In my experience the failure rate of those endeavors is quite high. This is because we fail to see ownership for what it is: a process instead of a switch. Unfortunately accepting that ownership is a process is not a guarantee that it will work. There are many pitfalls along the road.

Ground Zero

The first reaction you are most likely to meet is denial. Denial has many faces. Examples include:

• No;
• Up yours;
• Over my dead body;
• Not in a lifetime;
• Not in my backyard;
• Who do you think you are?;
• Been there, done that, doesn’t work.

It’s no wonder that this first phase is one of denial. This is common ground for many developments involving human beings. Organizational change practitioners can show you tons of literature ranging from early child psychologists (Jean Piaget),  studies on death and dying (Elisabeth Kuebler Ross), insights on burning platforms (Daryl Conner), to the latest findings on positive psychology (Jonathan Haidt) and an analysis of how you put it all to practice (the Heath brothers).

The Dip of Ownership

The next phase you are likely to meet is deconstruction. The alleged owner of your project or initiative will now take it all apart in an attempt to fully understand what it is all about. Although this is a very healthy indication of future ownership, chances are you will be hooked by the fallacy of resistance.

The fallacy of resistance occurs whenever we label this behavior as ‘resistance’ and pull our guns. Most of the times we will be tempted to respond with more control and discipline. And this is exactly the opposite of what is needed when people are coming to terms with their new identity.

It’s like opening the oven too early when baking bread. There is no better way to make the bread collapse. The worst part is that we you will probably react along the lines of: ‘You see, I told you the bread would collapse.’

Just when you thought you had it all, reality hits you with another with another kick in the butt. We are in the dip of ownership. The only way to get out of that dip is by increasing the level of trust – also on the public level.

Crossing the Fence

Even when you realize that controlling and sanctioning will evaporate all the investments of time, manpower and money in a split second, you could use some help in navigating the situation.

We are now in the next phase; the phase of claiming. After deconstructing the components of the initiative, the future owner will now start to claim the initiative. The mechanics of this phase are simple: after denying and deconstructing, the future owner is now confronting her new identity with the world. The future owner is now crossing the fence of public space.  They will either step in with both feet or run like hell.

This is when you will need to step back and allow even more trust. There is a great risk that you will not have the maturity yourself to let this happen because – most of the times – this is a messy phase (it’s called learning) and you will be tempted to ‘rescue’ the person claiming the ownership.

My advice: don’t.

Able to Respond

The next phase is the one of responsibility. It’s the final test before ownership. When people claim something in a space, chances are the space responds with feedback. This is the time for owners to mature and interact with the reactions they receive on their new identity.

Responsibility is a self-regulating mechanism. Everything becomes clear when we study the English definition for “responsible”: It literally means “able to respond” or “being capable of responding.” When people choose to take responsibility in a situation, they co-own it.

The propulsion of this mechanism provides a last filter before arriving at the destination. Responsibility touches the soul. If the new identity resonates with the owner’s soul they will make it. Else, well… they will break. (Note: there is nothing wrong with ‘breaking’. It’s a neutral fact; a confirmation that this identity is not who she wants to be.)

The Destination

Finally, we have arrived at the stage where the owner is pulling her own weight. Ownership is the word. It’s a process. Most of all: it’s the road less traveled.

Some time ago I overheard a conversation between consultants who were talking about how difficult it was to make progress with their customer. One of them said: “The only difference between a consultant and a prostitute is that the prostitute sometimes says no.” At first that was funny; but the more I came to think of it, I realized that this statement is painfully close to the truth.

Everyday I see consultants showing up and running on automatic pilot. In fact, that is how I started my career as a consultant, before I decided to go the road less traveled. Now, on certain occasions I do say ‘no’ and I have to sit with the stigmatizing guilt for some time. But when I say ‘yes’ I mean it.

The Choice

For the short timeframe that I am on a project, I receive some authority, mostly by means of a function title, a vague task list, a sense of urgency and a set of deliverables. That’s pretty standard in my world.  But from then on it is up to me to top this package with my individual commitment. The choice is clear:

• I can play safe, stick to the job description, produce impeccable deliverables, and push them into the lap of my customer. I am now in the position of being right and calling the customer ‘stupid’ when my advice is not followed.
• I can dive in and commit to their commitments. Attention here: boundaries become less obvious, influence happens without authority, and the true value of deliverables gets embedded in the relationship.

It’s the difference between being a spectator and being a player. Even though I am an outsider, in this very timeframe I tip over by committing to their commitments. All of a sudden time flies, passion is abundant, and devotion defaults into whatever I am working on.

It’s a relationship thing. Relationships matter. I start thinking: what if I would receive such an advice? How would I react? How does more empathy affect my advice? ‘Them’ becomes ‘us’. Their goals become my goals. I become a local. I am liberated from the attachment to being right. I am in relationship.

The Doughnut Principle

In his 1994 book The Empty Raincoat, Charles Handy introduces the doughnut principle.

Handy compares the work we do to a doughnut and says the core is what is essential. It is the agreed given of a job, or a project: the job description. And the outside of the core is our potential. The potential is variable and you can develop as much or as little of it as you want.

In my world, the outside is the relationship part. The point is that we are responsible for balancing our own doughnut: with a core (a duty) that matches our profession, and an outside that caters for our potential.

The Tragedy of Fitting in

Although the relationship part is less measurable, it is more valuable; both: to the customer and to myself. The tragedy for most consultants is that they are conditioned to comply to explicit measures that have nothing to do with fostering relationships.

Everybody wants to make progress, and from a compensation & benefits point of view, this is best done by complying to the measures. Most of us prefer to push the dimensions of the performance review to the max, that is: focus on the core and forget about the rest.

Who’s to Blame?

The truth is that we get into trouble when we try to measure ‘being in relationship’. The problem is that “getting suspicious of one’s own advice”, “connecting on an emotional level”, “committing without knowing how”, “creating art that matters” can’t measured on a scale from 1 to 10. Even though the values are beyond measures, the nature is subjective and non-linear. If Pavlov could not simulate it with a dog, you might as well forget about it.

Function descriptions, performance evaluations and well defined deliverables set the standard to good performance. Sadly enough, they also limit to our ability to develop the outside of the doughnut. When you are caught in the treadmill of performance evaluations, why on earth would you stand out and follow your heart – knowing that this may dilute the results on your evaluation? You don’t contribute beyond what is measurable. It’s not done.

The Happiness of Standing Out

There is a wonderful quote from Handy’s book that describes the feeling of disillusionment you get from focusing too much on the core of the doughnut:

We were not destined to be empty raincoats, nameless numbers on a payroll, role occupants, the raw material of economics or sociology, statistics in some government report

When reaching that point most consultants either cynically quit or numb themselves into automatic pilot.

However, for those who push through in search of more gratification in their work, they will find it in the outer part: the relationship part. Their gratification will make it easier to see the bigger picture of the contributions they are making. Eventually, their job might turn into a calling. The meaning of work then becomes connection, engagement and commitment.

Pushing is the Path

This is the strange part. It doesn’t just happen like that. In order to get there I have to leave the ‘position’ (i.e. fixed by definition) of a spectator, invisible to the players of the organization and blind to undercurrent; and get involved into the dynamics (i.e. in motion) of the insiders: I declare myself a player in the field.

It’s push, push, push. Like the character of the Muppet Show throwing himself under a taxi in order to catch a ride to the airport. There is no poetry in this move from outsider to insider: it’s a pure and blunt exercise of pushing yourself into the reality of the customer: language, habits, ways of thinking… you name it. You eat the same food and you laugh at the same jokes. You go local. You are local.

The Trust Strip

Pushing links me to the context of the customer to such an extent that I become ‘one of us’. I get connected. My work becomes connected. The leverage is in the relationship. I no longer need authority to have influence. Earlier in this series, Seth Godin called this emotional labor. Doing emotional labor is a blessing for a consultant: within the limited time slot of your assignment you are a allowed to land on the landing strip of people’s trust-airport. You are allowed to contribute the best you’ve got.

This landing slot doesn’t come for free. You need to push through the depressing belly ache that precedes committing to their commitments. To go beyond the nausea that precedes letting go of being right. Pure anxiety. The only thing you want to do is run. Hang in there. The next thing you are likely to experience is something that matters: growing into a customer.

To summarize what this e-book is about:

1. Resistance is a good thing; it’s the energy that fuels change;

2. It’s about emotions, and in the first place: your own;

3. It’s about relations, first on trust and then on agreement;

4. It’s about platforms – a platform for emotions; not a burning platform;

5. It is about you – up close and personal.

Here’s the deal:

- If you like it, share it.
- If you think it can be improved, let me know.

I hope you will enjoy reading this e-book as much as I did making it.

I am a fan of animal metaphors in my blog posts, be it ducks, elephants or a complete ecosystem of a pond. This post is quite similar, but it has a little twist from a Birds perspective. Indeed. In the exact sense and to the same horrifying extent as Hitchcock’s 1963 movie, where birds of all kinds suddenly begin to attack people.

As you can see from the above picture, I had my dose of Hitchcock today. I went for a morning run when all of a sudden a buzzard swooped from behind and attacked me with its talons. But I am alive and well, no stitches – just a tetanus renewal and full box of antibiotics for the coming week.

Timesaver: Sports & Primal Scream Therapy

Apparently buzzards always attack from the back. As I read through some buzzard attack incidents – I found that mine was exactly the same: a bang on the back of my head and as I looked up the buzzard was already preparing its next attack. It missed that second attack probably due to my primal screaming and gesticulating. By the third attack I managed to grab a piece of wood and noticing that, it past by and landed on a branch, finishing our encounter with some screams of victory.

Revenge or Respect?

I wouldn’t be blogging about this incident if I hadn’t procrastinated some sense out of this experience throughout the day. When a bird of prey tries to pick your brains there must be a lesson in there.

The takeaway – apart from the vaccination – for Organizational Change Practitioners is the fact that any time of the day you may be thinking of yourself as minding your own business and doing no harm, when all of a sudden horror strikes. You are puzzled and instantly your sense-making mind starts to produce a reality to match your indignation. Like me you may be advertising your innocence and receive lots of sympathy.

Fact is that I was a threat to the bird and that – from its perspective – the bird did what it had to do: it gave me hell. I was a foreign element disturbing the bird’s status quo. As long as I fail to see this, I will continue to be in the right. Indignation is the force that puts me in the right, and since the bird cannot post its opinion – not even on Twitter – that’s where this game will end: shared disgruntlement powered by one man’s indignation. Sounds familiar?

How about suspecting myself first? For instance: I now learned about the breeding season; I investigated comparable incidents; looked at the birds motives, etc.  As a result I can now invest in a hat or better even: avoid the territory this time of the year. Knowing that I cannot control the bird, ‘trying harder to be right’ will not help.

Instead, approaching the incident with respect is a better response; a responsible one. The result: I am now better equipped and  “able to respond” to the situation at hand (i.e. the real meaning of the word ‘responsible’).

You Never Know Until You Go

A second lesson I can take away from today’s adventure is the fact that you never know what will happen until you do something. As Tom Peters is often quoted: “Implementation is the last 99%”.

The point is that I could prepare my run with all of my knowledge but would never ever be investing time, money or manpower into preventing head injuries from buzzards. And still, reality hit me and proved me wrong. That is why preparation and plans are good as long as they are a conversation in the first place and NOT a document that reads between the lines “you can now stop thinking”.

Most of the times though we see people blindlesly carrying out a plan even when the circumstances are screaming for course adjustment.  Good planning may have saved a skinned knee but never would have saved my scalp today. Primal scream course correction prevented me from more than one head injury. Could I have prevented the injury altogether? No way. That part is called: Learning.

The part that is called Experience is scratched on my scalp. I take it with me wherever I go. It is the ultimate learning.

Imagine the following scene:

You are in your house. You’ve got your care keys in your hand. The lights go out because of a power failure. You can’t see a thing. You stumble around in your living room and you drop your keys.

You look around for a moment and you realize that you are never going to find them in the dark. But you look outside and you notice that the streetlights are on. So you say to yourself: “Hmmm … I’m not going to sit around here in the dark and grope around looking for my keys when there’s a light on outside. I’m going to go out here – under the street light – and I’m going to look for my keys.”

So you are outside, groping around and looking for your keys until your neighbor comes along. He asks:
- “What happened mate?”
- “I dropped my keys”
- “I’ll help you look for them!”

Now the two of you are looking for your car keys. Finally your neighbor says:
- “Excuse me, but where exactly did you drop your keys?”
- “Well… um …I dropped them in the house”
- “You dropped your keys in the house and you are looking for them here? This doesn’t make any sense!”
- “Well, it doesn’t make any sense to grope around in the dark when there’s light out here!”

Isn’t that exactly what we do when we have a difficult problem or a struggle that is located inside and we are looking for the solution outside of ourselves? Expecting somebody else to change or something outside of you to get better in order for you to make your life work, is something you have to take a hard look at. You are the one with the difficulties.

This reminds me of another quote by Bob Procter:

You are the only problem you will ever have and you are the only solution.

When I ask my 3 year old son to stop watching television and to come to the dinner table, I’m most likely to receive a ‘No!’ and when I persist in my plan, tears and other forms of ‘Resistance’ will follow for the next ten minutes or so.

However, when I get involved in his frame of reference, I tell him that the television will be shut down when the clock turns seven or when the episode he is watching ends. I can also tell him he can count to three for me to turn off the television, etc. It’s a game he gladly subscribes to; running to the dinner table – eager to start dinner.

What happened here? In the first situation I would be using my parental authority to reinforce an action. This likely results in ‘Revenge’, ‘Regret’ or ‘Rescue’. In the second scenario I am using a different approach: instead of pushing harder I take one step back – BUT I STICK TO THE OBJECTIVE, i.e. television out and on to the dinner table.

By stepping back I inverse the cause-and-effect relationship: I let him be the cause instead of the effect of the situation. This is more likely to result in a ‘Responsible‘ response: I give him the opportunity or the ‘ability‘ to ‘respond‘ positively to my request.

The same is true for organizational change efforts. The point is that you can achieve most of the goals by underscoring the objectives, stepping back and then leaving people the opportunity to become involved in the solution. Instead of pushing harder straight on to ‘Resistance’ you are stepping back and allowing ‘Relationship’ and ‘Respect’.

I bet one can’t learn that lesson so profoundly and deeply at Harvard or Wharton the way I did between the dinner table and the TV set.

Related articles:
Parenting as a Management Skill … Huh? (part 4) – March 1st, 2009
Parenting as a Management Skill … Huh? (part 3) – February 21st, 2009
Parenting as a Management Skill … Huh? (part 2) – February 16th, 2009
Parenting as a Management Skill … Huh? (part 1) – February 9th, 2009

Once upon a time there was a pond with the most exceptional fish one could think of. The man who took care of the pond wanted it to be the best pond of all times, and so did the fish.

The man took care of everything because he didn’t trust a single fish. Instead of feeding them and providing them with oxygen, he hooked them up each day. That way, he knew exactly what they were doing and how they were doing it. Each day he weighed each fish, pushed the food down their throat and told them exactly what they should do before he let them into the water again.

The man was quite proud of the way he controlled it all. Any time of the day anyone could ask how the pond was doing and he would explain in detail with colors, graphics, metrics and key performance indicators. By all measurements, this was the best pond of all times!

In order to control the fish efficiently the man threw out nasty bait: a talking worm telling the fish how bad their work was, how the quality sucked, how they were behind schedule and how it made the man nervous as hell. The man thought this kind of bait would keep the fish sharp. And it did. The bait was simply irresistible.

Below the water surface, Red Fish, Blue Fish and Yellow Fish caught every nasty worm. They were smart fish; strong and bright-colored. Each time the bait was thrown out it was only a matter of seconds before they would catch that nasty worm. Red, Blue and Yellow were the best of breed.

• Red Fish was always the first to swallow the bait; “that’s not true” he said; “I’m going to tell him!” But the rage and the misalignment grew with each catch.
• Blue Fish swallowed the bait differently; with each catch his self doubt grew, for he started to believe the accusations that worm was throwing at him.
• Yellow Fish was smarter than that. He would not fight it like Red Fish, nor feel guilty about it like Blue Fish. His approach was to solve the man’s problem. So he swallowed the bait each time, thinking he could solve the man’s problem.

These smart fish were all different in how they approached the nasty worm – so much is true. But there was one thing they all had in common: they always swallowed the bait by their own instinct and each time they got back into the water they felt sore. They didn’t know why; they were bubbled…

And then one day a duck landed on the pond. He said he had seen these situations in other ponds as well, but the fish didn’t pay attention to the duck; for they were too busy swallowing the bait that was thrown at them. Days went by and from the surface the duck could see the daily ritual the fish went through. These smart fish suffered, but they were too proud to admit it. After all, they were the best of breed and besides a duck is a duck. What could he possibly know about fish?

Until one day the hooks left them aching so hard that they needed some time to recover, so they figured they might as well listen to the duck. “OK duck, let’s hear it” Red Fish said. “Things are not OK down here, so tell us what you think is going on.” Blue Fish said.

“It’s fairly simple”, answered the duck; “from up here it is obvious how you are exaggerating on the R-side”. “The R-side; what the hell is that?!” Yellow Fish replied. The duck patiently continued:
“You see, there is a pattern in your daily suffering:
• Red Fish is driven by Revenge. That is the first R – and he is left with resentment;
• Blue Fish is driven by Regret. That is the second R, which leaves him feeling guilty;
• And you, Yellow Fish, you get hooked because you try to Rescue the man, and in the end you are scared because it didn’t work out as planned.
There is just one thing you should know about these R’s: they will always get you hooked”

“But that’s our nature – don’t you understand?” Red Fish said. “This pond is our destiny- there is nothing we can do about it” Blue fish said. Yellow Fish concluded: “The only way out is to change the bait”.

“Hang on – there is another way out”, the duck said, “but it will require you to use a different R than you are doing today.
• I’m not asking you to change your nature, Red Fish, but you need to become aware of it;
• I’m not telling you to change for a better pond, Blue Fish, but you can think of yourself as the pond instead of the fish;
• And finally, Yellow Fish, you cannot change the bait that is thrown at you – you just need to know that you can choose not to swallow it.
So the alternative R I am talking about is called Responsibility.”

The fish were bubbled…

“Just try it – you have nothing to lose. When you approach the bait with Responsibility, you will be able to stop and capture the useful information without getting hooked.” Because the fish had no other alternative they decided to try this crazy idea. Days went by before they could turn off the automatic pilot that hooked them.

Eventually, they did it and they reported back to the duck:
“We managed not to get hooked for a few days now.” Red Fish said. “And what were your findings?” the duck replied. “Well, it’s hard.” Blue Fish said, “because it needs all of my attention. But now at least the pain is gone and we continue our work.” Yellow Fish thoughtfully added: “This is almost as difficult as swimming upstream.”

“Indeed”, said the duck “approaching nasty bait with Responsibility is as hard as swimming upstream. Responsibility means that you can choose how you respond to a situation. And it’s not easy. Just remember that it’s the upstream swimming that makes you stronger!”

The man never changed. Neither did the bait. But the fish grew stonger each time they realized that there is always a choice in how they respond to a situation.

Happy Easter!

Examples include: Greet coworkers personally. Remember to say thank you. For meetings you convene, be the first to sit down and the last to get up. Welcome visitors by name. Answer your own telephone. Give away recognition when things go well; hoard responsibility when they don’t. Convey bad news in person. When you make a mistake, admit it and apologize.

When it comes to this last one – apologizing – I just finished an interesting chapter that matches last week’s post particularly well: Executive Humility Decencies. In that chapter, Harrison explains that apologies are serious business.

All or Nothing

He even cites a research by Jennifer Robbennolt, Professor of Law and Psychology at the University of Illinois College of Law. In two studies, participants, ages 21 to 70, read a scenario describing a pedestrian-bicycle accident. They were asked to take on the role of the injured person and evaluate a settlement offer from the other party, based on information about the injuries, the other party’s conduct, and each party’s responsibility for causing the accident.

Professor Robbennolt found that when a full apology was given, 73% of the respondents would accept the settlement offer. When no apology was given, 52% would accept, but when a partial apology was given, only 35% would accept. Even when she changed the scenario and made the evidence of fault less clear, a partial apology was still often perceived no different to no apology at all. Results also showed that the severity of the injury mattered: the more severe the injury, the more the need to fully apologize. It seems that a late or a bad apology is WORSE than no apology at all.

The 4 R’s

Not surprisingly, when we dig a little deeper in order to find out more about the anatomy of an effective apology, we end up in the field of medicine. Apparently, a lot of health care providers understand and practice what to do after unexpected outcomes – to apologize (*). Most of them use the 4 “R”s of Apology:

• Recognition: knowing when an apology is in order. An apology needs to ensure that the injured party knows that you understand specifically what you did wrong.
• Regret: responding empathetically. This is an indication that you accept personal responsibility for the injury. Here it is important to remember that an expression of regret is not an admission of guilt or fault.
• Responsibility: owning up to what’s happened. Be accountable for the problem, even if it was unforeseeable. This is the part where most apologies end up being partial expressions of regret, impoverished by exceptions and ‘but’ statements. As the above research of Professor Robbennolt points out, a bad apology is worse than no apology at all.
• Remedy: making it right. Explain to what’s being done to correct the problem and express your commitment to not make the same mistake in the future.

Finally, back to Harrison’s book, from which I’d like to quote how he links apologizing and vulnerability to leadership:

“During the course of his or her career, every leader will be tested by adversity, and sometimes the leader will fail. At these times, employees and other stakeholders are watching very carefully. When they see the leader as a fallible person who makes mistakes and has the decency to acknowledge them, take responsibility, and apologize if appropriate, the will not abandon the leader. Followers demand neither flawlessness nor omniscience. (…) In the end, followers demand leaders who are worthy of being followed.”

__________
(*) Source: Healing Words: The Power Of Apology In Medicine, by Michael S Woods, Jason Isaac Star, Hilda J Bruckner

In a recent workshop I was asked:

Shouldn’t the receiver of a communication be responsible for it? We can prepare all we can, but if they don’t want to swallow it – it’s their problem!

However true, rightful and justified this attitude may seem, to the same extent it will not help you any further on an organizational change program.

To ‘Me’ or not to ‘Me’

The only way to bring about change in a setting that is characterized by inertia or plain and simple “let-me-tell-you-why-this-won’t-work“-ism is by being the change you want to see in the world. Over and over again. Even when it seems hopeless. So I put the following scheme on the board (in Dutch – but I have put a translation below) (*).

The point here is that responsibility is a choice, not something that happens to you. Everything becomes clear when we study the English definition for “responsible”: It literally means “able to respond” or “being capable of responding.” When people choose to take responsibility in a situation, they co-own it. This insight is fundamental for organizational change management.

Want more possibilities? Yes you can…

… but it takes a radical (i.e. non-rational) approach! Knowing that one cannot assign responsibility  to someone else, there is a practice that can strengthen you at no-one’s expense.  It all starts with the radical declaration: “I am the framework for everything that happens in my life“.

Then, you take the practice one step further: You ask yourself in regard to the unwanted circumstances: ‘well, how is it that I have become a context for that to occur?’. You will begin to see the obvious and less obvious contributions of your past actions and thoughts. That is because when you look deeply enough into that question you will find that at some point you have sacrificed a relationship.

In their book ‘The Art of Possibility: Transforming Professional and Personal Life’ Ben and Ros Zander introduce this very practice and the call it  ‘Being the Board’. Being the board is not about turning the blame on yourself, instead it is about access to possibility.

So next time you are tempted to say: “They just won’t listen”, ask yourself: “well, how is it that I have become a context for that to occur?” And always remember rule number 6!

Related articles on this blog:

• Music and Leadership - July 20th, 2008
• Redefining ‘Responsibility’ – October 22nd, 2007

_____________
(*) I borrowed this scheme from Clint Callahan – to whom I owe quite some insights in this domain.

To my opinion the below movie tells more about leadership than any course on that subject in any business school.

These are some of the elements that hit me most in this movie and they pretty much sum up the essence of leadership.

Learning to commit instead of control

He demonstrates how beginners concentrate on each step. As we grow up and learn we are able to see past the individual step and instead see the whole movement. The same goes for leaders: beginners always try to control each step and mature leaders are rather committing to the whole movement instead of trying to control each step.

Mature leaders are committing rather than controlling. As Zander conveys: “It is one of the characteristics of a leader that he does not doubt for one moment the capacity of the people he’s leading to realize whatever he’s dreaming.”

Later in this performance he says: “A conductor does not make a sound. He depends for his power on his ability to make other people powerful… As a leader your job is to awaken possibility in other people.”

Without mentioning the word, what Zander is talking about is ‘empowerment’. How I wish I knew about his insights when I was an MBA student – it would have helped me through those dull academic definitions that completely – utterly – miss the point.

Responsibility

Through the metaphor of music, Zander shares his insights on taking responsibility. If eyes of your audience aren’t shining you should ask yourself ‘who am I being that their eyes aren’t shining?’. This question puts you in the position of what I would call “radical responsibility” and this entails both, good and bad news. First: you declare yourself ‘being in the driver’s seat’(Zander calls this ‘being the board’) and the bad news is: there are no excuses after that declaration.

Vision

Zander demonstrates how so many different people with individual ideas and situations can all be moved by one single piece of music at the same time. All humans are different but we can all connect through music. If a conductor were the leader of an organization, his vision would be the music that connects all different minds and motivate them to commit to the same goal. Of course, in order to do so there is one final ingredient to leadership, and that is passion…

Passion

The ‘shining eyes’ would not have been there if there if there wasn’t a spark from the leader. There is no better way to talk about leadership than to demonstrate it, and that is what Zander does – fuelled by his passion for music.

Related articles:
- Always Remember Rule Number 6! (December 6th, 2007)
- Redefining ‘Responsibility’ (October 22nd, 2007)