Two Facts and One Opinion

Two Facts and One Opinion

I have waited a period of time to comment on the outcome of Initiative 42. To say the least, I was deeply disappointed with the results, but to quote the Apostle Paul, “We are perplexed, but not in despair.” (2 Corinthians 4:8)

Based on the outcome and history, I would like to offer two undisputable facts and one opinion.

First, the facts:

Fact Number 1 -This was one of the closest statewide election results in recent history. Even the hotly contested Attorney General’s race was not this close – the loser, Hurst, got 44% of the vote, while 48% voted yes to amend the Constitution for Initiative 42. The last tight governor’s race was in 2003 when Musgrove received 46% of the vote. Take heart education supporters, Initiative 42 missed approval by a razor thin margin.

Fact Number 2 - These close results mean there is a growing coalition of voters who value public education and want it adequately funded.  Legislators and other elected officials would make a grave error to read the results of this election as a mandate to continue disregarding the legislatively approved K-12 funding formula. The leaders of our state would be well served to understand that over 200,00 citizens signed the petition to get it on the ballot and over 300,000 voted to amend the Constitution. 

Now, my opinion:

Based on conversations with many people who can read and think at high levels, the ballot was convoluted and confusing. I had a conversation with three ladies at a local sandwich shop who wanted to support Initiative 42 but were totally confused about how to make that happen. Another man said he was for 42 and skipped the first part, went to the second part and voted for 42. If only 4% of the Pro 42 voters were confused and did not mark the ballot correctly, that would have changed the outcome of the election. You might suggest that people on the other side of the issue could have been confused by the ballot, but remember they had two chances to vote against 42, while we supporters had to correctly vote for it twice to have our voices heard. My opinion is that the people elected to represent us devised this confusing ballot, and it was done to thwart the will of the people they represent. If my opinion is correct, the voters will figure it out, and our coalition will only grow.

During World War 2, Winston Churchill  proclaimed, "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." To paraphrase I think we are only beginning.

Cost of Arrogance

Many members of our church are reading chronologically through the Bible. In our reading, we have noticed that a recurring theme is that God honors humility and abhors arrogance.

While many of us would acquiesce to the spiritual dangers of arrogance, Eric Schmidt, former CEO and current Executive Chairman of Google, places an astronomically costly dollar value on its practice.

In an interview detailed in "Business Insider", Schmidt reveals what Google looks for when hiring, and it has a lot to do with collaborating with others. If someone comes across as overly arrogant, that could mean that he/she will not work well as a member of a team.

Schmidt candidly recounts the beginning of Google by stating, "In my first year, I would get phone calls from people that I knew, and they'd say, 'I'm the VP at Company X, and in my career path, I need to be a Chief Operating Officer.' That was always a signal that I should hang up."

So how costly was their self-centered arrogance? Schmidt explains, "And by the way, because of the packages we were giving out then, before we went public, those people who did that (behaved arrogantly) cost themselves a half a billion dollars ($500,000,000) in personal wealth.

In today's environment of teamwork and collaboration, arrogant people are at a distinct disadvantage. Instead of thinking of the greater good they think of their own career path and what is best for them. According to Schmidt, arrogant people don't collaborate well, and this can be costly to the organization and to them personally.

"Google's Former CEO Explains How Arrogance Cost Potential Employees Half a Billion Dollars" by Jillian D'Onfro in Business Insider, October 11, 2014.

Talk the Walk

We have all been told that leaders walk the talk. And we know the importance of practicing what we preach, but how important is it for a leader to be able to explain in words his/her actions and why they matter?

In his Harvard Business Review Blog, Bill Taylor states that leaders think differently about their work and invariably talk about it differently. Taylor says that leaders must "be able to explain, in language that is unique to their field and compelling to their colleagues and customers, why what they do matters and how they expect to win."

I have observed leaders who do the right things but never verbalize the why or how of those actions. Successful leaders not only consistently take correct actions, they also constantly explain why those actions are important and how they will help achieve organizational goals.

Many factors contribute to the success of an organization, and it is difficult to assign individual value to these. But Taylor in discussing success states "that behind it all is a language system that defines life inside the organization and reminds everyone what really drives success."

As you lead, do you model for your colleagues by walking the talk? If you do, that is a good start, but if you want your organization or unit to achieve at consistently high levels, you must develop a vocabulary that helps everyone on your team understand what makes our team unique and how we are going to achieve at high levels. Our words are critically important in leading.

The Best Leaders Talk the Walk by Bill Taylor in HBR Blog Network, August 7, 2014.

Fire Breathing Dragons

"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations if you live near him." J. R. Tolkien's The Hobbit

Visionary leaders plan, commit resources to the plan, and check progress on achieving the plan, but wise leaders also take into account fire breathing dragons. These dragons often "live near", and may even reside within the organization.

Recently, while leading a strategic planning session for a large organization, I shared the Tolkien quote with the participants, and was surprised how quickly they identified dragons that may hinder them in achieving their strategic plan. Many of the dragons were even housed in their organization.

The fire breathing dragons that reside within the organization may be the result of organizational growth and can be particularly detrimental to the achievement of the plan. As organizations grow in size, they tend to become more bureaucratic in nature. With growth can come complex policies, non-communicating departmental silos, and bureaucratic red tape that can hinder progress and kill new ideas.

As leaders plan, they must identify these fire breathing dragons and plan strategies to deal with them. In my experience, some dragons can be killed while some others can be neutralized, but all must be identified.  By identifying them, leaders are well on their way to assuring that they don't derail the plan. This is especially true if you live near one.

Questions, questions, and more questions

Visionary leaders ask questions for various reasons. Obviously, they want information about the progress of the organization, but they also utilize question asking to make people think, to hold them accountable, and as directional checks.

Well framed, thoughtful question can do all the above, but to do this leaders must formulate questions that require more than a yes or no response. In other words, people should not be able to answer the leader's well designed questions without thinking . One of the greatest achievements of a leader is to precipitate thinking.

Leaders also utilize questions to hold people accountable. A leader delegates, but he/she is always checking progress, and many times this is done by asking questions. People who know the leader is going to check progress are more likely to make progress.

But perhaps the most important role of questioning is to check direction. By this I mean a visionary leader will always keep everyone moving in the same direction. Any time someone presents a new proposal, the leader should ask what I call directional questions - questions such as: "If we implement this, how will it help us achieve our goals and mission?"; or "Could this new strategy be a hindrance to our organizational objectives?"

There may not be a more important role for a leader than assuring everyone understands where the organization is going, and these directional questions can be one way to assure a positive organizational trajectory.

Career Crucibles

Ancient alchemist thought that if they heated certain metals to sufficiently high temperatures in a crucible, the process would transform those metals into precious gold.

While that proposed process was an abject failure, modern leadership  theories suggest times of crisis- fiery crucibles that seem to be common to all great leaders and are many times "turning points" in those leaders' careers - are opportunities for refining leadership skills.

Bennis and Thomas' research indicates that success in leadership "has something to do with the different ways that people deal with adversity. Put another way, the skills required to conquer adversity and emerge stronger and more committed than ever are the same ones that make extraordinary leaders."

Think about a time in your career when you were in a fiery crucible. Did your leadership skills improve? Did you come out of the crucible a stronger leader?

Many of us can site times in our career when we went through a period of severe testing. While most of us will never enjoy these tough times, research confirms their value in making us better equiped leaders.

So take heart, leader, when you are in the midst of a fiery crucible. It could be your best opportunity to become an extraordinary leader.

"Crucibles of Leadership" by Warren G. Bennis and Robert J. Thomas in HBR'S 10 Must Reads On Leadership, 2011, pgs. 97-114.

The Heart of the Matter

An understanding of systems and management is critical for leaders; however, I think the most important understanding for an effective leader is human motivation. Leaders must have followers, and without a grasp of what motivates people and proper application of that knowledge,  prospective leaders will have few followers.

While the current accountability models employ rewards and punishments as primary motivators, extensive research has shown that these are poor motivators - especially for tasks without easy solutions (i.e., teaching and learning). In a thought provoking article in Education Week, Deborah Stipek states,“The promise of reward and the threat of punishment do not motivate people to perform effectively and sometimes undermine their performance when those approaches make them feel coerced, disrespected, or incompetent.” 

Stipek offers three elements that must be present for humans to be motivated to solve complex problems: a sense of autonomy, of respect, and of efficacy. Similarly, a Daniel Pink TED Talk,  reveals that people are motivated to solve difficult problems when: 1. They have autonomy, 2. They feel mastery, and 3. They have purpose.  What is different about these motivators? Unlike rewards and punishment, they are internal motivators. They get to the "heart of the matter."

The lesson for school leaders is while there is a place in our motivational arsenal for external motivators (rewards and punishments), we must understand and utilize internal motivators (autonomy, efficacy, and purpose), to lead people towards solving complex problems.  

“Using Accountability to Promote Motivation, Not Undermine It” by Deborah Stipek in Education Week, Oct. 16, 2013 (Vol. 33, #8, p. 32, 28).

"The Puzzle of Motivation" TED Talk, August, 2009. Dan Pink: The puzzle of motivation