The Audacity of Hope

I have written quite a bit over the last few weeks about engagement and personal competency among other things. I actually think that these two things have the opportunity to contribute pretty significantly to the issues we face.
To support my position I would point out the $200 billion annually that the American Mental Health Association says we are losing to "presenteeism". I would also point out that organizations that successfully embrace and implement an engagement strategy enjoy competitive advantages in productivity, profitability, and sustainability. Only 30 percent of organizations have implemented such a plan. Maybe they can do more for us than relying exclusively on government support from the stimulus package.
I think the time has come for us to look at new models and new partnerships. The old models aren't working.

I had some positive things happen this week that cause me to believe that we may come out of this ok.
I had the opportunity to accompany my son on an interview of a colleague I respect very much. This gentleman and his family represent an old fashion sense of values that " to whom much is given, much is required". They have quietly, but methodically provided leadership in their community for five generations. It was especially rewarding to hear him discuss how his personal leadership model had evolved and how he had embraced "engagement" as a model for community development. He told my son that "people support what they build and own" and how he had come to a place of recognizing his role as a "visionary" and explorer, but the most important part of that role was to pass ownership of the vision and its outcomes on to others. It wasn't his success that was critical, it is the success of the vision.
What was even more exciting is that he had asked his nephew to participate in our discussion. His family was not only personally "paying forward" in the community, he was providing the role modeling and the expectation to the next generation that the same would be expected of them. His nephew seemed absolutely committed to that prospect and prepared to embrace it as well.
Quite bluntly those values are not being taught in most of our business schools. While we revere explorers- we teach mapping. We focus on data and systems, not communications and engagement. Technology and information are important, but they don't create engagement. It is good to know that they are being taught.

I had an opportunity as well to catch up with a former protege. He has demonstrated the capacity and capability to lead and I am pleased to see an organization recognize that. It was really meaningful to hear him discuss taking conversations we had and problems we had worked on in a previous "life" and use them as learning opportunities for his current staff. He too recognizes and embraces the concept of "paying it forward". It was also great to hear him talk about a multi year strategy to move the organization from compliance to commitment. He recognized both what needs to occur and that it is a process rather than an event.

I have commented before that I think the current generations or not as complacent or disloyal as we describe them. They just reject a lot of our models.

Our current models encourage people to exchange personal competency for "security". Unfortunately we can't provide security anymore either. A lot of people "grew up" in an environment where the employer provided their health care and their retirement. We took those competencies away from them. Now we want to either give the responsibilities back or have the government manage them. When we began losing ground in productivity our first reaction was protectionism and the second was off shoring. Neither of those sound like personal competency either.
We are angry at the financial services organizations and the automobile manufacturers, but haven't we been complicit there as well? We took the loans and we bought the cars.

The young people I had a chance to interact with said a couple of things that stuck with me. You must role model the behavior you expect and you must hold yourself personally accountable. They seem to get it. They also seem to recognize that people need help seeing a different way to do things, especially when it was never expected of them or encouraged.

I am hoping that our current crisis provides the catalyst to explore a different model between employer and employed and between government and citizen. Let's not be enablers, let's be partners. I think that is what the Founding Fathers had in my mind when Madison suggested a central government to deal with the issues of the "great and aggregate". One could make an argument hat considering where we are as a society with health care, education, and productivity the government has a role, but that role should be limited to catalyst and facilitator.

So my "hope" springs from two sources; the courage and commitment of my colleague and people and families like his, and the "emerging" leadership I see willing and able to explore a new model.

The Power of Our Example or....

At the Democratic National convention former President Bill Clinton made a very interesting comment, at least the concept was interesting to me. He said that the United States is always at its best when we utilize the power of our example rather than the example of our power. What an interesting differentiation.
A friend responded to an earlier blog post with the comment that in today's intertwined economies and intersecting business and political interests that conscious interference with another countries economic model could have the same or even greater negative effect than a nuclear weapon and that attempting to impose a culture incongruent with another nations value structure as potentially devastating as a biological weapon.
When I look at what has happened from the recent economic crisis and the way it has wound itself back and forth through the world economy I don't think his comments are overly dramatic.
There have been interesting comments all over the Internet suggesting that the impact of the United States on the world economy is so significant that the citizens of the world, not just the citizens of the U.S. should have a say in our presidential elections. While I don't agree with that I do think we need to recognize the responsibility and impact we have as a world player.
I see a similar role for those of us that are Boomers and members of the Greatest Generation in providing leadership and guidance to the Gen X'rs and Millenials that will assume responsibility for the world sooner then we would like to acknowledge.
I have done a tremendous amount of writing, blogging, and speaking about the concepts of organizations based on commitment versus compliance and the wisdom and value of engagement.
I like to think that is what draws me to the analogy of the lighthouse- the power of example rather than the example of power. So in the end if not us then who, if not now then when......?

Are You Qualified?

It has been an interesting week. Given the state of the stock market and the economy in general that probably represents an understatement. It has been especially interesting to me based on a couple of experiences I have had. It hardly seems that they took place in the same week.
I made a couple of posts on LinkedIn as I typically do each week or so. The first was on the topic of the current presidential campaign and my "sadness" at the tone that some of the campaign rhetoric has taken on. In some cases the support on both sides is almost pathological. My point wasn't to support either candidate, but rather to lament resorting to character attacks on the part of either.
My second post was about where we "learn" leadership. Once again I got interesting responses ranging from "leadership is inherent in the DNA" to people that feel like the Bible or the Koran clearly lay out the expectations of leaders.
I also had a couple of "professional" discussions this week which caused me to pose my question. In one conversation we evolved into the debate about Gen X and Millenials. He was commenting that their expectations are too high and they aren't doing the "work" necessary to achieve their aspirations. I asked him if he was mentoring any of the young people in his firm and he responded that he would mentor them if they asked, but he would not proactively seek them out. So I said- "What if they don't know how to ask?"
My experiences with those generations has been different. I find them inquisitive, engaged, but frankly less patient based on what they saw their parents and grandparents experience. Their interpersonal skills have definitely been shaped by cell phones, the internet, and video games; but they do have an appetite to learn.
Then I had someone ask me why I believe I am "qualified" to do the work I do. He indicated that he had degrees and certifications that clearly "qualified" him, but I seem to be lacking those "credentials".

So what makes us "qualified"? Short of professions with a licensing requirement is there really a definitive test? Is is our track record, our "following" or some other set of criteria?

As usual I am going to retreat into the simplistic. I believe what makes us "qualified" is the trust and respect that others are willing to place in us. On my "short" list of qualifications for leaders I would include vision, clarity, and integrity. I have found that those elements are foundational to the most binding element in any relationship- the element of trust. Without trust we have nothing and trust cannot be demanded, it can only be earned.
So I would respond to my questioner that for now, what makes me "qualified" is the trust and respect that others have bestowed on me. It is a gift not a right and they may choose to withdraw it at any time.

The "Phenomena" Of Engagement

The whole issue of "engagement" is an interesting area for me personally and professionally. It may be that I lack appropriate "balance" in my life, but a big part of who I am is deeply connected to what I do. With that being said, the idea of being engaged or committed to the core values of organizations that I work for and with is important to me.

I also believe perhaps incorrectly that many others out there share my feelings, especially Gen X and the "millenial" generation. They seek or even demand meaning.

I have read blog posts (including response to my own) that say that expecting engagement is unreasonable and that there is not necessarily a correlation between engagement and productivity.

I struggle with both those positions. Is it unreasonable to ask employees to share the values of your organization assuming they are clearly articulated and behavior is consistent with your stated values?

Do engaged employees perform at a higher level or not?

I don't expect anyone to commit to an organization in perpetuity, but is it not acceptable to say that while you are here give me your best effort and adhere to the value and behavioral code of the organization?

Is engagement a management "myth"? Where does responsibility for engagement reside; in human resources, in the executive suite, or perhaps at the level of individual manager to individual employee, or perhaps all three?

I of course have my opinions. I have created a system called moving from Compliance to Commitment(TM), but I am looking for your thoughts, not just blind validation.