Redefining Greatness

Redefining Greatness (It's Complicated)

3:00 PM Tuesday November 30, 2010

Consider the following qualities:

Confident Humble
Courageous Prudent
Tenacious Gentle
Honest Compassionate
Decisive Flexible
Disciplined Playful
Strong Vulnerable
Deliberate Spontaneous
Discerning Intuitive
Outgoing Introspective




Which quality do you value more in each pair?

Is there any doubt that most of us tend to choose up sides between qualities, valuing one in preference to its opposite? Or that most organizations often value the whole constellation of qualities on the left over those on the right?

Many companies now build leadership programs around developing "competencies," a list of core qualities they expect all their leaders to embody. It's one size fits all, and the aim is to help people get up to speed wherever they fall short.

In direct reaction, the Gallup Organization began focusing a decade ago solely on developing people's strengths . The premise is that we're better served by cultivating our intrinsic strengths rather than by laboring, often futilely, to fix our weaknesses.

The problem is that both models vastly oversimplify the challenge of greatness — for leaders or anyone else — in a world of relentlessly increasing complexity.

Trying to build one's unique strengths turns out to be just as limited as single-mindedly seeking to overcome liabilities.

On the one hand, it's undeniably more efficient and more immediately satisfying to build on our existing strengths than to struggle with our deficits. On the other hand, even strengths have their limitations.

"There is always an optimal value," explained the philosopher Gregory Bateson, "beyond which anything is toxic, no matter what: oxygen, sleep, psychotherapy, philosophy." The same is true of personality traits.

The Stoic philosophers referred to this paradox as "antakolouthia," or the mutual entailment of the virtues. By this view, no virtue is a virtue by itself. They all include an opposite quality, and overusing a specific strength turns it into a liability.

Confidence untempered by humility, for example, turns into arrogance. Courage without prudence becomes recklessness. Tenacity unmediated by flexibility congeals into rigidity. Honesty in the absence of compassion is cruelty.

We're well served to rely on our strengths wherever possible, but not at the expense of valuing and developing their equally critical opposites.

Our brains are a good example. Most of our education focuses on developing the rational, deductive, analytic capacities of the left hemisphere. Far less attention is paid to cultivating the visual, imaginative, big-picture capacities of the right hemisphere. Each is necessary for the highest levels of thinking, and neither is sufficient by itself. Only by training both do we gain access to the full powers of the whole brain.

We need not be limited by our weaknesses, nor limited to our strengths. As Anders Ericsson and other researchers have shown, we're capable of achieving excellence at anything to which we devote sufficient deliberate practice.

"I don't do nuance," George Bush once famously said. It was his loss and ours. Greatness embraces paradox rather than choosing up sides, synthesizes rather than excludes.

Several years ago, I worked with the head of a large company who was very skilled at his job. Because no one doubted that, including him, he was also utterly at ease with acknowledging his shortcomings.

He was also eager for any kind of feedback, because above all, he wanted to grow and improve. What you got was a whole person, confident and humble, skilled and flawed. Not surprisingly, he was beloved.

I have a wise mentor who can be fiercely tough with me in one moment, and incredibly gentle in the next. Neither would be sufficient by itself. It's his ability to move between these opposite qualities, depending on the circumstances, that serves me so well.

Do I contradict myself?" Walt Whitman asked in Song of Myself. "Very well then. I am vast, I contain multitudes."

We all have an inclination to choose up sides — to find a comfort zone and stay there, especially in times of uncertainty. We go with what we know, and disregard the rest. Certainty makes us feel safer, but it also makes us smaller, and more defensive.

The less compelled we feel to defend who we are, the more energy we have to invest in becoming the best version of ourselves.

Greatness demands both decisiveness and flexibility, courage and prudence, strength and vulnerability, action and introspection.

The true measure of greatness is our capacity to navigate between our opposites with agility and grace — to accept ourselves exactly as we are, but never to stop trying to get better.

http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2010/11/redefining-greatness-its-compl.html

------------------------------------------

paladin2011 1 month ago

I truly liked this article. It resonated with me on a personal level in so many ways.



The quote is awesome!
also: "We all have an inclination to choose up sides — to find a comfort zone and stay there, especially in times of uncertainty. We go with what we know, and disregard the rest. Certainty makes us feel safer, but it also makes us smaller, and more defensive."


Finding balance and the range within which we can agilly and gracefully navigate between the opposites

expanding that range - and getting out of that comfort zone

Embracing the duality of life.

Cultivating strengths and having internal honesty to identify and work hard on weeknesses
we can not ve one dimentional leaders.

Accepting ourselves as we are with intrinsic value, but yet striving all ways to become a better version - constantly evolving requires lots of work

Also embracing the paradox - its real, its not simple, its messy like "it depends". The courage to wade into the messy and sort it out means you may risk the appearance of getting dirty. Jesus did it!

Not fitting easily in a nice neat box. There is greatness outside that box!
Each is necessary for the highest levels of thinking, and neither is sufficient by itself. Only by training both do we gain access to the full powers of the whole brain.

Again with "If"
The true measure of greatness.

2 people liked this. Like
Reply
lynn v 1 month ago

I love this quote:

“I have a wise mentor who can be fiercely tough with me in one moment, and incredibly gentle in the next. Neither would be sufficient by itself. It's his ability to move between these opposite qualities, depending on the circumstances, that serves me so well.”

I think this stresses another point about great leaders – having honest relationships with those around you. Great leadership involves using your own strengths for yourself and others. This mentor was wise because s/he knew when/how to be fierce or gentle - giving what you need when you need it.

Personally, as I am learning how to work well with leadership at a new organization, I’d love to hear others’ thoughts about how they adjust to this process – staying true to your own leadership style while adjusting to a new environment.

IdealistJung and 1 more liked this Like
Reply
FLeon12 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

Thanks for the quote, Lynn V, much appreciated. I agree in that a mentor should have an honest relationship with those around, especially a mentee. Assuming that this mentor has a good understanding of the mentee, is well balanced, and is not too jaded by any past notions of a mentee, I believe the mentor will be able to perceive and identify strengths and weaknesses of a mentee and have an honest conversation. Thus honesty is integral to self-improvement.

Interestingly enough, I am also working at an organization with leadership that is new to me. Adjusting to new leadership isn’t easy; in fact, I am still adjusting. This adjustment has required lots of listening, observing and questioning. I know who I am and the culture that I work best in (I hope that the hiring manager would have taken cultural compatibility into account), in the case that this organization is not the best fit for me I still must make the best of the situation.

During this observational period, I practice situational leadership- slightly changing my approach based on the individual I am working with while not compromising my beliefs. The goal is to maintain my integrity and my personal style, while collaborating with new colleagues and while being managed under new leadership; I think that in this case initially meeting people “where they are” can be helpful (again, please note I am specifically referencing the preliminary stages of “adjustment”).

paladin2011 and 1 more liked this Like
Reply
lynn v 1 month ago in reply to FLeon12

Thanks for sharing, FLeon12. As you have adjusted, have you consciously made changes to how you lead/interact with your peers and other leaders around you?

There were times when I told myself to make the most of it, too. However, in conversations with a friend, we discussed the difference between making the most of it and consciously practicing/expanding your leadership style in a new environment. He told me “making the most of it” gives the impression of “this could be better, but I’ll make do with what I have” – kind of a dissatisfied approach, still longing for what could be.

With developing your leadership style in a new environment, you consciously adjust your leadership – building the continuum of your skill set as some have mentioned in these comments – and are positively committed to really push your own boundaries, making you a bit uncomfortable but learning more in the end. What do you think? Do you feel you have expanded your leadership skills as you have adjusted?

Like
Reply
FLeon12 3 weeks ago in reply to lynn v

I do believe that I have made some conscious changes to my interactions with others. This is particularly true, as I have had the opportunity to observe those in my office and learn how they operate. I recognize that I will be interacting with people of various work/leadership styles in my new environment and will have to change my approach; the key is not compromising who I am. I do feel that as a leader I am growing and I am improving. I agree that growth can be uncomfortable; by going beyond yourself there will be very fruitful rewards.

1 person liked this. Like
Reply
PREZ 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

Lynn V, I couldn't agree with you more:) and in fact I believe it is through the dynamics of an effective mentor/ mentee relationship that you are strengthened. It takes a special bond and trust to take the good with the bad when it comes to advice, and doesn’t it mean so much more when it comes from the heart instead of just the head? When someone is truly looking out for your best interest it seems no matter how harsh their comment, you really end up appreciating it in the end because you know you will be the better for it.

I also really liked the comment that we need not be limited by our weaknesses, nor limited to our strengths. As Anders Ericsson and other researchers have shown, we're capable of achieving excellence at anything to which we devote sufficient deliberate practice. We can only know what we have to improve in when we have a trusted advisor to point it out and lead us in the right direction. However, in the same respect we also need to be accountable for our own growth and take responsibility for honing our strengths and never stop learning how we can become better.

1 person liked this. Like
Reply
Donald 1 month ago in reply to PREZ

I agree Prez. Lead with the heart and not just the head. Leading with the heart suggest that you actually care about the people you are leading. Great leaders care about those they lead as much as they care about the mission.

As you stated, harsh remarks are uncomfortable when we receive them but we end up appreciating them later because they were given to make us better.

The relationship can actually be compromised more when a mentor or a leader is not willing to give candid and sometimes stinging remarks. When they withhold valuable insight from those that depend on their guidance the follower misses out on an opportunity to grow and will continue to go down the wrong path. It also gives the leader a chance to grow, because he may need to come out of his comfort zone in order to give the needed counsel and direction.


1 person liked this. Like
Reply
lynn v 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

Thanks to everyone for some great feedback. I appreciate your willingness to share your stories and experiences. Whether it’s a challenging or thriving relationship, it must be nurtured and valued.

This is especially relevant to me at my current position since it started off as a rocky one. No major problems occurred, but I discovered that my leadership style is completely different from the culture of the company. After a lot for confusion and frustration, I decided I needed to adjust… and fast. Initially, I approached my adjustment with caution. I knew my strengths, and I wanted to use them! However, I, obviously, can’t force my preferences into an established culture, and like IdealistJung mentions, I need to focus on producing results. So, I jumped in with both feet. While I definitely struggle at times, I am learning how to lead in this new environment. Similar to Donald, I am also learning more about the impression my style may give to others. Some things I plan to continue, and some things I intend to adjust.

I realize this new environment has helped me practice another component of great leadership – helping others discover and improve elements of their own leadership. This is so obvious, but many times, as a leader, I usually think about the “helping others” side of it, not always the “others helping me.”

Thanks for helping me reflect and gain insight.

Like
Reply
Donald 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

I agree honesty and honest relationships are important. A great leader with be honest with themselves and with those they lead. I had a situation recently that put me in a light I never really considered myself to be in. I consider myself to be a gentle and caring person. However, recently at my job I have been called the heavy, the one that gets people to do their job because they are little uncomfortable around me.

Their uncomforting was not so much a result of me being heavy handed as was a matter of them not performing up to par. I was honest and straight forward, not harsh or mean, and expressed to them what the expectation are and what they had agreed too. They were not doing their part and became uncomfortable when I reached out to help them. I asked them what kind of help they needed and they took it as if I was being forceful our aggressive. I was simply trying to get the job done. I believe a leader should be will to do his part to help if someone he is leading is having difficulties getting the job done. I was sincerely trying to help. But my offer to help uncovered some short coming on their part, which turn me into the heavy.

I am ok with being the heavy, actually I kind of like it. Not because it I am intimidating, but because it is what is needed right now to get the job done. And all I need to do is be true to self and those I am leading. I have a very good relationship with the one who is uneasy with me, they just know I have expectation and I am holding them accountable.

This goes to the bloggers point that you can not be one extreme or the other. As a leader you must be honest invoke the appropriate response based on the current situation.

Like
Reply
Aixa A 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

I was able to observe leadership, unfortunately at its worse at my mentorship, but I was humbled by it all. Why? Because I felt confident that it was all going to work itself out and the outcome would be nothing less than great. Due to the way I handled things and my natural reaction to the more than awkward situation I was in - those that mattered saw how I handled myself - professional and patient with a bit of tenacity. I was able to pull it off with a balance of qualities.

Other thoughts for me is that those that have a tenacious character have a tendency of being annoying at times, but one can balance that with gentleness like the blog states. It merges two qualities into one. I practice on being honest with an element of compassion in order to get through dilemmas in my personal and professional life, however sometimes it’s seen as a weakness. Many woman leaders are known as a “bi!@h” when she is honest, tenacious, decisive, disciplined and confident, but when she has qualities that are outgoing, playful and flexible – it seems that people view her as not strong enough - I personally love the outgoing quality of leadership, as long as its followed with disciplned. I have the balancing act figured out!

What struck a chord for me and something I practice is, “The true measure of greatness is our capacity to navigate between our opposites with agility and grace — to accept ourselves exactly as we are, but never to stop trying to get better.”

Like
Reply
MC-2011 NUF 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

Lynn V,

I think you point out an important part of the article which struck a chord with me too. In my current role at my job where I am still fairly new, I constantly look to my boss(mentor) for guidance. She is an excellent leader: smart, intellectual and a great manager, but also humble and down-to-earth. She is open to always listening to everyone's feedback and is always willing to make everyone under her feel like part of the team and that everyone's opinion matters. Further, she takes it into consideration and uses it.

In my opinion this is the perfect example of a good leader/manager, and someone I learn from every day. Although she has a wealth of knowledge and experience under her belt, she makes it a point to let each person on her team know they matter and their opinions are valued. In that role, I feel I couldn't be in a better position to learn how to be a leader in the environment I work in.

"The true measure of greatness is our capacity to navigate between our opposites with agility and grace — to accept ourselves exactly as we are, but never to stop trying to get better. " This quote also hit home with me because it is something I try to practice every day. It's easy to think that because of your own unique experiences and skills and knowledge, you don't need to take advice from someone or hear someone else's take on how you should proceed with something at work, or even in your personal life. But I believe that the different idiosyncracies we all have/possess are gifts that we can share with others and we are all learning from each other every day.

In my current position, I find that I am in a unique position to do just that. Further, my mentor/boss provides a good example for me to learn from every single day we work together. I consider myself pretty lucky to be able to have that experience.


Like
Reply
IdealistJung 1 month ago in reply to lynn v

Lynn V,
I had a very similar reaction to this blog and that particular quote. I also appreciated that Tony recognizes that "Greatness embraces paradox rather than choosing up sides, synthesizes rather than excludes" and that we need such greatness "in a world of relentlessly increasing complexity."

You also make a wonderful point about having honest relationships and the interdependence of leadership upon one's own and other's strengths. No one can do it all and do everything well.

To your question, I believe great and effective leaders will have a certain amount of elasticity in their styles to adjust to new environments and challenges. Staying true to your own leadership style requires honesty with yourself as well--recognizing your strengths and weaknesses, when you need help from others, what's working, or not, in a situation, and then being able to adapt in a way that is still "true to yourself."

I recall David Mensah saying something along the lines of: focusing on producing results rather than your style of leadership. If you can produce results on a consistent basis, you've got to be doing something right! One way to think of it is that leadership style is more a means to an end (producing results) and not an ends in itself. Ultimately, I think people will remember the value of the results you accomplished and not so much your style unless it was extreme in some way (abrasive, arrogant, alienating, awkward, appreciative, alliterative...!).

Personally, I've been listening, observing, reading, asking questions, and meeting with colleagues as much as I can in these first three months of my mentorship--and I expect to continue to do that throughout my remaining six months in Seattle. The first three months have definitely been a period of testing the waters and one personal trait/work style that I've shared so far is trying to add a bit of fun in the work/day. I don't think this is unique at all, and I think most people can relate to or appreciate some fun as long as I'm also getting other things done!

Like
Reply
SejS 1 month ago

Thank you for the thought-provoking piece on "Redefining Greatness".

I would like to highlight an excerpt from one of your previous postings:
"Dope, Dopes and Dopamine: The Problem With Money" (October 26, 2010).*

“It would be wonderful to believe that those most responsible for the current financial crisis learned sobering lessons from the worldwide havoc and suffering they helped to prompt… Don't hold your breath — especially so long as we continue to revere our citizens based on their net worth, even as they've knocked down ours.”

Here is a question: are we intoxicated by the “success” of others even if it is achieved through arrogance and recklessness? We can determine the quality of our leaders through due recognition and support; it would do us well to succeed at recognizing true greatness.


*http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/...

2 people liked this. Like
Reply
Rick Ross 1 month ago

The key to navigating "between our opposites with agility and grace" may be identifying the destination. The first step towards finding it is viewing the opposites, not as a dichotomy, but as a continuum.

The continuum becomes clear when we work to appreciate the strengths of the view directly opposed to our own which underscores your point: "never to stop trying to get better". With an appreciation of the continuum, we're left with the final task of finding balance - that point along the continuum which is optimal for the situation.

Thanks for the wonderfully thought-provoking post.

1 person liked this. Like
Reply
Jennifer 1 month ago

Thank you for starting a great discussion. I disagree with your analysis of strength and weakness. You miss the influence of context. Context can turn a strength into a weakness in a second and as your list suggests context is the arbiter of which one we choose is the "upside".

La Trobe
www.creativeconneciton.ca
www.creativeconnection.co.uk

1 person liked this. Like
Reply
Cathy Carmody 1 month ago

This post on the redefinition of greatness is a great spark for discussion. You acknowledge the work-on-strengths vs. work-on-deficits camps, and I agree that to “get better” means working on both ends of whatever competency pair a company wants to emphasize for its leaders. Redefining greatness to include the "both/and" of various characteristics is long over due. I look forward to your examining more in depth the various points you raise (such as handling uncertainty and energy, both of which occupy my thinking).

One assumption, which I doubted at first and which seemed to contradict your point about balance, was that it's 'undeniably' more satisfying to build on existing strengths rather than work on deficits: perhaps it's just me, but I often find it very satisfying to succeed in something I haven't had as much success accomplishing than to improve what I consider myself already 'good' at, whether coaching leaders or hitting a golf ball. I’d much rather succeed at eliminating some three-putts than adding ten yards to my drive. Or is that not what you meant?

1 person liked this. Like
Reply
Kounselor 1 month ago

"We need not be limited by our weaknesses, nor limited to our strengths." This quote resonated with me. Its so easy to place limits on ourselves and our own ability. We often think that we place limits on oursleves by focusing sloely on our weaknesses. Because I am not as skilled in a certain area, i stay away from it and this limits us. But we can also be limited by solely focusing on our strengths. I never thought about it quite like that before. Focusing on either never fully allows us to see the bigger picture or the larger issue. I think this helps us to become more strategic. It reminds me of the debate crime.Some argue we need reforms in education to solve the issue of crime, others argue we need to become tough on crime and incarcerate more people, however the larger issue is the correlation between poverty and crime. How do we have a serious conversation about addressing poverty to avoid some of its by products such as increase in crime?

Like
Reply
MC-2011 NUF 1 month ago in reply to Kounselor

Kounselor,

Good comments. Particularly, you bring up a great point on how just focusing on soley our weaknesses or just our strengths we may be losing sight on the ultimate big picture, or the final product we are trying to achieve.

I think this can be our downfall in general especially those who work in the public sector/govt sector or non-profit sector, where it is imperative that folks work together as a team. If we focus on just one or the other, it impedes our progress towards our ultimate goal.

Further, how you relate it to the war on crime proves the argument even moreso, being that focusing on just one or the other(crime and/or education) might not be all we should be looking at; we also need to focus on the root cause which is, ultimately poverty. This is an especially important point, particularly when talking about compromise or seeing the other side's point of view to get closer to your common goal - or even when working with different political parties.

In order to get to a decision, it is important to focus on what we all bring to the table, while learning from others on things that we need to work on. I see this every day in my work place. Some folks are just fine with showcasing their strengths, and not focusing on where they can improve. A balance would do wonders in achieving a collective task and will definitely be a more effective strategy in the long run.

Like
Reply
FLeon12 1 month ago

Wow, Tony; how insightful!

I really did enjoy your piece! I think this article really capitulates my personal and professional take on life… it is all about balance!

Finding balance is particularly difficult while working for an organization/company that operates in the realm of “black and white”. There can be so much beauty in “gray” yet I find that often times the gray is frowned upon.

I am guilty of functioning in a world of black and white; I like to be able to define things. I find it easier to operate under a manager that is somewhat predictable and has set clearly defined expectations. On the other hand, I do believe that embracing the “gray” and finding balance is critical to those in managerial positions, especially if a manager strives to ascend to the next level-- greatness. Here, being predictable or embodying one set of attributes or another does not necessarily constitute being great; then I ask myself, can one be predictable and find that balance???

A great manager should learn to keep any extreme personality traits at bay; as you mentioned, too much of any of the aforementioned qualities can yield negative results. It is my belief that in life we must find a way to be even-keeled and transcend its dualities. I am working, working, working but it is certainly a struggle!

Like
Reply
cc0711 1 month ago in reply to FLeon12

Felice, I agree with you comments. I think it it's important to be able to do a self-assessment of your own strengths and weakness and find a balance. The ability to posses personality traits that are opposite from one another makes one multifaceted personally and professional. I appreciate having the opportunity to be mentored by someone that is obviously great at what they do, but still has obvious weaknesses that they are working on to improve. The cross between confidence and humility allows me, as a young professional, that being a great leader does not mean you have to be GREAT at everything.

Like
Reply
Rick Yvanovich 1 month ago

Thanks Tony for the great discussion you kicked off. As @notmd said, we're all an ongoing work-in-progress. Personally I always like the sporting analogy of "raising the bar" so irrelevant of whether its a strength or weakness, like athletes we just have to continue raising the bar.

Like
Reply
Mike Brown 1 month ago

In the 1990's, I sat in an corporate audience listening to Jim Collins talk about what differentiates a great from a good company and got progressively more depressed as he gave example after example of companies that by sheer size, longevity, and profitability deserved to be called great. His epitome of greatness at the time was GE and to him Jack Welch was the paragon of a great CEO. When I asked Mr. Collins why we should call a company and its CEO great if they pursued profits without heeding environmental costs (e.g., polluting the Hudson with PCBs then fighting attempt to force them to clean it up and compensate affected communities; contrast with BP today) he mumbled that that's not what he meant by great. If nothing else the concept of greatness is in the eyes of the beholder.

Like
Reply
Dolores Diz Schrader 1 month ago

Just a reflection. I guess that greatness it can be defined as excellence too. And I want to go back to the parents of our occidental culture: greeks and romans. And recall the concept of what the greeks called "arete", and the roman concept of"virtus". Both words are bound up to excellence. This means, the act of living up to one's full potential. And this implies to develop oneself to find the virtus in all we do. The virtus can not be found in an extreme (too much-too litlle),never. The right place to find it is in the middle, and middle doesn't mean mediocraty. Because in terms of perfection and good, the virtus is extreme. Middle means the right point between being a coward and being bold. In this middle point is where bravery resides. ANd this can be applied to all the qualities described in this article. To reach greatness is necessary to find the right middle for each situation, person and place. I wouldn' call that flexibilty I would call it the perfect balance. And to find the right balance, the most essential talent you need is the power to discern and judge properly what is right and true for each circumstance.

Like
Reply
notmd 1 month ago

All of us are a work in progress..in some ways we are like a sculpture by Michelangelo..we are removing our ego to uncover our true spirit..I am still chipping away..

Like
Reply
Emmanuel Matuco 1 month ago

Respectfully do allow me to share. I would like to pursue this from a different angle.My apologies for the lengthy comment.

Doesn’t your beloved country possess all the above attributes already? Your country is great. Each country that went through a struggle for nationhood is great. All are therefore great. Since a country’s greatness is but the sum of her people’s struggles, doesn’t that make all citizens worthy of respect? Great? The elements found in a jar of ocean water are the same elements of the ocean such sample were taken from. Immanent.

If all nations are great then why are we trying to defeat each other? To be not great? Side by side with greatness stands mediocrity. Two forces inside our hearts struggling to outdo the other. Immanent.

So how do we ensure only the best part comes out? That “greatness” is within our reach. What dreams must we pursue? What doable steps must we take?

One can be the best parent if one wants. One can be the best brother, or sister, or neighbor if one chooses to. One can be the best friend or whatever meaningful role one willingly pursues to help another soul. Does the love of my parents for their sons lesser than the love of Gandhi or Lincoln, or Mother Theresa for their people? Does your parent’s love for you lesser than mine for my children? No. In the pursuit to serve others, we are all equals. We can all forgive those who trespassed against us. We can all be great in our unique way if we want to.

Nations go through a journey to greatness. Institutions go through the same process. So must individuals. The immortals of Olympus envy us because each point of the journey is a moment of discovery. Not something like that movie – Ground Hog Day. Predictable. Would you like that boring kind of journey? Not for me. Without struggle the core is weak. It will crumble against the slightest obstacle. A strong core creates its own happy state even amidst adversity.A strong core creates its own happy journey.

Respectfully I propose, we must think like the great stewards. Like the founders of the great religions. They never sought greatness. They only seek to serve others especially the ordinary people. They operate on millennial timelines. One generation starts from an ordinary starting point but putting in systems where the next generation becomes better and better. A burning torch, a mission handed down through a timeline of at least a thousand years. Today ordinary. Tomorrow great. In the future-magnificent!

Let’s journey together to whatever “greatness” is in store for us. Let us discover life again and enjoy it. Let's embrace all our trials with glee and prevail!

“Let’s lead lives of great joy. Let’s strive for the sake of lofty ideals. That’s what makes life worth living.” Daisaku Ikeda.

Like
Reply
Diqa 1 month ago

"Greatness demands both decisiveness and flexibility, courage and prudence, strength and vulnerability, action and introspection.
The true measure of greatness is our capacity to navigate between our opposites with agility and grace — to accept ourselves exactly as we are, but never to stop trying to get better."

Two prime examples that comes immediately to mind is a Mother & Nelson Mandela - each great in their own right. Mothers are forced to be able to switch effortlessly from one trait to another as she takes on all the roles demanded of her eg. carerer & disciplinerian, housekeeper & home maker, wife & partner, confidant & mentor. Nelson Mandela is the ultimate example of revolutionary & peace maker. True Greatness.

Like
Reply
Eric Bryant 1 month ago

This is good. Love the philosophical references there as well. We need more good philosophy infused in business ethics and management, I think. The ideas are not only Stoic, but also Taoist. "A thing contains the seed of its opposite inside it already," and the Yin Yan symbol captures this idea that a quality begins to wane at the moment it is the greatest. I liked this post.

Eric Bryant, Director
The Gnosis Arts Community Intranet
http://gnosisarts.com/home/Int...

Like
Reply
Silence 1 month ago in reply to Eric Bryant

Really

Like
Reply
Tvannest 1 month ago

Also, your political example misses the mark. I'm not one to defend GWB as a leader OR communicator, but his comment on "I don't do nuance," was actually a demonstration of other values touted as foundations of leadership--candor, authenticity, and focus. Did you really want "W" to be awash in details and nuance?...Is that what was needed at the time? Brings about images of a 9-11 "beer summit" (ugh).

Like
Reply
Frank Diller 1 month ago in reply to Tvannest

Actually, yes, I would have liked for George W. Bush to have had some understanding of nuance. Then maybe we wouldn't be in two unnecessary wars based on staunch ideas that turned out to be erroneous. Maybe if he had considered other perspectives, we would be saving billions of dollars in defense spending every year.

Like
Reply
Tvannest 1 month ago in reply to Frank Diller

Great point, Frank. I strongly recommend, though, that we only place our trust for dealing with complexity and nuance in the hands of the capable. Regardless of who's the sitting president or your own party affiliation, D.C. has shown little such capability (and, clearly, hasn't won my trust).

I agree with and greatly respect your perspective on strategy and value (i.e., best use of billions, cost of faulty info and assumptions or decision frames)--lessons for us all. Still, probably not healthy or complete place for a post-mortem on the war decisions you cite...such a debate here would take the same, underinformed, shape that you ascribe to the Bush Administration.

Like you, Frank, I dream for better decision making in Washington and I dream of more transparency (again, promised, not delivered)...I just don't trust the Rube Goldberg-like machine formed by the political influencing and logic-bending rules of Washington to deal with the nuance you value. I think this year's political lesson is, "Dial it back boys and girls...you're a big, complex machine best trusted with only the most basic of charters and decision-making." (see for ex: social security; energy policy/EPA; the tax code; etc.---a genuine mess!)

Here's a short list of "Hero's of Nuance" --- ENRON, the EPA, the FDA, the Intelligence Community, the UN, Credit Default Swaps, etc. (ugh!)

By contrast, Kennedy, Reagan, and even "W" were a bit more straightforward and productive. If you want a biz list, I'd start with Harvard's own contributor, Bill George, or Jack Welch from his G.E. days.

Like
Reply
Tvannest 1 month ago

This is great guidance about the folly of choosing the fixing competency gaps v. talent building (neither sufficient). However, the view here on COMPLEXITY AS A VIRTUE suffers two key shortcomings (below). Also, it is important that you don't confuse characteristics measured on a continuum (like the personality constructs you list in your paired columns above) and demonstration of a competency or skill measured in binary terms, e.g., "got it or you don't" (Y/N). Much value in nuance can come from personality insights and related leadership application, but it cannot be treated like a task list.

First = NEC. BUT WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT: Certainly all humans should take your bow to our complexity as a compliment, there is no doubt that we are complex beings or machines. That said, many thought and practice leaders have found that, in fact, the path to real change and growth lies in simplicity and focus. Innumerable articles in this same forum (HBR) reinforce the power of focus and simplicity. In additon, think about key characteristics like Authenticity--it comes through behaving consistently with your own simple truths. Attempting to honor your own personal nuance tends to make you intellectually disingenuine (splintered, hard to pin down) and is rarely pulled off by anyone but the best of liars and thieves (or politicians).

Second=PRAGMATISM: We have a limited capacity (simply meaning 'less than ideal') to understand ourselves and others in nuance and layers. As demonstrated by the limits of psychotherapy, the high failure rate for organizational change, and the hulking size of the 'self-help' market, insight can be gained from the "I am complex" mantra. However, most actionable solutions aimed at living through such insight introduce MORE complexity (and lead to repeated failure as a result).

Most of us fall when trying to dance on the head of a pin (embracing "nuance"). Use the insight about your complexity to identify the most developmental value, then focus on 1-2 things that you can change to improve! (Necessary AND sufficient for progress...)

Keep it simple, Sparky!