Good is the Enemy of the Great

 

By now we are all aware of this phrase, but I wonder how often we apply it to ourselves?

 

When we are good at something we tend to take it for granted and if we are not intentional, we can become complacent. Being good at something keeps us from becoming great.

 

Over the last year I have been addressing this in my own life and in the particular arena where I spend most of my time: teaching. I was even so bold as to put this statement in my annual self-evaluation report for the dean of the college: Good teaching is the enemy of great teaching.

 

I am a good teacher, but if I am not intentional about becoming a great teacher I can slide into complacency and my teaching may actually decline. So last year I began to engage in a project that was the most challenging and uncomfortable thing I have done since earning my Ph.D. 15 years ago.

 

Despite my long-standing resistance, I decided that my courses needed to be available to our students in the on-line venue. I began the development process last August, and in June of this year I completed the development of 3 advanced graduate level courses:

• Managerial Behavior
• Power, Influence and Leadership
• Leading Change

 

The challenge of doing this occurred on two levels. First was the challenge of the technology. Second, was the challenge of structuring the course materials in a detailed and sequential way so that the content built on itself as the course developed. This was particularly challenging because of my strong preference for spontaneity and “building the bridge as I walk on it.”

 

On both levels I had to follow the prescription I have so often given my students: “Allow yourself the discomfort.” In the early stages the discomfort around the technology was so great that I wasn’t sure I could do it. But, I got by with not just a little help from my friends.

 

Now that the process is complete, I think the challenge has made me a better teacher – in all venues. I am more deliberate about course content and individual class sessions. And as these courses are rolled out, I am seeing additional things that need to be fixed, and that I need to learn.

 

Good teaching is the enemy of great teaching. I haven’t arrived yet, so forgetting what lies behind, I press on…

 

What are you good at? Are you allowing the fact that you are good to keep you from being great?

Allow yourself the discomfort and challenge yourself to get out of your comfort and complacency and press on to being great.

 

 

 

 

 

 

An Ethics Check

There has been quite a bit of discussion generated in light of the Penn State/Joe Paterno scandal. The discussion hits at a key leadership issue: character.


It has reminded me of a simple ethics check a friend of mine taught me several years ago. This simple tool extends cost-benefit analysis by adding a time dimension and can be applied to an ethical decision by asking:

Are the costs/benefits experienced now or in the future?

If the benefits are now, but the costs are in the future, it may not be a good ethical choice. If on the other hand, the costs will be experienced now, but the benefits are in the future, it may be a good decision. While this isn't a "universal law," it’s a good check.

Let's apply it to Joe Paterno's decision: If he had chosen to "go public" and risk damaging his and the school's reputation when he first found out about the abuse being perpetrated by one of his assistant coaches, the costs would have been immediate. But after the initial dust and fury settled, Paterno’s character would be intact and his reputation would have been enhanced.

Instead, he chose the "immediate benefits" of covering up the horrible scandal and deferring the costs to some future time, if he had been caught. Because of his choice, his reputation is now permanently damaged.

It really boiled down to a flawed cost-benefit analysis.

The Final ? ?? Commandments for Leading Change

10. We must work hard to understand the fears, concerns, and issues that people have. We should treat resistance as feedback and be willing to look in the mirror to make sure that we're doing everything we can to communicate as fully as possible.

However, we cannot afford to be held hostage by a vocal minority of self-serving resisters.


11. Remember: if there is a cost for changing, there is a cost for not changing. If there is a risk for changing, there is probably an even greater risk of not changing. When you make the case for change, be sure to include the case of not changing.

12. We must "keep a strain on it." This means that when we start having some short-term wins we cannot allow these successes to lure us back into complacency. We have to finish the game.

We have to keep on keeping on.

Commandments for Leading Change: 7, 8, 9

7. Deep change takes time and we must manage expectations about how realistically long it is going to take to achieve the vision.

That's why short-term wins are so important. They keep the bosses on board, they undermine the cynics, they pressure the self-serving resisters. 

And they prove that the pain is worth it because we’re making progress toward our vision.


8. Change is often painful, but we must be diligent to make sure it is not harmful. Any decision that impacts another human being is by definition an ethical decision. And when difficult decisions have to be made-and they will- we must take care to make sure that we are treating every individual that is affected with dignity and respect. This includes full disclosure and advanced warnings of the changes as we become aware of them, as well as generous compensation if severance is required.

9. Leaders are always disappointing somebody. The key is to disappoint people at a rate which they can stand.

The change that we are implementing is no doubt directly aimed at what was somebody's good idea 10 years ago. They will be disappointed that their idea's time has passed. But, we cannot let the past, or "the way we've always done it around here" to hold us back from making the changes that need to be made now in order to secure our future.

Commandments for Leading Change: 4, 5, 6

4. No change will ever happen until there is first a deep dissatisfaction with the status quo. That is why it is so important to create a sense of urgency.

While creating a sense of urgency and dissatisfaction with the status quo is important to get the change process started, it is also important throughout the change process. Before we get to the promised land, people often get disillusioned and want to go back to where we came from.

Therefore, it is important for leaders to frequently remind people of why we started this journey in the first place: we had deep dissatisfaction with where we were.



5. Leaders take people from here- the status quo - to there- the compelling vision of the desired future state.

We must engage people's heads and hearts in the transformation process. We must paint a desirable, compelling picture of where we are headed.


6. Sometimes leaders see the need for change before the people do. Therefore, sometimes we have to let the issue ripen.

Of course, sometimes we also help ripen the issue by allowing current systems to fail or issues to explode so that people will finally realize we cannot go on like this.

Twelve Commandments for Leading Change

One of my favorite courses is Leading Change. I am now developing an on-line version of the course. (Yes, I am now teaching on-line! In fact, Leading Change is the third course I have developed for the on-line platform.)

Developing courses to be taught in an on-line environment forces a discipline of thought that is not my normal mode of operating or preference. Yet, the discipline required has also become a tool for creativity. I never thought that discipline could lead to creativity and this proves that an old dog (aka tenured, "senior faculty member") can learn new tricks.

As I was recapping the key ideas for my Leading Change class, I created a summary of Twelve  Commandments for Leading Change. In this and the next few posts I will be sharing these ideas.

I am interested in your response to these ideas.

Are there any additional "commandments" that should be added?

1. Leadership is not about me. But it begins with me. If I am to be an effective leader in any context, I must first be the kind of person people want to follow. In the context of my Legacy Leadership model, I need to be worthy of imitation. This means that the leadership process must begin with intense self-examination. The self-examination must include my motives, my values, and a deep understanding of my personal case.


2. I must be the change that I want to see. Too many power wielders - they aren't real leaders! - identify a need for change and then tell the people that they - the people - need to change, yet are unwilling to make the necessary changes themselves. This creates a huge credibility gap and power wielders who follow this approach will not be successful in authentically engaging the people in the transformation process.

3. Character Counts! People have to buy in to the leader before they will buy in to the vision. If I am to lead with integrity I must constantly confront my own lack of integrity. We must be intentional about cultivating our character.

Our Being > Doing; Doing = f(Being). Being is greater than our doing. And our doing must flow from our Being.

Extra Grace Required

In my previous post on teams I discussed the "one another" principles as OCBs. As I said in that post, these provide oil that lubricates the machinery of our teams and eliminates friction. We need to be diligent in our practice those "one anothers."


I have been involved in small groups and various kinds of teams - in the work place, at church, and in sports - and there seems to be a constant in each of these. There is always at least one person in the group that taxes the team. I call these people "EGRs" - Extra Grace Required.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, but if they are allowed to dominate, the effectiveness of the team will be greatly diminished.

Often the need to have a direct (in private) discussion about their behavior and its impact on the team. For many EGRs this is an eye-opener and the feedback relates to things that were truly in their blindspot. In my experience, this works in the majority of cases.

At the extreme, sometimes (very rarely and always as a last resort) the EGRs may have to be removed from the team.

How do you handle EGRs?

Have you ever been an EGR?