Anyone who can withstand the grueling nature of the United States Presidential nominations’ race deserves a gold Olympic medal. It has to be adrenalin and a steady diet of optimism that keeps the candidates upright and awake! In a world in which top and middle management leaders are on overload most of the time, we can identify somewhat with the brutal challenges of leading.
Now, with the dial increasingly pointing toward Barack Obama as the Presidential nominee of choice for the Democrats, the real impact of Hillary’s pending loss is beginning to sink in. In North America, we have an elephant in the room: a rotten track record of voting women to the top political post of a nation. Kim Campbell’s tenure as Canada’s Prime Minister barely counts as she was not in office long enough to accomplish anything.
Currently, there are 6 female Presidents and 7 woman Prime Ministers in the world. The Presidents are located in Argentina, Chile, Finland, India, Ireland, Liberia and The Philippines. The countries with Prime Ministers include Germany, New Zealand, Moldavia (Designated), Mozambique, The Netherlands Antilles, Ukraine and The Aland Islands. The numbers are small. But, telling in that South America is doing better than North America.
Another way to view the situation is the number of female members in the 195 countries and governments in the world. It ranges from a high of 60 % (Finland) to zero (Monaco and Saudi Arabia).
We would expect due to the length of time we have had electoral democracies in North America, that we’d at least be skirting the high end. No! At 21 %, Canada is outdone by most other established democracies except Ireland (20 %), Luxembourg (20 %), Belgium (19 %), Liechtenstein (20 %) and the United States (15 %). Even Rwanda at 25 % beats North America and, by recent reports, it is largely women who are through micro-credit initiatives rebuilding the economic foundation of that country.
Social scientists and others academics likely have many explanations for North America’s elephant in the room. We’ll hear more from them once the Democrats make up their minds. Certainly the pundits have no fear of speculating: blatant sexism! The timing is now for healing the race issue! There is no simple answer.
Although there is reason to celebrate---a fresh new face on the political scene in the United States---it feels somewhat bittersweet for women. Nevertheless, Hillary’s grit and depth and Barack’s focus on change and bringing people together have together made a positive contribution to the political emotional climate in North America. For that, we are fortunate. The times ahead will be exciting and interesting!
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Annika Sorenstam's Choice: Every Working Woman's Dilemma
At first, I was flummoxed by Annika Sorenstam’s surprise announcement that she was “stepping away from competitive golf” at the end of the 2008 season. As one of the greatest female golfers of all time and with many more playable years left, why, at age 37, would she do that?
Watching her press conference and many others that followed, I began to understand---the peacefulness of her demeanor spoke volumes. She is ready to give back more. Her raison d’etre has shifted toward family and the fullness of life in general. This is every working woman’s dilemma.
To improve the quality of life for all peoples on this planet, women have a huge role to play. Many studies have demonstrated that organizations with women represented well at all levels, perform better than those who have thinning ranks of women, the higher one goes toward the top. For example, Fortune 500 companies with the most women on their boards outperform those with the fewest—52 per cent higher return on equity and 42 per cent higher return on sales (Why Women Should Rule the World, Dee Dee Myers, President Bill Clinton’s former press secretary). While this is good news, it only creates more stress for women. To effect change, we need to be where the action is. But, how does one choose between family and everything else?
The irony is that without women’s involvement, extensively and persistently, their voices will not be heard to the extent needed to make raising families easier. Take Canada’s situation on day care. Out of 14 industrialized countries, we are dead last in public spending on early childhood education and care, according to Stats Canada. Furthermore, while Canadian women outnumber men at university, and 75 per cent of women with children under 5 are in the workforce in Canada, women comprise just 30 per cent of the legislators in Ottawa (the average for Canada’s Conservative party is 16.3 per cent). Yet, in Spain, for example, women are in the majority at the elected level. What a difference that must make in better understanding the policies needed to raise the next generation while tackling the tough global issues of the day!
Annika’s story resonates. Her “axial spirit”, the desire to find greater meaning in life by being other-directed, is universal. She is joining a legion of women who have stepped out of the limelight and the “rat race” to attend to other pressing matters. If history is any predictor, she will return to the limelight after a decade or so. But, it won’t be to compete competitively. After time out to reflect and be involved in different ways in sports and in life (raise a family), she’ll be fighting with renewed vigour for policy changes in the world of sports that will impact the lives of many young people. At least, that’s my wish…..
Watching her press conference and many others that followed, I began to understand---the peacefulness of her demeanor spoke volumes. She is ready to give back more. Her raison d’etre has shifted toward family and the fullness of life in general. This is every working woman’s dilemma.
To improve the quality of life for all peoples on this planet, women have a huge role to play. Many studies have demonstrated that organizations with women represented well at all levels, perform better than those who have thinning ranks of women, the higher one goes toward the top. For example, Fortune 500 companies with the most women on their boards outperform those with the fewest—52 per cent higher return on equity and 42 per cent higher return on sales (Why Women Should Rule the World, Dee Dee Myers, President Bill Clinton’s former press secretary). While this is good news, it only creates more stress for women. To effect change, we need to be where the action is. But, how does one choose between family and everything else?
The irony is that without women’s involvement, extensively and persistently, their voices will not be heard to the extent needed to make raising families easier. Take Canada’s situation on day care. Out of 14 industrialized countries, we are dead last in public spending on early childhood education and care, according to Stats Canada. Furthermore, while Canadian women outnumber men at university, and 75 per cent of women with children under 5 are in the workforce in Canada, women comprise just 30 per cent of the legislators in Ottawa (the average for Canada’s Conservative party is 16.3 per cent). Yet, in Spain, for example, women are in the majority at the elected level. What a difference that must make in better understanding the policies needed to raise the next generation while tackling the tough global issues of the day!
Annika’s story resonates. Her “axial spirit”, the desire to find greater meaning in life by being other-directed, is universal. She is joining a legion of women who have stepped out of the limelight and the “rat race” to attend to other pressing matters. If history is any predictor, she will return to the limelight after a decade or so. But, it won’t be to compete competitively. After time out to reflect and be involved in different ways in sports and in life (raise a family), she’ll be fighting with renewed vigour for policy changes in the world of sports that will impact the lives of many young people. At least, that’s my wish…..
Sunday, April 20, 2008
When Empathy Can Get You Into Trouble: The Thin Edge of the Wedge for Barack Obama
Emotional intelligence refers to an ability to recognize the meanings of emotions and their relationships, and to reason and problem-solve on the basis of them…it is the capacity to perceive emotions, assimilate emotion-related feelings, understand the information of these emotions, and manage them.
---Mayer, et al
We all know what it’s like to grieve for a loved one. So, when someone out of the goodness of his heart says to us, “I know how you feel”, the first reaction is to say, “No you don’t”. It’s presumptuous for another to claim she can step into our shoes and experience our pain. Yet, we hesitate to verbally reject that person’s kindness because he ‘meant well’. It’s quite a dilemma for both of us.
In this vein, Barack Obama fell into the trap of apparently feeling for another by naming it and igniting a firestorm of “No, you don’ts”. At a closed door fundraiser earlier this month in San Francisco, he remarked that working-class white voters in Pennsylvania towns and in the MidWest are “bitter because of job losses” and thus “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”. Yes, that kind of thought process will get anyone into trouble! There are too many disconnects in the logic.
But, Obama wasn’t using logic. It was about empathy—an emotional connection to people’s frustrations due to the loss of good jobs in the globalized economy. He ‘meant well’ but he forgot that he really doesn’t know how others truly feel and think about their changing worlds.
With reference to Mayer’s definition of emotional intelligence, Mr. Obama perceived and assimilated the emotions. Where he skipped a beat was taking it upon himself to interpret the meanings of the emotions and translate them publicly into behaviours. He failed to balance emotions with evidence.
Using the grieving for a loved one example, we respond far better to someone’s empathy if we are asked: “What can I do for you right now”? Or, if that person simply listens to our present story and basically is a shoulder to cry on without judgment. The other takes cues from us first, as a good coach does. We also appreciate the little acts of kindness such as handwritten cards, homemade casseroles, etc., for all those visitors and generally a phone call here and there to see how we are doing. It’s at our pace and in our terms.
We look to our leaders to be good at connecting with us, not only to empathize with a particular situation but also to engage and motivate us for the long-term. Barack Obama’s faux pas illustrates that emotional intelligence does not mean “I know how you feel”. On the contrary, it means first and foremost searching for “How do you feel”?
---Mayer, et al
We all know what it’s like to grieve for a loved one. So, when someone out of the goodness of his heart says to us, “I know how you feel”, the first reaction is to say, “No you don’t”. It’s presumptuous for another to claim she can step into our shoes and experience our pain. Yet, we hesitate to verbally reject that person’s kindness because he ‘meant well’. It’s quite a dilemma for both of us.
In this vein, Barack Obama fell into the trap of apparently feeling for another by naming it and igniting a firestorm of “No, you don’ts”. At a closed door fundraiser earlier this month in San Francisco, he remarked that working-class white voters in Pennsylvania towns and in the MidWest are “bitter because of job losses” and thus “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”. Yes, that kind of thought process will get anyone into trouble! There are too many disconnects in the logic.
But, Obama wasn’t using logic. It was about empathy—an emotional connection to people’s frustrations due to the loss of good jobs in the globalized economy. He ‘meant well’ but he forgot that he really doesn’t know how others truly feel and think about their changing worlds.
With reference to Mayer’s definition of emotional intelligence, Mr. Obama perceived and assimilated the emotions. Where he skipped a beat was taking it upon himself to interpret the meanings of the emotions and translate them publicly into behaviours. He failed to balance emotions with evidence.
Using the grieving for a loved one example, we respond far better to someone’s empathy if we are asked: “What can I do for you right now”? Or, if that person simply listens to our present story and basically is a shoulder to cry on without judgment. The other takes cues from us first, as a good coach does. We also appreciate the little acts of kindness such as handwritten cards, homemade casseroles, etc., for all those visitors and generally a phone call here and there to see how we are doing. It’s at our pace and in our terms.
We look to our leaders to be good at connecting with us, not only to empathize with a particular situation but also to engage and motivate us for the long-term. Barack Obama’s faux pas illustrates that emotional intelligence does not mean “I know how you feel”. On the contrary, it means first and foremost searching for “How do you feel”?
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Where Leadership and Golf Mastery Meet
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
---Leonard Cohen, “Anthem”
Be master of mind rather than mastered by mind.
---Zen Proverb
All the significant battles are waged within the self.
---Zen Proverb
Life seeks order in a disorderly way.
---Margaret Wheatley, A Simpler Way
Every spring brings our collective sigh of relief that winter has past and fresh growth is upon us. With new surges of energy, we make new plans for the garden, our work and personal lives before the next transition.
As the seasons go, so do sports. In the spring, it’s the Masters Golf Tournament where we bear witness to incredible talent, the result of many years of hard work. We marvel at the ability of the golfers atop the leader board to scramble out of messes. We feel for them when things don’t work out.
The leader board and great leadership intersect in the “how” of getting there. When all is said and done, there are two key interdependent practices necessary for mastering anything, including golf:
Deliberate practice (Skill Power---improving technical skills/honing routines for “competition”)
Zen practice (Presence Power----taming/letting go of the ego, being in the present, improving and using mental agility for “competition”)
Both require disciplined goal-setting, rehearsing for thousands of hours to challenging scenarios, tracking results, reflecting on the results (learning what is working/not working) and based on the feedback to self and from trusted coaches, re-setting goals repeating the cycle of practice, etc.
What is “deliberate practice”?
Improving the skills you already have and extending the reach and range of your skills.
It encompasses focusing on tasks that are beyond your current level of competence and comfort. Not practicing in a vacuum but practicing to the challenging scenarios that confront and bedevil you in the work situation, or, in the case of golf, in tournament play.
By working at what you can’t do, you turn into the expert you want to become.
What is “Zen practice”?
Becoming free of the ego, by observing rather than reacting. Making peace with the present moment.
This is the area of “self-knowing” that repeatedly shows up in books and articles on leadership as well as golf. This is the ultimate source of effectiveness. But, the journey requires patience.
The ego is a “conditioned mind-pattern” or a thought. In its dysfunctional state, it thrives on reactivity---anger, frustration, impatience, etc., distracting us and interfering with our ability to enjoy and benefit strategically from the moment.
Only “presence” can free us of our egos. Ego implies unawareness. But the moment we become aware of the ego in us, it becomes weakened.
To become free of the ego is not really a big job but a very small one.
All you need to do is become aware of your thoughts and emotions---as they happen.
This is not really a ‘doing’ but an alert ‘seeing’….. When that shift happens, which is the shift from thinking to awareness, intelligence far greater than the ego’s cleverness begins to operate in your life. Emotions and even thoughts become depersonalized through awareness. Your “story” becomes of secondary importance. It no longer forms the basis of your identity (or controls your actions).
---Eckhart Tolle, A New Earth.
Just as we typically set goals and track them to improve our technical capabilities within our field of expertise, leadership progress also needs equal treatment, especially on the thoughts and emotions side. The “presence power” technique suggests an approach that is counter-intuitive yet well-known by those who meditate: observe but do nothing.
By doing less (not doing anything with our thoughts or emotions that are not helpful), we open up the space to become more. We become more of who we really are, that is, our incredible talent can shine through more because we are not caught up in our ego (self-conscious thoughts).
In our fast-paced world, the journey of self-awareness doesn’t fit. There is no way self-knowing can be hurried. It responds to what we make of “teachable moments” as they present themselves through the course of our work lives. Each new insight must be turned into a concrete application that, in turn, has to be fine-tuned through deliberate practice.
As in golf, leadership can be learned: “skill power” and “presence power”. For those who are passionate about the “game”, mastery is possible. It just takes time. Along the way, there is fun to be had!
There is a crack in everything.
---Leonard Cohen, “Anthem”
Be master of mind rather than mastered by mind.
---Zen Proverb
All the significant battles are waged within the self.
---Zen Proverb
Life seeks order in a disorderly way.
---Margaret Wheatley, A Simpler Way
Every spring brings our collective sigh of relief that winter has past and fresh growth is upon us. With new surges of energy, we make new plans for the garden, our work and personal lives before the next transition.
As the seasons go, so do sports. In the spring, it’s the Masters Golf Tournament where we bear witness to incredible talent, the result of many years of hard work. We marvel at the ability of the golfers atop the leader board to scramble out of messes. We feel for them when things don’t work out.
The leader board and great leadership intersect in the “how” of getting there. When all is said and done, there are two key interdependent practices necessary for mastering anything, including golf:
Deliberate practice (Skill Power---improving technical skills/honing routines for “competition”)
Zen practice (Presence Power----taming/letting go of the ego, being in the present, improving and using mental agility for “competition”)
Both require disciplined goal-setting, rehearsing for thousands of hours to challenging scenarios, tracking results, reflecting on the results (learning what is working/not working) and based on the feedback to self and from trusted coaches, re-setting goals repeating the cycle of practice, etc.
What is “deliberate practice”?
Improving the skills you already have and extending the reach and range of your skills.
It encompasses focusing on tasks that are beyond your current level of competence and comfort. Not practicing in a vacuum but practicing to the challenging scenarios that confront and bedevil you in the work situation, or, in the case of golf, in tournament play.
By working at what you can’t do, you turn into the expert you want to become.
What is “Zen practice”?
Becoming free of the ego, by observing rather than reacting. Making peace with the present moment.
This is the area of “self-knowing” that repeatedly shows up in books and articles on leadership as well as golf. This is the ultimate source of effectiveness. But, the journey requires patience.
The ego is a “conditioned mind-pattern” or a thought. In its dysfunctional state, it thrives on reactivity---anger, frustration, impatience, etc., distracting us and interfering with our ability to enjoy and benefit strategically from the moment.
Only “presence” can free us of our egos. Ego implies unawareness. But the moment we become aware of the ego in us, it becomes weakened.
To become free of the ego is not really a big job but a very small one.
All you need to do is become aware of your thoughts and emotions---as they happen.
This is not really a ‘doing’ but an alert ‘seeing’….. When that shift happens, which is the shift from thinking to awareness, intelligence far greater than the ego’s cleverness begins to operate in your life. Emotions and even thoughts become depersonalized through awareness. Your “story” becomes of secondary importance. It no longer forms the basis of your identity (or controls your actions).
---Eckhart Tolle, A New Earth.
Just as we typically set goals and track them to improve our technical capabilities within our field of expertise, leadership progress also needs equal treatment, especially on the thoughts and emotions side. The “presence power” technique suggests an approach that is counter-intuitive yet well-known by those who meditate: observe but do nothing.
By doing less (not doing anything with our thoughts or emotions that are not helpful), we open up the space to become more. We become more of who we really are, that is, our incredible talent can shine through more because we are not caught up in our ego (self-conscious thoughts).
In our fast-paced world, the journey of self-awareness doesn’t fit. There is no way self-knowing can be hurried. It responds to what we make of “teachable moments” as they present themselves through the course of our work lives. Each new insight must be turned into a concrete application that, in turn, has to be fine-tuned through deliberate practice.
As in golf, leadership can be learned: “skill power” and “presence power”. For those who are passionate about the “game”, mastery is possible. It just takes time. Along the way, there is fun to be had!
Sunday, March 30, 2008
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 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.
Monday, March 17, 2008
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.
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.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
