Just Don't Sit There

I'm willing to bet that if you have a family, that when you sit down for a meal you each have a defined 'spot' at the table.  So, give this a try.  Get to the table before your kids and sit in their 'spot' and then watch their reaction.  You can see it in their eyes; they feel empowered.  "Wow - I get to sit in Dad's spot" (I'm a Dad - but if your a Mom you will get the same reaction).

It's the same thing at work.  If you are a leader in your organization and you typically sit at the head of the table at your leadership team meetings, try sitting somewhere else at the table. Just try it.  It's interesting to see what happens.  

This is something that you may not even think about.  You rush in from your last meeting, barely able to get your head around what your next discussion will be and you walk into the room with your leadership team and you plunk yourself down at that same old place - the head of the table.  The power seat.  The chair where the decisions may, by default, get deferred to you. Now if that's what you want - autocracy - then always taking the coveted chair should be part of your platform.  However, if you are looking to take full advantage of the expertise around the table - then you might want to consider a different seat.   

McGregor (2005) observes about groups that are ineffective in accomplishing their purposes that, "The leadership remains clearly with the committee chairman. He may be weak or strong, but he sits always at the head of the table" (p. 318). And McGregor is not alone in noting this.

Harvard Business Review (2011) describes a similar sort of situation regarding teams that are infused with bickering and weakness.  They note,

...the leaders of the teams marked by extensive interpersonal conflict were either highly autocratic or weak. The CEO at Mercury Microdevices, for example, was the principal decision maker. There was a substantial gap in power between him and the rest of the team. In the decision we tracked, the CEO dominated the process from start to finish, identifying the problem, defining the analysis, and making the choice. Team members described the CEO as “strong” and “dogmatic.” As one of them put it, “When Bruce makes a decision, it’s like God!" (Kindle Location 2441-2445).

 Greenleaf and Spears (2005) describe it this way:

Sometimes it will be a servant's power of persuasion and example. Sometimes it will be coercive power used to dominate and manipulate people. The difference is that, in the former, power is used to create opportunity and alternatives so that individuals may choose and build autonomy. In the latter, individuals are coerced into a predetermined path. (Kindle Location 681-683)

Why is this important you may ask.  Well considering that research tells us that the actions of the leader make a significant impact on the climate of the organization and knowing that taking the seat at the head of the table lends itself to a more autocratic feel - if you want to encourage more collaboration and greater depth of discussion and thus forming a more positive atmosphere, choosing a different chair may be a good start.  

Roughly 50 to 70 percent of how employees perceive their organization’s climate can be traced to the actions of one person: the leader. More than anyone else, the boss creates the conditions that directly determine people’s ability to work well. (Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee, 2004, Kindle Location 437-439)

When you sit in a different location, you are providing a visual clue to the leadership team that you are not going to dominate the discussion.  You are open to letting the group hash through the items on the agenda.  Now this doesn't mean you don't take part - what it means is that you are all considered equals and your thoughts are thrown in with the others as part of the larger discussion.  No extra weight.  No coercion. It takes a leader with exceptional confidence in their team and who is secure in their abilities.  Kouzes and Posner (2010) note:

Effective leaders, by contrast, understand that their role is to bring out the answers in others. They do this by very clearly and explicitly seeking contributions, challenges, and collaboration from the people who report to them, using their positional power not to dominate but rather to drive the decision-making process. (Kindle Location 1076-1077).

They go on further to describe: 

Exemplary leaders are sensitive to the needs of others. They ask questions. They listen. They provide support. They develop skills. They ask for help. They align people in a common cause. They make people feel like anything is possible. They connect people to their need to be in charge of their own lives. They enable others to be even better than they already are. (Kindle Location 1094-1097)

So which leader are you?  The one who takes the head spot at the table or the one that leverages your team to its fullest by giving them the power to bring decisions to the table?  Or, maybe a better question is - which leader do you want to be?

I started with McGregor so I'm going to finish with him.  Here's how he describes the "not-so-head-of-the-table" leader:

The chairman of the group does not dominate it, nor on the contrary, does the group defer unduly to him . In fact, as one observes the activity, it is clear that the leadership shifts from time to time, depending on the circumstances. Different members, because of their knowledge or experience, are in a position at various times to act as “resources” for the group. The members utilize them in this fashion and they occupy leadership roles while they are thus being used. There is little evidence of a struggle for power as the group operates. The issue is not who controls but how to get the job done. (Kindle Location 4627-4631)

My advice to you...just don't sit there. 


Curt
(student of great leadership)



McGregor, Douglas (2005-12-21). The Human Side of Enterprise, Annotated Edition. McGraw-Hill. Kindle Edition

Kouzes, James M.; Posner, Barry Z. (2010-07-16). The Truth about Leadership: The No-fads, Heart-of-the-Matter Facts You Need to Know. Wiley. Kindle Edition.

Robert K. Greenleaf;Larry C. Spears. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness 25th Anniversary Edition. Kindle Edition.

Harvard Business Review (2011-04-12). Harvard Business Review on Building Better Teams. Harvard Business Review Press. Kindle Edition.

Goleman, Daniel; Boyatzis, Richard E.; McKee, Annie (2004-02-26). Primal Leadership: Learning to Lead With Emotional Intelligence. Harvard Business Review Press. Kindle Edition.

Great Leadership Encourages Conflict

This post is a continuation from a previous post (October 24, 2012) regarding a look at traits that exist within effective leadership teams.  

Yes, it has been a long time since my last post - a subject I may bring up sometime in the future; but, for now, I will continue with a look at some of the items noted in the book "The Human Side of Enterprise" by Douglas McGregor.  The book was originally published in 1960 and about two-thirds of the way through the volume, McGregor describes a number of characteristics of effective teams. One of those characteristics is conflict. McGregor (2005) notes, 

There is disagreement. The group is comfortable with this and shows no signs of having to avoid conflict or to keep everything on a plane of sweetness and light. Disagreements are not suppressed or overridden by premature group action. The reasons are carefully examined, and the group seeks to resolve them rather than to dominate the dissenter (p. 313). 

Comfortable with disagreement?  I don't know about you, but from my experience, I have not found too many situations where disagreement in meetings of senior leaders felt 'comfortable'.  In most cases it was extremely uncomfortable - to the point that participants (and myself) would look to AVOID any form of conflict in these meetings.  McGregor further notes, 

On the other hand, there is no “tyranny of the minority.” Individuals who disagree do not appear to be trying to dominate the group or to express hostility. Their disagreement is an expression of a genuine difference of opinion, and they expect a hearing in order that a solution may be found (p. 313).

It's hard to imagine what this is like since most of us have not been in this kind of situation.  Just suppose you were able to get together with your team and for there to be disagreement in a way that it is accepted and desired.  Where each representative is expected and encouraged to bring forward disagreements from within their own area of expertise.  It is not hard to see how this could be extremely beneficial to a group of leaders attempting to move forward in achievement of the organizations larger goals.  With frank discussion about potential pitfalls, the leadership team has time to minimize risk by addressing the concerns that are brought forth; all done with respect and without personal agendas.  

Of course, not everyone is going to agree on everything; however, McGregor notes that when this happens, the group recognizes that they will live with the disagreement by accepting them so as not to block the efforts of the team.  In some cases, it is noted that disagreements can be deferred for more research or investigation so  that the best possible decision can be made.  So is there an optimum level of conflict/disagreement for a leadership team?

In his book, The Advantage, Patrick Lencioni describes what he calls a "Conflict Continuum" (p. 42).  On the far left of the continuum is Artificial Harmony and on the far right is Mean-Spirited Personal Attacks (see the diagram below).  Lencioni notes that most organizations fall too close to the Artificial Harmony end of the spectrum and that the ideal place to be is just below the midpoint on the Constructive side of the spectrum.

The optimal place to be on this continuum is just to the left of the demarcation line (the Ideal Conflict Point). That would be the point where a team is engaged in all the constructive conflict they could possibly have, but never stepping over the line into destructive territory (p. 42).

I think it is fair to say that not every conflict stays on the constructive side of the conflict continuum.  Lencioni states,

In any team, and for that matter, in any family or marriage, someone at some point is going to step over the line and say or do something that isn't constructive. But rather than fearing this, teams need to accept that it will happen and learn to manage it (p. 42).

Working through times when conflict has gone too far in and of itself can help bring leadership teams closer together and prepare them for other times when the line is crossed.  As they are able to navigate through (not around) these times, the leadership team becomes stronger and is able to handle more difficult situations. 


The Harvard Business Review on Building Better Teams (2011) noted an interesting finding about conflict and the construct of the team.  They note,

"...the greater the proportion of highly educated specialists on a team, the more likely the team is to disintegrate into unproductive conflicts" (Kindle location 825)

The key to helping conflict become a tool that propels your leadership team forward instead of dragging you backward is multidimensional.  Take note of the following tips:

1. Leadership teams need to have an informal relationship that fosters trust when the individuals are dealing with formal organizational issues.  This informal relationship allows them to engage in constructive conflict and not have the situation digress into personal attacks.  The better they know each other - the more productive the conflict can be.
2. The leadership team needs to ensure that they are all on the same page working together for the same larger purpose.  Nothing will bring a group of people together than passionate execution towards the same goal.  Many conflicts arise when the individual slips down to their own goals within the organization; and can be cleared up when the larger goal of the group is front and center.  
3. Each leader at the table needs to apply the following when dealing with conflict:
• If they are about to bring up an area of conflict - they need to ensure that the area they want to bring up is specific to the larger goal of the group and not just specific to their own goals for their part of the organization.
• If they are responding to an area of conflict brought up by another leader - to ask the question of themselves: "Why would this person be bringing this up now?  What parts of this could be a danger sign for us as a team to consider and discuss?"
4. The leader within the leadership team needs to be aware of the dynamics of the group and look to dig out areas of conflict.  The greatest asset of the leadership team is that the people are of diverse backgrounds and perspectives which should be leveraged to help the entire team meet their larger goals.  Constructive conflict is the means by which this is accomplished.

Constructive conflict is healthy and present in great teams.  How can you help bring this forward in your teams today?

Curt

Harvard Business Review (2011-04-12). Harvard Business Review on Building Better Teams (Harvard Business Review Paperback Series) (Kindle Locations 826-827). Harvard Business Review Press. Kindle Edition. 

Lencioni, Patrick M. (2012-03-14). The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else In Business (J-B Lencioni Series) (pp. 42-43). Wiley. Kindle Edition. 

McGregor, Douglas (2005-12-21). The Human Side of Enterprise, Annotated Edition (p. 313). McGraw-Hill. Kindle Edition. 

Effective Leadership Teams

A few days ago, I completed the book "The Human Side of Enterprise" by Douglas McGregor.  The book was originally written in 1960, well before I was born, yet I have found this volume to store plenty of insights into organizational leadership.  I originally acquired the book to learn more about the Theory X and Theory Y styles of management that were touched on in my Masters studies in leadership.  I wanted to gain a better grasp on what these two theories were and how I might apply them in my own opportunities for leadership.  If you have not been exposed to these before, it is worth doing a search for Theory X and Theory Y or getting your hands on a copy of the book.

One of the other items that really caught my attention in this book was a section about effective teams.  In the last chapter of the book, McGregor spends some time talking about the Managerial Team - and notes a number of characteristics about the ones that seem to be effective.  What is even more interesting to me is that the next book that I picked up, entitled "The Advantage" by Patrick Lencioni, also talks about effective leadership teams, and how there are a number of similarities that these two authors have noted.  In this blog post I will spend some time talking about a few of the items that I noted from both volumes that I think are powerful and useful to leaders today.  There are quite a few of these items, so I may break them into multiple posts.

McGregor (2005), notes eleven items that embody effective groups.  The first is that, "The 'atmosphere,' which can be sensed in a few minutes of observation, tends to be informal, comfortable, relaxed. There are no obvious tensions. It is a working atmosphere in which people are involved and interested. There are no signs of boredom" (location 4601).  Lencioni (2012) notes this as "Trust", and more specifically, "vulnerability-based trust" as foundational for any leadership team (p. 26).

In my own consulting practice, I have been a part of a number of leadership team meetings where there is clearly no trust (as described above).  Some participants simply don't speak.  Others use the occasion to pontificate on a subject specific to their own interests.  Still others bring their favorite piece of technology, and although they are physically present, spend most of the time answering e-mail or some other activity.  In these types of meetings, it is usually found that the highest ranking member of the team (either a VP or CXX individual) allows this type of meeting to take place because it affords them no opposition.  There is little discussion and certainly no conflict (a subject that I will look at on it's own in a later post).  Everyone agrees with, what the leader wants (at least at the meeting) and, they may head back off to their office to either ignore the decisions that were made or begin to spend time figuring out how to oppose the decision.  Does this sound effective to you?  Have you been in meetings like this?  Have you been silent - or worse - have you brought your laptop and just answered e-mail?

Leadership teams need to function as a means by which to aggregate varying fields of expertise and insight to the point of supporting the larger objectives of the organization.  When members are silent, their area of expertise is not represented in the larger decision. When CXX leaders allow this to happen - they are not acting in the best interest of the organization (although they may be acting in the best interests of themselves and their own agenda).  

When I first started my Masters degree, we undertook a number of different kinds of personal "tests" to help each of the cohort members to understand themselves better.   This was an incredibly powerful experience for me personally.  One of the instruments was the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).  Once I was aware of my "type", it helped me understand some of my actions and why I respond the way I do in specific situations.  I did not look at this new knowledge as a reason to "change" who I was, but more to understand why I react the way that I do.  This simple awareness seemed to empower me.  

What was even more interesting about this is that the cohort members began sharing their MBTI's with each other.  I surmise that this act of sharing precipitated a new level of trust as each member was exposing some vulnerability about who they were.  I can tell you that I have never experience such a high level of group trust before - certainly not in an organizational setting - as I did with that group of people.  Lencioni mentions this as a means to begin the process of creating the right level of trust within the leadership team.  He goes on further to say that, "At the heart of vulnerability lies the willingness of people to abandon their pride and their fear, to sacrifice their egos for the collective good of the team" (p. 27).

Effective leadership teams don't just happen.  They require concerted effort to create an atmosphere of trust and vulnerability.  Egos need to be left at the door and the group needs to clearly understand the importance of their membership on the team and it's ultimate goal of supporting the organization.  

What has been your experience with leadership teams?




McGregor, Douglas (2005-12-21). The Human Side of Enterprise, Annotated Edition.  McGraw-Hill. Kindle Edition.

Lencioni, Patrick M. (2012-03-14). The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else In Business. John Wiley and Sons. Kindle Edition. 

Leadership and Family

Recently, our family has been presented with a situation that helped me to realize how leadership becomes a pervasive quality, not just something one focuses on in the office or at work.

I am an independent contractor who works primarily in the fields of Information Security, Risk Management, Governance, Compliance, and/or Strategy.  As I completed a contract for an organization I began looking for another contract through the normal channels of connections that one builds up over the course of business. An interesting option surfaced - one that has significant ramifications for my entire family.

I've lived in Edmonton, Alberta my entire life.  Ok - well there was some time where apparently as a very young boy my parents moved to Fort Mcmurray, Alberta for a while - but I was far too young to remember any of this.  As a family we have done a little bit of travelling to various vacation destinations and it would be fair to say that we enjoy tropical locals.  Not to mention that my wife and I have led teams (2007, 2009, 2012) to do humanitarian relief work in Nicaragua (you can check out our last trip on which we maintained a blog if you are interested).   Personally, I've always dreamed of living somewhere tropical - where you can go to the beach on the weekend and the temperature is such that you do not have to shovel snow or wear down filled jackets any time of the year.  So you might be able to understand my enthusiasm when one of my connections, in a very tropical place, contacted me and indicated that they were indeed looking for people and wanted to know if I was truly interested.  

Lights flashed.  Bells rung.  I nearly fell of my chair.  But once I recovered from the initial shock, I waited for the right moment to bring it up to my wife to see what she thought of the idea.  It's funny how my wife has the ability to balance me out.  She had some significant concerns about what this would mean for all of us - especially the kids - and we spent numerous evenings discussing the pros and cons.  

As things progressed - we got to the stage where the organization made a proposal for a 3 month trial period where I would commute back and forth as a means to see if there was a mutual fit.  If things worked out, the intention would be for a longer relationship and that meant a relocation.  Things were getting serious and the possibility of this actually happening was starting to weigh heavy.  To this point we had not mentioned anything to the kids.  I proposed the idea to my wife about having a "Family Meeting", and putting all the cards on the table so that they would be in the loop.  

Leadership is nothing without collaboration.  My studies have revealed to me that great leaders understand how to foster collaboration - they do not dictate.  In order to help make this happen in my situation, we needed to bring the whole group into the discussion.  "Without shared understanding, meaningful collaboration is impossible" (Kaner, 2011, Kindle Location 609).  So, to be transparent with the kids, we called a family meeting and provided them as much information as possible.  Before we told them what we were starting to look at, I laid down only one ground rule: At Family Meetings nothing can be posted on Facebook, tweeted, texted or placed on any form of electronic distribution.  This was for us to talk about - as a family - not to share with the world until we were certain that it was going to move forward.

The discussion was fascinating, and looking back I am absolutely convinced that this was the right approach.  We prefaced everything we said with the fact that at this point we have more questions than answers and that there were many steps to go before we got to the stage of relocation.     We sought feedback from each of the kids and let them know that we wanted them to participate in the process of making the decision. We had a variety of reactions.  One became quite emotional and indicated that he did not want to leave.  I told him that it was OK to be scared about this - and that I was scared too (which is true - remember I've lived in one place my whole life). Another was excited and wanted to know when we would leave.  As a whole, it brought us closer together as a family and the kids brought up some very good points to consider that we had not yet thought about.

This experience has shown me the power of collaboration within a family.  Although the quote that follows talks about organizations - it's clear to me that it resonate with families as well.  John Hamm indicated, “Effective leaders, by contrast, understand that their role is to bring out the answers in others. They do this by very clearly and explicitly seeking contributions, challenges, and collaboration from the people who report to them, using their positional power not to dominate but rather to drive the decision-making process” (Posner, Kouzes, 2010, p. 72).  

Effective Leadership facilitates collaboration weather it be in the office, at home or with any function participated in. I've certainly had to reflect on my own leadership and see if I've been aware of my own short comings outside of the office (and maybe within it).  "Under the guidance of an EI [Emotionally Intelligent] leader, people feel a mutual comfort level. They share ideas, learn from one another, make decisions collaboratively, and get things done" (Goleman, Boyatzis, McKee, 2004, p. 21). 

How about you?


PS - I'm still pursuing the option above...will let you know how it works out.


Goleman, Daniel; Boyatzis, Richard E.; McKee, Annie (2004-02-26). Primal Leadership: Learning to Lead With Emotional Intelligence (p. 21). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

Kaner, Sam (2011-03-10). Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (Jossey-Bass Business & Management) (Kindle Location 609). John Wiley and Sons. Kindle Edition.

Posner, Barry Z.; Kouzes, James M. (2010-07-16). The Truth about Leadership: The No-fads, Heart-of-the-Matter Facts You Need to Know (p. 72). John Wiley and Sons. Kindle Edition.

Experience & Emotional Intelligence

As a student in the thesis phase of a Masters of Leadership program I have the good fortune of being exposed to many resources related to the subject of Leadership.  I enrolled in this program for two reasons: first, because I have a passion and intense interest in the subject of leadership; second, because I am looking to move to more strategic positions within my profession of Information Technology.  I felt that potential employers would take my desire to operate as a CTO, CSO/CISO or CIO far more seriously if I held Masters level credentials in leadership.  I already hold seven certifications in networking, security and risk and have over 23 years experience in a broad range of IT subjects.

During my reading this past week I came across something the both lifted my spirits and stepped on my expectations.  The quote was from Claudio Fernandez-Araoz a partner in the executive search firm Egon Zehnder International.  As a result of his exposure to several thousand hiring cases he makes the following assertion about organizations in the search for senior leadership:  

"...the classic profile organizations look for in hiring a senior executive (relevant experience and outstanding IQ) is much more a predictor of failure than success, unless the relevant emotional intelligence competencies are also present" (As cited in Posner, Kouzes, 2010, p. 64).

Since my resume only shows smaller organizational executive leadership, it was like a revelation to hear someone describe how "not" important experience was to the role in the absence of emotional intelligence.  Leadership is about relationship.  Leadership is about understanding that 70% of the choices we make and actions we take as humans is based on emotion.  It is how we are wired.  How our brains function.  

I know in my history I have worked for both kinds of leaders.  Those who you just can connect with.  Those who would almost do anything for if they asked you [yes RS - I mean you].  Those who are genuine and will take the time to look you in the eye and want to understand who you are and what you are about.  Of course there is always the other kind of leader - the ones who use manipulation, threats and play games.  The job gets done - but it is not because of the respect of the leader - it's more because of the fear they create.  I'm not sure I'll ever understand how these kinds of people get to where they are or why leadership above them seem to miss what is obvious to everyone under the oppressive leader.

In another one of my readings the author indicated:

"EQ [Emotional Quotient or Emotional Intelligence] is so critical to success that it accounts for 58 percent of performance in all types of jobs. It’s the single biggest predictor of performance in the workplace and the strongest driver of leadership and personal excellence" (Bradberry, Greaves, 2009, p. 20).

This is exciting news for a leader looking to serve and organization and provide sound leadership through an understanding of emotional intelligence.  There is only one problem, most organizations focus on experience and experience alone.  Great.

I can only hope that as I continue the search for an organization looking for someone to provide leadership in Information Security or IT in general that there will be someone who will look beyond the fact that I have not been a CTO or CISO in my past - but see that I possess the capability to be a capable leader in the present with the capability to understand the importance of emotion and build strong relationships.

I look at experience on someone else's resume differently now.  I see it just as what they have done before.  It doesn't tell me if they did it on the backs of the people they worked with - or if they stood beside them and linked arms - or if they lifted them up so that they could be successful. 

I hope to be the latter example.  How about you?

Bradberry, Travis; Jean Greaves (2009-06-13). Emotional Intelligence 2.0 (pp. 20-21). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition. 

Posner, Barry Z.; Kouzes, James M. (2010-07-16). The Truth about Leadership: The No-fads, Heart-of-the-Matter Facts You Need to Know (p. 64). John Wiley and Sons. Kindle Edition. 

Should Vision be Realized?

Last weekend our church held its 40th anniversary celebration.  Invitations were sent out to throngs of people who over the years had spent time at our church to come and take part in the weekend's activities.  On the Friday night, a BBQ was organized at a members farm.  The weather was amazing.  Clear blue sky and sunshine.  As evening drew near we had an unobstructed view of the blue moon that was taking place (it just so happens that this was the same day that Neil Armstrong was being laid to rest).  There were plenty of hugs, smiles and rekindling of old friendships.

The next evening was a formal banquet held at a nearby location to the church.  It was not held at the church directly because the building was just coming to the end of a rather major renovation project.  After 40 years of use, you can imagine that there might be some things that needed to be...well...upgraded.  The first stage of the renovations were going to be unveiled the next day (Sunday), when they were going to hold the first service in the newly renovated sanctuary with all the new sound and lights and everything.

Rewind 15 years.  

I'm a volunteer working in the sound and technical area of the church and providing leadership on the church board.  The sound board we are using was donated by someone from the congregation.  The speakers we are using were donated by someone from the congregation (is the pattern starting to show?).  We hold things together with electrical tape and binder twine.  Sound stuff is always put into the yearly budget - but it is the first thing to be cut when the finances are low (and for us that was every year).  

So I did what any good visionary would do - I drew out what the future would look like and turned it into a 5 year plan.  I tried to sell it to the leadership of the church and they did support it verbally - but when it came time to buy these things it was the same old story.  Nothing moved forward.  I lasted at this for about 10 years and finally gave up working in the technical space.  I was just tired of not seeing things move forward.

Fast forward 10 years

The church decided to take on a capital campaign to undertake some major renovations.  Included in the renovations is a full upgrade of the sound and lighting system.  I was originally one of the leaders for this project and helped cast some of the vision of the future. As a result of taking a Masters Degree (and a few other things) I stepped down from the leadership role to focus on my studies.

Fast forward to one week ago

It is Saturday evening and I'm in line to attend the 40th anniversary banquet.  There are many people here that I have not seen for a long while.  As I approach the entrance there are  greeters meeting those who are arriving, welcoming them to the event.  As I reach my hand out to the greeter, she notices me and she says something like: "You must be very excited to see how your vision will have come into being?"

Full Stop

Was I excited to see the vision come to be?  I didn't feel excited. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that I didn't feel...well...anything related to the completion of the project.  Why?  I probably should feel something - shouldn't I?  I mean, this is what I wanted.  This is what I dreamed of.  This is the vision that I helped create - coming to fruition.  Nope.  Nothing.

I talk about the future as if I've been there and experienced it.  And for me this is how it is - its like I've been there.  But when it comes to the here and now - I feel like "What do you mean excited - I've been wandering around in this vision for 10 years.  It's old. It's boring.  It's ... it's...it's the now".  In The Truth About Leadership, Kouzes & Posner say that: "Vision is the lifeblood of any organization. It is what keeps it moving forward" (p 51).  But what happens when you make it to your vision - reached your goal - met the challenge?  Now what?  Where do you go from there?

What this says to me is that a vision is much different than a project.  Projects come and go but visions - visions need to be built to last.  Visions describe the essence of where the organization is going.  Visions need to be presented in such a way as to make it appear to be within reach yet at the same time innately designed to not be achievable.  Why?  Because much time and energy will need to be expended to promote and encourage the vision within the organization - to get it moving - and to keep it moving.  If this was physics we might call the vision our "vector". Vectors have magnitude and direction - but no destination.  Leaders do not have the luxury to spend precious time supporting a vision only to have it come to a conclusion. 

I feel better knowing that the milestone we reached is a great end to a fantastic project (or at least this stage of it).  The sanctuary looks nice.  The carpet is cool.  The lights are fantastic and the sound is what I would call "clean".  I also feel better knowing that where we are is not the culmination of a long term vision; because visions need to be made to outlast the visionary.  Or at least they should be.