TIME TO GROW UP?

People have realised that heirarchies have some value after all. We spoke about this several newsletters ago.

Their purpose is to offer clarity. They were never intended to provide a blueprint for relationships. Nevertheless we all seem to default to hierarchical arrangements. You can see this whether it's two guys running a hot dog stand, the working of the local post office, or the Byzantine and inscrutable incompetence institutionalised in government departments world-wide.

So, why do we not only keep opting for hierarchies (from PTA to girl scouts), but throwing up dysfunctional, emotionally immature ones? The answer we suggested a few newsletters back was fear.

In short, it's emotionally easier to default to hierarchical relationships and not do the heavy-lifting of relationship building.

Commentators on World War II remind us it should have come as no surprise. One had only to see the seething humiliation of the Germans, everyone should have been able to read Hitler's intentions in MEIN KAMPF, the military build-up was unambiguous and all the early warning signs were chilling. Even when Hitler began to make his moves, Churchill's was the lone voice from the wilderness, smothered by the complacency and appeasement of the government of the day. But it wasn't just the Brits. In the US we downplayed what was happening and the gravity of the threat. The Vatican looked the other way. Why? It's hard not to think that the failure was not one of intelligence. Rather, as above, it was emotionally less challenging to engage in 'magical thinking' rather than to face and seek to transform reality (the ultimate act of leadership).

Many years before Katrina hit, risk assessments done in the United States reported that the two biggest threats to the US homeland were a terrorist strike in a major city and a Force 5 hurricane hitting exactly where it did. We knew the levies couldn't take it. But we didn't repair or upgrade them. We said it would be too expensive. Looking at the carnage today, what was 'too expensive' before, would have been a wonderful investment had we had the spittle, the will, the foresight. As I write, two of the many thorny issues in the US media are the White House stalling inquiry into what precise intelligence they had received in the run-up to 9/11 and now the pre-Katrina warnings. There is an eerie similarity.

But if the hesitation (however glossed over by hand-wringing about needing to protect Presidential advisors) is, as most suspect, because there were indeed warnings that went unheeded, then we are once more in the same situation. Why were they ignored? Were all these people monstrous thugs? Maybe. But more likely, they hoped it wouldn't be as bad, might not happen, they 'de-prioritised' it in face of easier and seemingly more 'tangible' things in front of them. They took the emotional low road.

Why do organisations watch slack-jawed as a new technology clearly antiquates their most prized offering? Clayton Christensen in THE INNOVATOR'S DILEMMA would tell us because the new 'disruptive technology' (whether computers, or microprocessors, or discount airlines, or Japanese cars) initially only are inviting to previous non-users. However, as the providers enter on the back of undemanding non-users (or low-rent users who can't afford 'the real thing'), they perfect their disruptive technology, until it becomes clearly superior to what exists. And so the number of customers increases, until the original product or service or technology becomes marginalized and virtually irrelevant.

However compelling this analysis, it is clear that this takes time. And well before this transition is anywhere near being completed, it will become evident that this new technology is here to stay, can be improved upon, will be improved upon, and then will most likely take over as its glimpsed potential is fulfilled.

So, then why don't these clear (current) market leaders with significant capital take action before they're routed? Yes it might make no economic sense to give up profitability on some fringe flash in the pan initially. But as the flash becomes more enveloping, and before it becomes 'a way of life', why don't they wake up? The answer I would suggest is the same. It would be too hard to change. It would require too much energy to create a secondary organisation. It's too emotionally demanding yet again to reorient processes, mindsets, heartsets, priorities.

Business after business suffers from silo warfare. Departments within companies, as the old saw goes, act like medeival fiefdoms. Each potentate demands unquestioning loyalty to themself. The interdepartmental bickering crescendoes when budgets are being debated, when feedback is being shared, when credit or blame are being allocated. So much energy goes into fending off each other internally, that precious creativity that could go to winning in the market is stupidly squandered.

When I deal with clients who have reorganized along Category lines and are 'globalizing', you can see the same interface issues from head office to region, from region to country operation. The model is clear, the rationale is uncontested. Yet power struggles and wasteful peevishness abound. Why? Because once more, it's EASIER. It is far more emotionally challenging to build a team, rather than a glorified executive committee posing as a team. It is far more emotionally draining to care, to share, to consult, to co-create, and to add value not through territorial chest-pounding but by choosing to BECOME the prototype for how it all can work.

Many times as a consultant we go into groups that are smiling on the surface, but have knives drawn just below the Conference table. Usually this is because there are some '800 Pound Gorillas', the undiscussables, that are poisoning the atmosphere, the relationships and the possibilities. When I gently but firmly provoke their expression, and facilitate their constructive exploration, it's amazing! Energy flows, people relax, hope is in the air, people are excited, and I am frequently thanked profusely for this critical intervention. Yet what we've done most critically is make it impossible to hide any longer. We have been paid to escalate the issue and help generate the energy to face it. If we've done well, we haven't let people do what's easier, go underground, back into hiding. Sometimes, with enough exasperation, leaders see the heavy cost of this subterfuge themselves. But more often, they need some gentle provocation.

And it's not just corporates or politicians. How many times at home do we allow a relationship to disintegrate but never tackle the mutual apathy or boredom for fear of upsetting our own little fruit tray? It's emotionally easier to let a relationship die the death of a thousand cuts (of boredom, or non-listening, of self-absorption, whatever), than to re-invigorate it by being vulnerable enough to be open, and caring enough to really grow for each other.

One of the hallmarks of leadership is the ability to face crisis, no perhaps even to WELCOME crisis, to usher it in. It's not that true leaders glory in agony. Yet they realise that we are an evolutionary species. We are always 'moving', evolving, developing. Crisis is the cutting edge of that ongoing transformation. Crisis is how we grow, our old self is no longer enough, we have to outgrow who we were.

So we are ALWAYS in a type of crisis if we will see it. And the earlier we can see the crisis and meet it, the faster we can act on it and remake it. One of the great opportunities of leadership is to have our antennae up to spot crises that are most relevant to our vision, to help our people look at them head on, and then galvanize ourselves and our teams to creatively grapple with them and in time make them into something else, something better. The faster we get there, the faster we can move in and then move on.

How do we find the emotional will for this? By realising that ignoring the early warning signs (and they are usually quite evident -- look for anywhere where what once 'worked', no longer does so to the same extent, and the trend is downward), we only make the problem worse. In other words, if we cringe at facing the potential problem today, we will literally SPASM at having to face its full flowering sometime soon down the road. Right now we have the freedom to make an impact, then all we'll have is the obligation to react, probably in shock and perhaps even panic.

We know we cannot keep depleting the planet's resources at the rate that we are. We realise we need other fuels than oil. We know there are several staggering crises in Africa. We know we need to help Middle Eastern societies to evolve. We know as we fight terrorism, we must also fight to keep our own societies healthy and free. We know we have to do better with schools and on nuclear proliferation. We knew, years ago, that women should occupy more leadership positions. Yet of all these and many other truisms, look at how little has moved, what paltry action we've taken. And in some cases, look at how terrifyingly palpable our 'date with destiny' is beginning to seem. We STILL have a window of opportunity re some of the above, but it's narrowing.

Why do we allow this? The answer is again there are no shortage of remedies, but the remedies demand emotional intelligence, maturity, discernment, energy, engagement, personal and collective leadership. They require challenging our complacency, our comfort level, and our past sources of satisfaction. But without this there is no evolution, no way forward, certainly no breakthrough.

Could it be, that it's finally time to grow up?

And how do we do it? Slowly but surely. We begin by meeting smaller crisises early, so we can get the practise, so we can get emotionally into shape. We do so by developing our appetite for converting problems accepted early into enduring possibilities and opportunities. We do it by challenging people to think early and deeply. We do it by celebrating the breakthroughs that take place when we decide to face reality as it sends out its first smoke signals. We do it by ensuring that our decisions accept the implications of what's happening all around us. We stimulate the most frightening reality with our vision and our dreams, and then get busy shaping what we encounter.

Ask yourself and your team what are 2-3 potential crises that we sometimes fleetingly discuss but never do anything about, which we know are significant, but always get swept under the rug? What are the things we've made taboo for others to raise, but which they likely discuss often in the coffee room or hallway? Which customer segments are declining precipitously and why? Where are we losing talent? What is happening with our suppliers? What do we see happening geopolitically? What are some technological breakthroughs we should be aware of?

We can see why scenario planning is considered such a potent tool and why companies are appointing 'Chief Knowledge Officers'. We suggest every Board session, every senior meeting, have at least 15-20 minutes dedicated to 'most interesting crises glimpsed'. The more we can extrapolate and use the time in between meetings to have conversations, to listen, to read, to open our eyes, the more we are likely to raise our collective awareness and thereby also our practical vision.

As real conversations take place (not conversations that are replete with innuendo about other things NOT being talked about), people will wake up, sit up, take notice, offer more of themselves, and we can then move on to create the future.

Time to grow up? Oh yes. Our societies need it, our companies need it, our teams clamor for it, so much more than we realize may hang in the balance. How can we lead a world we refuse to really recognize? How can we lead a company whose greatest challenges we are unwilling to face? How can we create, when we refuse to face the obstacles our creativity has to surmount?

Our job as leaders is to do what's emotionally harder today so that we can help to make it objectively and fundamentally easier on all levels from today onwards.

Meet 3-4 crises early this year and watch both you and your business leapfrog forward! Increase your team's aptitude in this regard and notice the proactive innovation that begins to gush through your organisation. Start catalysing crises so that you can get in there early, learn all about them, prototype fast, and ride those currents to the shores of fresh achievement.

Let's lead the future rather than fearing it!