Category: Proactive Leaders

Categories
BLG Leadership Insights Features Political Competence Proactive Leaders

Toads & Good Ideas

In the 1920s Austrian biologist, Dr. Paul Kammerer, was conducting controversial experiments on the evolutionary process with amphibians—including midwife toads. His work challenged conventionally held beliefs and advocated the Lamarckian theory of inheritance which argues that organisms can pass acquired characteristics from one generation to the next.

His research was deemed fraudulent by American herpetologist, G.K. Noble, in the journal, Nature. He charged that Kammerer had injected his mid-wife toad samples with ink so they would appear to have carried on characteristics from their environment.

Soon after the review was published Kammerer killed himself.

But was Kammerer’s work fraudulent? Did his suicide indicate a confession?

In The Case of the Midwife Toad, Arthur Koestler attempts to figure out whether or not Kammerer was telling the truth.

At the time of Kammerer’s research Austria was in political turmoil and the Nazi party was tearing the intellectual community apart.

Koestler discovers that Kammerer’s toads and notes might have been tampered with by a colleague at the University of Vienna who was a Nazi sympathizer. The motive of the suspected sabotage, Koestler reasons, was to discredit Kammerer who was a public pacifist.

If that was the case, Kammerer’s research may not have been fabricated and would have firmly run contrary to the scientific orthodoxy of the time.

Modern science suggests that Kammerer’s work, while running contrary to Neo-Darwinist evolutionists, may explain epigenetics—the study of heritable changes in genes caused by factors other than changes in the underlying DNA sequence. In other words, Kammerer may have found evidence that would suggest some acquired traits can be passed on from generation to generation.

While Koestler artfully tells us the engaging story of Kammerer he lets us decide whether or not Kammerer’s work was falsified.  He gives a fair and critical analysis of Kammerer’s work and also explains it with simplicity.

The Case of the Midwife Toad teaches us the old lesson: people who challenge the status quo might not be entirely crazy. It’s a valuable take-away for leaders who propose new and different ideas.

Even though you may be right and your evidence is strong you will attract critics who play the “got-you” game.

Defending conventions is the refuge of the nervous and unwilling, standing up for new ideas takes daring. Kammerer’s case exhibits all of the pitfalls and highpoints of walking into new territory.

Categories
BLG Leadership Insights Leadership On the Edge Managerial Competence Political Competence Proactive Leaders Proactive Stories

A Promising 12 Point Program to Success, Happiness, & Riches

Jesse Thorn is a self-made man who considers himself successful. He’s got a family, money in the bank, and a growing radio business he loves.

Thankfully, Jesse isn’t a secretive man. He’s written down his road-map to success and given it the modest title: Make Your Thing: 12 Point Program for Absolutely, Positively 1000% No-Fail Guaranteed Success

Every one of Jesse’s points is illustrated by a quirky, real-world, example. He suggests you build a community much like Insane Clown Posses. He recommends you “Keep Your Legs Moving” just like the rapper Killer Mike. He also doesn’t think it’ll be a bad idea if you keep it ‘real’ in the same vein as rock musician Andrew W.K.

Jesse isn’t saying that you must paint your face like a juggalo, start a record label like a fringe rapper, or thumb your nose at the establishment like a punk rocker in order to become successful. He’s arguing that you can learn from the accomplishments of people who have been briefly acquainted with success.

However, his 12 point program comes with a caveat. Point 12 demands that you actually get to work and start exercising your talent. I was hoping he’d have horse racing tips.


Categories
BLG Leadership Insights Features Ideas Managerial Competence Political Competence Proactive Leaders Proactive Stories

Leadership in Higher Education: The Skills of Political Competence

innovation safety leaders

In my neighborhood job security meant working for AT&T, teaching K-12, or joining the ranks or higher education. The latter career track came with the additional advantage of containing a bit of prestige. But there was also a sense of calling, a sense that you’d be serving some collective good by adding to the knowledge of society, and moving truly important agendas ahead.

You also entered higher ed because you felt it wouldn’t be a pressure cooker and the ruthlessness of the private sector wouldn’t rear its head every time you made a mistake.

Well, things have changed.

In a world where AT&T can’t provide job security and the U.S. auto industry almost disappeared, we can’t assume that you favorite college or university will be there tomorrow.

For years higher ed has been dominated by two mantras. One for administrators: “Leave well enough alone and things will get done in their due time.” The other for academics: “Let’s have a faculty meeting.”

But now the clock is ticking.

Higher ed is no longer the proverbial, angelic, oasis amidst a sea of private-sector sharks (if it ever was). Today, higher-ed organizations must keep moving in order to stay afloat. The Ivy League right down to the smallest of community colleges can no longer be guided by the stars—they need leadership that is proactive, pragmatic, and aware that change is crucial. They need the type of leadership that gets things done.

First and foremost leaders in higher ed must understand the three reasons universities and colleges often resist change.

  1. Intransigent culture: Leaders in higher ed must appreciate how to subtly move around the deep culture which has been celebrated and worked for so long. The very culture that has given higher ed its identity must now be adjusted.
  2. Turf protection: Higher ed is an arena of turf and silos. In a world of minimum resources, zero-sum games, and department elimination, this is becoming more evident. We need leaders who have political competence and can mobilize around these issues.
  3. Tension between administration & faculty: Traditionally, there has always been tension between administrators and faculty and each group quickly dismisses the other. Each has their own stereotypes of the other. It’s the false distinction between a stereotypical bureaucrat and a stereotypical academic. In a world where we want to increase shared services and shared missions, leaders must help administrators and faculty come together.

In the context of all this leaders within both the faculty and the administration must develop a degree of political competence. They must understand how to bring people together, mobilize around agendas, and sustain change.

A number of years ago, a colleague of mine told me, when assuming the chair of a large science department, “I don’t do politics.”

My answer was, “Don’t be a chairperson.”

The university is a maze of mixed interests, mixed agendas, and inconsistent visions. Political competence is the minimum we should ask of leaders in higher ed.

Categories
BLG Leadership Insights Features Managerial Competence Political Competence Proactive Leaders

Three Blind Leaders

Leadership is about the moving of agendas–but sometimes micro agendas get in the way of macro visions and, dare I say, real accomplishments. Sometimes leaders get so obsessed with the incremental, the immediate, the necessity of the moment, that they simply blow off the big issues.

Sure, leadership is about keeping people on your side, but this over obsession of trying to sustain a coalition, this over management of making sure your people are with you, can really take you from the position of leadership to a position of tactical compliance, or even worse, passive acquiescence.

So let’s think for a moment about Barack Obama, Bebe Netanyahu, and Mahmoud Abbas and the speeches they gave at the United Nations last week.

What do they all have in common?  Simple. All were obsessed with their internal coalition, their micro-political agenda, and not with truly visionary movement.

Let’s start with President Obama.

His recent General Assembly speech was a long way from his 2009 Cairo Speech. President Obama no longer challenged Netanyahu, but he reinforced him. As a good friend of mine recently said, “Obama became more Netanyahu than Netanyahu!”

What was the point of the speech?

Well the point was the 9th congressional district in Queens where Republican Congressman Bob Turner recently beat his Democratic opponent David Weprin in a largely Jewish district.

President Obama, having slipped in the polls and needing all the support he can get on his jobs agenda, crafted his speech in order to keep “the Jewish democrats” in his corner.

Now, let’s look at Netanyahu’s speech

Netanyahu speech appropriately states the classical Jewish Zionist vision–and dismisses the issues of the settlements.  He presents the purity of his vision and brings up the classical arguments and says that the Palestinians keep missing opportunities.

Netanyahu, however, was well aware of the context. He knew that Israel’s left leaning labor party was becoming more and more invigorated and that he had to speak to his base.

Now, let’s finally analyze Abbas’ speech.

Abbas’ speech addressed the 1948 Al-Nakba, but it ignored the principal of a Jewish homeland, the Jewish tragedy, and the Jewish state, and essentially gives a micro list of his perceptions of injustice. He gave very little and implied a live-and-let-live mentality.

However, Abbas speech couldn’t ignore reality. Hamas still maintains strength in Gaza and indeed many of his critics would feel that any recognition of Israel would be inappropriate.

Here’s what we have. Three leaders who are concerned with maintaining their coalitions. Three leaders, who are avoiding an opportunity to leap forward because they are fundamentally concerned about the degree of their political survival.

Obama could have simply said that we wanted to be the neutral broker and, using the ‘getting-to-yes’ mindset, he could have declared in some dramatic way: “this is an opportunity to bring all parties together.” But, he failed to do that.

Bebe Netanyahu had the opportunity to recognize Palestinian grievances and a bit of the Palestinian narrative. He could have used the opportunity to legitimize some of the Palestinian pain by simply saying, “I recognize that the Palestine’s have their grievances.” If he had done so, he would have shifted the dialogue.

And Abbas failed just as dramatically. Rather than recognizing Jewish historical claims, Jewish contemporary fears and anxiety, he chose to speak only to his own narrative.

We can learn a few leadership lessons from these UN speeches.

1. Focusing on your short term collation is political survival, not leadership

2. The key to creating change in a conflict situation is to at least recognize the narrative of the other.

3. Don’t always lead by talking about what has been talked about. Talk about what could be.

4. The high ground never hurts.

Maybe these three speeches at the UN were effective. Maybe I missed the point. Maybe by giving these speeches these leaders gained enough legitimacy with their base so they’ll have time to participate in the talks suggested by the Quartet. Maybe they’ll really want to push towards a visionary peace.

I’m not sure. But all I heard were three micro-politicians with little vision. I saw three blind mice. See how they run, see how they run for office.

Categories
Creativity Managerial Competence Proactive Leaders

Labor Day


Through a sea of glistening blue (jeans), you spot a current of croissants and crullers rippling through the break room. Confetti streams the walls in tribute to Ralph from HR’s birthday and hints of nutmeg and cinnamon perfume the room. The mailboxes, disguised as Christmas stockings, contain beckoning paychecks and invitations to a weekend cocktail party celebrating the impressive numbers released from finance earlier in the week. A rare laughter swells out of Ethan Marcus’s office where a group is gathered watching viral YouTube gems. It must be Friday.

This phantasmagorical scene may be deep-fried in hyperbole but it still conveys an essential point of organizational culture: Fridays are different. Office norms loosen and a euphoric air envelops a once stale workplace. As a proactive, engaged leader, the challenge then becomes how to accommodate and engage in this culture shock, while simultaneously advancing an agenda that can’t break for Falafel Friday.

So how do you remain chill without exhausting air conditioning resources and freezing your agenda? A politically savvy leader knows how to infuse some productivity into the celebratory croissants. With your coalition partners congregated and their guards down, you have a unique opportunity to solidify the relationships that will ultimately mobilize your agenda. While your colleagues may burrow into their silos on Monday through Thursday, Friday pops these bubbles and allows information to waft around with the nutmeg already saturating the air.

Today is the shooting star of organizational phenomena; it’s a casual Friday preceding a long Labor Day weekend. My office is a ghost town and I think I saw a lonely hay bale blow by my desk 15 minutes ago. I have a creeping suspicion that my calendar is off and I’ve accidentally come into work on a Saturday or, more troubling, that I missed the meteorologists warnings to evacuate the area.

Nevertheless, I’m not squandering a perfectly fertile labor day. While I munch on abandoned pastries, I chat with coworkers and gain casual background on this office and my current campaigns. Without the pressured angst that pervades other labor days, I gain privileged insight into my organization. Meanwhile, I break to blog about this to the anonymous masses quietly celebrating their Labor Day Fridays in other office nooks and crannies. I hope this message reaches you in time before your day dissolves into a haze of lazy celebrations. If not, no worries. There’s always Monday.

Pic Credit: amirjina