Stephen Harper Missed Leveraging the Earth Hour Opportunity

The success of Earth Hour participation around the globe demonstrated that small actions combined with big ideas are a powerful force for change. Such awareness, particularly when the action is simple, sets the stage for deeper and longer term behaviour change.

The sense of community the campaign engendered added to the potency of the idea. Our minds are forever imprinted with the entire experience of having fun with family and friends while achieving something practical and beneficial. In our increasingly interconnected world in which change seems too slow in coming for the many, the quick feedback on reduced power loads heightened our sense of satisfaction.

None of the success of Earth Hour would have happened without leadership in the countries and communities that participated from the top to the front line. According to the post Earth Hour reports, approximately 30 million people took part in the event, comprised of 380 communities of which 150 were in Canada.

For reasons that defy logic, if the newspaper reports are accurate, Stephen Harper missed a chance to be a more visible leader on this file. The Toronto Star’s correspondents in Ottawa noticed that the ground floor lights at 24 Sussex Drive remained on during Earth Hour and so did the lights in Harper’s Parliament Hill office. On the other hand, John Baird, Harper’s Environment Minister dimmed his household lights. In this instance, they were not joined at the hip.

Who can argue against the merits of gearing down on power usage? Harper could have reached across party lines and connected better with all of us. At the least, Mr. Harper could have used the opportunity to plant seeds for future votes.

Leading effectively is a matter of both the heart and the head----being in tune with “the people” and the evidence. In this instance, the spirit of the people and the evidence were strong enough for a leader to go with the flow.

Muhammad Yunus, winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize for his micro-credit success with millions of the world’s poorest families links the reality of economic change to the “excitedly multi-dimensional” nature of people. Our “emotions, beliefs, priorities and behaviour patterns can best be compared to the millions of shades we can produce from the three primary colours”. In Yunus’ view, the business of pursuing specific social goals is part of our multi-dimensional psyche, providing a meaningful way for us to step outside of ourselves and be “change agents for the world”.

Robert Quinn in Building the Bridge As You Walk On It expands on this notion:

It is our hypocrisy and self-focus that drains us.
When we become purpose-centered, internally directed, other-focused, and externally open, we discover energy we didn’t know we had.

Earth Hour captured our energy to conserve energy. It also fired up our imaginations and sense of being able to make a difference. Let’s hope that Prime Minister Harper picks up on the energy and helps us do even more.

The Clinton-Obama Leadership Race Needs a Rallying Point to Break the Gridlock

Simplistically-speaking democratic delegates are in a bind. Vote for Hillary if you want depth or deep experience. Or, if breadth is the requirement, a symbol of diversity and apparent open-mindedness, vote for Obama. Both are vital for effective leadership. Too bad one of the candidates doesn’t measure up significantly on both. An either-or choice is making life difficult for the Democrats. Without resolution, they are in danger of being divided and causing confusion for voters.

My informal surveys with emerging and experienced leaders reflect the difficulties. The results are extreme: the majority for one or the other with few in-between. Hillary came out on top among approximately fifty government leaders from a range of functions. About half as many staff in a research university, also representing a cross-section of jobs, sided overwhelmingly with Barack. The reasons may lie in what an organization values: getting things done in better ways or jumping into the new and different. Certainly the democratic candidate choice must be forcing a lot of soul-searching.

With so much at stake, the situation calls out for a rallying point that will help differentiate the choice more clearly. Recent articles cite the “popular vote” as a guide. Obama wins that one. But, what are the messages underlying the “popular vote”?

Richard Florida, in his new book, Who’s Your City: How The Creative Economy Is Making Where You Live The Most Important Decision Of Your Life, presents some intriguing connections between people and economic growth that may be playing on the minds of Americans. His data demonstrate correlations between “open to experience” personalities and regional innovation and growth. He explains that openness is an important factor for attracting and leveraging diversity which, in turn, drives prosperity.

Given the dire estimates on the economic costs of the war in Iraq, Americans may instinctively be moving towards a candidate that they believe can generate recovery and growth faster. Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University’s 2001 winner of the Nobel Prize in economics has sent a chill down the spines of political decision makers in the United States: the war has conservatively cost $3 trillion. The bleeding will continue with the cost of war veterans’ disabilities. The meaning of security is changing from protection from terrorists to protection from financial hardship and a lower standard of living. The “popular vote” may be mirroring this shift.

In the end, it’s still a tough choice: “either-or” rather than “yes-and”. Let’s hope that whoever wins is able to reach out across the divide to bring both depth and breadth quickly to the leadership table.

Is Obama Helping Us Coppice?

As the flow of ink becomes exponential describing and analyzing the escalating battle between two able presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, we search to identify and feel comfortable with the forces in play. Many pundits refer to Obama’s appeal as a “movement”, the likes of which we have not seen since the beginning of the civil rights era or the challenges to the status quo by baby boomers in the 1960s. The women’s movement led by Betty Freidan, Gloria Steinem and others derives from that time too.

We are overdue for renewal of some kind. Both candidates speak to this. Perhaps Obama does it just a little better, as in the ecological practice of “coppicing”---cutting trees down to the base every few years to allow more light to reach the forest floor.

Obama, because of his appeal to the younger generation and others who feel as if they are on the outside looking in, might be fostering in their imaginations greater diversity of opportunity faster, as occurs with coppicing. Change under his watch, they might reason, could happen with far more speed and intensity than under Hillary’s. That idea, it seems, is catching fire. That’s a movement. There is pent up frustration. Consciously or unconsciously, Obama, more so than Hillary, might represent the way to greater sunlight in the minds of an increasing number of delegates.

Are we witnessing the way of nature? Certainly, the Obama fever is reminiscent of the early days of courting when our critical minds take flight for awhile. Those instances don’t occur very often as all the right circumstances need to be in play including an unconscious biological connection gifted to us by our ancestors.

We do recover about three years out or sooner, when the hormones masking our judgment cool down and allow for a more balanced view of the special person in our life. In many instances, we were right on in our choice. Sometimes, not and hopefully, we can move on. But, at least we gave ourselves the chance at choice.

Leadership isn’t just about the facts. It’s also about art and music. It’s something that resonates deeply in our souls. We are witnessing that drama in the United States presidential primaries. We map that drama onto our own leadership experiences in our respective countries and work places to compare notes. We ask ourselves over and over again---what kind of leaders really do make a difference?

The Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama story will continue to fascinate us for a long time, regardless of who makes it to the podium. Both have enormous potential to tame the wildness of the times. Both offer pathways through the wilderness. Both have enough bandwidth to help us build more resilient societies.

But do both recognize the importance of biodiversity, a precursor for resilience? Obama’s appeal is in that direction. To deliver is another matter.

The Echoes of an Original Sound

The American Presidential primaries have ignited a firestorm of civil participation not seen in a long time. This is good. Something is getting to the hearts of people across all spectrums. Could this be an original sound of rediscovered meaning and purpose in a world that has veered too far from what it takes to lead an ordinary life?

Hands down, Barack Obama has led the way with his inspirational oratory. To quote John A. Shedd, “When there is an original sound in the world, it makes a hundred echoes.” But other Presidential hopefuls are doing their share. John McCain has a great story of survival under the worst of circumstances. Hillary Clinton is a gritty woman renowned for her work ethic and ability to survive multiple dueling matches up close and personal. Obama’s background symbolizes the struggles of ordinary folks. The timing couldn’t be better for his leadership. Without a revived and happier middle class and a helping hand for the disadvantaged to get on their feet, prosperity and progress have little chance.

Much has been said about Obama’s charisma and Hillary’s lack of it. That is not the heart of the matter. Authenticity is. Is this person “for real” deep in his heart and soul? Does he care? Does he understand my situation and want to help me reach my potential? Or, is he just full of hot air? Does he have the courage to face up to and work through the forces that stand in the way of a better life for the many not the few?

Authenticity relates to a complex lifelong process of self-discovery and self-knowing, It is the opposite of self-delusion and grandeur and “I know best”. Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones in Why Should Anyone Be Led by You? offer a quick checklist of an authentic leader:

1. Consistency between words and deeds
2. Coherence in role performance, displaying a “real self” that holds all the different performances together
3. Comfort with self

This cannot be faked. Even children sense when things are not quite right about a person. They don’t like self-absorbed opportunistic adults who cannot connect to their worlds. Authenticity is deep in our souls or not.

In the absence of stability, authentic leadership anywhere and everywhere becomes even more vital. It must be earned over and over again. Whoever does that well each step of the way has a better chance of securing one of the most coveted jobs in the world than the others.

Michael Buble's Funfest: A Sign of the Leisure Economy to Come

I had the pleasure of observing a Michael Buble tour up close and personal recently. I discovered a welcoming, well-run organization with a pervasive spirit of fun mixed with---as the younger generation says--- “awesome” virtuosity. With talk of the rise of a leisure economy again, this could be a signal of things to come for managers and leaders working with the “twenty and thirty-something” generation.

My daughter Jennie and two of her singer colleagues were engaged by the organization with which Buble is partnering for the logistics side of his cross-country tour to perform back up to “That’s Life” in the Toronto and environs area. As the tour passed through Toronto, London, Kitchener and Hamilton, I willingly became the chauffeur to provide safe passage for the girls to London and Kitchener. An unexpected perk was being able to observe the clockwork activities behind the scenes and upfront. The litmus test was its impact on how we experienced being there from the beginning to the end.

Despite being run off his feet and dealing with all manner of challenges, the head logistics guy took the time to guide us to and within the venue at each step of the way. Driving directions to the place especially once at the city limits from the highway. Where to park (security was ready for us). What door to enter (and he was right there to greet and escort us). Where to hang out to get ready (dressing room). The location of the food. The check points before the performance. Who would be taking care of the women to guide them to the stage. How they would watch over their belongings while performing. The security outside the dressing room door. Periodically, he would waft by to see how we were doing. With his eye on serving Michael Buble’s overall performance for the evening, the logistics guy did all the right things: he made sure the singers were emotionally and physically-supported each step of the way.

The icing on the cake was Michael Buble and his entourage. No doubt, Buble is the fun spirit behind the whole of the enterprise. Without him, the atmosphere would have been different. Perhaps the logistics team would not have been quite as pleasant and competent.

Besides having a great singing voice, Buble is a barrel of laughs and infects all the performers accordingly. He missed his calling as a comedian. He sprinkles his performance with outlandish comments and antics. He takes his energy from the audience and engages them well in the whole experience, sometimes worrying his security detail, no doubt. His very capable live band partnered smoothly with him to entertain us and lend some lightness to the serious array of songs from Buble’s album “Call Me Irresponsible”. The opening act, a gospel a cappela group called “The Naturally Seven” was astounding in its ability to mimic various instruments and lift the rafters with their inspirational songs.

My prime takeaway from this was the importance of the emotional climate in an organization. With no effort whatsoever, I immersed myself in it and felt better for the experience. My volunteer work was unexpectedly acknowledged with free tickets to watch from the front rather than the back. I did not see big egos ensuring that a hierarchy was firmly in place. Respect for each other pervaded the whole. The prime intent was to serve the customers. With that aim in mind, no stone was left unturned.

The second takeaway was the glimpse at an emerging phenomenon once again: the “leisure economy”. Retiring “workaholic” baby boomers are discovering its allure. But by accounts from many researchers probing the brains of the up and coming generations who will be our next crop of leaders, the “twenty and thirty somethings” will want copious opportunities for leisure throughout their careers. That means on the job “fun”, definitely a culture of respect and caring and non-traditional arrangements for holidays.

Linda Nazareth, in her book, The Leisure Economy: How Changing Demographics, Economics, and Generational Attitudes Will Reshape Our Lives and Our Industries, poses some provocative questions:

“What if more people chose to work less and give themselves more time?”

“What if they start making decisions not on the basis of speed---choosing things that can be consumed or done fast, or that let them do things faster---but on other values?”

Leaders and managers are already noticing this shift. And, it’s worrisome from the point-of-view of succession planning. The Boomers are now coming to grips with the reality: the subsequent generations don’t want to be like them (having unbalanced lives). At the same time, they do want to make a difference.

This trend is good for our health, well-being and longevity. Let’s embrace it and use our creative brains to make it work. It’s good for business too.

The "Tiger Effect" May Lurk in Your Organization

The presence of Tiger Woods in a tournament causes higher-skill PGA golfers’ tournament scores to slump. This can have implications for “tournament style” competitions in organizations when one person far outshines everyone else.

According to Jennifer Brown, a researcher from the University of California in Berkeley, California, the other top pro golfers’ scores are 0.8 strokes higher when Tiger Woods participates, relative to when Tiger Woods is absent. She refers to this as the “adverse superstar effect” which increases during Woods’s streaks and disappears during Woods’s slumps. Ms. Brown found no evidence of players taking undue risks which would have potentially reduced their performance. She concludes that “the presence of a ‘superstar’ in a competition can lead to ‘reduced’ efforts from tournament participants”.

Recent newspaper reports on Tiger’s 62nd win at the Buick Invitational in San Diego, California appear to support this research. A number of players indicated they were competing for “second place” due to Tiger’s commanding lead going into the final round on Sunday.

On the other hand, Brown contends that if another highly skilled person believes that the race is “winnable” against rivals of similar skill more or less, he or she will tend to be motivated to work harder. Within our organizations, therefore, she questions the compensation “20-70-10” system and similar compensation devices that reward the top 20% IF there is a superstar present.

This flies in the face of conventional wisdom, in general, especially for leaders who grew up playing sports and who believe in competition to raise the performance bar. Maybe it’s time to re-structure our assumptions and systems to reward the many not the few for their efforts. This also suggests that superstars require attention but not at the expense of everyone else.

Charisma: The Chameleon That Always Seeks Sunlit Mountain Tops

It tantalizes us. It provokes us, this perplexing leadership trait called “charisma”. At the same time, we crave it and we fear it, as we do not want to lose our critical judgment or look silly. We also wish we could have more of it for ourselves as the media reminds us over and over again---people love it.

Barack Obama has struck a chord deep in the American psyche. It’s about being tired of living with the tyranny of fear that has permeated our daily lives particularly since 9/11. Fear is not uplifting. Fear puts the wrong hormones into our already over stressed bodies. Fear is a downer. Fear makes us go within ourselves. Retreat from hope and community.

Apparently gospel singer Mahalia Jackson shouted out at least twice to Martin Luther King when he was deep into a “nightmare” speech in front of a throng of thousands on August 28, 1963, in Washington, D.C.: “Tell them about your dream, Martin.” This roused King from his fears (“America has given the Negro people a bad check….”) to “I have a dream…” which resonates to this day. We prefer sunlit mountain tops to the valley of darkness. It is in our nature.

There is much to do as all politicians and ordinary folks know. The middle class in both the United States and Canada is shrinking. The gap between the haves and the have nots is widening. Statistics Canada recently reported that the earned income of the “average” Canadian---the median income--- was the same in 2004 as in 1982. While the Canadian economy grew in real per capita terms by more than half, it is only the very well-paid---those above the 90th percentile of the income distribution that experienced increases in earned income. The same trends exist in the United States but not quite as starkly: Between 1975 and 2005, median family income in the U.S increased by only 28 per cent while the economy grew by 86 per cent. The average earnings of the highest 1 per cent of the U.S. pyramid rose 160 per cent between 1975 and 2005. The income of the top tenth of 1 per cent soared 350 per cent. Top CEOs in both countries now make 200+ times as much as the average worker. This does not make for peaceful and prosperous community-building.

The reasons are complicated. Decisions made by leaders on both sides of the border have mattered. More tolerance of a “winner take all” environment over the past 30 years coupled with massive manufacturing job losses linked to the rise of China and India, according to numerous analysts, have contributed to our era of discontent.

With progress not matching our expectations for overall community well being, the time is ripe for the enlightened and the good side of charisma anywhere particularly one that unites instead of divides. Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King were all well aware that positive change is not possible through fighting. Barack Obama through his record of community development and his “audacity of hope” messages now brings that approach to today’s volatile and complex social and political environment.

While charisma of the right kind beckons, in the end the true measure is getting the right things done. This is a tall order and often transcends charisma. Yes, inspiring visions are absolutely critical and finding common ground vital. But that wears thin when little happens.

In this age of wariness about our political leaders, we are always drawn to warmth, caring about others, authenticity, openness to creative thinking, evidenced–based and thoughtful decision making and action. Senator Obama has caught our attention. We can be grateful that he has re-ignited those very positive emotions that have been subdued or buried since 9/11.