who model empathy and work to align the feelings, beliefs, and experiences of team members with organization mission, vision, and values have the greatest chance of achieving excellence.