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