The Leadership Challenge :: Ask an Expert

Ask an Expert

Ask the expert explores those sticky situations, difficult challenges, and all-around strange predicaments that on-the-spot facilitators sometime find themselves.

We will update this feature every month, so don't forget to check back to read the latest.

Question for August 2010:

How do I use The Leadership Challenge to develop senior leaders in the healthcare arena?

A:The Leadership Challenge is an extremely appropriate model for developing leadership skills in administrators and clinicians within healthcare organizations—especially when you keep in mind the unique background and perspective many professionals working in this field bring to the leadership development experience.

Healthcare professionals, especially clinicians, are highly educated with little tolerance for the use of anecdotal information to demonstrate the effectiveness of a new treatment modality. In their work, they are well-grounded in evidence-based medicine and demand to see supporting research when deciding if a new treatment regime is worth trying. Lacking evidence, their willingness to try new forms of treatment is limited at best.

Professionals within the healthcare arena approach leadership development using this same logic. As a result, one of the most successful strategies is to underscore the evidence-based research that supports The Five Practices model.

A significant challenge when teaching healthcare administrators about leadership is in capturing their attention and educating them fully on the important role effective leadership can play throughout the organization. Because The Leadership Challenge is an evidence-based model for practicing leadership—and there is plenty of research to support that claim—it lends itself to being a perfect model for capturing a healthcare professional's attention.

Credibility is important, whether teaching others about leadership or when writing a book about leadership. The fact that The Leadership Challenge is based on nearly 30 years of research gives this book instant credibility for audience members whose professions are heavily grounded in research.

From my own experience, for example, I had just completed teaching a three-hour leadership block of instruction to 150 young physicians. Several approached me asking about the evidence that supported The Five Practices model. They wanted to be sure that this wasn't just somebody's idea of what leadership meant to them. Instead, empirical proof was what they were after. At first, I was taken aback as I hadn't thought about this model being well-grounded in research. I stumbled through a response until one of the physicians asked for the very best book they could read about leadership that was researched-based. As soon as the question was asked, I knew. I had failed to appeal to the essential element they needed to know. I quickly recovered and explained that this model of leadership was not just the thoughts and experiences of Dr. Posner and Mr. Kouzes but was based entirely on over 25 years of research. I knew then that the next time I was to speak to an audience whose professional participants were trained in the sciences, I had to emphasize evidence-based fundamentals of this model.

In this recent experience of mine, I had forgotten how critical it is to know your audience. For some audiences, The Five Practices model has face validity and stands on its own. It simply makes sense on the surface. For other audiences, face validity is not enough. While the model might make great sense, it is not credible—in and of itself—unless the audience first understands the research supporting it.

The good news is that The Leadership Challenge meets the needs of both audiences—and, in particular, the specialized, science-educated professionals within the healthcare field.

Dr. Jody Rogers is a Professor at Trinity University, Board Certified in Health Administration, and leads the Army Medical Department Executive Skills Program. A Certified Master-in-Training, he also teaches in two graduate programs and speaks nationally on the topic of leadership in healthcare. He can be reached at JODY.ROGERS1@us.army.mil.

Submit Your Question

Do you have a question that you've been dying to ask? Did one of your participants stump you last week with an out-of-the-blue problem? Don't hesitate to send us your question and we will try our best to get back to you with and answer. Submit your question.

Question Archive

Help! My client wants increased engagement and performance. I know employees that are fully engaged outperform those that aren't. But where do I start?

A: Engagement is one of those buzz words we all have been hearing a lot lately. And who doesn't want to improve performance? Well, fortunately it's simpler to deliver both increased engagement and performance than you may think-and it comes down to motivation.

I recently facilitated The Leadership Challenge® Workshop for a health care organization and we had some rich conversations around the fifth of The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®, Encourage the Heart. One of the key concepts of this practice is that motivation comes from positive reinforcement and encouragement. Unfortunately, too many times the words of Benjamin Franklin play out in the workplace instead: "Once I did wrong and heard of it ever; twice I did right and heard of it never." Have you ever worked in an environment where the manager said "If you don't hear from me, it means you're doing a good job, but make a mistake and I'll jump down your throat?"

As leaders, we need to give corrective coaching in a respectful manner. Whether it is to improve performance and ensure procedures are followed correctly for patient safety and comfort or for business efficiency and financial results. However, we also cannot underestimate the power of positive feedback and encouragement for these same valued outcomes.

John Gottman's pioneering research on marriage found that the magic ratio of positive comments to corrective or negative comments must be 5-1 in order to be perceived as balanced. In the workplace, a ratio of 3-1 is found to produce an outcome where employees and volunteers are significantly more productive. So for every negative or corrective comment, leaders must find ways to provide three times as many opportunities for positive support in order to nurture feelings of competence, a sense of accomplishment, increased personal worth, and appreciation in others.

It's not that every employee needs encouragement. But it does motivate all of us to work and try harder when we know our efforts will be recognized. For example, in research Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner have conducted over the years, they found that while only 60% of survey respondents answered "Yes" to the question "Do you need encouragement to perform at your best?", 98% of people surveyed replied "Yes" when asked "When you get encouragement, does it help you perform at a higher level?".

If you are looking for increased engagement and performance, give more encouragement. Work with your client and the organization's leaders to find ways to provide positive feedback to each of their employees and volunteers. What can they recognize and show encouragement for today? Coach your leaders to provide feedback and encouragement that is positive, personal, timely, specific, and most of all, sincere in order to produce the most powerful results. Recognizing and celebrating what's right gives us the desire and energy to fix what's wrong, inspiring us to work harder and continually strive for successes.

Mary Cooper is founding principal of her Orlando-based consulting firm, EngagingOutcomes. Co-author of The Voice of Leadership, she is a Certified Master Candidate of The Leadership Challenge® and a facilitator of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team® and EISA® Emotional Intelligence workshops. She can be reached at mcooper@EngagingOutcomes.com

How do I introduce The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® to attendees prior to a workshop or to persons who will not have the opportunity to attend a workshop?

A: The Leadership Challenge eLearning Program! Co-developed with award-winning e-learning developer Enspire Learning, this new Leadership Challenge resource is a 130-minute introductory-level modular e-learning course based on The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® (the core Leadership Challenge model). Working individually, employees will engage with the content through a story-based scenario, creative interactivities, and multimedia. Each Practice module includes didactic learning, photo-based case studies and stories, and basic interactivities such as multiple-choice questions, matching quizzes, self-reflection exercises, and opportunities for personal application of the concepts.

The program begins with an Orienteering module: a welcome video message from Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner, an overview of the model, and an introduction of the workplace characters and their story. Learners are asked to write out their own Personal Best Leadership Experience and a Current Leadership Challenge that they will work through as they progress through the modules. The program then takes learners through each of the Five Practices: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart. A Commitment module concludes this e-learning program, encouraging learners to continue their leadership journey with specific goals and an action plan. To view a video clip featuring more information about this program, click here.

In looking forward to the decade in front of us, what is one important trend in leadership to consider?

A: Here’s what two professors have to say about innovation today: Professors von Krough and Raisch (Harvard Business Review, Oct., 2009) uncovered what we think may be a future trend for leaders to notice—a strategy related to innovation. Global companies “most successful at achieving growth through innovation tend to devote their energies to a small number of breakthrough ideas.” They “put innovation on the top of the agenda, work across functional and divisional boundaries, and empower employees with an entrepreneurial mind-set.”

That’s quite a “to do” list but the companies they highlight (Proctor and Gamble, Nestle, GE and BMW) are examples of champions in which their shareholder returns were nearly double those of other Global 500 companies.

How does this trend trickle down to leaders in small and large companies? Conservative thinking as it relates to breakthrough ideas seems to oppose the business plan of many leaders who believe that they must have a large inventory of creative ideas to succeed. To stay competitive, they find comfort in a constant pipeline of innovation. According to the professors’ research, however, reducing the number of initiatives and cutting costs to redistribute dollars to R&D results in greater rewards and profits. Apparently, no matter the size of an organization, when it comes to innovation, the trend seems to be that leaders need to think “less is more” in order to grow.

Last summer, we posted a blog entry on an ad campaign that was humorous and anti-trend but factual. It’s a good example of a company staying with their original brand that had staying power.

“Next time your breakfast consists of Post’s Shredded Wheat, consider the CEO’s message from their recent ad campaign: “Progress is Overrated”. He takes a jab at the idea that progress has taken us to a better place. He explains that by stating, “Throughout the years our product has not changed since it was introduced over a hundred years ago. It’s natural, 100% whole wheat and free of additives.” Read more or comment on our blog.

Pat Schally, a consultant with Sonoma Leadership Systems, is editor of the newsletter, The Leader’s Almanac. The intent of the Almanac is to generate ideas, inform and engage leaders everywhere. Sonoma Leadership Systems is the #1 provider of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop, training, and materials. Click here for more information on upcoming public workshops.

How do you re-engage once gung-ho workshop attendees who have "fallen off the wagon" 6 months, 1 year, or 2 years later?

A: We often experience what a colleague calls "training afterglow" following a Leadership Challenge session. Participants leave, action plan in-hand, and get down to work. We receive encouraging emails about their progress and all looks great! Fast forward six months, the ember fades a bit.

One of the principles underlying The Leadership Challenge model is that the Five Practices need to be performed frequently so that leadership becomes habitual and the default reaction to whatever opportunity or challenge a leader might face. But old habits are hard to break. When situations arise and chaos ensues, it is not uncommon for participants to fall back to the habits of the past.

In my work, we have used several techniques with clients to keep people engaged, including:

Refreshers. At Herman Miller, we offer regular refreshers that include the opportunity to retake the LPI. The structure of a refresher is built around a current business challenge, engaging the group in talking about how the practices, commitments, and LPI behaviors can be used.
Coaching and mentoring. Beyond the classroom, high-potential leaders at one client are offered specific coaching on applying the Five Practices model. At this same client, formal mentoring relationships also have been established, with former participants mentoring new workshop attendees.
Executive support. Again at Herman Miller, senior executives talk about the practices regularly during their monthly business updates to the workforce. They talk candidly about applying leadership to the challenges facing the company.
Staying in touch. We do our best to stay in touch through emails, social networking, and the occasional cup of coffee to ask that all important question "So, how?s it going?"

Of course, we never miss an opportunity to Encourage the Heart of those who constantly pursue their next personal best!

Michael Neiss is a Certified Master and a recognized leadership expert with a decidedly practical approach to leadership and management development. A consultant, educator and coach, he can be reached at mike@michaelneiss.com.

Whenever I ask for feedback, people around me will never tell me anything. Their eyes go right down toward their feet, or they say everything is fine. What am I supposed to do?

A: When receiving LPI feedback, many people have bumped into our old friend, question # 16, which reads: "Asks people for feedback on how my actions affect other peoples’ performance." Across the database, this is the lowest rated item on the inventory. This question also is ranked among the lowest with the vast majority of people to whom I provide LPI feedback. And this is a common question I frequently hear about this item, especially from bosses.

First, accept the fact that somewhere in this silence lurks an issue of trust. The trust issue may not even be much about you. People may be hesitant to respond because they witness integrity issues in the broader organization, or because they were punished for being candid in previous, similar experiences. However, do not assume that you are the victim of other circumstances and not the cause! You must accept that in some way, you are contributing to their reticence.

One of the biggest factors in trust is intentions. Think about how willing you are to totally commit yourself, if you question or doubt someone else’s intentions or motives? The voice in your head poses some pretty thoughtful questions when this occurs. "What is really going on here? Is she trying to sacrifice me to make herself look good? What is the real reason he is asking me to get involved in this project?" You know the questions, because you have likely been in a situation where you have heard them in your head.

So perhaps you are not getting a response from others when you ask for feedback because they are too busy trying to answer similar questions about your intentions in their minds ? "why am I really being asked for this feedback" or "is it absolutely safe to be truthful?" Think about the caution flags in your head when someone else, especially a boss, asks you to be genuinely forthcoming about his/her deficiencies? It is not easy, is it?

In the end, it is leaders who must make it easier and safer. With that in mind, here are some immediate options you can try:

Make your request less formal. Don't close people in your office and seek their feedback as if it were part of a strict, performance management process. Maybe it can start as a brief encounter in the hallway or lunchroom: "I am struggling with how to better show people that I appreciate their work. Can we get together later today to talk about that?"
Seek feedback in smaller, more specific pieces: "As you all know, I have a tendency to micromanage the daylights out of people. I would like to stop, or at least slow it down. What are a couple of suggestions you can provide me?
Confront the elephant head on: "This may not feel like a safe environment to provide helpful feedback, especially upward. But I really need your help to be better. Leave a note on my desk or coax a stranger to leave your feedback on my voicemail. One day, we will get to a point where we all feel safe to give each other feedback in a more open, personal way."

And then a few last reminders. First, give people some extended time to think about and prepare their responses. Even the stereotypical high extravert, who enjoys the noise of immediate conversation, might appreciate the pause, so as to not feel being put on the spot. Extended time here means later in the day or week, not in the next 5 seconds.

Finally, continue to do what you can to demonstrate the integrity of your intentions to improve, by taking action and publicly reporting back. Don't ask for feedback only after you receive LPI feedback. Make it part of your monthly meetings. Periodically, let others know what you are attempting to do to change and what you continue to struggle with. Continue to ask for help. And good luck.

Steve Coats, a Leadership Challenge® Workshop Certified Master, is a managing partner and co-owner of International Leadership Associates, a leadership development education and consulting firm. For nearly twenty years, Steve has taught, coached, and consulted with executives and all levels of managers around the world in leadership development, team development, personal growth, change, and business strategy. Steve can be reached at stevec@i-lead.com.

Could you tell me how to interpret the completed LPI Observer questionnaires? For example, if the final mark is 50, what does that really mean? Is it possible to simply say (just an example) 30-40 is poor, 40-50 is acceptable, 50-60 is outstanding?

A: A reasonable question—such as a scholar might approach the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). However, from a practical standpoint or for purposes of leadership development, we do not categorize individuals or their responses to the LPI questionnaire using words such as "above average" or "below average" or "weak" or "strong." The important thing to remember about the LPI assessment is that it is based on a frequency scale—a ranking that measures how often a leader engages in any one of the 30 behavioral statements. It is not a measure of how pleased one is with their own performance or how satisfied an observer is of the behavior of the leader being assessed.

Our view is that results data from the LPI, overall, represent a baseline for each individual on how frequently he or she currently exhibits key leadership behaviors. Wherever that line is—whether it is 50 or 20— it is not a measure against an ultimate number, say 100. Leadership is more like a race in which there is no finish line, and the best leaders are constantly learning and striving to do better (engaging more frequently) in these leadership practices.

That said, researchers have looked at the distribution of scores for each practice (because the mean and standard deviations for each vary) and have attached labels to them. And you, of course, are welcome to do the same. However, it would be most accurate to refer to these descriptively in empirical terms, rather than terms that describe effectiveness (e.g., poor, acceptable). In this way, you might refer to responses as "above or below the mean," rather than low or high scores.

Barry Posner is Professor of Leadership at the Leavey School of Business, where he served as Dean for 12 years, at Santa Clara University. He is co-author of over twenty books and workbooks on leadership and leadership development, including The Leadership Challenge (now in its 4th edition).

What key factors should be considered when determining how to present The Five Practices model in an eLearning environment?

The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® is a robust model for designing and delivering a virtual learning program.

The first step involves choosing between synchronous (facilitator-led) training or asynchronous training modules. Is the program designed to be individually received or broadcast to a room of people? As I’m sure we all can agree, The Five Practices evokes rich discussion, which we believe is best supported by the synchronous approach. Starting from the well-known 16- or 24-hour live classroom delivery of The Leadership Challenge, the virtual facilitator-led format makes interaction with the facilitator and collaboration between students similar to the classroom experience.

The tools available during synchronous training include chatting, polling, emoticons, surveys, breakout rooms, and streaming audio and video, among others. But designing a virtual learning program goes beyond planning how to use the technology. The design needs to be focused on the learner’s engagement. In a virtual event, what is presented on screen becomes more important as that there is no in-person facilitator whose body-language or movements might be watched that would otherwise draw the participant in.

For example, the virtual module of Inspire a Shared Vision, from The Leadership Challenge, is enriched by a fully developed graphical story, where "driving through the fog" becomes an interesting and evocative storyline when told with graphics rather than words alone.

Reflecting on the foundations of credibility, The Leadership Challenge teaches us that credibility begins with showing up as honest, forward looking, inspiring, and competent. We have all sat through a "Death by PowerPoint" presentation where a likely credible-in-person leader shows him/herself to be woefully underprepared to meet the expectations of the audience. A credible TLC virtual facilitator must be disciplined in content knowledge, skillful in the use of virtual technologies yet flexible enough to "go with the flow" during the live session...all of these driven by the desire for participants to learn.

Nancy Duling is a Certified Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop, developer of The Leadership Challenge Webinar Series, and a member of the consulting team at Sonoma Leadership Systems. Lauren Parkhill is Marketing Manager at Sonoma Leadership Systems, A Leadership Challenge Preferred Provider.

Morale in our organization is at an all-time low since we have been through a downsizing. How do I turn the morale issue around?

hear a lot about morale and motivation, from leaders who want to know how to motivate employees and how to raise the level of morale throughout their organizations. The economic downturn has forced many organizations to make some tough decisions, one of which is around talent. While some have taken the route of downsizing, others have tried to utilize their talent in other ways.

Regardless of which tactic your organization has taken, now is the time to develop real relationships with people. Put down the blackberry, cell phones and give people your undivided attention. Have conversations about what they feel, what ideas they may have about the future of the company. Find out the real source of the morale issue. It may not be what you think, but you will only know by asking. You might get a laundry list of issues, so try to work on the top three by enlisting help from the team. Showing progress on the most critical issues lets people know that their voices have been heard.

Focusing on short-term goals, while keeping the long-range goals in view, will help people have small wins along the way. Help others reconnect to the vision—and that means you may have to recast a short-term vision for people to rally around.

In tough times, it is always good to focus on others as well as yourself. Consider working together on a community project or another project that brings the team together to do good for someone else.

Finds reasons to celebrate together and recognize individuals. Add an element of fun to the workplace by asking people what they would like to do. Building morale takes time, but it also changes one person at a time. That is why it is important to build relationships, keep open communication channels, and build a collaborative vision.

Lastly, stay positive and authentic yourself as you work through these leadership challenges.

Valerie Willis is a Certified Master of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop and principal of Valarie Willis Consulting in Loveland, OH, where she focuses on strategic management consulting. She can be reached at vwillis@cinci.rr.com.

Do you know of any YouTube or video clips (movies, etc.) that are current and applicable examples of the practice of Challenge the Process? I’m looking for some innovative examples.

A: Film and TV clips are my favorite way to demonstrate The Five Practices® in workshops. Rather than sitting through a theoretical lecture about concepts of leadership, participants enjoy entertaining examples of what The Five Practices look like in action.

When selecting clips, I look for scenes that not only depict a leader modeling one or more of The Five Practices, but also show how other characters respond favorably to the leader's behavior. I also make a point to look for examples that reflect ethnic and gender diversity.

Here are four of the scenes (described by numbers and titles as shown on their DVD menus) that I've found most effective for launching discussions about Challenge the Process:

	*Men in Black: Scene 6. “Jeebs” (Fast forward to Will Smith entering the Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority. Watch for 6 minutes, until Rip Torn announces the eye exam.)* In this humorous scene, NYPD Det./Sgt. James Edwards (Will Smith) demonstrates thinking outside the box through his unorthodox approach to bureaucracy and crime fighting, and is rewarded by being selected to become Agent Jay.

	*Dead Poets Society: Scene 3. “Understanding Poetry” (Watch for 6 minutes through the end of the classroom scene.)* English professor John Keating (Robin Williams) lights up the faces of his high school students as he challenges the process with his unconventional teaching methods. This heartwarming clip is a favorite of mine because he also models the way, inspires a shared vision, enables them to act, and encourages their hearts by asking each of them, “What will your contribution be?”

	*Star Trek Voyager: Episode 118 "Elogium:" Scene 7. “Aggressive Posturing”(Watch for 4 minutes; stop before the Captain makes a questionable joke with Chakotay.) Captain Katheryn Janeway (Kate Mulgrew) is a favorite role model for me as a steely yet compassionate female leader in a traditionally masculine setting and role. In this scene, she takes risks* in order to uphold organizational values and openly learns from experience in front of her crew. She also enables others to act by welcoming advice from all without appearing weak or indecisive.

	Sahara: Scene 13. “We're Home Free Now” (Watch for 6 minutes until they're playing Steppenwolf, fast-forwarding through the interim scene with Penelope Cruz.) Treasure hunting, former Navy SEALs Dirk Pitt (Matthew McConaughey) and Al Giordino (Steve Zahn) take risks and innovate to escape from the bad guys and survive in this comedy-adventure. When all hope should be lost, they also enable each other to act by maintaining positive attitudes to build teamwork and trust, thereby strengthening each other and fostering collaboration.

In addition to these films, if you find some YouTube clips you'd like to use but can't count on Internet access during your presentation, check out www.youtubekeep.com. This application allows you to download and save any YouTube video in high-quality (iPod compatible) and high-definition (HD) format.

Before presenting any portion of a film, be sure to check with the Motion Picture Association of America for their latest guidance on public performance use of films. The Federal Copyright Act requires such licensing in most non-academic settings. A helpful explanation and resources are posted at: www.mpaa.org/Public_Performance.asp.

Don't let the licensing requirements scare you off; they're easy to address. Movies can make training more applicable and more fun, especially if you mix in plenty of comedies between the more powerful dramas – and serve popcorn!

With nearly 20 years of experience, Michelle Poché Flaherty has held leadership positions in federal, state, and local government. She currently serves as the Organizational Development Manager for the City of Rockville, Maryland.

I’ve had discussions with a colleague in the United Kingdom about extending the study of leadership using the LPI model to Britain. He doesn't believe the items in the LPI related to the practice Encourage the Heart are valid for Britain. Have you or anyone you know done any work in the UK with the LPI? Any info would be helpful.

Let's consider what seems like the underlying question: Are Brits and Yankees the same when it comes to leadership? Context matters, in the same way that people that work in banking may be different from people in sports administration. So perhaps the question isn't whether we are the same or different but, “Does leadership matter to British people? Do the Five Practices and, in particular, the practice Encourage the Heart matter?”

The empirical answer is YES.

It is true that people in the US engage in each of the Five Practices more frequently than do their counterparts in the UK. However, just as it is true on this side of the pond, the more frequently leaders in the UK are reported to be engaging in the Five Practices the more positive and engaged are their constituents (followers). And isn't that the most important question, after all?

Using a sample of over 6,700 respondents from Britain, regression analysis confirms that the Five Practices explain about 20% of the variance on a ten-item scale (referred to as "positive work attitudes"). While Model the Way enters the equation first, Encourage the Heart enters next and makes a statistically significant additional contribution to explained variance.

For the most recent update on the psychometric properties of the LPI, visit The Leadership Challenge website or the Rants and Raves section of this newsletter.

Barry Posner is a Professor of Leadership at the Levey School of Business and Professor of Leadership at Santa Clara University, where he was Dean of the School for 12 years. He is co-author of The Leadership Challenge.

Q: Our CEO is pushing us to provide some objective data showing that the LPI is having an impact on the organization and producing more than just anecdotal success stories among individuals who have taken the LPI. How can our company be assured that the LPI is affecting leadership behaviors within the organization and, as a result, our corporate culture?

A: First of all, anecdotal success stories give voice to real people, with real passion and enthusiasm for The Five Practices®. Enthusiastic reception of the LPI by those taking the assessment is an endorsement that has merit in itself. In addition, the transformation that occurs in how individuals work frequently carries over into their personal lives—a result often reported by those who embrace the principles of The Leadership Challenge.

However, the LPI, which is backed by over 25 years of original research, also lends itself easily to the challenge from your CEO: to provide objective data that demonstrates the change occurring in your organization's culture.

In order to document the changes that the LPI produces in leadership behaviors of individuals as well as across the organization, there are several requirements:

The use of the LPI tools must be accompanied by training, coaching, or debriefing to help ensure that the insight revealed in the LPI report is effectively assimilated by the leader and applied day-to-day back on the job. The organization must have a plan both for effectively presenting the LPI and for maintaining a continued focus on The Five Practices®.
Creating culture change requires ongoing reinforcement of how The Five Practices® reflect and affirm the stated values of the organization, with accompanying language to guide everyone's leadership behaviors.
Clear results can be evidenced most effectively when a re-test of the LPI is given approximately 9-12 months after the first administration.
The individual LPI comparison report, called The Five Practices® Comparative Data Report, will indicate changes that have taken place in one leader's practices and leadership behaviors over time. This report is available via LPI Online or as part of the LPI Scoring software.
Custom Group LPI Comparison reports—e.g., Group Percentile Ranking Graph, Group Leadership Behaviors Ranking Analysis, and The Five Practices® Group Comparative Data reports—are additional reporting tools that can objectively and quantifiably demonstrate the impact of changes in the leadership behaviors of individuals, in the organization as a whole, or in the leadership behaviors of individual teams within an organization. Many companies have used Custom Group LPI reports quite effectively to document marked change in leadership behaviors.

Bottom line, your CEO's request is not unreasonable. In fact, it represents a challenge that your leadership development team can welcome—especially when they know there is a plan in place for implementing the LPI with vision and commitment to long-term organizational change.

Fine Points Professionals is The Leadership Challenge® Authorized Service Center, experts in workshop and assessment administration, and a Platinum Sponsor of last month's Forum 2009 in Chicago. Samples of the Custom Group LPI Reports mentioned in this article are provided by Fine Points Professionals and can be found at www.finepointsprofessionals.com. For additional information or questions about these reports, please contact clientcare@finepointspro.com or 513.793.9144.

I recently used the LPI with a group of 25 people. Because this was an introduction to The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®, they took the LPI Self. When compared to the normative data, the vast majority of the group fell in the "low" or "mid” range. As I am quite familiar with normative data and various 360 tools, I found it unusual to see so many folks fall in the “low” range. To what might this be attributed?

Although there is no known reason why the LPI scores from your group fell predominately in the low to moderate range, there is some good news in this somewhat unusual outcome. These scores suggest that many in your group could realize significant improvement in their effectiveness as leaders if they are committed to such an effort. The LPI data is quite clear: effective leadership behaviors can be learned and practiced by anyone dedicated to becoming a more effective leader. Based on over 25 years of research, we know that the 30 leadership behaviors that are measured in the LPI apply to any leader at any level in any organization. And the more frequently leaders engage in each of these leadership behaviors, the more effective they are—both personally and organizationally. In this way, you have discovered a group of potential leaders who could benefit from exploring more deeply the Five Practices and taking on the challenge of leadership.

Can the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) dimensional scores be aggregated into one numeric score without violating the validity of the instrument? I have only seen dimensional scores used in studies for comparisons, but never an aggregate.

A number of researchers have combined The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® into a single measure and labeled it Transformational Leadership. Generally, researchers have found this single measure to have acceptable psychometric properties and significantly correlate with positive individual and organizational outcomes. (Abstracts of these studies, among many others, can be found in the research section of The Leadership Challenge® website

From an empirical perspective, however, when The Five Practices are merged into a single measure much of the particular variance—regarding which practice or individual leadership behavior in a given situation is having the most impact—is lost. Similarly, from a developmental or educational perspective it is more difficult to teach "Transformational Leadership" as an overall concept versus The Five Practices.

Barry Z. Pozner is Dean of the Leavey School of Business and Professor of Leadership at Santa Clara University where he has received numerous teaching and innovation awards. He is co-author of The Leadership Challenge.

I have always thought that the key to successful leadership is influence, not authority. Do you agree?

The answer to that question, it seems to me, lies in whether the goal is to get others to work from a place of compliance or from a place of commitment. I believe that is the difference between influential leadership and authoritative leadership. Working within an influential leadership model, committed employees will give up discretionary time to solve problems, serve customers, and think creatively. On the other hand, people working under authoritative leadership—or ‘command and control', as we more commonly know it—will work to achieve compliance, doing only what needs to be done to get by.

It is well documented that organizations perform better when all employees work collaboratively across organizational lines, and are allowed to voice their opinions and have healthy open discussions. Leaders who are great at listening to diverse opinions and can facilitate teams in moving toward solutions—without ‘telling' team members what to do—are leaders of influence that can create positive working environments, remove organizational obstacles, and provide tools employees need to perform their jobs effectively. Influential leaders create environments that are:

Trusting
Collaborative
Open
Sharing

In return, employees will use their talents and skills to achieve the mission and vision of the organization. This is especially true of younger workers coming into the workforce today who do not respond well to ‘command and control” leaders or to those who merely exert their authority. They want freedom and control over their areas of responsibility and to use their talents and skills to solve problems. Gen X and Gen Y are motivated through teamwork, with fewer rules and goals. What they don't want is to be micro- managed by a leader constantly telling them what to do and how to do it. Authoritative leaders who attempt to control the organization and the people who work in it will find that employees disengage and are less committed to helping the organization achieve its goals. Leading from a place of authority does not create the trusting environment required for success. Instead it often leads to second-guessing, potential hidden agendas, and a less productive workforce.

Effective leaders help people understand how their contributions fit into the broader vision and inspire the team to achieve the greater good of the organization. Inspiration is not mandated, dictated or driven by authority. It is achieved by enlisting others, touching the hearts of employees while engaging their brains—through the influence of leaders.

While authoritative leadership only has room for one leader, influential leadership allows the leader in everyone to be brought forward. In today's fast-paced, rapidly changing environment, everyone has to be a leader.

Recently, Harvard Business Review published an article about research conducted at INSEAD on 360-degree evaluations (specifically, the Global Executive Leadership Inventory). The results show that women tend to score better than men in almost every leadership category, except for Envisioning, and the article went on to offer three theories as possible explanations: 1) women use a different process for shaping the future, 2) women don't feel it is appropriate to use vague ideas when planning for the future, or 3) women may not see the value in a vision. What do you think of this? What does the LPI data tell you?
While the battle between the genders continues to range on, let me go out on a limb here and make one of those "blinding flashes of the obvious" statements like: males and females have different strengths, in general. The same can be said for tall people and short people. And green people and purple people—even Jim Kouzes and I—have different strengths—in general.

There is no formula for explaining 100 percent of the variance around leadership effectiveness, including our own Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®. What we've generally found is that effective leaders are the ones who can engage most in The Five Practices—and this is independent of gender (indeed of a whole range of demographic and organizational factors).

For example, our own recent analysis of LPI data reveals statistically significant differences between males and females, but ones that may have little practical significance. A comparison of 7400 men with 4600 women on the LPI-Self found no differences on the leadership practices of Challenging and Inspiring (this latter finding is in direct contradiction to the HBR-reported study). Females reported engaging in Modeling, Enabling and Encouraging more than their male counterparts empirically. But consider what the practical implications of those differences really mean (on Modeling for females, 45.95; for males, 45.24). The scores from female observers about their leaders are empirically higher than those of male observers but is this because of real differences in the behavior of their leaders or a methodological artifact that females give higher scores than do males of other people?

We also just completed a four-year long study of leadership development involving college students. In their first year, females and males reported no difference in their practice of Inspiring, Enabling and Encouraging. Males viewed themselves as more engaged in Modeling than females, while females viewed themselves as engaged more in Challenging than their male counterparts. However, by the time these same students were in their senior year, there were no statistically significant differences between their engagement as leaders, based upon gender. As a side note, this study showed that the leadership development intervention for all of these first-year students resulted in a statistically significant increase in their self-reported leadership practices by the time they were seniors.

So, if gender makes a difference (?), the real point is that in developing effective leaders we must pay a great deal of attention and create a deep understanding of the strengths and areas of improvement necessary for each person—as an individual—to unleash and enhance his or her existing talents.

Barry Z. Pozner is Dean of the Leavey School of Business and Professor of Leadership at Santa Clara University where he has received numerous teaching and innovation awards. He is co-author of The Leadership Challenge and A Leader's Legacy.
Q: "The Leadership Challenge is among the most comprehensive, clear, and practical books on leadership I have ever read. Through many readings, I have discovered aspects of leadership I had never considered before as well as those I'd only imagined or considered as abstract perceptions. However, there is still one factor that inhibits me from fully engaging in the leadership challenge: my sense of being an ordinary person—no more or less intelligent than others—always makes me ask, why should anyone follow me? Why should others listen to my ideas when they have their own mind to listen to? Why should I envision a future for others, if this will lead them to follow my path instead of a path of their own design?"
A: Two quick thoughts on your question. First, leadership has to start somewhere, and with someone. So, why not with you and your ideas? If you have the courage, the sense of direction, and the internal drive and motivation to achieve results, why not begin the journey by setting an example (leading the way)? The Leadership Challenge, after all, is fundamentally about how ordinary people exercise leadership to get extraordinary things done by establishing the foundation of credibility and then putting The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® into action each and every day.

Second, leadership is not all about the leader's vision. Of course, an essential part of effective leadership is the ability to demonstrate—in action and words—that the vision you have for the future is where others want to go as well. But getting there takes more than an individual leader and more than just a single idea or dream. Consider that you may get something started—a change initiative, for example, that is rooted in your personal passion and credibility. Based upon input, involvement, and feedback from others, what might have begun as "your idea" becomes "our idea." The future you may have first envisioned has no doubt morphed into a shared vision that incorporates the dreams and aspirations of others, which is precisely how leaders, in the final analysis, turn followers into leaders themselves.

If you are inclined to explore this issue further, you also may find reading A Leader's Legacy helpful. In this book, my co-author, Jim Kouzes, and I explore a number of topics, including the very notion of how leadership is not just about one leader's vision, why it takes courage to “make a life,” how to liberate the leader in everyone, and ultimately, how the legacy you leave is the life you lead.
"Inspiring—just what exactly does that mean"

Many people seek the answer to this question. And while we know people expect their leaders to be inspiring, there is a great deal of confusion about the subject and what it really means.

For example, this question took on new interest during the 2008 Presidential campaign. Covering Barak Obama's grand speeches about change, reporters constantly referred to how inspiring he was. Although a number of followers were tremendously excited about what an Obama-presidency could become, he also had critics who referred to him as a Messiah-wannabe. They saw him as nothing more than empty suit of words and were not moved. On the other hand, his opponent, John McCain, was seen by many as boring with many news commentators noting that his nomination acceptance speech was the worst ever given. By the same token, there were millions watching his speech who would tell you that his account of his time in captivity and how it shaped his love for country was one of the most inspiring moments they had ever witnessed.

Yes, partisan politics played a role in these examples. But politics alone doesn't explain the difference in perception.

Over the years, I have learned a few things about this topic and hope that these insights might be helpful in answering this question. While neither perfect nor all-encompassing, these observations have proven to be consistently true in my experience.
1. More often than not, people are inspired by another's ideas or ideals, not just by the person. Martin Luther King's vision of equality and freedom; John F. Kennedy's promise of a new generation, the Peace Corp, the moon mission; and Reagan's almost biblical City on a Hill are examples of spoken ideas and ideals. Although less publicized, Mother Theresa's daily actions in serving the poor spoke volumes about her ideals and inspired millions.
  
  As you examine your own ability to be inspiring, take a look at your ideas and ideals. What do you believe in that others find exciting or moving? In today's world of self-centered arrogance, solid character and role modeling are very inspiring to many people.
2. You will never be equally inspiring to all people. To Christians, Billy Graham has been very inspiring throughout his career. But, I doubt if he has touched as many non-Christians. The same can be said about Michelle Rhee, the chancellor who is revolutionizing the Washington, DC public school system. She is seen by many as a lightning rod of hope and inspiration; to others she is an over-controlling, pending disaster.
  
  As a leader, you must take stands on issues based on your values and beliefs. There will always be those who disagree with your positions, and trying to convince others that your values are right and theirs are not is usually a losing battle. Instead, others generally view someone as inspiring based not on a logical analysis of facts but on how they feel about that person's ideas and ideals, values and beliefs.
3. Finally, passion plays a role. It is hard to be inspiring to others about topics you care little about. You just seem to know that Steven Jobs is passionate about “cool and imaginative stuff” and that Howard Schultz is passionate about his Starbuck's coffee. We become inspired by people who truly love what they do.
  
  When leaders inspire others they form an emotional connection. Rather than trying to change how people feel, leaders reflect back the deeply-held needs and aspirations of others and demonstrate how those needs and aspirations can be met.
  
  When you demonstrate a passion for the values, dreams, and ideals that others hold dear, they will recognize your ideas—and ultimately you, as a leader—as inspiring, too.
Good luck.

Steve Coats, one of the leading authorities on The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®, is a managing partner and co-owner of International Leadership Associates, a leadership development education and consulting firm. For nearly twenty years, he has taught, coached, and consulted with executives and all levels of managers in several countries around the world. He can be reached at stevec@i-lead.com.

Can you provide some examples of an effective leadership role in an environment of competing priorities and continuously growing customer demands?

What a great topic!

First, let's list some of the challenges most leaders face when trying to balance priorities and increasingly demanding customers.
1. In many organizations we have more than one line of business and often prefer to focus on what's “hot” or new, rather than what is tried and true. However, by taking our eye off the ball in our core business, we risk creating another fireball issue.
2. Leaders are faced with a constant barrage of new issues (e.g., financial, technological, HR). They pop up every day. Knowing how each of these will affect our organization and what to do about them is a huge challenge.
3. Customers don't know or care that you are struggling with internal issues. They just know that either their needs are or are not being met. Their expectations are increasing all the time and they expect you to deliver flawless products and services 24/7/365! They expect you to bring them the next and newest product or service before they know they need it.
Let's face it. This leadership gig is exhausting!

So what can we do? Well, I would suggest we start with EMPOWERMENT, INNOVATION and CHEERLEADING

EMPOWERMENT

Let's stop thinking that this is our problem alone. As leaders we need to share our concerns and problems in a way that allows others to jump in and help solve them. The better we get at empowering our people, the closer we bring the problems to a place where they can be solved. We need to push planning down a level and let our front line folks get involved. When we do that, we have fully involved the people who are the first to know what is coming and who have the solutions at their finger tips. Instead of saying, “If I was in charge I would fix this problem” they say “If I don't fix this problem, we are not going to reach our service goals.” When it comes to managing all the different priorities in the business we can leave each issue, problem or part of the business in the hands of a capable team. The day-to-day operations will be taken care of by self-managed teams. In terms of anticipating new issues and being ready to take advantage of new opportunities, these teams will be best able to recognize these and plan for them. You can relax if these teams report to you so that you are not responsible for finding all the issues and opportunities, only for creating an environment where others will. You need to enable the people around you.

INNOVATION

If you want to know about customer demands and ensure you are on top of the latest trends, just ask the folks who work alongside the customers. They know what is going on. If their plans involve feeding information about new products and services into the organization, they will do it. Suddenly you are a market leader just by listening to your front line people.

Your role as a leader is to create the environment where this can happen. You can breathe a sigh of relief when you do not have to create the next great innovation. You do, however, have an important role to play in making this happen. You are the one who will help to create the environment where others can innovate. You do this by making sure that it is okay to take risks, to try new things and to learn from mistakes. Watch how you react when you hear about a new product or service failure. Do you ask, “What can we learn from this?” Do you make people feel safe when they are trying new things? This is all about the practice of “Challenging the Process.”

CHEERLEADING

Depending on your personality, this might be the toughest job of all, but it is a crucial role for leaders. It combines “Inspire a Shared Vision” and “Encourage the Heart” and requires that we support the empowered, innovative team by shouting out the team cheer and telling them how great they are. Let's face it, you want them to innovate in such a way that they score a touchdown as often as possible. You want them to find the energy to get back up after a rough go and keep trying. It's your job to cheer them on and keep them going.

So it seems like our favorite Five Practices have a great fit with the never ending grind of competing priorities and increasing customer demands. If we lead well, we can create an environment where these issues can be tackled by many talented people and solved by the great teams we support as they drive forward.

Kelly Ann McKnight, a Master Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge Workshop, is principal of Stone Ridge Consulting and an associate of The Performance Group where she focuses on bringing innovative training and coaching tools in leadership and management development, behavioral profiling, and team building to her clients. She can be reached at www.leadershipjourney.ca.

I believe it is a good idea to have upper-level leadership experience The Leadership Challenge before rolling it out to others in the organization. In general, most senior leaders with whom I work do not feel they need leadership development and want to implement it for lower-level management staff only. How have you gained commitment from such senior leaders when this happens?

This is a great question as we, too, have faced this issue with many of the organizations to whom we have introduced The Leadership Challenge. To be sure, organizations that have recognized the importance of having executive and upper-level management experience The Leadership Challenge® Workshop and learn the value of putting The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® into more consistent use have been more successful at bringing aspiring leaders at lower levels of the corporate ladder up-to-speed. When this is not the case, one of the most common evaluation comments we see after a workshop is completed often runs something like "this is great information but my boss should really be learning these skills." Also during workshops, participating leaders often talk about what "they" should be doing-referring, of course, to someone else at a higher management or executive level.

Because we always must recognize that we can only be responsible and control our own behavior, our workshop discussions always get redirected so that the 'they' is seen, in fact, as 'we.' To whatever your sphere of influence, to the people on your team, or to your direct reports, you are the person to whom they look to provide leadership. All of these we vs. they comments can be minimized with support from senior executives and by holding even the most C-level leaders accountable for learning the same skills that aspiring leaders everywhere else in the organization are being required to learn. This creates far greater commitment from all to The Five Practices.

So while the reality may be that not all upper level executives see the need to go first, there are many other ways to gain their support and get them involved:

1. Ask one of the most senior-level leaders to kick off the workshop. Even if you have to brief him or her on what to say, it is inevitable that the kick-off executive will see that more will need to be learned.

2. Provide upper level executives with a copy of The Leadership Challenge book. Or consider purchasing a copy of the 16-page summary, "The Five Practices Article", that provides an overview of what The Leadership Challenge is all about.

More often than not, when people read this brief introduction, they want to know more. They realize this model is not about learning something completely new. Rather, it is about helping leaders recognize their 'personal best' leadership experiences from the past and learning to consciously incorporate The Five Practices behaviors in order to create similar 'personal best' experiences in the future.

3. Gain the support of one champion for each workshop that can share their personal experience with each of The Five Practices as it is being taught.

We tried this recently in two pilot workshops with great success. Although we normally prefer to facilitate a workshop off site so participants do not get pulled back into the day-to-day work during breaks and lunch, the organization wanted to hold the workshop in their on-site training room. As it turned out, this on-site training worked well because it allowed our Champion the flexibility to drop by at specific points during the workshop to share stories of success as well as failures. For example, one executive recently shared the results of his attempt to force his vision down the throats of his constituents without considering their input and making it a shared vision. This was very powerful and led the whole organization to question their current vision and reassess whether it was truly shared.

In order for champions to share what they know about what one of The Five Practices means, they have to know what they are talking about. And to that end, they read and think about the practice which, essentially, achieves the goal of exposing them to The Leadership Challenge.

This organization since has asked that another workshop (albeit a shortened version of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop) be presented to senior-level executives. Now that it is their idea, it will take on a whole new meaning. Executives will want to attend-not because they have to learn new leadership skills but because they see the value.

One of the reasons that the value of The Leadership Challenge is more evident is because we also have successfully integrated a follow-through process on commitments and goals.
- We used the 'Friday 5s' follow-through process which helped hold participants accountable for putting commitments into practice. We know that it takes practice to change behavior and this process got results that can be seen and measured. Managers of the participants had to learn about what The Five Practices were all about, at least enough to understand what people had committed to. That meant they also had to educate themselves.
- The workshop facilitators became on-line coaches for the Friday 5s follow-through process so they could offer suggestions, recommendations, and encouragement that reinforced teaching points originally presented in the workshop.
- Combined, these steps provided real change in behavior, processes are being challenged, and the workforce is more engaged and encouraged. And with word spreading about the results, leaders want to attend an upcoming Leadership Challenge® Workshop, including the executives.
4. Finally, gain support from senior leadership to attend the graduation event and present certificates. We use the process described in the Facilitator Guide, including bombarding each recipient with positive affirmations. When executives see this positive experience, they are motivated to attend other events. Moreover, each participant shares one of their commitment goals and makes a public statement about the value of the workshop. This also demonstrates to executives the workshop's value in generating commitment to achieving results.

These are a few of the ways that we all can work to involve senior-level executives-even those reluctant to see the value in this type of workshop training.

Focus on allies, not resisters. They learn about The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®. And when the experience creates interest and excitement-when it becomes their idea-they will get on board.

Stephen Hoel is president of Diversity Leadership Consultants and a Master Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop. Experienced in both operations management and human resources with Walt Disney World Resort, Hilton, Marriott and other independent hotel and restaurant organizations, he has designed and delivered leadership and team interventions and multicultural leadership development initiatives. He can be reached at shoel13@aol.com.

I'm curious about the data that is used when comparing responses from current users of the various LPI instruments vs. norms established from others. For example, are results from the LPI-Self instrument plotted against a LPI-Self normative database? Are results from mangers plotted against data collected from managers? Or is the normative database used for comparative purposes a collection of all responses from leaders and observers?

That is an excellent question and one that we have been recently discussing as the quantity of responses we now have gathered into our database has grown substantially and new ways of slicing-and-dicing the data is now possible. However at this time, we do not break out leaders and observers into separate data segments against which direct comparisons can be made (e.g., self responses vs. self/leader data). Currently we also do not segment response data from observers based on their relationship to the principle LPI participant. Right now, we have no specific normative databases for managers, coworkers, etc. Rather, all responses to the Observer instrument are aggregated.

Based on the amount of data we now have, there is a potential opportunity to implement such a change in the LPI Online that would allow results to be plotted in a more specific way. That may be considered as a future enhancement to the capabilities offered through the site. We would be unable, however, to fine-tune the data to this same degree for responses processed from paper submissions.

Barry Z. Posner is Dean of the Leavey School of Business and Professor of Leadership at Santa Clara University where he has received numerous teaching and innovation awards. He is co-author of The Leadership Challenge.

I am designing a leadership course for MBA students. We are considering designing it around The Leadership Challenge. I would like suggestions for specific case studies which illustrate one or more of The Five Practices to use in our curriculum.

The world is brimming with cases suitable for such a course. Some cases we study in conjunction with The Five Practices at Darden's executive education program include: Warner Cable, which may be more of a negative example of leadership styles, in some ways, but always generates very good discussion; Peter Browning at Continental White Cap which addresses evolutionary organizational change; and Philip Justus at eBay Germany which features good cross-cultural and high tech aspects. John Smithers at Sigtek focuses on leading change from the middle, in a not very successful Six Sigma implementation, that can be examined and discussed using the Five Practices even if they were not present (e.g., where did John Smithers fall short?).

Examples of cases that I use in my elective course at Darden all demonstrate at least some of the Practices: Phil Jackson and the Chicago Bulls; Louis Gerstner and Lotus Development Corporation (a takeover scenario); and Play (a multimedia case about a small creativity consulting firm). Another Darden case worth previewing is the Chicago Park District, which is about very large scale organizational change in a failing public organization.

And finally, a case from Thunderbird: Ricardo Semler at Semco offers a very compelling story of drastic organizational change, covering all Five Practices.

Joseph W. Harder Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business. His research interests include distributive and procedural justice in organizations, the effects of perceived injustice on individual performance, determinants of individual and organizational performance, pay-for-performance systems, and perceptions and effects of leadership. Harder has taught executive education in the U.S., Asia, Europe, Central, and South America.

I just finished reading your fantastic book and have a couple of questions. When an organization will not change, do leaders leave in order to better themselves? Do you just walk away and let them sink? The other question I have concerns the small group of individuals who will not cooperate in achieving the group's goals, or do not have the necessary skills—and they will neither learn them nor change their behavior. What do you do, fire them?

Jim Kouzes: You ask some terrific questions. Permit me to briefly respond to each:

"When an organization will not change, do leaders leave in order to better themselves? Do you just walk away and let them sink?"

Our research indicates very clearly that "personal values drive commitment." When a leader's personal values are highly consonant with the values of the organization in which they work, then the leader is more committed, more satisfied, more productive, more willing to stick around when times get tough, etc. But when personal values are not consonant with the organization's values, then the opposite is true. People will continue to stick around if the incentives are great enough, but only until they can find another job in an organization where the values are more congruent. This being the case, it would seem to me that sticking around benefits neither the person nor the organization. Also, I am not so sure that organizations will "sink" with the loss of one leader. It might, but I'm not sure that the loss of any one leader will cause the entire organization to fail. One could argue that the constant conflict and tension might do even more damage to the person and the organization.

"The other question I have concerns the small group of individuals who will not cooperate in achieving the group's goals, or do not have the necessary skills-and they will neither learn them nor change their behavior. What do you do, fire them?"

Firing employees is always a last resort and never the first intervention a leader should make. I don't have nearly enough data to respond fully to this question but the first thing I would do as a leader would be to ask "Why aren't people cooperating to achieve group goals?" An absence of cooperation on group goals suggests that people don't see how the group goals are in their best interests? Why is this the case? I could list many other questions I would want to ask before "firing" would become an option, and that would be my recommendation in this case. Collecting valid and useful information would be the first step I would take.

And the same is true for the question, "Why don't they want to develop the necessary skills or change their behavior?"

Is this really a skills issue—that is, could people do what is required if their lives depended on it? If they can, then it is likely not a skills issue but something else. What is the root cause here? It's just inconsistent with what we know about human motivation for people not to want to learn new things IF they can see how it will benefit them. So, I am left with more questions than answers. Before I conclude that people should be fired, I'd spend at least an hour or two in one-on-ones with each person involved, simply asking questions to try to understand what is going on, why they are working here, what their aspirations are, what recommendations they would have for improvement, what they need to do the very best they can do, etc. With that kind of information, I think I'd be better able to make an informed choice about what kind of action was required.

Thanks again for your provocative questions. We greatly appreciate it, and we wish you all the best.

Jim Kouzes is the co-author of the best-selling The Leadership Challenge and A Leader's Legacy.
I consider The Leadership Challenge the most important and concise book ever written about leadership. In fact, it's my 'Leadership Bible'.

I've sensed increasing difficulties among my executive coachees regarding the "loneliness of power" aspects of the leadership role. Obviously the coaching process has proven quite helpful to these executives. And although the issue has been touched on by Kouzes and Posner in the 4th edition (on pages 319 and 328), I'm still investigating how to address the burdens of leadership issue and support my coaching clients more effectively.

Top management leaders are human beings, but they frequently feel as if they are expected to act as "super-humans" without flaws. I'd duly appreciate some thoughts from the authors on this issue and suggested resources for further investigation.

Jim Kouzes: Thank you for the question. You remind me of a comment made by Professor Ichak Adizes in a keynote he delivered to the Central and East European Management Development Association last year in Istanbul, Turkey. In commenting on the culture of individualism that permeates much of business, he said, "Individualism fosters loneliness-and not only at the top. It permeates, by and large, all the managerial ranks." What I take away from Ichak's comment is that the feeling of "loneliness at the top" is rooted in the notion that leaders are somehow separate and apart from others. That they must-because they are the leaders-act alone. They must climb to the top of the mountain, become inspired by some divine inspiration, and then descend from the heights to deliver the Word to the people. There's an assumption that leadership is a solo act, so leaders begin to believe that they must think alone, decide alone, and act alone.

But nothing is further from the truth. Leadership is a relationship. Exemplary leadership requires an extraordinary level of trust and a high level of collaboration. This attitude is best represented by Don Bennett, the first amputee to climb Mt. Ranier. That's 14,410 feet on one leg! When I asked Don the question, "What is the most important lesson you learned in climbing Mt. Ranier?" he responded, "You can't do it alone." Here was a guy who had just done something no one else had accomplished, and yet he believed the key to success was teamwork. It seems to me that the place to start with your clients is to coach them in the importance of building trusting relationships and the criticality of learning to collaborate, even on those decisions they think they have to make on their own. Having at least one trusted advisor, such as you, is a great start.

As to the expectation to be "super-humans," perhaps what is most needed is the courage to be simply human. As Barry Posner and I wrote in our book, A Leader's Legacy, anyone who's ever been in a leadership role quickly learns that you're squeezed between other's lofty expectations and your own personal limitations. You realize that while others want you to be of impeccable character, you're not always without fault. You learn that you can't see around every corner, and even if you know your way forward everyone may not end up at the same destination, let alone be on time. You discover that despite your best efforts to introduce brilliant innovations, most of them don't succeed. You find that you sometimes get angry and short, and that you don't always listen carefully to what others have to say. You're reminded that you don't always treat everyone with dignity and respect. You recognize that others deserve more credit than they get, and that you've failed to say "thank you." You know that sometimes you get, and take, more credit than you deserve.

In other words, you realize that you're human.

The courage to be human is the courage to be humble. It takes a lot of courage to admit that you aren't always right, that you can't always anticipate every possibility, that you can't envision every future, that you can't solve every problem, that you can't control every variable, that you aren't always congenial, that you make mistakes, and that you are, well, human. It takes courage to admit all these things to others, but it may take even more courage to admit them to ourselves. If you can find the humility to do that, however, you invite others into a courageous conversation. When you let down your guard and open yourself up to others, you invite them to join you in creating something that you alone could not create. When you become more modest and unpretentious, others have the chance themselves to become visible and noticed.

Jim Kouzes is the co-author of the best-selling, The Leadership Challenge, and A Leader's Legacy.
How do I use the Leadership Practices Inventory assessment instrument in determining employee promotions?

Having been a Director of Human Resources for a large corporation for several years, I understand the challenge of promotional decisions and the desire to have a "tool" to assist the process. However, the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) was developed and has been used as a personal development tool-and, specifically, not for recruiting or promotional decisions. In fact, to protect the credibility and integrity of the instrument, we only provide LPI results to the individual receiving personal feedback. It is then up to each individual to determine with whom the results should be shared. Only with an employee's permission have we provided a copy of LPI results to a boss or HR Manager.

If individual respondents thought LPI feedback would be used to determine who received job promotions and who did not, there is the likelihood that the results would be skewed either positively or negatively. In addition, speaking technically, while we can prove that people who practice the Five Practices more frequently produce better results than those who practice them less frequently, the LPI has not been validated as a selection or promotional tool.

I heartily endorse using demonstrated leadership competency in the promotability equation and would use job-related metrics to make that determination. Start with business results, which are consistently higher under good leadership. Then look at the credibility of the managers in question: How trustworthy are they? Do they consistently do what they say they will do? Do they treat people with dignity and respect, especially direct reports? Are their direct reports energized by a clear, uplifting vision of what they are striving to be and achieve? Are other people drawn to work with a particular manager or working to get a transfer? How is turnover, and what is being said in exit interviews? Do these managers provide promising folks to the rest of the organization?

These are examples of what is measurable, if you invest the time to look. Most 360-degree tools that I am familiar with are designed to help managers recognize their strengths and opportunities for improvement in the areas I've mentioned above. What managers do with the feedback, over time, will either enhance or limit their promotability.

Steve Houchin, owner and Managing Partner of International Leadership Associates, has presented the Leadership Challenge Workshop® to mid-level and senior executives in corporations around the country for over 15 years. He can be reached at shouchin@i-lead.com.

I work at a university in a smaller department. We have a dean and associate dean who have markedly different leadership styles. The dean is quite laissez-faire, while the assistant dean is command-and-control. The dean says "go ahead" on an idea and the assistant later says "no." This has resulted in faculty and staff being quite confused and discouraged. Do you have any advice for working with these two styles?

As a former academic, I know this story all too well. What you have described as "working with two conflicting leadership styles" may require a different framing story—how we view a situation or the story we tell ourselves.

The new story I would suggest is "How can I get my idea approved." My experience suggests that there are two choices here. Both involve working with the system rather than remaining "confused and discouraged."

Your first choice involves soliciting the support of your Chairperson for your ideas. Department chairs routinely have more contact and connection with deans and associate deans and, as your ally and advocate, may be able to frame your idea differently so that it is viewed as beneficial to the greater good of the department or college.

The second approach (the one I believe to be more fruitful long-term) is to get to know your associate dean's story. What you describe as conflicting leadership styles is more a systemic issue: the Dean playing the role of the "good cop" to the Associate Dean that has been hired to be the "deal-breaker"-the one that raises the red flags on new ideas or approaches. So, Challenge the Process!

As a specialist in adult communication and storytelling, I have developed a framework that considers My Story, Your Story, and Our Story. To Challenge the Process, you will need to suspend your story to find out your Associate Dean's story. Find out what motivates and inspires and frame your ideas in those terms. Discover what data he or she selects and what assumptions and conclusions are drawn. Find out what is likely to generate a no response and what might garner a yes. As you listen, you can begin crafting the Our Story-a blending together of your story as well as the Assistant Dean's. This means you have to build a relationship. And when you do this, you just might find that you are modeling the way for your colleagues.

Art Cross, Ph.D., a former academic in the field of adult communication, now heads Cross Learning Associates, a consulting practice that focuses on Leadership (based on the principles of The Leadership Challenge), Art of Dialogue, Storytelling, and Journaling. He can be reached at crosslearn@aol.com.

During the discussion of Model the Way, the conversation often turns to the distinctions between one's own values, the shared values of the group or the organization, and the Characteristics of Admired Leaders. How are they the same? How are they different? Why is it important to be paying attention to all three?

Borrowing from a favorite technique of Jim and Barry's, let's start with a look at definitions. Funk and Wagnall's Dictionary defines a value as "something regarded as desirable, worthy, or right; as a belief, standard, or moral precept." A characteristic, on the other hand, is defined as "a distinctive feature or trait."

Already a subtle difference is beginning to emerge. A value is about belief-something I, or we, choose-while a characteristic is an attribute, something that typifies the subject. In this case, the 'subject' is a Leader.
Of course, in the Characteristics of Admired Leaders research, people select the attributes they look for in leaders they'd willing follow, so there is a relationship between our values and what we admire. Hmmn…..
Values
OK, let's go back to values: 'yours' and 'ours'. Personal values are those core precepts and beliefs that you hold dear. You decide what they are. You use them to guide your decisions and your actions-wherever you are and in whatever context you find yourself. As Noel Tichy frames the conversation, your personal values speak to the question, "Who am I?"

Shared values hold the same place for the group: in the ideal scenario, guiding all business and organizational decisions whatever the context. With shared values, we decide through dialogue and consensus at the relevant structural 'levels' of the group or organization. Shared values speak to the question, "Who are we?"

Two different questions: one personal, one for the group. Hopefully the answers offer enough 'overlap and fit' that we, as individuals, are comfortable in the organization and the organization is confident in us. Both are important.

Research
The research methodology for the Characteristics of Admired Leaders offers another link between values, characteristics, and attributes: what we see is that the decision about what attributes to emulate has already been made for us, by thousands and thousands of people, validated again and again by workshop groups time after time. People, based on their personal set of beliefs and experience, choose seven characteristics they look for if they are to willingly follow someone. Then the results of those choices are tabulated and we look for those characteristics that were chosen by at least 50% of the individuals. No discussion, no consensus… rather a search for what will inspire "followership" in the most people.

As it turns out, the characteristics that rise to the top are important to many more than 50% of the people who have responded. In the most recent edition of The Leadership Challenge, 89% of research participants identified 'honesty' among the most important attributes of a leader, 'forward looking' was cited by 71%, 'inspiring' by 69%, and 'competent' by 68%. 'Intelligent' and 'fair-minded' ranked 48% and 39%, respectively.

So, it begins to look like the Characteristics of Admired Leaders research speaks to yet another question, "Where is the biggest bang for your leadership buck?" Or as I often think of it, if you want people to join with you willingly, the "price of entry" for leadership is that you must demonstrate the top four characteristics that are consistently chosen by the highest percentage of people.

Personal values . . . define you as a credible leader. Shared values … set the direction for the business decisions we make. Characteristics of Admired Leaders … inspire others to believe in us, hear us out, and follow our lead. Each is distinct, yet related, and all are critical components when we ask ourselves how we want to Model the Way.

Sharon Landes, a Master Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop, has been working with individuals and organizations around the world for over 25 years to help them clarify their core values and beliefs, develop their leadership, work effectively in teams, and advance their communication and relationship-building skills. Currently based in Berkeley, she can be reached at shlandes@comcast.net.

Is there a perfect leadership or management style? Or is it situational?

First, I am always careful to distinguish between management and leadership. Although we always strive for a balance of strong management and strong leadership to achieve success, they are different. While management focuses on tactical processes such as budgeting, reporting, and managing projects, leaders focus on business results through, or with, people. Given this distinction, I will focus my comments on leadership.

The one thing that great leaders have in common is the use of The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® researched by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner in The Leadership Challenge: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart. Even when using these practices, however, leaders' styles can be very different and yet still be equally as effective. So while there are commonalities among those who lead well, there is no single leadership style that is more effective than another.

Leadership is definitely situational. In order to have outstanding business results, a leader must be able to respond to the needs of constituents. Rather than treating others as the leader wants to be treated, a practiced leader may follow the advice of Dr. Tony Alessandra and "treat others as they want to be treated."

Whether working with a peer, a boss, or a direct report, a leader must adapt-providing more information and coaching to help newer direct reports achieve their goals while providing more challenge to those more experienced, for example. Or, aligning work with what is valued by individuals and the organization. "People see the benefit of behavior that is aligned with cherished values," Kouzes and Posner advise. Although it would be impractical to pursue and incorporate every individual, a successful leader garners commitment from each member of the team by establishing common values that are important to all.

When considering the question of whether there is a perfect leadership style, I also think about those that do NOT work. The command-and-control style is the most notable example. While autocratic leaders can have integrity with their values, provide a vision, challenge processes, and give people the tools for growth, they can lack something that the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) found is necessary for success: affection or warmth. Cited in Encouraging the Heart by Kouzes and Posner, this CCL research shows that warmth is a key characteristic of high-performing leaders. Unfortunately, this fifth practice of leadership is often overlooked by those employing a command-and-control style, but is essential to the success of both leaders and their organizations.

While there is no one "perfect" leadership style, The Five Practices provides a solid framework for leaders to perfect a leadership style that works best for them as individuals and also for their constituents.

Renee Harnessis president of the Meridian Leadership Center and a Master Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge® and Leadership Practices Inventory® Workshops. She has led organization development, training and effectiveness initiatives in corporations and academia for over 14 years. She can be reached via e-mail at renee@www.meridianleadershipcenter.com.

Recently, I was conducting a workshop for a particular department in a large corporation. Only a few minutes into the program, the department head made the statement "360-Feedback doesn't work-period." How do I respond to such a comment?

In a recent article in Talent Management magazine, Kenneth M. Nowack, Ph.D., offered reasons "Why 360-Feedback Doesn't Work." Nowack contends that there is a lack of research confirming that 360 feedback impacts behavior change and performance. At the same time, research documented in The Leadership Challenge shows that people are successful in achieving their goals and "self-correcting" their performance if they receive ongoing, detailed feedback.

This paradox struck me when I considered the LPI, a powerful tool that assesses leadership behaviors based on The Five Practices of Leadership®. My business partner, Jo Bell, and I have found the LPI to be very effective in helping individuals improve their leadership behaviors. Jo has worked with the LPI for nearly 10 years and says, "With the clients that take the LPI a second time within 3-6 months, every single person I've worked with has shown improvement in one of the practices or in multiple behaviors. The improvement shows up in their own scores, or in the smaller differences between their scores and those of their constituents." Organizations that have chosen to focus their development efforts on a single practice also have demonstrated significant improvement on their overall LPI over a two year period.

While our experience shows that the LPI does work, I agree with Nowack that organizations and individual leaders can help others implement the feedback component more effectively. Often organizations promote thinking that I call the 'event' mindset, where the LPI, for example, is used merely to reflect a point-in-time snapshot rather than a guide that can be helpful in the process of lifelong learning and development.

In learning and development circles, we campaign to eliminate the event mentality to ensure that learning takes place and to create a positive impact on performance and business results. Instead, in The Leadership Challenge® Workshop we encourage clients to think of leadership as a journey and the LPI as the compass. LPI results can show leaders where they are and where they need to go. They may find that they are right on track in some areas while in others they may need course corrections to be more effective.

With the LPI, leaders see their current location, but the journey should not end there. Leader's can't put the compass down at the start of the journey and expect that they'll successfully navigate through areas where they are unsure of themselves. Unfortunately, that is what happens when the LPI is used as a one-time tool to improve behavior. When viewed as a snapshot only, any tool can be static, providing little information or incentive to move forward.

Instead, we must view and use the LPI as a guide. Refer back to the tool often. Perhaps have clients complete it again periodically. And allow leaders time for practice, reflection, and additional feedback. Look at feedback as a dynamic process, one that is essential to developing talent in an organization and changing behaviors that lead to more effective individual and organizational performance.

When leaders increase awareness of their own behavior by participating in the LPI, they see themselves differently and can make a concentrated effort to improve their leadership. The most effective leaders continually seek feedback, implement changes that enhance their leadership skills, and focus on practicing those skills for the long term.

Renee Harness is president of the Meridian Leadership Center and a Master Facilitator of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop. She has led organization development, training and effectiveness initiatives in corporations and academia for over 14 years. She can be reached via e-mail at renee@www.meridianleadershipcenter.com.

How can I really ever hope to get better as a leader, with all the emails, voicemails, meetings, and everything else on my plate? I don't know how I can ever do it all.

The management sides of our jobs are endlessly screaming at us. And we all know why. It is those management activities that are most closely measured, reviewed, and valued. And importantly, they also are the basis of our pay. No one gets a free pass on achieving today's results. And the primary focus of our management responsibility is just that: delivering results each and every day.

As leaders, you also must tackle the added responsibility of preparing the organization to change, grow, and prosper over the long haul. That means you have to be continually building future capabilities while consistently making the monthly numbers.

Successful leaders simply cannot avoid this seemingly competing set of demands. That's why we call it the leadership challenge, not the leadership cakewalk! But the following ideas might help you start making progress in resolving what often seems like a conflict between your role as a manager and as a leader.
1. Check your personal level of commitment to your own growth as a leader. How much are you willing to stretch? Are you prepared to deal with some anxious and uncomfortable moments? What or how much are you willing to sacrifice? You need to be committed because you already know how difficult it will be to change how you work in an overscheduled, "everything is a priority" environment.
2. If you are committed, do something immediately to directly invest in your leadership development. Think about this: if you desperately wanted to learn to fly a plane, you would enroll in Ground School, as your first step, and then you would make time to attend. You would likely stick with it if you paid the full tuition upfront (rather than on a per-session basis). So consider how to apply this same approach to your own leadership development. Putting some 'skin' in the development game right away makes it harder to back away. One immediate action you could take would be to complete the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI), to more fully understand the areas in which you have proven strengths and those that may be derailing your efforts. You cannot grow without valid feedback, and if you are indeed committed, you cannot ignore it.
3. Let other people know your intentions and ask them to help you. This is so important. And yet, it is so often overlooked. Developing your leadership should not be a secret, which you feel you must pursue independently and alone. Always remember that people with whom you interact directly benefit as you become a more effective leader. They probably want to help you, if you will let them. Finding a confidant, mentor, or coach will also be helpful.
4. Finally, identify a first small win that you want to achieve and remain focused on it. Bite-size pieces to start might include:
  - allocate one hour per week, allowing no interruptions, so that you can think about and consider new ideas
  - devote 30 uninterrupted minutes each month to spend with each of your direct reports, listening to their ideas, current struggles, and aspirations; become more closely connected with them
  - pick 2 people from other departments to have lunch with each month in order to start breaking down silos
One thing is for certain: in order to find the time to fulfill your current management obligations and still become a better leader, you must change. Sometimes you must change what you do, which means saying "No" to work that might be comfortable but is simply not valuable enough to keep doing. Do not underestimate how hard that is to do. And often you also must change how you do your work. For example, spend 10 less minutes in reviewing results with people and devote it to brainstorming ideas instead. Set meeting times for 20 minutes or 40 minutes, vs. the standard half or full hour. Or start out your meetings by genuinely recognizing the efforts of people deserving credit, then use the remainder for your management work.

Be fully committed to your growth as a leader and you will find many creative ways to free up the time to lead.

Steve Coats is a managing partner and co-owner of International Leadership Associates, a leadership development education and consulting firm. For nearly twenty years, Steve has taught, coached, and consulted with executives and all levels of managers in several countries around the world is one of the leading authorities on The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®. He can be emailed at stevec@i-lead.com

Can The Five Practices be taught in modules?

Anyone who has ever participated in a competitive sport or played a musical instrument knows how critical practice is. The job of leadership also requires that same discipline. Having The Five Practices top-of-mind is key to practicing them on a day-to-day basis. One method for achieving this goal is to bring participants back together over an extended period of time; participants exposed to The Five Practices frequently are more likely to integrate them into their daily routines.

Many clients have chosen to divide The Leadership Challenge® Workshop into modules based on each of The Five Practices. If your organization has the commitment, this is the preferred method of delivery to get the best results. Most who have chosen this approach divide the practices as follows:
1. Overview of The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® (and administer the Leadership Practices Inventory/LPI) : four-hour session
2. Model the Way: four-hour session
3. Inspire a Shared Vision: four-hour session
4. Challenge the Process: four-hour session
5. Enable Others to Act: four-hour session
6. Encourage the Heart: four-hour session
7. Re-administer the LPI (6 - 9 months after the learning initiative has ended)
Jim Kouzes consistently suggests that we approach leadership development as though we were practicing for a sport: practicing a set of specific skills until one becomes proficient. The more you practice the better you will get. By breaking up The Five Practices into short sessions over an extended period of time, participants have a greater tendency to actually learn the practices.

In addition to bringing participants back together for a modular schedule of learning, I highly recommend administrating the LPI both before and after an extended training initiative. Too often the LPI is administered before the training and is never used as a follow-up tool to assess the learning that should have taken place in the classroom. As facilitators and trainers, our goal is often to hold participants accountable for their learning. And re-administering the LPI six to nine months after the learning initiative is a great way to build in and reinforce a measure of accountability.

As my high school wrestling coach used to say, "practice makes permanent." Developing leaders requires that we build in plenty of opportunities to practice, practice, practice. Dividing The Leadership Challenge® Workshop into modules is an ideal solution to ensure The Five Practices become permanent.

Daren Blonski is a consultant working for Sonoma Learning Systems, an authorized affiliate of The Leadership Challenge. Daren studied at UC Davis where he received his bachelors in Organizational Studies. His passions are leadership philosophy and entrepreneurship. He can be e-mailed at daren@sonomalearning.com.

Can leaders be followers too?

YES, ABSOLUTELY!

"A good leader is also a good follower," Susan Wong, financial analyst at Apple, told us. "This may sound like a paradox," she continued, "but based on my experience I notice that good leaders understand boundaries and are willing to accept sound advice from followers."

Too many leaders think that they should know it all, be able to do it all, and always be in charge. But Susan reminds us that the best leaders are self-aware enough to realize their limitations and secure enough to know they can let go of control and let others take charge.

The key to high performance is not simply good leaders but good leadership. In the set of skills and abilities, and in the highest performing organizations, the emphasis is on following the process, not the person, So if we were to look at leadership and followership though this lens, here's what we'd be asking people to follow:
- A clear set of values and beliefs consistent with their own
- A vision of the future that they share.
- Creative ideas that enable the organization to make changes so that the values and vision can be realized
- Other people whose strengths and talents contribute to realizing shared values and vision, and teams whose collective capacity is greater than our own.
- Our hearts and the esteem we have for the people who make it possible for us to get extraordinary things done
From this perspective, we are all followers of a way-a path to making a difference in the world. Leaders are asking people to follow a process and it is in this way that leaders should always think of themselves as followers.

If leaders kept this in mind, then leadership could move around the organization-up, down, sideways, in, and out. Leaders would be thinking of what's best for the mission, not what's best for them.

There's another important reason for leaders to follow. No one person can do it alone. The idea of being the in-charge leader-the one who is supposed to do anything that is required and be better than anyone else, the charismatic bigger-than-life personality, the warrior charging in on a white horse to single-handedly save the day-is daunting. But what happens when we set aside this heroic myth and realize that leaders are not independent of others but, more to the point, dependent upon the energies and efforts of others? What happens is that we're more effective as leaders. We admit that we can't do it alone, and we then begin to develop and utilize the full potential of everyone.

How do you encourage leaders to Challenge the Process when they are in an industry or position that requires them to "follow the rules"?

My fellow employees generally accept and embrace the Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership®, except for Challenge the Process. State employees exhibit resistance to this practice because they feel that they don't have control over their organization's policies and processes. They feel that Challenge the Process means resisting public policy, which in some cases is state law. While they can't challenge everything, I try to explain that they can challenge things that are under their control (e.g., procedures, recognition, meeting facilitation). What else can I say to convince them of this key leadership practice?

Working for The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the largest state department in California, we too have faced resistance to the practice of Challenge the Process. The LPI results from our various leadership programs reflect a "reluctance" to accept this concept as a department. Many of the participants feel they are limited by our mission of public safety because they are focusing on overall organizational policies and procedures. The practice is seen as a defiance of authority and/or the refusal to comply with a rule, procedure, or edict. Their initial responses to mere mention of the practice often include: 'We can't change the Penal Code or violate it!', 'We can't let the offenders run free!', and 'We have to deal with the union!'

We have been successful in getting participants to embrace this practice by demonstrating how their role fits into the overall vision, mission, and plan for the department. For example, our mission as a department is to provide public safety. If we start at the top, the world wants to be safe. The President wants a safe country. The Governor wants a safe state. Our department Secretary fulfills the need for public safety by ensuring that offenders sentenced to state institutions do not escape or are released before their sentence is completed. Our wardens and superintendents make sure that their facilities are safe for both staff and offenders. And as an individual in your area of responsibility, you are applying the policies, procedures, and practices that add to the safety of all of the folks in the world.

So within our organization, we've further defined the practice by asking such questions as: 'How can you fine-tune what you do to make things just a little bit better?', 'How do you monitor and adjust what you do on a daily basis to be more efficient?', or 'Where is the kaizen*?' We tell participants that when they do that one little thing better, they have moved beyond the status quo. They have Challenged the Process and acted as a leader. This is the breakthrough moment. Our participants have had great success with developing challenges for their areas of responsibility because now it is not about "What I CAN'T do", but "What I CAN do."

* kaizen: continuous incremental improvement of an activity to eliminate waste (Source: http://www.qlic.ca/glossary.htm)

How can leaders stop being "held hostage to the present" and spend more time looking forward so that they will be able to articulate a vision and get others excited about that vision?

In their new book A Leader's Legacy, Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner include a piece titled "Forward-Looking Is a Leadership Prerequisite." In this chapter they write, "You can leave a lasting legacy only if you can imagine a brighter future, and the capacity to imagine exciting future possibilities is the defining competence of leaders." Sounds good, right? But as your question indicates, this is easier said than done. From the daily demands of email to the quarterly expectations of Wall Street, leaders are often distracted by short-term responsibilities at the expense of time spent in a visionary state of mind. Where can leaders start?
Enter André Martin from The Center of Creative Leadership. André is all about the future. In his recent presentation at the ISA (an association devoted exclusively to the issues and needs of executives in the training industry) conference, he captivated the room with a presentation on the global trends and business challenges that leaders are facing today. For over an hour, the leaders in the room were encouraged to ask questions . . . questions that we don't know the answers to (for a change!), questions that provoke thought, questions that encourage debate, and questions that get us thinking about what's next.
Take a listen. | Have a look at his slides.

Read some of the books he suggests:
As the Future Catches You
The World is Flat
Wikinomics
Powerful Times
A Perfect Mess

Check out www.trendwatching.com and subscribe to their Trend Briefing e-newsletter.

This response article was submitted by members of The Leadership Challenge® editorial team.

On the LPI Online website and in other related materials, you claim that the instrument is a "valid and reliable measure of a leader's effectiveness." Can you please explain how LPI results indicate leaders' effectiveness in terms of personal credibility, high motivation levels, and overall success in effectively meeting job-related demands?

First of all, most of these measures are subjective, as in:

Item #11 - Follows through on promises and commitments he/she makes. (personal credibility)

Item #3 - Seeks out challenging opportunities that test his/her own skills and abilities (motivation)

Item #1 - Sets a personal example of what he/she expects from others. (meets job-related demands)

Leaders' scores can range from almost never (1) or rarely (2) to very frequently (9) or almost always (10), and they are dependent upon the Observers' subjective opinion.

Through the years, LPI research has also proven a correlation to effectiveness. For example, as the frequency of leader's behavior goes up from constituent's perspective, so does their perception of the leader's credibility, effectiveness, and the like.

In some studies, as reported on the "Research" area of www.leadershipchallenge.com, researchers have also used objective measures, like store performance (sales), hotel occupancy, financial contributions to the church, rates of turnover, stock price, student's test scores, and the like. Sometimes, the assessment is between similar or equivalent organizations who are recognized for high achievement versus those who are not (as in the case of "blue-ribbon" or distinguished schools).

All in all, the statements you refer to are based upon meta-studies - that is, not just a single study but the accumulation of results from a number of studies over a number of different industries, functions, and contexts.

Hope this helps!

Some of my clients who have completed their LPIs are not available for a workshop due to their remote location. Aside from sending their results, how do I ensure that they benefit from this experience? Telephone, Internet, and email are the forms of communication that I use.

Yes, the LPI is a meaty document and experienced facilitators know that the feedback delivered through the LPI can sometimes cause joy and relief, but also confusion and anger. Those emotions are fairly easy to uncover during a face-to-face session, but can be a bit more difficult to observe at a distance.

My first suggestion is to keep in mind that the LPI has a lot of texture beneath the polished surface. However, technically, it is designed to accomplish one thing -- to measure the perceived frequency of The Five Practices that the Observers see, feel, and hear through various interactions with the Leader. During your follow up, please try to ensure that your Leaders do not think of the LPI as a personality test or popularity quiz. It is not a pass/fail exam, either.

There are numerous methods to support the participant in discovering new ways to increase these fundamental behaviors. The following illustrates one suggested framework for a typical LPI coaching session conducted over the telephone:

If they did not go to a workshop and they have no idea how to read the LPI, then you must begin the call with a detailed view of the LPI history and its focus, to create the proper context. A quick review of The Leadership Challenge model contextualizing The Five Practices should also be included.

Once they appreciate the LPI perspective, use the Summary Page to inquire as to what they understand about their scores at first glance. You can also use the Bar Graph pages that follow the Data Summary pages for each Practice to help them see their results more clearly. Once they have shared their thoughts, you can help them see behind their first impressions. They need to understand that this is just about frequency of behaviors and that these behaviors can be learned and/or increased through practice.

With practice in mind, for many of my colleagues, the Leadership Behavior Ranking page is the key place to draw the participant's attention. We sometimes ask the participant to photocopy the page so they can keep it near them…on their desk or in their portfolio. This ensures that they see it each day and enables them to stay focused on their behavior goals.

It is helpful to focus the participant on all of the leadership behaviors, not just the ones at the bottom of their score sheet. Of course, you will want those at the bottom to be raised through an Action Plan, but like the game of golf, it is beneficial to practice the whole game, not just the weak part of your game.

One of the best ways to begin an Action Plan discussion is to offer them long-term homework. Have them select three different behaviors a week for ten weeks and practice them consciously. Then repeat. Even if the behavior is one that is rated high, they should put it into the mix. The more they actively think about doing all thirty behaviors the more likely they will become leadership habits. They should take the LPI again, roughly nine months to a year from the first report. If possible, you can add remote coaching sessions monthly or at various appropriate intervals.

You also may want to walk them through each Practice's Summary page. Have them share with you what they think each Behavior means. This allows you to help clarify the meaning of the behavior, which prevents misunderstandings.

For instance, you may want to help them understand how to increase their scores in the Inspire a Shared Vision Practice.

Many people are a bit intimidated by this practice and their scores usually illustrate it. This is your opportunity to explain the behaviors in your terms. For instance, you might share with them that behavior seven, "Describes a compelling image of the future" is just another way to tell a "story" about the future in detail. Behavior 12, "Appeals to others to share a dream of the future" is just another way to "invite" their colleagues to be a part of the future vision/story. In addition, behavior 17, "Shows others how their interests can be realized" is another way to share with their constituents how they will "benefit" from joining. Doing this with all of the practices helps them see the behaviors more clearly.

The Percentile Ranking page is a great way to illustrate to participants how they rank with several thousand others who also took the LPI.

Moreover, if you have made arrangements for a narrative response section at the end the feedback report, the peer comments will create a deeper dialogue between you and the Leader in a very detailed and relevant way.

With the previously mentioned Action Plan in mind, I recommend that you use the LPI Leadership Development Planner. This helpful tool includes an outline for creating a detailed Action Plan. The workbook also provides exercises and other helpful hints that will help a participant stay focused on their LPI goals. A detailed reading list is also included.

Finally, if you are in an extended relationship, offer some specific tasks to complete before their next coaching session. Be sure to create a check-in date so they have a results deadline. Offer a suggested reading list, so you can discuss the key points with them and how it relates to their world. If you are not in an extended relationship, then be sure to answer any questions and offer to take emails from them on a sporadic basis.

Good luck!

How to you keep the learning alive after the excitement of the workshop wears-off?

This is always the challenge. People get together and have a great shared experience and then return to work. We've made it our practice to ask participants to commit to developing two to three behaviors over the next few months and we even have them partner with someone to help them and to hold them accountable. Sometimes, though, even that isn't as effective as we would like for it to be.

One client, the University of Connecticut (UConn), may have cracked the code on sustaining leadership development. We conducted a two-day Leadership Challenge session for one of their clients and included some coaching time in the evening so that participants could get immediate feedback to their questions around the LPI results.

After the participants left UConn they participated in an online discussion that lasted three months. Six topics were covered, each lasting two weeks. Three main questions were posted for each topic. The participants were required to answer all three questions with at least 100 words per question. They were also given the opportunity to respond to any of the other participant's answers. Some of the topics covered were "Mining the LPI Data," "Envisioning an Effective Leadership Project," "Designing/Implementing the Project," "Reflecting on Your Leadership Project," "Assessing your Leadership Journey," etc. Keeping leadership alive and moving it from "common sense to common practice" requires that we keep The Five Practices in front of participants until it is ingrained.

What is the most effective way to come across as a leader, and not "just a manager"?

As a manager you probably spend a lot of time sweating the details, following up on action items, and tracking things. While these things are still important in an organization, when you lead, you have a different focus.

As a leader, people are looking for you to show them the future of the department, organization, or project. They expect and anticipate that you will understand and discuss the big picture with them. They are not necessarily looking for you to be 'hands-on'. People will appreciate a sense of direction, especially in times of change.

Talk about where the organization is going and what it will look like when success is achieved. One way to get yourself started is to imagine that you are being interviewed by a national business publication five years from now. You are sharing with them the vision that you have finally achieved; the successes, the learning, the people and the metrics. What did it take for this vision to be accomplished? What will it look like, feel like? What is different, how have things changed? Once you can articulate what the future will be, you will start thinking and behaving more like a leader.

Leaders concern themselves with the strategic aspects of the business without losing touch with front lines. Be sure that front line associates are included in your vision messages and that you get input and feedback from them about what the future holds.

Be attentive to celebrating the milestones, small wins, and successes of the organization. People will emulate what you do.

Leaders also address the hard issues, they make decisions and they stick to their values and leadership philosophy. There is the old saying that "the buck stops here" and it does. As a leader, you will address the issues that others want to avoid and you will ask the tough questions that need to be asked.

Above all, be authentic in your leadership, and show the people that work for you that you care about them as you lead them on new paths and in new directions.

When faced with the dilemma of telling your boss the truth or what he or she wants to hear, what do you do?

Answer: Many of us have faced this situation. The boss walks into a meeting you are holding with your staff and presents a new idea or direction. She explains the new idea and with great excitement talks about future possibilities and performance implications. Then, very abruptly, you are put on the spot: what do you think? The dilemma hits you full on. You have two choices. Do you say the "correct answer," the one you know the boss really wants to hear? Or do you say what you really think?

We know from working with The Leadership Challenge database, and in conducting the Characteristics of Admired Leaders exercise, that honesty is the single most important leadership characteristic, and is the most often selected when choosing among the 20 characteristics listed. One of the lessons we can take from this knowledge is that if we expect the people around us to willingly follow our guidance and direction, it is very important that we model and demonstrate this characteristic in our everyday actions. In working with groups of people around the world in leadership development, it is obvious this one characteristic can pose a serious dilemma for us in facing our everyday challenges, such as the one described above.

In exploring this situational dilemma, people have responded with a variety of answers such as:

"You keep your job that's what you do."
"You say the right answer and live another day."
"You keep your mouth closed and don't say anything."
"Leaving information out is not telling a lie."
"You stay quiet in the meeting and follow-up with the boss after the meeting to express your concerns."

What is your response to this dilemma?
All of these hypothetical responses can create problems for us in demonstrating honesty to others. If people see us act in a particular way in the meeting, or say one thing, and they know our true feelings are different, we have created a credibility problem for ourselves. Others may observe our behavior and have some challenges seeing our actions as consistent with their understanding of honesty. Instead, they may interpret our actions as "political" or some other type of communication game (masking, diffusion, diversion). Our challenge is to figure out a way to say what we really believe, or at the very least, express our concerns in the meeting. This is a difficult situation, and one that separates the ordinary from the extraordinary in leadership behavior. At this fork in the road, it's often the path less traveled.

Now here is another way to look at this situation, knowing that this dilemma is very real for each of us as leaders, what does that tell us about how people respond when we are the ones asking the question? We must work hard to create an environment that supports peoples' willingness to say what they really think. We must continue working to be open to hearing the honest truth, even if we might disagree with their perspective or opinions. As leaders, we must create an environment where those around us are able and willing to share their opinions, even if they think we might disagree with the opinion or ideas. This is truly a Leadership Challenge for us all, and a choice provided by the fork in the road.

Do you have any advice on how to deal with reluctant participants of The Leadership Challenge® Workshop? How do you respond to people who are attending because "my manager made me go."?

The reasons why people attend workshops are as varied as the people themselves, but how they arrive in the classroom does not have to be an indicator of how they will participate in class. One trick is to drill down into the concept of "Leadership is Everyone's Business." By getting people to think about and articulate why it is their business, you can start the shift from compliance to commitment. For individuals who have been sent by their manager, it is important for the manager to explain why he or she sees value in the experience. But, it's equally important to help people discover what value there is for them in becoming a better leader. The pre-work "What Do I Want To Accomplish?" is a great starting point. I have tried a new approach that may be useful when you're dealing with a group that seems more compliant than committed at the start. Ask them to state the challenges they face and the "takeaways" from class they think would best equip them to deal with the challenge. Post the challenges (anonymously) around the room and when the class begins, ask the participants to name a takeaway they think will help them face one of these challenges effectively. The result is a shared sense of common challenges and a great conversation around how effective leadership can help address those challenges.

Another tip comes by way of Master Facilitator L.J. Rose, "Ask the class how many are here because they were told to be." Quickly link to the role of the leader by asking if as a manager or a project leader, they have ever found themselves in a similar situation? How many have been handed something they didn't ask for and told to make the most of it. Chances are good every hand will go up. Remind them the choice of what you do with what you've been handed is always yours.

I believe values are at the heart of the issue. By helping the participants tap into what really matters to them, you create the environment for them to become fully engaged. It's not about your fancy facilitator footwork, but giving them a reason to join in the dance.

Question for October 2006: I have a client who is asking me some tough questions about the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). They noticed that the validity report indicates that over 350,000 people have taken the LPI, but not all of their data is included in the normative comparison that generates the Percentile Ranking page of the LPI Feedback Report. Why is that, and how many people are included in the normative comparison? Second, I assume that this normative group includes people of all ranges of leadership effectiveness; that is, the scores are not just compared to "good" leaders, is that correct? If so, what evidence do we have of 'who the good leaders' were to begin with?

Thanks for your question. Please let you client know that we are constantly updating the normative database, although the addition of tens of thousands of responses periodically does not significantly change the results. The current database, contains responses from 2003-2004, and we'll be updating this shortly with the addition of nearly 95,000 LPI Online responses from 2005. I think your client's question subtly asks, "Is the sample biased toward high performers?" The answer is no. For psychometric reasons, the law of large numbers suggests that the more responses we receive the more likely the sample approximates the population. In addition, we have no reason to believe that only high performers, or for that matter low performers, complete the LPI. The range of companies, disciplines, and hierarchical levels also helps to make the database unbiased.

Also, please let your client know that studies dealing with leader effectiveness generally do not involve an analyses of the LPI normative database, but can be found from hundreds of individual studies (check out the abstracts can be found on this website).<> Researchers will sometimes compare the distribution of their sample with the normative database (as it "represents" the population) and make comments about being higher or lower than "leaders in general." You may want to browse some of the research abstracts for information related to studies involving ethnicity and gender differences. In general these studies show that neither of these variables make systematic differences in leadership behavior. Moreover, we maintain that "comparisons" with the normative database, while interesting, are not really relevant to individual leadership development. When using the LPI, the individuals own scores should be seen as baseline for that person, and the relevant question for each individual is "what will it take for me to engage in these behaviors more frequently than I am doing now?" Our normative statement is that those who engage in The Five Practices more, versus less, frequently are more effective.

Question for September 2006: When preparing to deliver The Leadership Challenge® Workshop, I like to call each participant in advance to find out what they expect to get out of the workshop. Recently, one of the participants said he'd like to figure out how to make his managing-to-leading ratio be more equal. Have you come across this issue in your leadership research? Do you have any suggestions that might help this person with this common challenge?

I was talking to a colleague today about this issue, so I know how real this is for many people. Warren Bennis once commented in writing about his tenure as president of the University of Cincinnati, "Routine work drives out non-routine work and smothers to death all creative planning, all fundamental change in the university-or any institution" (see page 189 of The Leadership Challenge, 3rd Edition) Warren might as well have also been talking about leadership. Routine work is often associated with managing and non-routine with leading.

That said, Peter Drucker also commented in response to a question about the difference between managing and leading and said that while there is a distinction between the two, they both have to be done by the same person, so he wonders why we make such a distinction. I think both Bennis and Drucker have relevant points. Both are talking about how we spend out time as manager-leaders (I use manager-leaders here because not all leaders are managers, at least by title). Both would acknowledge that there are a lot of tasks a manager-leader has to perform. Both would agree that there is a lot of routine work that we have to perform in our roles. Both would agree that routine work can overwhelm us.

What I try to do is acknowledge the dilemma, but also suggest that we reframe the situation. I would suggest that manager-leaders are BOTH managing and leading 100% of the time. They cannot separate themselves from the fact that constituents expect and deserve both, and both are absolutely essential. This requires a bit of reframing on the part of manager-leaders, but it can help in getting folks to see the situation differently.

For example, manager-leaders are ALWAYS being watched by their constituents. Every decision, action, speech, email, letter, visit, story, etc. sends a signal. The question then is, are the signals one is sending with ones' behavior consistent with stated values or are they inconsistent with them? Whether they like it or not, manager-leaders are Modeling the Way all the time. The question is, are they modeling the appropriate behavior? Are people saying, "His/her mouth says one thing, but his/her feet say another?" Or, are they saying, "This leader's words and deeds are aligned?" What leaders must realize is that Modeling the Way is not something you do when you get around to it, it's something you do every minute of the day, no matter what other tasks you are performing.

Second, a lot of leadership takes only minutes, even seconds. Take Encourage the Heart. The data is really clear on this. To be fully engaged, people need to be positively recognized at least once a week by their manager. Let's say I have 10 direct reports. That would mean in a given week, I should be recognizing, on average, two of my direct reports each day. Now, I could look at this as something formal and organized, or I could look at this as a simple "thank you." The "thank you" takes only seconds-minutes at most-and can be just as significant as some big celebration that takes weeks to organize. Encouraging the Heart is both of those things, and if you add up all the 10 one-minute recognitions they have cumulative effect.

As one final example, take Inspire a Share Vision-the most difficult practice according to our research. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech is remembered 43 years after it was delivered in 1963. Think about it. Forty-three years later we remember the power of a speech that took under three minutes. Under three minutes! You can influence people's actions and thoughts in under three minutes. (Psychologists would tell us we can influence in a lot less time than that, actually.) It's not about how much time you spend. It's about the power of the message. Now, I will grant you that the dream didn't happen overnight. It didn't pop into his head in an instant. It took a lot of thought, a lot of trial and error, a lot of revisions, a lot of practice. But, in the end, those three minutes are some of the most important three minutes in modern history. So, I would encourage manager-leaders to spend more time in their regularly scheduled minutes to have a dialogue about peoples' hopes and dreams for the future. How about ten minutes a week to start? Or, spend one meeting a month on nothing but these questions: "Are we in this job to do something, or are we in this job for something to do? If we're in this job to do something, then what is it we're here to do? If people were to be talking about our contributions, our legacy, five years from now, what would you hope they would say?" I have to believe that the manager who raised this issue has sixty minutes a month to spend on these important questions.

So, in short: you are leading and managing 100% of the time. You can't escape the importance of both roles. How can your reframe the situation you are in so you can accommodate both roles?

I wish you all the best of luck with your next program.

Love 'em and lead 'em,
Jim

Question for July 2006: How can I secure copies of The Leadership Challenge in languages other than English?

Jossey-Bass, an Imprint of Wiley and publisher of The Leadership Challenge, sells and distributes the books around the world, but in English only. In order to facilitate translated editions, Wiley has a very active foreign rights department that works with foreign publishers from all over the world. When we make a foreign rights deal for a particular book, our foreign publishing partner becomes responsible for translating, printing, and distributing the book in their specified territory. If you would like to secure copies of the translated book, please contact the publisher directly.

The Leadership Challenge, Third Edition is available in the following languages:
- Simplified Chinese - Century Wave Culture Development Co. PHEI
- Portuguese - Elsevier Editora, Ltda.
- Russian - AST Publishing House
- Lithuanian - Smaltijos Leidykla, Ltd.
- Korean - Mulpure Publishing Co.
And will be available in the near future in:
- Arabic - Jarir Bookstore
- Orthodox Chinese - Faces Publications
- Estonian - Pegasus Publishers
- Bahasa Indonesian - Penerbit Erlangga
- Swedish - Kontentan Forlags AB
- Thai - WeLearn Co.
The Leadership Challenge, Second Edition is also available in Dutch - Scriptum Publishers.

We have taken a slightly different approach with the Leadership Practices Inventory.
Question for June 2006: The LPI's Group Summary report lists each of The Five Practices, the average score by observer group, and the standard deviation. The text at the top of the report explains that the standard deviation indicates the extent of agreement among the individual leaders and their observers. Can you explain more about what that actually means?

The standard deviation is a score that measures the dispersion of responses (or variance) around the average of all of the scores. It might be thought of as measuring the extent to which respondent's scores agree or disagree with one another.

From a mathematical perspective the standard deviation might simply be thought of as a proxy measure for the distance (or range) between the lowest and highest scores in the distribution. For example, if everyone's score was 45, then the standard deviation would be zero (no deviation around the average score of 45). If the average score was still 45 and the scores were, for example, 25, 25, 65, 65 the standard deviation from this distribution would be higher than if the scores were, for example, 40, 40, 50, 50.

The Group Summary page computes a standard deviation for your sample of respondents and is not calculated against the normative data base.

I hope you find this information helpful. Thanks for making use of the LPI and I hope that your colleagues found this feedback useful.

Question for May 2006: One reader from a university asks—"We have a situation where the provost is clearly and agreeably on a mission to become a college president. As such, her stated vision for the organization is false and unbelievable and she has no credibility. Anything we attempt to do by her direction is seen as phony since everyone knows she is merely "notching her gun" and we are proceeding with activities and not in an environment of respected leadership toward a TRUE vision. This undermines our 'subordinate' leadership attempts since everyone knows 'we are just working to achieve her personal objectives.' How can you be a 'co/sub' leader when the head dog is clearly and painfully not credible?"

This situation reminds all of us of an important lesson of leadership. There is a huge difference between having a vision—and having a vision that is shared by others. That is why the practice in The Leadership Challenge is "Inspire a Shared Vision," not "Force Your Vision on Others." And as we all know, it takes a lot of work to enlist others to fully buy into and "share" a vision.

It also reminds us of the great importance of credibility. A leader's lack of credibility does not just reflect on him or her, it impacts those directly associated with the leader as well.

The quick answer to your question is this: when the lead dog is not credible, you have to step up even more to provide the kind of leadership that can overcome that credibility problem. Since working with a leader like this can create a negative perception of your own credibility, you must make a decision that you are unwilling to accept that perception and fill in the leadership void created by her apparent self-serving agenda.

Effective leaders start with themselves, so the first thing to do is reflect on the situation and ask yourself what you might be doing to contribute to it. For example, is it possible that the provost is doing some things good for the university, but her self-serving behaviors are, for some reason, all you seem to see? Think about that.

Realistically, all of us have encounters with poor leaders throughout our careers, and this may be one of those times for you. So here are some other thoughts on what you can do as a leader that hopefully will provide you with some options for taking action.

1) Find and align yourself with others who are in the same situation and determine what you must do collectively in order to preserve your credibility and fulfill the needs of those you serve. When you feel like you might be faced with confronting the authority of a higher-level person, it is better to have people with you, versus going it alone.

2) Be willing to put forth a different vision for the group - one that is inspiring to you, your colleagues and those you serve. It does not have to be carved in granite or approved by the president. It just needs to be shared, and embraced by those you need with you. My guess is they will be willing help you develop it and carry it out. Remember, a prestigious organizational position is not a pre-requisite for having a powerful vision.

3) Figure out a way to provide the provost with some feedback about the consequences of her current behaviors. This can be quite difficult since many people in this position in a university are much more comfortable giving feedback than receiving it, but as a leader you must try. (She may be so focused on her goal to become president that she is unaware of the things she is doing that will ultimately sabotage her chances.)

4) Keep in mind that there is almost always more than one way to get something done, so search for innovative ways to fulfill your responsibilities, while not being directly contrary to the desires of the provost. If what you say about the provost's ambition is true, the people you serve in the university will likely be more interested in collaborating with you than worrying about her.

Good luck,
Steve

Question for April 2006: "An executive in an upcoming program voiced his concern that the LPI instrument has no N/A response choice and, instead the instruction suggest that respondents use the value "3" if they feel that the statement does not apply. One of his respondents was worried that this would artificially lower certain scores, and I am hoping to get your rationale for that design."

It's been said, "You cannot NOT communicate." Everything we do-and don't do-sends a message. This is especially true for leaders. Because leaders are always "saying" something by their actions or non-actions, we don't offer observers an opt-out response of "not applicable" or "no opinion" on the Leadership Practices Inventory.
First of all, we do not allow respondents to leave any of the 30 items blank for empirical reasons. We've been testing and retesting the psychometric properties of the LPI for nearly 20 years, and our data tell us that ALL of the 30 LPI items do, in fact, apply to any leader at any level in any organization. Nearly 300 other researchers have also conducted studies using the LPI, and their conclusions are the same as ours. We know that each item accounts for a percentage of the statistical variance in why a leader is successful on a number of dimensions, including productivity, teamwork, employee satisfaction, and leader credibility. We also know that the more frequently a leader engages in each behavior the more positive the outcomes. Therefore, our tests indicate that each one of 30 items that assesses a leadership practice is an appropriate measure.

Additionally, the psychometric properties of each of The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership are based upon scales that include responses to six statements (not five or four items). We know that the more items used to construct a scale the more reliable it will be-that is, the more likely it measures what it purports to measure. In addition, all of the normative data is based upon responses to all six statements that measure each leadership practice. If an individual did not have a response to one or more statements that comprise a practice we would be less confident in both the reliability and validity of their data.

Second, let's examine the specific question that is being asked on the LPI. When responding to the items on the LPI, the observer is asked: "How frequently does this person (the leader) engage in the behavior described?" The observer is then asked to rate the frequency of each of 30 behaviors on a scale from 1 (almost never) to 10 (almost always). It is very important to keep this question in mind, because the rationale for not including a "not applicable response" is based on the nature of the scale. This is a frequency scale; it is not a rating scale about how satisfied the observer is with the leader or how well the leader displays the behavior. It is about how frequently the observer sees or experiences the behavior. We use the frequency scale because it permits a rating under most conditions.

Third, the instructions we give to LPI administrators and leaders urge them to distribute the instrument only to those "who directly observe" the person in a leadership role. We therefore assume that the observers will have enough exposure to the leader to be able to offer assessments of his/her behavior. If that is not the case, then the LPIs should be distributed to other individuals who have directly observed the leader's actions.

Given these three factors-(1) all 30 items are valid and reliable measures of leadership behavior, (2) behaviors are measured on a frequency scale, and (3) the observer has had direct experience with the leader-a "does not apply" response is not appropriate. If all the conditions are met, then a response from the observer should be possible.

With these things in mind, if an observer says, "I just don't have enough information to respond," or "I don't know if you do this or you don't," or "I don't know if this behavior applies to you," what's the underlying message? It's been our experience that the observer is really saying, "I don't see that behavior so I can't rate that person on this item." In all these instances the observer is providing real information and feedback. The observer has already offered a rating by virtue of that observation. He or she is actually saying, "I don't see or experience you engaging in this behavior." Why waste this response and data?

So, the more critical question is not "Why don't you allow a 'not applicable' or 'no opinion' response," but "Why do you recommend that the respondent use a response code of '3' rather than some other number-say '1' or '2' or even '4'"?

We talked with respondents (primarily observers) about their responses and from these interviews determined that the use of "almost never" (1) and "rarely" (2) should be reserved for situations where the observer wanted to send a strong and meaningful message to the leader about his/her leadership behavior. Those who were unsure about how frequently a person engaged in a particular behavior tended to use the response "seldom" (3) to capture that sentiment. In this latest version of the LPI we now make an explicit statement that if the respondent feels a "statement does not apply," it is probably because they don't see or experience the behavior. That means, we say, "this person does not frequently engage in that behavior, at least around you. In that case, assign a rating of 3 or lower."

Question for March 2006: "What is the best method for transforming an environment where the Executive Director believes and even says out loud that there is only one right way to do things and he knows what the way is? He maintains a strong control on information, does not solicit employee input, talks about staff negatively behind their backs, and blocks change. Needless to say, tasks delegated by this person are rare and doomed to fail. No time is allowed for meetings between collaborating departments. Our company employs less than 50 people and many of them are so disheartened. How can I make a difference as a middle manager with a lot of responsibility and not much authority?"

You raise one of the most common, universal workplace dilemmas. Most people want to use their own curiosity and creativity to do their work and nobody wants to be micromanaged. The controlling behavior that you describe is contrary to this truth and almost always counterproductive. Many research studies, including our own, have shown that management behavior that is perceived as controlling will result in low credibility and lack of commitment. That is a recipe for long-term disaster.

You mention that people are 'disheartened,' which generally leads to two alternative results. Either people become disengaged and 'go through the motions' at work or, if they are clear about their own core values, they will eventually find another, more fulfilling place to work. In today's jargon, this is the problem of talent retention.

It will take courage to step forward and change the situation if, as a middle manager, you make the choice to make a difference. You will have to lead the executive director (ED) to see a new path for achieving the business objectives he seeks, and you have to lead your colleagues to a new sense of possibilities to prevent them from jumping ship and harness their energy to join you. I suggest you adopt a very straightforward approach, directly applying The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership outlined in The Leadership Challenge.

"Model the Way" by clarifying the values that are driving your choice. When you find your voice, you can help your colleagues to raise the level of dialogue at work. It sounds like issues of personality and disagreement are dominating conversation and keeping people from developing the required new focus on the business issues at hand. You can model the behavior of stepping up to create new relationships at work.

"Inspire a Shared Vision" by helping everyone, including the ED, to see the advantages of a future situation in which everyone is pulling together to succeed. The clearer you can be about articulating the necessary change and the advantages of working in a different way to achieve the results the ED seeks, the better others will be able to share the aspirations and strive to achieve them.

This is, of course, is about "Challenging the Process" and we all know that people frequently resist change. Someone like your ED, so set in his ways, can seem like a formidable obstacle to progress. One key approach, as Dick Nettle of Bank of America has said, is to "make staying the same more painful than the change." Motivating others to change established habits is often based on their realizing that the costs of their current behavior are too great. Are people leaving? Is productivity lower than it might be? A possible strategy here might be to get a group together to take on a specific aspect of your work and create a prototype of a more effective process to prove your point to the boss.

Your goal, certainly, is to "Enable Others to Act." If you choose to lead, you must enable yourself first. Are you and your colleagues waiting for permission to act? This may be one of those cases where it would be better to seek forgiveness than ask permission by enabling yourselves to work together and proving your point by showing the ED the efficiencies and improved results you achieve by collaboration.

If you do choose to step forward and turn things around, you will need to "Encourage the Heart" along the way. A suggestion here is to be sure that you encourage and support the ED and his goals. You need to help him see that you understand that the goal is progress and coordination business success, not confrontation for its own sake.
Good luck out there.

-Dick Heller is an energetic and enlightening consultant, trainer, and speaker who has worked with organizations in the U.S. and abroad to design programs that enhance leadership, team building, and customer service in climates of change.

Question for February 2006: "As a nursing student in China, I am just beginning to study leadership and am very interested in your book, The Leadership Challenge. In reading about the book, I have seen it referenced that The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership are behaviors of "transformational" leadership. What is your perspective on transformational leadership?"

We greatly appreciate your question about our book and transformational leadership. Yes, many people have suggested that our book reflects a transformational as opposed to a transactional approach to leadership. We agree with this perspective.

If you look at the third edition of The Leaderhsip Challenge published in 2002, on pages 153 and 178-179, there are brief discussions of transformational leadership. What we say is, "Leadership that focuses on a committing style is what leadership scholars have called transformational leadership. Transformational leadership occurs when, in their interactions, people 'raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality. Their purposes, which might have started out as separate but related, as in the case of transactional leadership, become fused… But transforming leadership ultimately becomes moral in that it raises the level of human conduct and ethical aspirations of both the leader and the led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both."

-Jim Kouzes, author of The Leadership Challenge
Question for January 2006: "I find it more difficult to lead people who work remote from me. What advice do you have to reach out to people who are located around the country and even around the world when budget doesn't allow for travel?"

This is a growing issue and in my mind a very real issue. When using the LPI, one of the reasons people will be rated lower is because of distance—there aren't enough data points to determine whether a person is doing something only occasionally or very frequently.

In managing long-distance associates, the challenge is to be there for them, just as you are for the people working right beside you. Since it is more difficult to determine when your remote people are feeling either unstoppable or lousy, you have to put forth some effort to establish what they most need from you and how you can support them. In these distant relationships, it is crucial to do the things you can to establish as much trust as possible, as quickly as possible. Think about what that requires. It often means an upfront, in-person meeting followed by regular phone calls to talk about the nature of the relationship, not just the work itself. It means spending time with the individuals (even if it's over the phone) strengthening the relationship and making sure the people feel their voices are being heard. It is also about Encouraging the Heart. Some argue about the near impossibility to effectively recognize remote people, because of the perceived needs of time, money or other factors. But encouraging is always more about genuineness than slickness, and all people, remote or not, get a lift from unexpected things such as personal notes or congratulatory phone calls. These can be easily done. As a leader, you just have to pay closer attention, since the accomplishments of the remote person are usually not as easy to spot.

Remember that we choose to follow leaders based on the way the leaders make us feel. Therefore we're more likely to follow people who make us feel strong, powerful, valued, etc. Remote associates are no different. You just have to concentrate on ensuring that your remote people feel included, supported and part of a team. You must be there for them!

Reflection Question: Without getting on an airplane, what are 3 things you can do to continue to build trust and provide a sense of "being there" to your remote associates?

-Steve Coats, managing partner and co-owner of International Leadership Associates

Question for December 2005: "Is it appropriate for a researcher to use just the LPI-self appraisal given to the leader and to not use input from others about the leader? Has your research found this use of the instrument results to be valid and reliable, or does the current documentation only support the self in conjunction with the "other" questionnaires about a leader?"

The Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) provides great feedback about how frequently an individual engages in the five key practices of exemplary leadership, and the 30 specific leadership behaviors associated with these practices. Numerous studies have documented strong empirical relationships between this frequency and other important variables, such as credibility, constituent satisfaction, productivity and commitment.

The impact of these associations is even more powerful when the responses are not simply self-perceptions but are validated by the perceptions provided by other people involved in the relationship (e.g., direct reports, peers, managers). Additional value-added feedback comes from learning about how closely one's own perceptions mirror those of the people around you. When only self-assessments are possible the respondent is left to wonder just how much his or her perception of behavior is in alignment with what other people see.

With data from other people (from the LPI Observer) is available, respondents get to see the comparison (and/or contrast) between their view of how they behave and what other people observe (and experience). Moreover, individuals get to learn how various constituent groups may be in alignment or not with how they perceive this individual to be behaving. Indeed, it is not unusual to find variation even within categories of respondent constituents.

Self scores vary from the scores received by constituents. What we're looking for, however, is not 100% agreement between the two, but rather how the "shape of the curve" or pattern of responses between leadership practices and/or specific leadership behaviors is similar or different and what sense the individual can draw from this data. In this regard, the respondent is transforming data into information, and determining what is meaningful and what may be challenging or even problematic.

As a rule of thumb, we recommend that respondents use 360-degree feedback whenever possible, meaning that they don't rely simply on their own assessments. From a normative viewpoint, we continue to find that whatever the individual's assessments are, that by engaging in the five practices more than they are currently doing today, they will become more effective leaders.

Question for November 2005: "What should facilitators keep in mind as they prepare to use the new Workshop materials?"

Wow! Great question. Where do I start?

First, Check out the Forms Folder on your CD.These are helpful "toolkit" additions aimed at saving you time when it comes to: Equipment & Supply Needs, Planning Criteria, LPI Reflection Pages, and Gathering Feedback. You also have a hard-copy of the pre-work and slides in your Facilitator Guide to help you see what your options are. In addition, there's a helpful section on experiential activities you can leverage to bring the concepts to life in the real-time.

Because all the material is now in one workbook it's more important than ever to understand your strategic scope. Otherwise, the activities and pages will feel equally weighted and that will be confusing for participants and stakeholders. Time will also be tough to manage.

Once you've scoped your strategic outcomes and expectations, have a blast innovating. From the groups I've worked with using the new materials, I was toggling between the 2- and 3-day activities to make sure the group was getting what they needed. I was also tweaking the design and pace as a facilitator. Read your room, minute to minute, and be as strategic as possible.

Initially, you might find it challenging to use the workbook without some prep time. It can be geared toward modules or workshops extended over numerous days. You'll need to anticipate how to guide your participants through the pages. What's interesting about the workbook is that it has the capacity to be an ongoing, fluid resource for you as facilitators, consultants and coaches. It's packed with options so dive in with your clients strategically over an extended period of time.

No workbook or workshop can be all things to all people. Here are four reminders as you start to use the new materials:
1. I found some of the groups I was working with were getting too conceptual. They were owning the idea of leading from a distance. They needed to apply the activities to their real life, real work and real issues. Don't hesitate to find that balance based on your group dynamics. The agendas provide a starting place.
2. Because all the PowerPoint slides are included on the CD you'll want to pick your spots strategically. Hide slides as needed and insert others that will deepen your group’s experience. Review your DVD video clips as well to determine relevance.
3. The agendas give you timing and activity guideposts. Know what essentials you need to hit and by when. Also be aware of what you can let go and use for follow-up work.
4. Many groups want to network/teambuild using the activities and discussion points. There is more individual reflection in the new design so assess the needs of your group and determine how to give individuals time to soul-search and time to relate with those around them.
— L.J. Rose, The Leadership Challenge® Workshop Master Facilitator