- Leaders are decision makers. The "WILL" portion of HUMILITY + WILL = LEVEL 5. This is first and foremost in my mind. I enjoyed the part in the book about the window and mirror with regard to decision making. Leaders must be able to take the heat for decisions that don't go as planned, and then on the flip side they must share the success ones with others. This his hard to do, since most of us have been trained since childhood to hide mistakes and take the bow when things go well. There really is no place for fragile egos in leadership, but it seems that many in leadership positions suffer from exactly that.
- Leaders must know themselves...their assets and liabilities. This is key to developing teams that are a well rounded whole. Again, this is hard to do because we often don't see ourselves as others see us. I think one of the interesting assessments suggested this semester is the one that compares our self perceptions to the perceptions of our peers.
- Leaders must have a vision that is translatable to a team shared vision. I was struck by the theme of "shared vision" running through last weeks readings as well as this weeks. I believe the term vision has been abused in recent years. Visions statements have morphed into politically correct PR statements. The trick is to identify the real vision. This is difficult, because often there are hidden adgendas that create unknown variables into a problem or plan.
More later...
Catherine –
ReplyDeleteYou raise a couple of good points here. The Humility equation is a great illustration. I always wondered what causes people to change into the Lee Iacocca and Donald Trumps of the world. My sense is they didn’t start out that way or they would have never risen to the heights they did. Maybe I am naive.
Regarding leaders must know themselves, having held leadership positions I can tell you I have never really had honest, no holds barred feedback. This makes the knowing yourself part really hard. As you noted we need to know the perception of our peers. If no one tells you your weaknesses, how do you KNOW what they really are! Sure I received the mandatory, annual evaluation, but essentially it was worthless. I did get honest feedback a few times in my career after an assignment. In one case it took two years and I got it from someone who worked for me. He had just attended a change of command ceremony for the officer who replaced me. Evidently, my replacement ended up taking credit for all the initiatives and projects I had set in motion during my tenure as commander. He called just to say thanks for my efforts. The other feedbacks all occurred well after I had worked with the people who called. So, how do you really get feedback to know yourself? I really wish I knew how to measure this one!
You are right … identifying the real vision. The other thing that is a problem is how people interpret the vision. You can explain it as correctly and as convincingly as possible. However, people will believe what they want to believe. If they want you to succeed you have the possibly to succeed. If they want you to fail … you probably will!
Ed
Catherine. I love the comment about vision statements. Dufour and Eaker, in their writing on professional learning communities, have talked at great length about vision statements in schools. They note that all schools have a vision statement because they are made to have a vision statement, but that the vision statements really are not distinguishable. There is really only one element of the vision statement that makes them different and that is how the school - or member of the faculty - accept responsibility for the education of all children. In reading your personal vision statement, I see tremendous passion for the education of students in the school of nursing. Does this notion of responsbility, as introduced by DuFour and Eaker, have anything to do with shared vision?
ReplyDeleteI think it does very much so. I think we all have personal visions in our work. The best environments I've worked in are those that have inividuals with personal visions that mesh well together..."shared" so to speak, but individualized for real meaning. It is when individual visions are completely mismatched with the organization's vision, or when the organizations vision is simply obligatory rhetoric that shared vision can't occur.
ReplyDelete