Hawkins Blog

Excerpts from "Renewing the Wellsprings of Responsibility"

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:15:00 +0000

Dr. Nathan Hatch is President of Wake Forest University. In March 2009 he delivered a keynote address to the Council of Independent Colleges entitled Renewing the Wellsprings of Responsibility. Dr. Hatch's comments provide an accurate assessment of the perspective that many students on American campuses have about life, college majors and their future careers. The following are excerpts from Dr. Hatch's address. I agree wholeheartedly with his observations.

There has been something seriously out of whack with Americans’ relationship to work—at least those with college educations who pursue professional and management positions. On the one hand, we are clearly working at a more furious pace. Among the top fifth of earners, long weeks have increased by eighty percent since 1980; and Blackberries and cell phones have further eroded social time, blurring the boundaries between work, home, and leisure. Judith Shelevitz has written about bringing back the Jewish observance of the Sabbath as one way to extricate herself from a society that pegs status to overachievement. How else, she asks, can we shut down the machinery of self-censorship about work, or still the murmur of self reproach about not getting enough done. 1

There is also a second problem with contemporary professional life, beyond the fact that work looms larger in our lives. It is that young people have been defining success and choosing careers with less attention to larger questions of meaning and purpose. The stratospheric salaries in investment banking, in consulting, in the premier law firms, and in specialized sectors of medicine have bedazzled a whole generation of our best students. Yet despite their financial success, there are signs of acute frustration by many young professionals. Often, work does not satisfy or sustain. An astounding seventy-eight percent of new lawyers leave their firm by the end of their fifth year—up from sixty percent in 2000. 2

How do we train leaders, Father Theodore Hesburgh often asked, not just to make a living, but how to live? What can colleges and universities do to form leaders who, to use a poignant example, might have a twinge of conscience about a system that sold mortgages without restraint to persons with little ability to make future payments? “We don’t just need a financial bailout,” Tom Friedman has suggested in his piece “The Great Unraveling,” “we need an ethical bailout.”

Our culture and our students are thirsty for reconnecting issues of meaning and purpose to vocational discernment, but colleges and universities today have a much harder time doing this than in the past. What is heartening is the number of experiments that are seeking to address the issue. To do this effectively on behalf of our students, will mean working against the gravitational forces of the modern academy. To broach the issue of shaping character, to suggest that there are religious and spiritual resources that might be useful in that effort, to delve into student’s beliefs and commitments, and to take on a subject matter that falls outside normal disciplinary boundaries—all make for a complex if not precarious effort.

1 Judith Shulevitz, “Bring Back the Sabbath,” The New York Times, March 2, 2003.
2 http://www.jdblissblog.com/attorney_retention.html. See also Pauline W. Chen, “Medical Student Burnout and the Challenge to Patient Care,” The New York Times, October 31, 2008.

Human “Doers” or Human “Beings”?

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:40:00 +0000

From my book, Leadership as a Lifestyle

As often observed, people are much more comfortable with “doing” than they are with “being.” In fact, at times people seem to be human doers rather than human beings! The gnawing belief that “doing” defines one’s value, whereas merely “being” just takes up space hovers over us all. The longing to establish our value based solely upon our accomplishments compels us to attempt life-management approaches that focus primarily on our roles rather than on our purposes.

The aversion to considering our purpose and then using it as a guide for our actions greatly minimizes the positive influence we can have in the lives of others. The depth of our influence with others is not primarily dependent upon the roles we play or positions we hold. The people we have become and the purposes we are fulfilling truly determine the depth of our influence with others. It is my belief that in its essence, leadership is a lifestyle, not a position. Solid, sustained leadership flows primarily out of who we are, not out of what position we hold.

Leadership positions do provide some tools of authority, such as resources and the ability to discipline. Yet in the lean, globally competitive corporations and organizations that dominate our world, the stretched resources and limited control of most managers exerts little sustained influence over constituents.

It is the character, competence, and commitment of a leader that sustains and validates their leadership. These three foundational elements must be aligned with the moral beliefs and principles at the heart of the leader. A leader exerts influence with integrity only to the degree that this alignment is realized. When your character, competence, and commitment are not aligned with your moral beliefs and principles, your influence is compromised.

As we assume the roles of spouse, parent, boss, and citizen, our greatest influence will not result from the title that we hold. Rather, our progress in becoming persons of character, competence, and commitment will determine our influence and effectiveness. No matter the roles you are given to fulfill in life, your success will begin with the person you have become and the life purpose you are fulfilling.

Its All Vision and Talk, Until We Take Action

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:17:00 +0000

Barnette Crabtree is President of Sun River Builders and a good friend. Once during a conversation with Barnette I shared with him a new vision that I had for Leadership Edge which is the company I serve as President. Barnette responded by saying, “John, I like visionaries. Then with a smile and a wink he followed with, “But I just LOVE implementers.” His point was well made. Visions are important. However implementation or execution of the vision is even more important.

On October 2nd New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote a provocative column on the questionable impact of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. The following paragraphs summarize Brooks’ argument:

So what is the theme of our history lesson? It is a story of remarkable volume and utter weakness. It is the story of media mavens who claim to represent a hidden majority but who in fact represent a mere niche — even in the Republican Party. It is a story as old as “The Wizard of Oz,” of grand illusions and small men behind the curtain.

The rise of Beck, Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and the rest has correlated almost perfectly with the decline of the G.O.P. But it’s not because the talk jocks have real power. It’s because they have illusory power, because Republicans hear the media mythology and fall for it every time.

It seems that Brooks’ opinion is that the listeners of the right-wing media are not great implementers. They listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and the like, but they fail to have significant impact implementing the vision that is generated by these media entertainers and commentators.

For close to 20 years I have used The Leadership Challenge by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner as a guide for my own leadership and that of those that I train. This model teaches that effective leaders challenge the status quo and inspire a shared vision. But it also helps us to see that all of that is for naught if the leader is unable to enable others to take action on implementing the vision. The adage goes, “he who leads, but no one follows, is merely taking a walk.” A real test of leadership is moving people to right action, not just to inspiring visions.

Perhaps history will one day clearly understand the impact that the right-wing media have had on leading its listeners to take right action. Maybe David Brooks will be proven correct in his analysis. Until then I agree with my buddy Barnette. I just LOVE implementers.

Do Leaders Apologize?

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:09:00 +0000

Should Leaders Apologize?
What Would We Teach Our Children to Do?

Reporting and commentary concerning recent apologies made by three American public figures has had nonstop coverage in web and print media outlets. First, there was the apology of Congressman Joe Wilson for his outburst in the joint session of the US Congress that challenged President Obama’s honesty. This was followed by Serena Williams apology for her inflammatory remarks to the officials at the US Open tennis tournament. And finally, there has been the apology (I think that is what it was) by Kanye West for insulting Taylor Swift and stealing her opportunity to express her thanks for receiving the Best MTV Video Music award. Each of these offenses and apologies leave many confused as to the motivation and remorse behind them.

A recent conversation with two friends gave me a more substantive and revealing consideration on apologies made by leaders. The three of us were discussing the public “reaming” that one of us had recently endured by his boss in front of those that report to him. This confrontation was angry, laden with profanity, and humiliating. In addition, my friend was not even directly at fault for the problem that sparked the furious diatribe.

By the next day the supervisor was back to his friendly self and interacted with my friend as if nothing bad had happened. As my friend finished telling this story, I commented that the boss would move toward reestablishing his leadership if he were humble and aware enough to offer a sincere apology. The third member of our discussion quickly interjected that in the world of business, leaders don’t apologize. As we absorbed the truth and effect of this last comment, our conversation moved to something less depressing.

So, do leaders apologize? I would say usually not. We can list out many reasons why leaders don’t apologize, but the reasons tend to be various forms of pride or fear. Should leaders apologize? I would say yes. The reasons for leaders making a sincere and humble apology are also many. But the reasons tend to be various forms of honoring right values, honoring one’s faith, and aligning with leadership practices that usually produce long-term success. As I have pondered this conversation and these public apologies in the news, I have thought that there is a more fundamental question that is far more revealing to this topic.

That question is, “What would we teach our children to do?” We teach our children to sincerely and humbly apologize because if they don’t learn to do so, they become brats or bullies. If they never learn humility and respect of others, these children grow up to be congressmen, professional athletes, celebrities, and bosses who are more skillful brats or bullies. When they finally hit one of those moments in life in which they are forced to apologize, the ability to meaningfully do so tends to escape them. As a leader, their pride or fear undermines their ability to retain the followership and full contribution of their constituents. Even a kid knows that the sooner you can get away from a brat or a bully, the better. Too bad so many adults in positions of leadership have forgotten what every kid knows.

The Malaise of Moral Laryngitis

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:06:00 +0000

"By doing the right thing first, you avoid destructive and divisive compromises. I think that everyday we're constantly debating whether or not to sell out or to be true. Sometimes we can seek to be both true and popular, but that option is more the exception than the norm. As Peter Drucker said, "You first have to ask what is right, and then ask what is possible--and in that order." Most people only ask what is possible and never deal with the other question. If you ask what is right, then what is possible, you will know what compromises are appropriate."(1)
Stephen Covey

This quote challenges us to remember an essential practice of great leadership. It is the practice of moral examination by which we determine the wisdom and rightness of our actions. Great leadership that builds great people depends upon moral examination as a guiding light, regardless of the time and energy that is required. Determining what is right to do allows us to move forward emboldened with a clear conscience about our actions.

Dr. Stephen Carter, in his book Integrity, puts forward the following three steps as requirements for acting with integrity.

Discerning what is right and what is wrong
Acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost
Saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong (2)

Leaders often find taking these three steps to be a challenge. Moreover, many of today’s leaders deem the third step to be also inappropriate. Dr. Carter, a Professor of Law at Yale University, counters this unfortunate opinion by stating,

“The third step – saying publicly that we are doing what we think is right, even when others disagree – is made particularly difficult by our national desire to conform. Most of us want to fit in, to be accepted, and admitting to (or proudly proclaiming) an unpopular belief is rarely the way to gain acceptance. But if moral dissenters are unwilling to follow the example of the civil rights movement and make a proud public show of their convictions, we as a nation will never have the opportunity to be inspired by their integrity to rethink our own ideas.” (3)

Dr. Carter’s point is illuminating. When leaders are unwilling to express the moral basis for their decisions they give up the great opportunity to challenge their constituents to moral reflection and moral action. By consistently silencing their moral voice, leaders display a common symptom of the malaise that I call moral laryngitis. Moral laryngitis is the unwillingness to speak about one’s moral beliefs or to publicly challenge moral issues. Sadly this cultural sickness is becoming pandemic in the United States.

Recently in a conversation with a recognized specialist on moral philosophy, I was struck by her observation. In speaking about the university students in her classes, she said that she had come to realize that today’s students tend to have only one value and that value is tolerance of all opinions. She went on to say that this left them with a philosophical inability to critique clear examples of immorality.

I believe that what is true of many collegians is also true of many business and professional persons. In their business or professional leadership, there is a bias against addressing moral issues as such, solely out of fear of offending someone’s opinion and thereby being deemed intolerant. The virtue of moral authority has too often been replaced by the weakness of amoral silence. Leadership without a moral base and moral voice is leadership that does not deserve nor inspire loyalty or trust.

In the debacle of the downfall of the Enron Corporation, corporate profit maximization and personal greed drove a good company to self-destruct. It is chiefly the responsibility of all the Senior Officers, Senior Managers and Board Members to monitor the demands of profit maximization and personal greed and to speak clearly and loudly when unethical practices manifest. Furthermore, these same leaders must take action to redirect the company to do what is right, as opposed to what is merely corporately or gainfully expedient. It appears that the sole moral voice in Enron’s senior management was unheeded due to the ignorance, decadence and greed that surrounded it.

Our country is in great need of leaders who will confront corporate moral compromise by declaring “This cannot be.” rather than asking “What’s in it for me?” The malaise of moral laryngitis is highly contagious. Its germ grows most rapidly in cultures that contain high concentrations of moral cowardice or moral abandonment. It can overtake a population in a seemingly unnoticeable fashion. Left unchecked it can be fatal.

(1) Executive Excellence, October 1999, Volume 16, Issue 10, page 3.
(2) Integrity, Stephen L. Carter, Basic Books, 1996, p. 7.
(3) Integrity, pp. 11-12.

Commitment to Give First

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:50:00 +0000

As a student of the process of human influence (aka leadership) I have learned through the years that committing to give first expedites and strengthens my influence of others. Often in human relations there is a dance around “who gives first,” “who gives most,” “who gave last.” My general response to these questions, when I am thinking clearly, is “who cares?”

When I enter into new relationships with others, whether it is in a new community or new office, I aim for clarity on three things. The first centers on “Why am I here?” For me, this is always best answered by beginning with my faith and my understanding of calling/vocation. The second question concerns “What do I need, want and hope for?” The third thing I want to get clear on is “What do others need, want and hope for?” Once I get clear on these three areas, I purpose to help fulfill what others need, want and hope for before getting what I need, want and hope for.

I practice this commitment to give first because of a biblical value that I learned years ago. This value can be stated as “putting the success of others above my own.” I practice it because it is right for me to do so. Over the years I have learned that it also expedites and strengthens my influence of others. Others open up to your influence when they understand that your aim is to do what is right, and that part of what you believe to be right is to help others succeed.

With any principle like this, our hearts and minds quickly go to cynicism and exception. Our sharky little hearts cause us to believe that giving first is a fast track to being used, enabling others’ destructive behavior and/or undermining the overall success of an organization. I think that all of these are possible, especially if giving first is not guided and balanced by good judgment and wise perspective. I think that more concerning than the possibility of these occurring is the chokehold on influence and goodwill that a “getting first” approach brings to life. Similarly, a quid pro quo approach to relationships does not lead to broadening, free-flowing influence; it merely leads to measurement and reaction.

Grabbing and grubbing, manipulating and controlling, giving only what is required – these approaches make me a smaller and self-absorbed leader. Committing to give first opens up the opportunity for my leadership to expand as I prove myself to be a resource to those whom I lead.

Breathing on the Coals of the Heart

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:20:00 +0000

From my book, Leadership as a Lifestyle

It is said that human capacity is a state of mind. Although this may be true, the heart most often controls the expansion of one’s capacity. Moving to a higher level of performance usually requires a person to face and choose against an area of fear in the heart. This concept has immense value to leadership in today’s organizations.

Current corporate trends move toward either smaller organizations whose future existence is often uncertain or behemoth mergers whose profitability is often uncertain. In either of these scenarios, there is increased pressure upon employees to stretch their capacities to higher levels. In organizations where people are genuinely valued and developed, this pressure can have a very positive effect on those involved. In organizations that do not value and develop their people, the effect is usually demeaning and demoralizing.

Leaders who are committed to the people they lead can play a key role in the positive expansion of their constituents’ capacities. One of the ways a leader can do this is by understanding the relationship between fear and capacity. A leader’s constituents must wrestle with the fears that hold them back in order to make the breakthroughs that are needed for the team’s success. Wise leaders learn to recognize the fears that limit the capacity and performance of their immediate followers. Often times, leaders learn to identify these fears in others by first identifying them in their own hearts.

As they come to understand the fears that control the human heart, leaders are able to communicate to their people the need for courageous choices in the midst of gripping fear. In so doing, the leader breathes on the coals of the follower’s heart to re-ignite the courage that fear has chilled. As the fire of these coals brings warmth again, an increased willingness to believe that one’s capacities can expand to meet new challenges grows. An understanding of the true nature of courage—voiced by Mark Twain as, “Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear—not absence of fear”—also develops in the heart of the follower.

Leaders breathe on the coals of the heart by positively encouraging their followers to make the following choices:

Risk over stability
Collaboration over isolation
Growth over comfort
A noble effort over a routine performance

Building Sustained Influence

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:04:00 +0000

Joseph Grenny is a leading voice in corporate training and organizational performance. In a recent issue of Business Week, he challenged current perspectives on leadership, calling these perspectives “vague, disparate, and vapid.” Grenny’s belief is that “leaders are responsible for intelligently and ethically influencing behavior in a way that creates value.”

I agree with Grenny’s view. I also know that influence is often relatively easy in the short term. A great challenge for leaders is sustained influence over years and decades. Often the way to influence people in short term situations is not sufficient for fueling ongoing positive influence in the long term. A case in point is the use of urgent appeals related to impending crisis. When based in fact, these types of appeal can be effective in the short term and on occasion. However, if the leader’s only tool of influence is “crying wolf” he will soon end up with deaf sheep, not motivated ones.

Learning and earning sustained principled influence in the lives of people is an art, not a science. It requires time, reflection, risk, and patience. The following are commitments that I have learned and work to put into practice as I grow to be a leader who has sustained, long term influence with others.

1. Commitment to Give First – An ancient Jewish proverb states that “a man's gift makes room for him and brings him before great men.” Leaders often approach people with their focus on what they can get out of the person, whether it is performance, resources or access. This perspective toward people often leads people to hide, not follow. Leaders who aim for long term influence understand the importance of in some way giving before they request.

2. Commitment to Incremental Progress – Any great success is a culmination of many small wins. A great tool for gaining and sustaining influence is spotting small wins as they happen, bringing attention to them, and celebrating them. This builds a “catching people doing it right and celebrating it” kind of culture. Incremental progress does not have to be slow. It does have to be steady. Influencing incremental progress over time can accomplish significant, sustained success.

3. Freedom to Walk Away, Encouragement to Stay – By definition, influential leadership is not built around control. This requires that leaders build cultures in which people are free to leave but are encouraged (not coerced) to stay. An interesting phenomenon of this kind of culture is that often when people use their freedom to leave, they eventually return. And when they return, they often bring with them greater skills, perspective, and loyalty.

4. Commitment to Grow as a Valued Asset and Resource – Persons of influence realize that one of their greatest leadership resources is their lives. Their wisdom, perspective, experience, relationships – even their failures from which they learned important lessons – add great value to their influence of others. For one’s life to be a growing reservoir of value to their followers requires continual growth and learning for the leader.

5. Commitment to Reflective Advisement – People tend to value advisement from those whom they respect, especially when it comes out of reflection and consideration. Leaders who spend several minutes, hours, or days considering the needs and situation of their followers often gain the attention and appreciation of those that they advise. This kind of coaching can build deeper loyalty even when the guidance given concerns developmental areas that are large and difficult to confront.

When Is Business About Ethics?

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:35:00 +0000

One of my most memorable experiences in leadership training occurred with an MBA student at a top tier business school. Working as a member of a business ethics team from the Kenan Institute for Ethics, our students had just returned from their summer internships to begin their second year of studies.

About an hour into our three hour business ethics training program, a young woman who was clearly angry raised her hand and stood up. I stopped the training session and asked her if she had something she wanted to say. She blurted out, “I’m paying $110,000.00 for this degree and in my mind it has nothing to do with ethics whatsoever and I don’t know why you are wasting my time!” Stunned by her comment and perspective, I was also amazed that some number of her classmates applauded her remarks while others were clearly embarrassed. As I attempted to regain my thoughts and leadership of the class, the first thing that came to my mind to do was to blurt back at her, “Have you read any business journals over the last five years?” Fortunately better judgment came to me quickly.

As I have mused over this incident now for several years, it brings many thoughts to mind. Chief among them is that many business leaders rarely if ever think that their daily work is about ethics. They assume that they are ethical people and that their company and its people are ethical as well. As you read the accounts of the calamitous collapse of business leaders and their companies, the key culprits seem to never get that they used practices and processes that were unethical. To them, they echo the young woman’s perspective that “… it has nothing to do with ethics.”

So when is business about ethics? If you use the simple definition that “ethics is about determining the right thing to do and doing it,” then the following four contexts for ethics come to mind.

How people are treated
How resources are managed
How decisions are made
The quality by which work is done

When a manager is dealing with practices and processes related to any of these four areas, then among other things, it has to do with ethics. And as every manager knows, they deal with these areas every day of their work life.

I sometimes wonder about the young MBA student that I encountered that day. I wonder how she leads others to treat people, manage resources, make decisions and maintain quality. I wonder if she has gained wisdom in her understanding of the fundamental role that ethics plays in business. I hope that her ethics education came to her gently and not in the form of a handcuffed perp walk into a federal courthouse.

Greatest Years of Influence and Service

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:17:00 +0000

"In this country . . . men seem to live for action as long as they can and sink into apathy when they retire."

Charles Francis Adams, Sr.

"Musicians don't retire; they stop when there's no more music in them."

Louis Armstrong

A number of years ago, I had a memorable discussion with a friend over lunch. He was a man in his mid to late 40's. He had built and sold two very successful businesses, had a personal worth in the millions, was married with two young sons, and was constantly restless.

In the conversation I mentioned to him that I had purposed to live my life in such a way so that my years of greatest influence and service would be between the ages of 50-70. My friend's face indicated his wonder at my goal. He said that most of his peers hoped to "cash-out" by the time they were 50, move to Florida and play golf the rest of their lives. My face probably indicated my wonder that men our age would aim for so little in the golden years of their lives. I told him that Florida is great and golf is okay but his peers' goal seemed to me to be a pitiful way to spend those years of their lives. From there our conversation moved to other things.

Years later, that conversation regularly comes to mind. My point is not anything about retiring with lots of money with a home in Florida playing golf. These are more matters of context. My point is rather about purpose and impact. Should my goal be to make it to an early retirement and then indulge myself in where I want to be and what I want to do? Or is one's goal to be to build the character, competence, and commitment during one's 20's, 30's and 40's that allow for great influence and service in the golden years of 50-70?

In our organization, we teach some of the brightest college students in the country that leadership, in its essence, is a lifestyle and not a position. Learning the challenging and costly lessons of life-driven, principled leadership builds depth and wisdom over the years that should be humbly put forward in our later years as a gift of influence and service.

My aim is to leave behind a legacy of influence and service, not just a scorecard from the Doral Golf Course. What are you aiming for?

Principled Leadership in an Age of Cynicism

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:53:00 +0000

“The value system is being torn apart. Your stockbroker has just been thrown in jail and your priest is being accused of child abuse. Where do you go for a source of values?”

Dee Soder
Industrial Psychologist
As quoted in Fortune Magazine

The American public is in a quandary over principled leadership. Many people wonder if they can really trust those who put themselves forward as principled leaders. In moments of honest reflection, we realize we have an expectation for competent leaders who display moral rectitude. Not only is this an expectation, it is also for many of us fundamental to our understanding of leadership.

This expectation for principled leaders is too often crushed by those who present themselves as such, and yet prove to have a reckless disregard for a consistent, principled lifestyle. At a time when many believe we are in desperate need for persons of high ethical standards to lead us, we become immediately suspect when such persons step forward.

Our suspicions sometimes arise from hurts or wrongs that we have received as a result of placing our trust in disingenuous leaders and their misguided endeavors. Human hopes and expectations can be crushed when leaders prove themselves to be mere images of the virtues that they espouse. This breach of trust often results in an unwillingness to believe the best about any leader again.

Others express skepticism toward principled leaders because of a general fear of losing control. These persons see “followership” as a position from which no one is to be trusted. For those who view “followership” in this way, even the most moral leaders are viewed as suspect and possibly threatening. Regardless of the leader’s ethical track record, the fear of losing control can often greatly tinge how others view them.

The cynicism toward credible, principled leaders forces these leaders into their own quandary over principled leadership. How do they establish themselves as principled leaders in the midst of the current cynicism without diverting their attention from the work that they and their constituents need to accomplish? Four thoughts will guide those who want to establish their credibility as a leader who can be trusted.

1. Credible, principled leadership must be demonstrated in speech and actions, publicly and privately, 24 hours a day. Leaders must commit to doing what is right in every context. What a leader does in private does matter, and will ultimately establish or undermine the credibility of his influence. It is the truth that comes from the entirety of the leader’s life that will dismiss or sustain his constituents’ predisposition toward cynicism regarding his morality.

2. The test of time is compelling; it also builds patience and in some, a rich humility. Time proves both the value of one’s virtues and the consistency with which they are displayed. Time is the acid test that determines the credibility and morality of any leader. In establishing one’s trustworthiness, the current fad of ropes courses and executive retreats is no substitute for months and years of daily collaboration. Working with others in the trenches over time is the context in which the leader’s virtue is proven and his patience and humility are forged.

3. Media exposure is of limited value in putting forward and establishing one’s virtue. The establishment of one’s moral authority is a result of building a credible reputation in a relatively small context. From this context, there is the chance of multiplied influence as one’s reputation becomes legendary. Ultimately, it is futile to attempt building one’s moral authority in front of the camera.

4. For every principled leader, there will be at least a few times when he or she must choose “to die right rather than live wrong.” Ethical leadership cannot be separated from hard and costly choices. Leaders must keep clearheaded as to their moral boundaries that they cannot violate, no matter the cost. In the course of one’s career, there will most likely be a few occasions in which the leader must choose to take her personal losses and walk away from an ethically compromised endeavor.

The antidote to cynicism is reality. It is the challenge of every leader today to put forward the reality of a life that is built around virtuous standards. For leaders, this is a lifelong process of personal and spiritual reckoning. And over time there is the great possibility of becoming the kind of leader that we so desperately need.

Five Ingredients for Effective Mentoring

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:18:00 +0000

The current edition of the Harvard Business Review features a clearly written, insightful article entitled "How Gen Y & Boomers Will Reshape Your Agenda ." The summary attached to the article makes the following claim to managers reading the article: "Your oldest and youngest talent cohorts demand many of the same things in a workplace—and have the numbers to get their way." The article goes on to put forward that many of the aspirations and motivations of Gen Y (those born between 1979 and 1994) and Baby Boomers (those born between 1946-1964) are the same and that this has significant implications for those who lead them.

One of the most interesting findings in the article relates to mentoring. The article states the following:

Gen Ys are usually the offspring of Boomers—and a famously doted-upon set of children. Perhaps that’s why these two generations seek each other out in the workplace. Boomers delight in taking Ys under their wing: 65% say that members of the younger cohort look to them for advice and guidance. Generation Y’s motto, meanwhile, seems to be “Trust those over 50.” Most Ys (58%) say they look to Boomers, rather than Xers, for professional advice, and over three-quarters say they enjoy working with Boomers. The fact that 42% of Ys go to Boomers for mentoring is also remarkable, given the layers that typically separate them in a corporate hierarchy.

Mentoring is the place of deepest impact in our Leadership Edge training services. It has also been one of the most transformative experiences throughout the last 39 years of my life. I have found that for long-term mentoring relationships to have greatest impact, there has to be ongoing clarity on the following Five Ingredients for Effective Mentoring:

1. Framework: Mentors and protégés must remain clear on the purpose and meaning that frames a mentoring relationship. What is the relationship’s purpose? What gives it meaning? What outcomes are relevant and to be expected? Maintaining clarity of purpose and meaning prevents the relationship from devolving into a wasted developmental opportunity.

2. Commitment and Perspective of the Mentor: Successful mentors remain clear on what their commitment to the protégé is and what it is they can, and can’t give to the protégé. Mentors don’t have limitless time and they don’t have transformative magic wands. When they are clear on the commitment that they can make, the resources they can share, and the influence they might have, then they position themselves to be of significant service to the protégé.

3. Commitment and Perspective of Protégé: An ancient Asian proverb states: "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." Ongoing readiness to learn on the part of the protégé is the single most important ingredient in a mentoring relationship. Managing and communicating expectations, practicing transparency, standing on your own, and valuing the opportunity are key perspectives for protégés to maintain in a mentoring relationship.

4. Selection: Mentors and protégés must be selected who fit with the framework, commitments and perspectives mentioned in 1-3 above. When this occurs, the relationship is setup to succeed. When this does not occur the mentor or protégé or both are setup for frustration and the relationship is setup up for ineffectiveness.

5. Developmental Paradigms: In their essence, mentoring relationships are developmental opportunities. This requires clarity on what is to be developed, how it is to be developed, and the protégé’s current status in the developmental area. The use of simple developmental paradigms (such as KSCV - knowledge, skill, character and vision) provides guidance in the effective ongoing development of the protégé.

The aforementioned Harvard Business Review article is a great reminder that the age old developmental relationship known simply as "mentoring" remains a vital and necessary part of one generation passing on to another that which they have to offer. May this be done with the clarity required for greatest impact. And may both mentor and protégé be blessed by this simple, necessary relationship.

The Tragedy of Compartmentalized Character

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:15:00 +0000

Reflections on the Unraveling of Mark Sanford

Last week I spent two hours with about 100 high school students attending the Free Enterprise Leadership Challenge. Our topic concerned leadership and ethics. One of the points that I made to the students was that a compartmentalized approach to character on the part of leaders is always in the long-term a set-up for failure. I told them that if they attempted to maintain a private character or morality that was different than who they are publicly, that if they live long enough, their leadership will unravel and they will deeply hurt some of the dearest people in their lives.

After I made this point the students went into discussion groups on a related case scenario. During this break in the action for me, a friend came to me to tell me that Governor Mark Sanford had just announced his affair with the Argentinean woman. As my friend and I concluded our conversation, the students were also concluding their discussions.

I proceeded to tell the students about Sanford’s confession, using it as a tragic but timely example of my previous point regarding the failure of compartmentalized character. His self-inflicted collapse seemed to strike the students as a strong real-life warning for them. But not for one young lady. Her immediate response to Sanford’s confession was, “What he does in private is nobody’s business.” It saddened me that at her young age she has already adopted this mantra of compartmentalized character.

It may be true that in many cases, perhaps most cases, the public does not have a right to know what a leader does in private. But if a leader espouses high morality publicly and lives low morality privately, he chooses a path that, given time, will lead to his hypocrisy becoming the people’s business. As Shakespeare so clearly said in The Merchant of Venice, “truth will come to light … at the length truth will out.”

It appears that along with his admitted affair, the Governor has also misused state funds and been derelict in his duties to the state. By choosing to live by a private character that was immoral and hypocritical, his influence has unraveled and he has deeply hurt some of the dearest people in his life. Governor Sanford reminds us all that persons of honor must live by boundaries of honor that constrain the dark parts of our heart from devastating compromise.

Values-Driven?

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:47:00 +0000

Maybe so, maybe not

I recently spoke to the fellows of the E.A. Morris Fellowship For Emerging Leaders. The topic of my three hour workshop was "Responsibilities for Ethical Leaders." Our discussion was a lively one from which I believe we all learned. Click here to view an edited version of the notes from the workshop.

One of my take-aways from the discussion relates to the challenge of seeking guidance from our core values as we make ethical decisions. Many of us are quick to establish that we are values-driven leaders. Only some of us can actually remember what our core values are. Few of us take the time to either consider our values as we make decisions or test our decisions by our values before we put them into action.

This leads to living the presumption that if sometime in the past I have named my values, then all my subsequent decisions are values-driven. This presumption reminds me of the MBA student who during an ethics workshop complained to me that she had determined her values as a teenager and that she didn’t need any assistance in applying them to complex business ethics dilemmas.

It seems that determining our core values can set us up for taking one of two paths. We can name our values, save them on our hard drive and continue making decisions the way that we always have. Or we can determine the values by which we feel motivated and obligated to live, and use them regularly as a guide for making decisions or for critiquing our decisions before they are implemented.

During the course of our lives we all have the opportunity to use our influence to promote as much good as possible and to restrain as much evil as possible. This influence always stems from our own example. My friends in the E.A. Morris Fellowship and I realized that keeping our influence values-driven requires ongoing humility and vigilance as we make our values the boss of our decisions.

One Big Yes...

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:31:00 +0000

Thoughts on the MBA Oath

Fifty percent of this year’s Harvard Business School graduates signed the MBA Oath. This oath pledges that the graduate will “serve the greater good,” “act with the utmost integrity,” and will guard “against decisions and behavior that advance [his or her] own narrow ambitions but harm the enterprise and the societies it serves.” The Economist offers a good summary of the MBA Oath, its meaning, and reception.

The MBA Oath is like any other vow, whether it be religious, marital, or personal. A vow begins with "one big yes" that must be followed by daily “uh-huhs.” It is the daily keeping of a vow that determines if it is a vow kept, or merely a vow made. We as a nation are at an interesting time as we are sick of vows made but not kept, but at the same time often cynical toward those who make and actually keep vows. Perhaps those who make and keep honorable vows cast light in our own personal darkness.

If I were asked I would advise our future business leaders from Harvard to focus on practical daily uh-huhs that put their Oath into action. I would also advise them to build a community within and outside their businesses that will encourage and expand their daily keeping of the Oath. Additionally, my work with corporate clients in business ethics initiatives tells me that the Oath has better chances of being kept if its tenets are translated into specific actions with specific stakeholders.

Finally, I would advise these future business leaders to consider how honoring their Oath will at times bring them to the end of their ethical and moral reserves. I believe that making and keeping honorable vows always point humans to their need for God. The whole idea of a vow is that it is a means by which to distinguish oneself from others as to how one will live and treat mankind. Inherent in making vows is either the pride and arrogance that says, "I’ll be better than others," or the humility that says, "I’m called to a higher standard. With God’s grace I will achieve this."

So off the HBS Graduates go with their diploma in their hands and their Oath in their heart. We wish them success and hope that their one big yes is sustained by many actionable uh-huhs. May God’s grace be with them.

Expediency: The Adversary of Honor

noreply@blogger.com (John Hawkins) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:27:00 +0000

"No man is justified in doing evil on the ground of expediency."
Theodore Roosevelt

"Principle - particularly moral principle - can never be a weathervane, spinning around this way and that with the shifting winds of expediency. Moral principle is a compass forever fixed and forever true - and that is as important in business as it is in the classroom."
Edward R. Lyman

It appears that the leaders of our country and our corporations agree that this is a time in which quick, expedient action is required. Bailouts and bankruptcies move forward at a stunning pace. Approving Supreme Court Justice nominations, repairing international relations, addressing health care needs and reversing unemployment trends are only a few of this week’s list of important items that many believe need immediate action.

I believe that expediency often becomes the adversary of honor. Expediency can be defined as a regard for what is politic or advantageous rather than for what is right or just; a sense of self-interest.[1] Expediency shifts the focus from doing what is right to only achieving an advantageous outcome. Honor is concerned with both the means by which goals are accomplished and the effect of their accomplishment. Expediency is concerned only with the accomplished goal and the securing of its intended effect. Expediency challenges honorable action because of its perceived need for acts of self-preservation. In corporate settings, expediency often manifests itself in desperate acts of corporate self-preservation that deceitfully cover desperate acts of individual self-preservation.

Managing the conflict between honor and expediency requires wisdom and thick skin. The weight of honor and the cry of expediency can be maddening to those who have to decide a course of action. But this is the responsibility of principled leaders. This is the kind of leadership that we must model and expect.

[1] "expediency." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 09 Jun. 2009.

John Hawkins - a brief biography

noreply@blogger.com (Rob) — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:55:00 +0000

John Hawkins, Founder and President of Leadership Edge Incorporated, helps university students and organizational leaders across America wrestle with the issue of developing a leadership lifestyle. John believes that this is essential for effective, long-term leadership of today’s chaotic organizations and corporations.

Providing seminars and presentations for corporations such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, Capitol Broadcasting, Blue Cross Blue Shield, the U.S. Department of Commerce, American Express and GlaxoSmithKline, John stays in touch with the type of leadership that is currently needed. John currently serves as a Business Ethics Consultant for the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University. In this position, he has worked with managers and employees of media, accounting, real estate, food services and pharmaceutical companies in the areas of ethics and cultural change. Through his affiliation with the Kenan Institute, John has also collaborated in training design and delivery with the Center of Leadership and Ethics at the Fuqua School of Business and with Duke Corporate Education. He is a member of the Duke Corporate Education Global Learning Resource Network and through this association has served as an executive coach for Fuqua’s Advanced Management Program.

In 2004 and 2005, John collaborated in the design and delivery of four leadership training programs for business managers, governmental leaders and emerging leaders in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. These training events were hosted by the Plekhanov Russian Academy of Economics and the United States Embassy.

John earned degrees from Wake Forest University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. His professional development includes completion of the Master Class for Leadership Educators at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He has been published in numerous journals and publications including: Executive Excellence, Personal Excellence, The New York Times, Bottom Line Business, Student Leader Magazine, The Journal of the Service Industry Association and The Journal of Leadership and Management in Engineering.

John’s book Leadership As A Lifestyle: The Path to Personal Integrity and Positive Influence was published in October 2001 by Executive Excellence Publishing. This book provides practical and insightful guidance for leaders in how to have principled interpersonal influence with those they lead. A Chinese edition of this book was published in 2003.

John has served as a founding member of the Duke University Interfraternity Council Board of Advisors. In that capacity, he designed and facilitated leadership development programs for the Duke fraternity system. In the Spring of 2000, John was awarded the William J. Maschke Award as a result of the impact of his leadership development programs.

More important than any of the above, John has been married to his wife Janet for 32 years and is the father of Laura, Gary and Will. It has been in their family that John has learned the most practical lessons on leadership.