Gender

For as long as our country has been around there has been some presence of racial and gender bias. Our Constituion has been amended several times to acknowledge the God given rights of all people, not just the selcet few architects of American democracy. There has always been some sort of inequality, and only until recent events in the last 40-60 years have we as a nation made strides in leveling the playing field and allowing women to compete fairly with men in the workplace. But there is still much work to be done.

In today's work force women have a more profound presence. The old traditional mind-set of the man bringing home the bacon for the woman to cook is fading into our checkered history as a nation, but there is still work to do. The question is still being debated: Are men and women equal?

I find this question very ignorant in the simplest of terms. The answer is an astounding NO. Men and women are physically different from each other. I find the argument laughable to say that what a man can do a woman can do just as well. This also implies that men can do everything a woman can, and from a man's point of view if it were up to us to give birth that would be the end of the human race. It would be equally true to say an average woman could not lift and carry a 240 pound man to safety from a burning building or a sinking ship. We are just built differently.

There are similar characteristics and skills both men and women do share and can learn from, which can be applied to many overlapping areas. I think this is where the question is more applicable. We can both make sound decisions based on our experiences. We might have different platforms and points of views on how we reach our decisions, what influences our actions, or how we place value on external data, but both can and have demonstrated an equal ability to lead when it matters most.

I would like to see our progression in the gender debate advance towards a "who is right for the job" scenario. Not a decision based on filling quotas or gaps. Not an affirmative action derivative. A true, best person wins. We need to stop placing so much value on physical attributes such as skin color, gender, sexual orientation, or religion and start placing our values in performance and qualities. Personally, I follow character and quality, and I will have a hard time following someone who was put in the game when more qualified players ride the pine because they weren't the "right" sex, color, etc. Results are what matters in this world, and there is very little room now for prejudice and bias.

This is a hard battle to be fought because we are using the wrong terminology in the fight. We use equality, fair, and balanced as adjectives for formulating successful teams, making policy, or running a corporation. Our system is not set up for fairness... it is set up for the most qualified, hardest working, best skilled to lead. Afirmative action may have had its part to play in jump starting an equal opportunity initiative in America, but that race was been run. We need the best people in the right positions to take control of our industries and move this country forward. Period.

Yukle suggest in his book Leadership in Organizations that "special effort should be made to ensure that relvant skills are accurately assessed when selecting leaders". We should be choosing our leadership based on performance, or a collection of desired skills/abilities to get the job done, and this needs to be done with the highest transparency. Rosabeth Moss Kanter of Harvard Business School believes that when there is a lack of transparency in an organization there will be a high level of resentment to follow. Organizations should be very specific on what they are looking for in a leader, choose the best qualified candidates for the position, and be clear about the objectives to be filled... and then stand behind the decision 100%.

We still have a long way to go in this country before we can put aside our deep rooted prejudices and biases. When, and if, we ever learn to see people for who they are, what they can offer, and how they can best be used to maximize their inner potential we will once again be an unstoppable force in this world. As a man I fully understand that there are somethings I will never be able to do that women have been doing all along. However, as a leader it is my responsibility to capitalize on my strengths, minimize and understand my weaknesses, and put my best foot forward in all that I do so when I am called in to the game I am ready and prepared to lead with integrity, determination, and a genuine understanding that our differences are our most significant assets.

JP

Self-Awareness

Jim Rhone once said, "If you want to accomplish your dreams and goals then help others accomplish their dreams and goals".

This week we take a look into ourselves for a little reflection on what makes us different as leaders, how we add value to our organizations, and how we make our people better. We should always look in the mirror first and out the window second. If we ever encounter results that are not what we are expecting, wanting, or working towards we must first see if the problem lies within ourselves.

The foundation we lay inside us is based on our core values. Our most basic perceptions of who we are may be very different from others' perceptions, but if we fully understand ourselves and our core values we can learn to make adjustments in the delivery. For me, I strive to be honest, hard working, and understanding of others around me. I believe in integrity and constant learning. There is always room for improvement, and I don't have all the answers.

Being ethical shouldn't be an option. You either are ethical or you're not. You either choose to do things the right way or you don't. The choice is clear, but the effort can vary greatly between doing the right thing and cuting corners. It is often more difficult to carry out the right choice than it is to give in to shortcuts. I expect those I lead to understand this difference, and I expect them to have a solid example of this concept in my actions.

You can't tell someone to do something one way and do it yourself another way. The "do as I say, not as I do" concept is not conducive of sound leadership. As a leader, you should be aware of the 80/20 rule... 20% of the people will do 80% of the work, and people will contribute 80% of the effort they see. So, if you want a higher performance output you better be willing to put in 100% of the effort in order for your people to give 80%. Now, of course this is a generalization and there are always exceptions to the rules, but you can't expect everyone to mirror your values and efforts completely.

We add value to our organizations by making people and processes better. We must be champions at building and sustaining trust. We must be transparent in our desires for constant improvement and relay these expectations continuously and constantly to our people. It is hard to disguise selfish motives when trying to increase production and results. If my only goal in raising the bar is to pad my evaluation or climb the ladder to a loftier office with a view the people will sense this a mile away. However, if I am geniuinely interested in making things better for the organization by making the people and processes better I would then be valuable to the organization.

The bottom line is this... if we want to be better leaders we must be willing to know ourselves, work harder than everyone else, and generally care about the people we work with. We must be willing to sacrifice and do what is necessary to win on a daily basis. We do this by understanding who we are at the core foundation, understanding what drives and motivates our people, and acting appropriately. Leaders lead because they want to lead. They want to make things better, and by making things better they become better. If we do this consistently, the sky is the limit for what we can achieve.

JP

Meaning

When we set our minds to do something there has to have some meaning or purpose to be gained. Too often we can succumb to routine and monontonous tasks that mask the meaning in our lives. Whether in work, at home, or life in general it is hard to argue that the search for meaningness is a compelling and driving force. How can we be meaningful and significant?

In the realm of leadership we wear many hats. An important role of a leader is to be a change agent. We facilitate change within our organizations. Pat Zigarmi spoke about a general resistance to change in her TEDTV presentation Leading Change. She said people will resist change, not for the purpose of change, but because the players involved don't yet understand the reasons and benefits of the change. They don't know how the change will benefit them or the organization. They haven't drunk the Kool Aid yet. In other words, people will resist change until they find the meaning in it.

There is one certainty in our world and this is that change will be necessary to grow and adapt. We live in a continuously changing environment. New technology, faster communication, better transportation... all of these help to facilitate change at break-neck speeds. So, how do we as leaders rally the troops around change, especially when there is an endless supply of it? We do this by sharing the vision and incorporating meaning.

A simple guideline to follow when sharing vision is to answer 5 questions:

• Who - will the change affect?
• How - will the change be implemented?
• Why - do we need it?
• When - will the change take place?
• What - is the change going to do to make our lives better?

Vision decisions should proactively answer these questions when explaining changes to followers.

Now, how do we attach meaning?

If I am the General Manager overseeing a retail store, and my pay is based on the bottom line, my purpose and meaning for adopting a new process is unique to me. To the hourly employee who will have to learn some new processes that streamline work flow their meaning will more than likely take on a much different form. So, how do I invoke meaning out of the team? 

The answer lies in the individual, and it is the leader's responsibility to discover what the individual meaning is. We must find out why they are on the team in the first place in order to make the change mean something to them, which will help the adoption of new methods become a more rewarding task rather than a loathsome objective that is going to disrupt the way things are. Meaning is unique, yet many can share in the vision when they attach meaning to the task at hand. 

A wise man once told me, "It is hard to make a living doing what you love, but if you can learn to love what you do you can make an incredible living." You have to find the meaning and embrace it. It is very much a part of leadership to present change in a meaningful way that maximizes the effort associated with change. This is the personal touch of leadership. If the vision alone is pushed without attaching meaning the efforts will be forced. When the vision is shared and meaning is attached change can seem almost effortless. 

We live in an ever-changing, constantly moving, adaptive world. It takes a rooted understanding of the meaning in our lives that motivates us to keep up.

JP

Remote Transformational Leadership

Before mass media and the Internet, before the conference call leaders had very little other choices to communicate with their followers than by direct methods. Rhetorical communication in the form of journals and newspaper articles held some transformational qualities, but direct person-to-person communication was how we effected change in others.

Leaders of this forgotten world were prime-time, home run hitting, super communicators. Today, we are displaced, remote, and wide-spread. Governed by leadership that may very well be in another country, we rely heavily on electronically means of communication. Can we still be as influential via email? Can we still be masters of communication over the Internet?

A study on remote transformational leadership was conducted by Barling et al. in August, 2002. The purpose of this study was to determine if transformational and charismatic leadership could be effective in exacting desired response via email. The basis of this study was to challenge the known dynamics of transformational leadership involving a strong personal identification between leader and follower. The authors illustrated four main characteristics of transformational leadership:

• Idealized influence - participating in risks with followers, maintaining consistent behavior patterns, and being dependable.
• Inspirational motivation - bring meaning and purpose to the work being done, and introducing challenges and maintain motivation.
• Individual consideration - paying attention to individuals and providing support.
• intellectual stimulation - helping followers to develop new ideas, looking outside the box, and developing critical thinking methodologies.

(The authors defined charisma as the sum of inspirational motivation and idealized influence)

Two studies were conducted to discern if transformational leadership could transcend digital communications in much the same way as open and upfront methods. They hypothesized that recipients of emails would be able to perceive and accurately identify leadership "styles" in emails, and receiving emails with positive leadership messages (i.e. transformational) would be associated with positive outcomes. The second study sought to identify that individuals exposed to emails containing charismatic or intellectually stimulating messages would express higher levels of task motivation, thus demonstrating higher levels of performance.

The first study was conducted with a vignette approach using imbedded transformational messages. 132 undergraduate students read a hypothetical email from leader to follower and completed a questionnaire. This first part was performed to establish if transformational leadership could have an effect on interpersonal justice and job satisfaction.

The second study was performed by 105 undergrads to see if charismatic characteristics are effective and intellectual stimulation via email is possible via email.

The results showed that in the first study interpersonal justice and supervisor satisfaction were significantly and substantially correlated when the email message contained transformational tone. The second showed that charisma is of little value when communicating electronically.

While this study was conducted almost 13 years ago, and innovation has aided electronic communication immensely, it served as a valuable benchmark of the times into the effectiveness of e-communication. The overall goal is still to be effective, to motivate, and inspire through influence. We have sacrificed the art of free-hand letters for gmail, and created a whole new realm of communication tools that convey our messages as leaders. We can be just as influential in our emails as we once were in face-to-face contact, maybe even more so. Tone, inflection, word choices, and simplicity are the tools of the trade when communicating via email. Charisma plays a small part in its traditional forms. If we wish inspire and idealize to other we must be innovative in our delivery. 

Positive reinforcement of moral and ethical positions are just as valuable today as in the days of snail mail. The nuances of a hand written note can indeed be conveyed electronically if the art form is mastered. While there are still some barriers to personalization and inflection in email messages, we can learn to be masters of e-communication as this is the norm for mass communications in todays world. We must be able to interpret our meanings as though we are the recipients, we must be clear in our thoughts and words, and we must be effective in sharing our guidance to those who we lead. Leaders of today must not only be masters of e-communication. We must be masters of transformational leadership through any and all means at our disposal.

JP

Leadership Traits

 There are certain key traits effective leaders exhibit. Some of these traits are inherent and some are learned. The make up of the "leader" can have a direct affect on the overall effectiveness in goal achievement, and worthy of dissection. What makes effective leadership?

Yukl describes several personality traits of effective leadership. These are energy level and stress tolerance, self-confidence, internal locus of control, emotional stability and maturity, power motivation, personal integrity, narcissism, achievement orientation, and need for affiliation. Taking a look into where I am in my career path and how I got here I can agree with how these traits were defined in my actions and thoughts along the way.

It is important to have a high energy and stress tolerance in today's world. Face it, we live in a fast paced world with no limits on stressful situations. If you can't keep up the pace you will risk being passed by, or worse... stagnate. A leaders job is to inspire and motivate others, to make them better. I once read that people will put in 80% of the effort you expect. So, if you want your team operating at a varsity level you must perform like a pro. If you want your people to put in the extra effort needed to complete a job or task you must set the example by being the first one in and the last to leave. We lead by example and the energy you put in to your team will affect the results you get out of your people.

Stress tolerance is a learned trait. No one comes out of the gate prepared to handle stress with the expertise of a seasoned pro. It takes trial by fire to be able to keep your cool under pressure. Fortunately for me I served in the US Navy and experienced a high-stress environment on a daily basis. We train how we fight, and fighting is the most stressful endeavor a human can endure. So, for me when the going gets tough I can always look at the situation and think to myself, "well at least I'm not floating on a big gray ship in unfriendly waters". That always seems to give me the perspective to handle most situations. Plus, if you want your people to keep calm they must learn it from you. I never let my team see me sweat. There is always a solution, you just have to find it.

In regards to locus of control I am an "internal". I am the master of my destiny and in control over my actions. I am also responsible for myself and the shortcomings I may encounter along the way. Personal accountability is a dying trait in todays world, but probably one of the most influential traits a leader can possess. My boss has a saying, "Look in the mirror before you look out the window". We can either focus on the things we can't control like the market place, economical trends, buying habits, or financial restrictions and let these define us, OR we can look at how we react to these external stimuli. I choose to focus on what I have control over, and I pass this on to my team. There is no sense wasting energy on things outside of your control.

Emotional stability and maturity are also learned traits. In my opinion these traits grow stronger with age and experience. I don't sweat the small stuff like I did in my earlier years, and I also am fully aware of my strengths and weaknesses. I don't get too high with highs or too low with the lows,  but I do get ecstatic with progression.

Power motivation can be a strong influence for a leader, but must be used with caution. I used to have a goal. This goal was to see over $500K in my annual income tax statement. At one point I was probably willing to make some serious sacrifices in my life to accomplish this goal, but for what? Would I give up the time with my family (which I didn't have when I set this goal)? Would I postpone all the life-experiences I have received for higher-end vacations when I am older? My answer, no. Everybody has that comfort zone they should strive for where the bills are paid, money is saved and invested, and a balance of work-life exists. Zig Ziegler once said, "if you want to be successful, make those around you successful". That to me is power motivation!

Integrity is doing what you mean and meaning what you do. There is no room for leadership with little integrity. If a person will lie about a little thing they will probably lie about the bigger ones. When I pass on from this world I want to leave behind people who think of me and say, "Man, that Jody Powell was a stand up guy". Remember, you have to look at yourself in the mirror each morning and night before you lay down your head.

The other traits of narcissism, achievement orientation, and need for affiliation are not as important to me as the above. I do what I do to be a good leader, father, and husband. I am always looking to better myself and those around me. I keep my eyes and ears open for new opportunities to showcase my talents and utilize the talents of my team. I have been fortunate to have had some great influential leaders in my life, and I strive to pass on the torch. As leaders it is our responsibility to maximize these traits, be the best at utilizing them, and pass them on to others. We should always leave a place a little better than when we found it, and that is the most profound leadership trait in the books.

JP

Power and Influence

"Influence is the essence of leadership. To be effective as a leader, it is necessary to influence people to carry out requests, support proposals, and implement decisions" ~ Yukl

While we have discussed varying definitions of leadership there is one common factor that is synonymous with leadership. Influence. One must be able to exert influence in order to lead. Terms like power and authority contribute to influence through various means, and there are many tactics, or ways to use these terms to influence others.

But, how does one gain power or authority? There are several sources that are linked power. Legitimate, reward, coercive, referent, expert, informational, ecological, position and personal power are all sources that contrive influence over others. Some may be more effective than others, and some may be interchangeable. All can be used effectively to gain influence.

The very nature of power is rooted in the individual. Sure, the boss' nephew can become VP of a department through nepotism, which has its own set of legitimate power sources, but to be effective the nephew should learn to use this power and authority to lead effectively. Leaders must consistently prove to their followers why they are in charge. Rewarding and rallying the team for expected results and behaviors supports legitimate power sources. Referent and expert sources can be used to build on a strong knowledge base and likability. Information control and ecological power sources can be used to motivate others to be better and increase their desires to learn and grow.

Once power influence is attained it must be used cautiously as to not abuse its gravity. Coercion is a powerful tool and source of power to accomplish a task, but may result in negative responses if abused. Positive influence is more rewarding than negative, but both can be used to accomplish a goal. We are judged by our perceptions and uses of our power just as much as we are judged by our results. Often, the road to accomplishment is more important than the destination.

I am a General Manger for an outdoor living store with seven employees under my charge. These employees were in place before I arrived on the scene, and it was with a sense of understanding of my positional power that would lay the foundation for growth in our office. Yes, I was the new boss. Yes, I had certain positional authority over the employees, but how I handled this position was going to build the perception of my personal power to influence the team in the direction we need to go. Instead of coming in like a wrecking ball and changing everything I chose to use the power of others to gain insight into their thoughts, goals, and methods. I became the student learning the culture. I openly praised the efforts of the team while making notes on where we could be more efficient down the road. Only when I was "part of the team" and not a threat to the culture was I able to start implementing changes towards efficiency.

Ultimately, the final decisions in our office are mine to make. I pass on the rewards and praises to the team and shoulder the burdens and responsibility of failure as the leader. Through my continuous actions I have reenforced my power and authority as the GM. Almost always changes can be painful to some extent, and I have used my power to gain the confidence of our crew that these changes will improve our position in the marketplace.

Overall, we all share some power to influence others. How we use this power and use it to grow as people is what matters in the end. 

Supportive Behavior

"Supportive Leadership means being polite and considerate" ~ Yukl

This week's topic is supportive behavior in terms of leadership style. Obviously it would be much better to work for a caring, pleasant, cheerful boss (leader) rather a brash, cold, impersonal one. In today's "politically corrected" environment it is necessary to take into consideration others' feelings when in the position of leadership. Would it be unexpected if a harsh verbal correction these days be considered the unimaginable "bullying" tactic? Probably. So, it is worthy of conversation to discuss this shift and how it impacts the overall objectives of leadership.

Yukl describes a few guidelines for supporting:

• Show acceptance and positive regard.
• Provide sympathy and support when the person is anxious or upset.
• Bolster the person's self-esteem and confidence.
• Be willing to help with personal problems.

Granted, acting in a mentor/coaching role is a prolific aspect of leadership. We are to make others around us better, right? We are to be positive examples of our organization's mission statement and purpose. And, we are to support our subordinates... but to what extent? When is the line crossed from being supportive and being seen as weak and un-authoritative? 

For example, I served in the United States Navy. There are many directives lately that focus on a more "kinder, gentler Navy" where some of the "old" methods of leading with an iron fist is no longer acceptable. Chiefs have had to relearn their tactics when administering "leadership guidance" and can be held accountable for verbally and physically reprimanding junior Sailors. The culture of the Navy has effectively shifted towards what Yukl describes as "Supportive". The shift in doctrine is shifting from the far left (old, harsher ways of leadership) to the far right (caring, supportive leadership). But how has this effected our Sailors and overall mission?

If you boil down the Navy's purpose it would be to provide a well trained and formidable naval fighting force. When action is needed the Navy must be able to respond with instinct and discipline. Sailors must follow order unconditionally or others may face grave consequences. These core values are learned from day one in basic training where a civilian is broken of civilian habits and reformed into an order following, chain of command respecting Sailor. The leaders in basic training have this tough job to prepare the future Sailors for their roles and purpose in the greatest Navy the world has ever known. It would never have been conceivable for a Recruit to be able to stop instruction, raise his/her hand and voice their opinions that they may feel the instruction is too harsh, mean, or cruel. In today's "kinder, gentler Navy" a recruit can now submit a grievance as to their treatment that can result in an investigation into the leaders methods. If the recruit feels as though they were treated a little too rough they can now effectively say "hey, I don't like the way you talked to me Mr. Chief". what will happen when this Sailor is faced with a "life or death" situation and is under severe pressure to perform?

On one hand I can understand the need to be attentive to your subordinates feelings and personal issues. We as leaders should be in tune with our juniors, but not at the expense of the mission. Once the word is out that a leader will stop what they are doing to "reduce stress by showing appreciation, listening to problems and complaints, providing assistance when necessary, expressing confidence in the person, doing things to make the work environment more enjoyable, and buffering the person from unnecessary demands by outsiders" the purpose of the leader has effectively shifted (Yukl, pg.64). 

On the other hand, I believe there is a time and a place to lead and a time and place to nurture. Sometimes it is important to have stress in the work environment. I believe it creates that sense of urgency to succeed. There should be expectations to be met, and these expectations should provide the push needed to be a little better each day, and when the objective is complete there should also be time to regroup, praise and recognize, and rebuild your followers in a personal way. A boss has got to be respected as being firm but fair, unwavering yet considerate, harsh and understanding. There has to be a balance.

In conclusion, a leader must be able to wear many hats in today's environment. There has to be some balance in being stern and supportive. We have a job to do and a prescribed way to do it, and this takes discipline. We also have people we are responsible for and they have needs of their own, which we must be cognizant of to be effective. As a leader in my organization I find it a constantly shifting balance of being supportive and also pushing my employees to be better. Positive change hardly ever comes without its share of challenges. Being supportive, developing subordinate skills, and recognizing the efforts of those who are led are important aspects of being a leader, but so is getting the job done. It takes a balance.

JP

Leadership vs. Management

Twenty years ago a good friend of mine bought a small wooden play system and a tool box in San Antonio, TX. He didn't initially seek out this play system or the rights to sell these play systems in San Antonio. He purchased these two things as an extra opportunity in a transaction to buy the rights to another small business venture in the efforts to supplement his blossoming landscape company. He was interested in providing excellent landscaping services and products, wowing his clients, and working hard. Now, twenty years later he is the largest distributor of Rainbow Play Systems in the world.

Today, my friend oversees 7 Rainbow Play System locations from Corpus Christi, TX to Austin. Two of these stores offer a wider variety of high-end outdoor products like Springfree Trampolines, Tuff Shed, Goalsetter Basketball Goals, The Big Green Egg, custom pergolas and pavilions, and 3 lines of mid to high-end patio furniture. His offerings are only of the highest quality and his vision is to fully enhance the outdoor lifestyle. So, when I was looking for my next opportunity after my service in the Navy, and my friend said he was looking for a innovator to manage his Homefield Outdoor Living Store in Corpus I got excited!

There is something extraordinary about quality leaders. They inspire. The results of my friend's (and now boss) efforts are undeniable. He has exceeded everyone's expectations of him (except his own of course). However, I chose to follow this guy for one main reason... he believes in what he is doing. He believes that no one offers the line up of quality products and services in Texas, and he is right. He believes he is on the cutting edge of innovation in a unique market, and he is right. He Believes, and he is right. He just needs a little help from a few trusted individuals who buy in to his beliefs to truly make his vision come to fruition.

Simon Sinek discusses this concept in his TED Talk presentation How Great Leaders Inspire. He discusses the difference between great men and great leaders, and the difference is in the WHY. Sink created his "golden circle" which consists of three rings. In the center is the WHY, followed by the HOW, and wrapped up with the outer ring of the WHAT. His argument is that people don't give a hoot about the what until they understand the why, and this is true for individuals as well as companies. Why sells, not the what. People won't run out to buy the best made pergola for their backyards, but they will seek out the company that is dedicated to providing shade in South Texas without sacrificing aesthetic beauty and driven to stand apart from other carpentry by offering shade structures they would proudly display in their own backyards.

Leaders live in the Why and work their way to the What. Managers, on the other hand, live in the What and work their way to the Why. Managers look to do things right. Leaders look to do the right things. Magical things happen when someone decides to play both roles at the same time. So, when my friend asked me to manage his store in Corpus Christi, TX I knew what he was asking was for me to do things the right way while finding the right things to do. There are so few opportunities out there to work with such a fine leader, yet there are infinite opportunities out there to lead. You just have to know the Why!

JP