DISCOMFORT AND DISCOURTESY

“The challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude; be kind, but not weak; be bold, but not bully; be thoughtful, but not lazy; be humble, but not timid; be proud, but not arrogant; have humor, but without folly.”

- Jim Rohn

“Never be bullied into silence. Never allow yourself to be made a victim. Accept no one's definition of your life, but define yourself.” -Harvey S. Firestone

No organizational Leader will deny the omnipresent pressure to perform and produce demonstrable results. Regardless of whether I am speaking with for profit or nonprofit Leaders, I often hear common variations on the old cliche' "you're only as good as your last victory." Financial targets, including fundraising and budgets, may lead as the obvious sources, but public perception, growth, and market competition contribute to the array of factors driving Leaders to seek ever better personal and organizational performance.

Historically, there are two basic models of sustainable performance and growth. One variation is built upon personal integrity, leading to strong interpersonal trust among colleagues, and a shared commitment to long-term objectives, respect for human capital, and an integrated approach to how the organization fits into the larger community. The second variation is built upon personal ego, leading to weak interpersonal trust, and a fractured commitment within the management ranks to short-term results and professional survival. This second culture is characterized further by burn-out, turnover among mid-level and senior-level Leaders, further weakening day-to-day trust and commitment within the hourly ranks of the organization.

A colleague of mine told me of a corporate CEO in the health care field who absolutely refused to set an out-of-office message on his voicemail or email. During the engagement, my colleague inquired of the CEO's direct reports about the anomaly which she had discovered when she knew the CEO was away on a Mediterranean cruise and couldn't possibly have been in the office. The Senior Leadership revealed that it was the CEO's practice to appear always "on duty" and that on more than one occasion he had expressed that it was his opinion that every member of the company's management should always be available to engage in work activities.

My colleague further analyzed the effect this practice had upon the organization. Because the message being telegraphed well beyond the executive suite was that work always took priority over personal matters, mid-level managers remained on-edge, since no evening, no weekend, no week of vacation truly every allowed for renewal and refreshment. The human dimension was negatively impacted at every level of the organization. Years later, when the health care concern succumbed to a merger following a sharp decrease in its market capitalization, my colleague wondered to herself what effect the Skinner Box culture had on its downfall.

As Stephen M.R. Covey illustrated in "The Speed of Trust", there is a high cost to an organization, a community, a church or a family when an environment of low trust is allowed to fester. And, yet, low trust organizations continue to exist, seeking to exact profit, growth, and productivity from every other possible source except strengthening the culture of interpersonal trust.


TODAY'S QUESTION: Are you exercising firm and balanced leadership to achieve long-term trust and performance, or has your management style devolved into brash bullying bent on achieving short-term gains at all costs?