Creative Organizations and Strategic Change Discussion

User Generated

pyb21

Business Finance

Description

Purpose of Assignment

The purpose of this assignment is to provide you with an opportunity to apply research definitions of a creative organization to real life examples.

Assignment Steps

Identify and discuss several global creative organizations using the criteria and descriptions in Ch. 10 and 11 of Mastering Leadership.

Include the strategic opportunities for change that each organization utilizes. Each member must post at least two substantive comments (a minimum of 350 words each) that includes the following:

  • An explanation as to why these organizations should be considered as creative.
  • An exploration of alternative viewpoints.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Chapter 10 Creative Leadership Fulfilling the Promise of Leadership The transition from the Reactive to the Creative Mind is arduous. Only about 20% of adults fully make it. It is the major transition in most adults’ lives. In the Mythic literature, it is called the Hero’s Journey or the Heroine’s Journey. It is not for the faint of heart. PERFORMANCE REVIEW Before we launch into the nature of the Creative Mind and how it devel- ops, let’s summarize briefly what we have said about its effectiveness (Figure 10.1). While Reactive Leadership styles are strongly inverse to Effectiveness (−.68), Creative Competencies are very strongly and positively correlated to Leadership Effectiveness (.93). In the highest performing businesses, those evaluated in the top 10% compared to industry peers, Creative Competency scores average at the 80th percentile compared to the world- wide norm base of 500,000 rater surveys. Reactive Leadership styles are well below the norm at the 30th percentile. The reverse is true in under- performing businesses (bottom 10%). In our Stage of Development study (Figure 10.2), those people assessed as living and leading from a Creative Structure of Mind had average Leadership Effectiveness and Creative Competency scores at the 65th percentile compared to norms. This constitutes a Leadership Quotient of nearly 2.0, suggesting the leaders who function out of a Creative mindset create a big competitive advantage. The Creative Mind is much more capable of leading in today’s com- plex organizations. Since only 20% of leaders operate out of a Creative mindset, the Development Agenda in most organizations should be to accelerate the development of Creative Leadership, individually and col- lectively. This is a leadership imperative. To execute this Development Agenda, senior leaders and HR execu- tives need to lead the way by developing Creative Mind themselves and then by developing it within the organization. For that to happen, we need to understand the nature of Creative Mind, how it is different than Reactive Mind, why it gets a different pattern of results, and how Cre- ative Mind develops— what needs to happen to support its development. The metamorphosis of Reactive Mind into Creative Mind is the major transition in most adults’ lives. It is a profound development, and those who make the passage into Creative Mind seldom, if ever, go back. THE HERO’S JOURNEY In his book, Hero With a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell describes this transition as the Hero’s Journey (Campbell, 1949). In the Mythic stories of many traditions, the hero goes on a journey in pursuit of a deeper call or aspiration. Usually the kingdom is in peril; the land is in famine, war is rampant, the kingdom is under a spell, and there is much suffering. The hero takes the journey to heal what is broken. At the start of the journey, heroes may not be aware of the relationship between the kingdom’s need and their aspiration. They respond to the call of the soul from a deep place of longing without fully understanding why. The movement from the known to the unknown makes no sense. The journey only makes sense at the end, looking back. Shortly after the heroes cross the “Threshold of Adventure” (code for leaving behind the conventional mind, with all its socialized assump- tions and well-worn solutions that are reaching adaptive limits), they get thoroughly trashed—abducted, lost, swallowed by a whale, attacked, dis- membered. Mythologically, this is the way of expressing the arduousness of the passage and the reality that the one who starts the journey is not the one who finishes it. The person who starts the journey is too small, too reactive, too full of themselves, too scared, too controlling, too cau- tious, too protected, too subject to conventional wisdom, and too caught in an unseen play-not-to-lose game to be ready to lead with the neces- sary uncommon wisdom. The old self, the Socialized, Reactive Self, is too much on autopilot and can only replicate what is, not lead with courage and clarity into a new and thriving future. That self must die. It must come apart and be reconstituted into a new self, one that marches to the beat of a different drummer. What makes this passage so disorienting is that the hero is shedding all the known and familiar ways of knowing that have worked well. The old self is being shed for a new self that has not yet been discovered. It feels like death, and when the hero/heroine goes through this transition, they are not gifted with the certainty that it will all work out. There are no guarantees. There is only the pull of the unknown longing to contribute. This transition is “Spiritual Boot Camp.” It is hard but required if we are to move from the old conventional reality to a new creative reality. The spiritual traditions refer to this process as Metanoia—a profound shift of mind, a transformation in the Structure of Mind. The butterfly is the symbol for this transformation. The caterpillar, following some unknown impulse, spins a cocoon, crawls inside, and disintegrates. Halfway through the cocooning process, there is no form, only gelatinous goo. Disintegration precedes integration. Death precedes resurrection. As the butterfly gives itself over to the metamorphosis process, a new, higher-order structure begins to take form. When the transition goes “full circle,” the butterfly emerges. No longer limited to crawling, it arises to a winged life. This life is more free, more agile, more fluid, and capable of going farther and faster and doing so from a higher perspective. In this transition, the tension between purpose and safety is re- optimized. The self that was previously playing-not-to-lose (in a Comply- ing, Protecting, and/or Controlling game) reorients on higher purpose. It orients on the question, “What would you do if you could?” The outside- in identity is traded for an inside-out identity. The Socialized, Reactive self moves from subject (operating unseen) to object (seen and capable of being reflected upon). The emerging Creative Self can now take a perspec- tive on the old Reactive Self, which no longer runs the show on autopilot. It is incorporated and utilized from the higher perspective of the Creative Self. This is the shift from an External Locus of Control to an Internal Locus of Control, from a Dependence to Independence (Covey, 1989), from the Socialized Self to the Self-Authoring Self (Kegan and Lahey, 2009). If it happens, it is often seen, and experienced, as a crisis. WHAT THE TRANSITION LOOKS LIKE When we first met Joe, he was the Chief Technology Officer for one of the largest U.S.-based telecommunications companies. It was the morning before the first day of a public workshop. We were in the meeting room preparing for the day. We had arranged the tables and chairs and were writing on the flipchart when we heard the door open. We did not turn around, but continued writing. We heard Joe say in a loud gruff voice, “This room arrangement sucks! I do not think I can find a seat in this room.” We were surprised by his outburst, but continued to work. You can imagine what Joe’s 360◦ feedback might look like, given the way he entered the room. It showed, among other things, low scores on Creative Relating competencies and high scores on Reactive Controlling and Protecting. His feedback, handed out on the afternoon of the first day, sobered him. He became quiet and reflective. The next day, we asked the group to write down the results they would commit to create going forward. We looked at Joe and noted that he was not writing anything. He was simply staring at a blank sheet of paper. Our first assumption was that he had checked out of the workshop. However, we noticed that this judgment was our reactivity to him, so we walked up to him and asked, “We notice that you are not writing. Is there anything we can help you with?” He looked up, aggressively jerked his thumb in the direction of the door and said, “Let’s take this outside.” We were not sure if he wanted to talk or punch us out. When we stepped outside the room, he said rather aggressively: “Let me tell you what I got from this workshop. If you want me to write down on that sheet of paper a list of results, that is a nobrainer. I do that every day. But, if you want me to write down what I really want, I don’t know. That is what I got from this workshop, and I got it from the 360◦ feedback and from the stories you told about your own lives.” What he next said is a vintage example of the Socialized, outside-in, Reactive Level Mind in the form of Controlling-Protecting, being seen perhaps for the first time. You can also read, in what he says, the Creative Mind starting to boot up. Joe’s next words to us are an example of the vulnerable and courageous inner work that goes on in this transition. He continued: “When I was a boy, my dad told me to go to college. So I did. When I was in college, they told me that the highest job availability was in engineering, so I became an engineer. No one asked me if I wanted to be an engineer, but I did so. When I started working as an engineer, they told me that I should be a manager, so I became a manager. When I became a manager, they said I was better off if I moved up the ladder, and so I began to climb. Now I sit at the top of a very large organization and I can chase results with the best of them. So, if you want me to write on that sheet of paper a list of results, that is no problem. I do that every day. But, if you want me to write what I really want, I don’t have a clue. What do I do with this?” Joe was now looking at us, wide-eyed, like a deer in the headlights, and his eyes were misty as he said, “What do I do with this?” Needless to say, we worked with him to create a supportive plan going forward. In this story, you can hear Joe describe his Socialized Mind and how it was formed. You can hear him describe the core of his identity, “I can chase results with the best of them,” which is code for, “That is who I am. If I am not that, who am I?” Given this self-definition, you can understand the source of his aggressive and autocratic way of leading. It makes perfect sense. You can also see him start to take a perspective on the limitations of his externally defined and driven Reactive Structure of Mind. “I can chase results, but I do not know what I really want.” You can hear in the core organizing questions of the Creative Mind. “Who am I if I am not my ability got get results? What do I really want? What would I do if I could?” You can also hear the courage and vulnerability of a leader facing these questions. This is the Hero/Heroine’s Journey. In this story, you can hear the old self disintegrating and the new self that has not yet emerged. This is what makes the transition so scary, a crisis. Joe is messing with the core of the operating system that has brought him the success he has achieved. He is not sure that if he dismantles this way of being it will work out well for him. He does not yet have any experience with the new Creative Mind. He will not know the benefits of Creative Mind for some time. All he has is the question that naturally arises from the Creative Mind to initiate the transformation, “What do I really want?” While Joe does not know where this question will lead, he intuitively knows that this is the right question. Joe does not yet know that this transition is not asking him to give up his hard-won capability to get results. He does not yet realize that he is hanging that gift on a Reactive Structure, and that in doing so is limiting the gift and introducing liabilities (evident in his 360◦ results). Joe has not yet experienced that, in the transition to Creative Mind, you keep your gift and jettison the liabilities. As a result, you get your gift in a higher form. The Creative capacity to achieve far outperforms what can be achieved from his Reactive Controlling-Protecting mindset. Joe does not know any of this yet. All he can say is, “What do I do with this?” So he is faced with the courageous choice to go forward on a journey with no guarantees, or to retreat back into his Reactive Mind. That choice will define the future of Joe’s leadership. TALKING ABOUT IT WITHOUT KNOWING IT The leadership literature has described Creative Leadership for decades, but without the framework of Adult Development. This has limited our ability to understand what it is, what makes the Reactive and Creative Mind so different, and how to support the evolution. Robert Fritz masterfully described the difference between the Creative and Reactive orientations. However, he did not place each orientation within a vertical development framework. Larry Wilson did the same thing. He described these same two orientations as play-not-to-lose and play-to-win, but did not see these as progressively developing structures of mind. This is true of most of the good leadership theory and research. In the work that led up to his book, The Empowered Manager, Peter Block started out trying to get the bathroom conversation into the meet- ing room (Block, 1987). In the bathroom, people say how they are really experiencing the meeting. When the meeting reconvenes, everyone agrees that things are going fine. This is usually not the conversation that hap- pened in the bathroom at break. To address this, and to get the truth to appear in the meeting room, Peter began to work on teaching the neces- sary authentic “political” skills. As Peter engaged leaders in the skill-practice of telling the truth in meetings, he ran into caution. Peter constantly heard leaders say, “If I stand up, I will get shot.” In order to address this cautious, play-not-to- lose game, Peter realized that he needed to help leaders discover a vision or purpose that was bigger than their fear—worth the risk. This led him to challenge leaders with the question of vision: what would you do if you could? These questions (How am I playing notto-lose? How am I getting in my own way? What do I really want? What would I do if I could? How would I lead if I knew I could not fail or would not be fired?) are key developmental questions for the evolving Creative Mind. If asked frequently and with searing honesty, they reliably boot up the Creative Mind. Peter was on to something. He and others were describing Creative Mind and how to develop it without seeing or describing the vertical process of development. The Leadership Development field is a random collection of great stuff—models, frameworks and research. Each is use- ful, but partial. Most of it describes the leadership that emerges at the Creative Mind, without attributing it to a natural, sequential process of development. In his book, In Over Our Heads, Bob Kegan made a game-changing statement. He said that most of the leadership literature describes the kind of leadership that naturally emerges on Creative Mind (Kegan, 1998). The leadership literature and competency research is quite clear in describing effectiveness. Effective leaders are purpose driven and trans- late their deep sense of purpose into a clear and compelling vision and strategy, which become the focus of execution and decisions. Leaders are systems-aware, redesigning systems to produce higher-order results. They are authentic and courageous in their conversations, lead with integrity, and are self-aware, emotionally intelligent, interpersonally skillful, and relationally competent—fostering high teamwork and trust, as well as mentoring and developing others. Kegan says that such leadership is vin- tage Creative, Self-Authoring Mind (Kegan and Lahey, 2009). He con- cluded that these leadership competencies arise naturally on Creative Mind, but do not reliably boot up on Reactive Mind. Our research cor- roborates Kegan’s conclusion. The leadership literature has described Creative Mind without know- ing it. This has led us to approach Leadership Development primarily as an outer game of skill development and ignore the maturity of the inner game. Meanwhile, a well-researched understanding of the process of development, and the vertically sequential structures of mind, was being incubated in the field of Developmental Psychology, outside the main- stream of the Leadership Development field. Stage Development theory needs to move to the center of the Leadership Development conversation. It is at the center of the Leadership Circle Profile and the Universal Model of Leadership. CREATIVE STRUCTURE The Reactive Mind creates an oscillating pattern of performance over time, the natural tendency of which is to seek equilibrium and return to normal (Figure 10.3). The natural tendency of the Reactive Mind is to establish hierarchical, patriarchal structures, dynamics, and cultures. Such organizations do not perform as needed today. The Creative Mind creates a different pattern of results. In the story of the insurance salesman, we mentioned that he talked about the prob- lem, his disgust with himself, and his swinging into gear, but he never talked about his vision or why he cared about selling. He expressed no overarching passion, which is the heart of the Creative Mind. Cre- ative Mind orients on Purpose. The core of the Creative IOS is a con- stant focus on a desired future vision, and amid the current reality (with all its mixed messages and hurdles) taking authentic, collaborative action to bring that vision into being over time. Creative Leadership is about creating an organization that we believe in, creating outcomes that matter most, and enhancing our collective capacity to create a desired future. It is designed for change, to bring into being The Creative Mind starts from purpose and vision, not with a problem. There are plenty of problems to deal with as we create the futures we want, but the driving focus is on creating a vision that we care about, a vision worthy of our deepest commitment. Not any vision will do. If it does not matter, it generates no energy. The energy that fuels the Creative Mind is passion. Love is not too strong a word. While fear is naturally present when creating what we want (the spark behind fear), fear is not running the show. The focus on purpose and vision generates a passion, love, and commitment that is bigger than the fear. Love is superordinate to fear. It is more powerful, and, thus, Creative Structure supersedes the Reactive play-not-to-lose game. The focus on vision, fueled by passion, results in action, not reaction. In Creative Structure, we do not take action to eliminate what we do not want. Nor is action a reaction to fear—trying to attenuate it. In the Creative Mind we do not react, but we act to bring into being what we most care about. This mind structure is fundamentally different from Reactive Mind and gets a different pattern of performance over time. The Creative Structure is not a balancing loop. It does not seek equi- librium or have a natural tendency to oscillate. In System Dynamics language, the Creative Structure is a growth loop— each time you cycle through the loop, it grows (Figure 10.5). As we get clearer about our purpose and translate that into a clear picture of the future we want, passion naturally grows. As passion grows, the tendency to take the action necessary to creating our desired future also grows. As we take action to create what we want, we either get closer to our vision or clearer about it. Then our passion grows again (or stays high). As passion grows, the tendency to take additional action also grows, which takes us farther in the direction of our vision. This is a virtuous growth cycle. Each time through the cycle, it grows and funds future growth (unlike the Reactive Mind, where each time through the loop, it reverses the direction of results, thus oscillating). Creative Mind is designed to seek vision, not equilibrium. It is designed for the complexity of leading change and creating new futures. It is the minimum system requirement for mastering leadership. CREATIVE STRUCTURE OF IDENTITY The Creative Structure is inside-out. It marches to the beat of a different drummer. It is not driven by what we are socialized to think is in our best interest. We live and lead from our own internally discerned sense of purpose, values, and vision. This is why Kegan calls it SelfAuthoring (Kegan and Lahey, 2009), Covey calls it Independent (Covey, 1989), and Susanne Cook-Greuter calls it Individualist (Cook-Greuter, 2004). We call it Creative because it is designed to create what matters most. In the transition to the Creative Self, we experience a shift from an externally based identity that is dependent on outside validation to an internally based identity. In this identity, we do not base our self-esteem, worth, and security on how others see us. Our self-esteem, worth, and security are in our own hands. We establish them, not by living up to others’ standards, but by living up to our own. In this transition, people often refer to “finding themselves,” discover- ing their “authentic self,” and enjoying a new level of inner freedom and creative capacity. RESTRUCTURING IDENTITY BELIEFS The new level of creative capacity that comes with this transition results from a rewriting of the IOS code. Reactive beliefs are structured and depend on outside validation: “I am okay if you like me, accept me, see me as smart, or as the one who is in control and gets results. If I am not that, who am I?” These beliefs can be structured to Comply, Pro- tect, or Control, depending on how we have organized our character/ego structure, with what core strengths/gifts we are identified—heart, head, or will. At the Creative Stage, these assumptions are not running on autopilot. We are not subject to them. We can intervene and challenge them when the fear that they produce hits our bodies. Instead of reacting to the fear as if it is real, we think: “I know this is when I always go into fear and say to myself, ‘If I stand up, I will be shot,’ but, now I know that voice of fear in me like an old familiar friend. I now know that this fear comes from the illusion that my future is in your hands and, thus, I constantly need you to like me and think highly of me, or else. I now know that this is not the truth.” This ability to, in the moment, gain perspective on the old Reactive assumptions and to challenge their illusions is one hallmark of the Cre- ative Mind. It is now running the show. It is managing the limitations that come with hanging our gifts on a Reactive Structure. As this perspective-taking and challenging process unfolds, we develop new assumptions that are structured from the inside-out, not dependent on outside validation. The belief that “my future is in your hands” is replaced with “I am responsible for, and capable of, creating my own future.” The belief that “I am okay only if you always like or admire me” is replaced with “I am okay whether or not you like and admire me.” The belief that “to be is to be successful and, thus, failure is not an option” is replaced with “I create results; I am not my results. Failure and mistakes are part of the process of creating success.” As we see, chal- lenge, and rewrite earlier Reactive assumptions, we upgrade the Reactive IOS into a Creative Level IOS. Consciousness is the operating system of performance. Since structure determines performance, and since con- sciousness is the deep structure of performance, this restructuring process transforms how we lead and live. Rob’s story (from Chapter 3) has all the elements of this restructuring process, as well as the corresponding shifts in performance that come with it. Rob was the manager that we called two years after debriefing his LCP with him. What Rob said to us illustrates this shift of mind, the ability to take a perspective on the old Reactive IOS, the ability to intervene and challenge the old assumptions when they reassert them- selves, and the presence of new assumptions that do not depend on out- side validation. As you recall, Rob’s 360◦ feedback clearly indicated that he was a strong Controlling-Protecting type. He described himself as “The Ogre.” He told us that if he had not changed, he would have failed. Listen to what the transformation from Reactive to Creative sounds like. When I returned to the office, I did a lot of soul searching and observ- ing of myself. I saw more clearly all the stuff that we had talked about. I realized that I am hard-wired for results. I care about people, but when problems erupt, I explode and take over. I am constantly worried about what others will think if we fall short of expectations. Fear of failure runs me. I measure myself by always succeeding. So, when problems hit the fan, I become the Ogre! About six months ago, I received a promotion. I am now in charge of all supply-side management for the start-up of our new plant in another country. I could not have been successful here had I not changed. This is a different culture. It is very relational. People hug each other when they come into work. They look each other in the eye when they say hello. Had I led the way I used to lead, it would have been game over. What is even more amazing is that it would be okay with me if I am not the guy. If I fail here, I will be okay. It would not be the end of the world. Consequently, when problems come up, I can deal with them. Instead of blowing up, blaming people, and taking over, I work with and through the team. I am direct and firm, but in a way that builds accountability, trust, relationship, and teamwork. Sure, I still feel the urge to blow up. I feel that fireball erupt in my chest, but now I manage it—it does not manage me. I am not as defined by my results now, and that enables me to be more effective at achieving them. Rob then told us that before he worked for his current company he worked for another company in Detroit. He told us how painful it was to live though the downturn in the industry, the closing of plants, and the impact of all of that on people and their families. Rob began to cry as he said: “Now I can have a positive impact in another community. I am becoming the leader I have always dreamed I could be. I am a much happier person.” In this story, you can hear Rob’s ability to take a perspective on his earlier IOS. He finds humor in how he was subject to it. It took him over and he became the Ogre. You can hear his insight into the structure of his socialized mind. He describes himself as having been hardwired for results, convinced that failure was not an option, in constant worry about what others would think if results were off, etc. He is no longer subject to these assumptions. He has them. They do not have him. He can intervene when they reassert themselves. He has learned to manage the fear and the “fireball” of anger that comes up in him when these assumptions are triggered. In this story, you can also hear the presence of the newly written Creative code. The new Creative level assumptions are evidenced when he says: “And what is even more amazing is that it would actually be okay with me if I am not the guy. If I fail here, I will be okay. It would not be the end of the world.” Here he is describing that he is no longer as dependent on outside validation. He is responsible for this and is man- aging it. Finally, in this story you can hear that he has shifted from a fear driven, problem focus to a vision focus. “Now I have the opportunity to have the opposite, positive impact in another community. I am finally becoming the leader I always knew I could be.” This focus on vision and his ability to manage his fear and anger puts Rob more consistently in the Creative growth loop. This is the structure that is now determining his performance. Rob is experiencing a restructuring of mind and identity and re- optimizing the tension between purpose and safety. Thus, he is less sub- ject to the oscillations of the Reactive Mind. Purpose and vision are now leading, and he is managing his Reactive Tendencies. He has not lost his gift of getting results. He keeps his gift and jettisons the liabilities that come with identifying with those gifts (hanging them on a Reactive Structure). He is getting his gifts and strengths in a higher, more effective form. He is now capable of meeting the adaptive challenge presented by the plant start-up in a foreign culture, in a way that works. He will never go back to his earlier Reactive mindset. Chapter 11 Six Leadership Practices Spiritual Boot Camp for Leaders Leadership is a set of practices. The notion of practice is simple: To mas- ter anything, you need to practice; to become more effective in our lead- ership, we must continually practice and improve both our outer game and our inner game. Here we describe six essential leadership practices that, if approached as ongoing disciplines, reliably mature the inner game and develop outer- game capabilities. These practices, taken together, are a spiritual boot camp for leaders. They are spiritual because they the call forth the highest and best in us. They are a boot camp because they change and restructure us, making us more fit to lead. They reliably transform Reactive Mind into Creative Mind and beyond. PRACTICE 1: DISCERNING PURPOSE Life is purposeful. Leadership is purposeful. A primary task of a life cre- atively led is to discern the purpose of our life. Creative Mind orients itself on the purpose that seeks to come through us. Great leaders stand for what matters and create it. In his book, On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis writes: “Leaders are made, not born, and made more by themselves than by any external means. No leader sets out to be a leader per se, but rather to express him/herself freely and fully. Becom- ing a leader is synonymous with becoming yourself. It is precisely that simple, and also that difficult. First and foremost, find out what it is you’re about, and be that” (Bennis, 1989). I Am Not Becoming Who I Am Bob: I started my career making hog food and dog food. I managed pro- duction in the most technologically advanced livestock feed and pet food processing plant in the United States at the time. We were in start-up (code for nothing worked). Late one night, we were trying to get the plant back on-line. I was frantically working in the receiving bay emp- tying a railroad car filled with feed ingredients needed to get the plant back in production. When the car was empty, I climbed inside to sweep it out. As I finished, I propped my feet up in the hopper bottom to catch my breath. Out of my mouth, in a loud authoritative voice, completely unrehearsed, came the words, “I am not becoming who I am.” I knew immediately that I had spoken a truth about myself that I could not take back. That moment began my practice of Discerning Purpose. A few weeks later, I received a book by Rainer Maria Rilke titled Letters to a Young Poet (Rilke, 1993). This book is a series of letters that Rilke, the great German poet, wrote to an aspiring young poet. The young poet had sent Rilke samples of his work for critique. Rather than critique the poems, Rilke responds with some advice about why one would write poetry in the first place, and in so doing, gave a powerful description of the practice of Discerning Purpose. You ask whether your verses are good. You ask me, and others before me. You send them to magazines. You compare them with other poems, and you are disturbed when certain editors reject your efforts. Now, since you have allowed me to advise you, I beg you to give up all that. You are looking outward. Nobody can counsel and help you, nobody. There is only one single way. Go into your- self. Search for the reason that bids you write; find out whether it is spreading out its roots in the deepest places of your heart, acknowl- edge to yourself whether you would have to die if it were denied you to write. This above all—ask yourself in the stillest hour of your night: Must I write? Delve into yourself for a deep answer. And if this should be affirmative, if you may meet this earnest question with a strong and simple “I must,” then build your life according to this necessity; your life even into its most indifferent and slightest hour must be a sign of this urge and a testimony to it. When I read this, I knew that I had to discern my “Musts.” I started by creating a list of Musts— the deepest and highest aspirations for my life. Each night after work, I would write about these Musts. As I did, I knew that if I admitted what I really wanted my life to be about, I was crossing a threshold from which I could not go back. I realized that I had to be about this life, the one emerging on the pages of my journal. Otherwise, I would be living someone else’s life, not my own. When I finished writing, I set about creating the life that I felt born to live. Fifteen years later, I found this journal in the attic. As I reread it, I began to weep because everything I had written was happening in my life in ways I never could have imagined at the time. I then realized the full power of the Creative Mind set on purpose. This practice has the power to boot up with Creative Mind. When we get clear about who we are and what we must do, magic happens. Joseph Campbell (Campbell, 2008) says that when we step into the adventure of living on purpose “the universe will open doors where there were only walls.” W.H. Murray could not be clearer on this subject (Murray, 1951): Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative (and cre- ation) there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and mate- rial assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. I have learned a deep respect for one of Goethe’s couplets: “Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it, / Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it.” Creative Mind harnesses this genius, power, and magic in a way that Reactive Mind cannot. Creative Mind moves the levers that cause creation while Reactive Mind looks in the rear view mirror trying to navigate forward by fixing what it does not want in order to stay safe. Stalking Your Longing Creative Leadership springs from the pursuit of purpose, from discerning and defining a personal purpose worthy of our deepest commitment. Pur- pose is longing—love for what the soul wants to pursue most in this life. The Greeks called it Eros, the capacity to follow what is most intensely missing or unfinished in our lives. Purpose wells up from within. It is not something we invent. It finds us, if we pay attention. The primary task of life is to let it live us. Discerning purpose is a practice of attention, much like tracking a deer through woods. The deer leaves signs if we know how to read, track, and stalk them. Discerning purpose requires attention to the trail, to the minute, subtle, and detailed clues our life is leaving as we live it (or as it lives us). Life has been speaking to us for a long time about what matters most. It has been leaving a trail. It remains for us to have the courage and the discipline to pay attention. This practice is about learning to trust those moments of clarity when purpose is speaking. We exist as multidimensional beings. Since the deep- est, truest parts of ourselves know what we are up to here, we need to be in conversation with them. Life speaks in times when we are most alive, when we are doing something that lights us up. Joseph Camp- bell’s admonition is to “follow your bliss.” He states: “If it brings you joy do more of it” (Campbell, 2008). The purpose of our life is leav- ing clues in periods of joy, excitement, enthusiasm, meaning, and ful- fillment. These are the times when we feel most alive, moments when the soul is speaking about who we are and what we care most about, pointing us in the direction of our highest aspirations. It speaks of our Musts. Learning to stalk these moments is the practice of discerning purpose. Life is also speaking in the moments when we are least alive, when life is not working, when it is as bad as it gets, when we are miserable, bored, restless, and flat. Life is letting us know, in these periods, what is most intensely missing. This too informs us about what we must be about. As David Whyte once said in a lecture, “The first step toward the fire is noticing how cold you are.” When we sift the times we are most and least alive, we can extract the themes, patterns, and clues that forge our purpose. Paying attention to these clues, letting them point the way to our deeper longings, and defin- ing which of these longings are musts is the work of this discipline. When we do this, we stalk our longing—navigating the pull of the Ascending Current. Purpose is not discovered in a vacuum. Our purpose is not merely about our personal fulfillment. It is about contribution and service. Albert Schweitzer said: “I don’t know what your destiny will be, but this I know: the only ones among you who will be really happy are those who have sought and found how to serve” (Schweitzer, 1935). Our purpose is about what brings us meaning and joy, but it is also about what the world most needs. We are born and live into a set of circumstances: fami- lies, societies, cultures, and organizations. The circumstances of our lives are no accident. Our purpose is connected to the needs of those around us, of the organizations, society, and world in which we live and work. In each of us, there is an intersection between our unique passion, curiosity, and talent and a world in need, a contribution only we can make, and when we find that intersection, we are on to the purpose of our lives. Viktor Frankl discovered his purpose in a Nazi concentration camp. He learned that those who had a purpose for living had a much higher survival rate. He also discovered the meaning of his own life. Frankl sur- vived, founded a school of psychotherapy he called Logotherapy, and wrote his classic book, Man’s Search for Meaning. In it, he says, “Every- one has his own specific vocation or mission in life; everyone must carry out a concrete assignment that demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated, thus, everyone’s task is unique as his specific opportunity to implement it” (Frankl, 1959). Each of us must find our inevitable work—the work we came into this life to do. Connecting the Dots In his commencement speech at Stanford, Steve Jobs said: “You can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. This practice requires that we trust that the dots will some- how connect in your future. You have to trust in something—your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life In the feed plant, I started stalking my longing. When I left that job, I did not know how things would unfold or even what shape my life and career would take. I did not even know about the Leadership and Organizational Development profession. Now, 35 years later, as I look back over my life, and see all that has unfolded from what I wrote in my Musts journal, I can see how all the dots connect. I used to think that I was stalking my longing. I realize now that the longing was stalking me the whole time. So, practice paying attention to what your life is trying to tell you about who you are and what you are here to do. Stalk the longing that is stalking you. Then, exercise the courage to submit to the purpose that wants to have its way with your life. Purpose is something bestowed—and received. It arises in our lives and in us. We must notice it and inquire what it wants from us. It is not something we rationalize and choose, though we must choose to follow it. It is something we receive and to which we surrender. This practice is an inside-out dialogue with life as it spontaneously arises in our interaction in the world. This practice is not something we do once; it is a life-long discipline to remain in dialogue with our purpose. The soul has a way of moving on as soon as we complete one phase of the journey having realized the vision that emerges from our purpose. About the time we feel we have lived into our purpose, it requires us to discern our purpose again. The soul is a jealous lover; it refuses to invest itself in a compromise. We either step toward “the spark behind fear recognized as life” or “the body fills with dense smoke.” Discerning purpose is a core practice for living and leading from our Creative Edge. There is no safe way to do that. Creative Leadership The ongoing discovery and exploration of our sense of purpose is the central discipline of the Creative, Self-Authoring Mind and the start- ing place for true leadership. The power to create what matters in the face of difficult circumstances comes from within, from passion and conviction. Passion is the energizing force of the Creative Mind and of the creative tension it takes to lead. Passion has its source in knowing our purpose: what we are here to learn, become, and do with our lives. If we are unfamiliar with this abiding sense of purpose, we have not integrated a discipline of spiritual attention into our lives. As long as deep convic- tion and passion are uncommon, so will genuine, creative, and authentic leadership remain uncommon. The soul knows where it wants to go, and it does not compromise. Leadership requires the spiritual discipline to be led by our higher pur- pose. This discipline provides the staying power required to transform ourselves and our organizations in spite of the vulnerability of change, the political risks, the self-doubt, the fear, and the possibility of failure. We will only see it through if it matters enough—if it is worth the risk. Our purpose is worth the risk. To lead, we must optimize the tension between purpose and safety by orienting on purpose and letting the chips fall where they may. There is no safe or risk-free way to do this, no sure formula for success. How- ever, great power lies at the source of Creative Leadership. As leaders, our first task is to cultivate purpose, translate that into vision, and sus- tain that creative tension in ourselves. Our second task is to cultivate and sustain this creative tension for the organization. This is the path of transformation. We transform ourselves into an embodiment of our purpose and vision, and then we stand for it in the midst of the current realities and shifting political currents. We act it out in every encounter, and, thus, transform not only ourselves into our highest self, but also the organization into its higher purpose. This is the Promise of Leadership. PRACTICE 2: DISTILLING VISION The second practice that reliably develops Creative Leadership is the ongoing discipline of translating purpose into a vision of our desired future, both individually and collectively. Every credible authority on leadership (Bennis, Collins, Covey, Wilson, Senge, Fritz, Block, Peters, Drucker, Kouzes/Posner, and Cashman, to name a few) describes vision as the centerpiece of effective leadership. In the LCP, the dimension of Purposeful Visionary most correlates to Leadership Effectiveness. The Creative Mind is focused on creating vision; thus, the discipline that most evolves Creative Mind is the challenge of self-authoring a vision of great- ness for ourselves and for the organization. Being a person of vision and leading the organization into its desired future is the first Promise of Leadership. Vision is personal, specific, lofty, strategic, and collective. Vision is personal. Vision, in the Reactive Mind, is given or authored by others, and then it is adopted, however enthusiastically. Vision at the Creative level is self-authored. Creative Leadership is the act of articulat- ing and acting in pursuit of a vision that flows from our personal com- mitment to higher purpose. Vision is the picture of how that purpose wants to actualize in meaningful and tangible ways. Vision describes the specific direction our soul longs to go. Vision is specific. It is specific enough that we would recognize it when we realize it. Recently, as we consulted with a healthcare organization, we encouraged the leadership team to take a three-day off-site to get clear and aligned on their vision. As we introduced the meeting agenda, the CFO said, “I am concerned that this will be a huge waste of our time. What do you mean by vision and what might we say about it that could possibly take three days?” We responded, “You will create a specific and detailed picture of the healthcare organization that will exist in this community five years from now.” The CFO said, “If we could do that, it would be amazing. We have never had that conversation.” For vision to be useful it needs to be specific enough to set direction, focus strategy, drive action, and guide decision-making. We need to spec- ify the result you have in mind, in enough detail that everyone knows when the vision is attained. Vision is strategic (but it is not strategy). Strategy charts the course of how to get from wherever we are to the vision. Vision is the capstone of strategy, a description of the business, as we most want it to exist at some point in the future. Vision is a response to the current reality of the marketplace, but it is not limited by the constraints of that reality. It is strategic because it sets a direction that enables the organization to excel in its current environment and well into the future. Vision defines the organization’s unique contribution to real needs, real markets, and real social and cultural imperatives. It sets the organization on course to thrive and contribute. Vision is lofty. It captures our highest aspirations for our lives and work. It is unashamedly spiritual and fundamentally imaginative. A lofty vision grabs us at a deeper level than does the promise of profit or market share. While a vision will often include these, by lofty we mean that it appeals to our deepest values, higher aspirations, and personal purposes. As such, a lofty vision also makes the pursuit of it meaningful and worthwhile. Lofty vision is worthy of our deep commitment. It is worthy of our life’s blood. Lofty vision magnifies the creative capacity of the organization by drawing people into alignment. Vision is collective. Vision catalyzes alignment. If purpose is the source from which great leadership springs, vision is the leader’s primary contri- bution. By expressing his or her vision, the leader causes others to reflect on what they stand for. It is difficult to remain neutral in the presence of strong, visionary leadership. When we encounter it, we are challenged to examine and evaluate our own interests, values, stance, and direction. Alignment happens when members of the organization can see that they are able to fulfill their own personal purposes by achieving the organiza- tion’s vision. Leaders enroll others in their vision, but enrollment has little to do with getting others to buy in to our vision. This notion is a vestige of our Reactive, patriarchal roots. Enrollment, as a Creative process, hap- pens in dialogue. When, as leaders, we articulate and embody our vision, we stimulate reflection in others. If we then engage in dialogue about our individual aspirations, we find common ground. We enable the true purpose and vision of the organization to rise to the surface. Alignment develops naturally as the dialogue continues. Thus, the practice of Dis- tilling Vision requires that leaders initiate and sustain this dialogue— that they are willing to influence and be influenced. Such a dialogue ups the probability of a collective vision emerging that expresses the highest aspirations of the organization: one that excites, humbles, and fulfills its members, as well as one that contributes to the success of the business. The Purposeful Visionary dimension on the LCP is the dimension most highly correlated with Leadership Effectiveness at .91. Since a lofty and strategic vision catalyzes alignment, it is highly correlated to Teamwork at .89. The combination of Purposeful Visionary and Teamwork is the combination of dimensions that is most highly correlated (.94) to Leader- ship Effectiveness. Distilling Vision is the primary Promise of Leadership. This discipline requires that we create a purpose-connected vision of results, embody that vision, and encourage others to do the same. It also requires that we distill and refine a collective sense of purpose and vision through honest dialogue. The resulting vision taps the spiritual power of purpose and brings a generative force to bear on the creation of mean- ingful personal and organizational results. Since vision is the focus of the Creative Mind, this discipline awakens the Creative, Self-Authoring Mind. As leaders embody this practice, they fulfill on the Leadership Agenda and imperative, developing a Creative Leadership System. PRACTICE 3: KNOWING YOUR DOUBTS AND FEARS Bob: Early in my career, I did not know that I was a flaming perfection- ist who was subject to his Reactive Mind. I was functioning at a mid- Reactive level as an expert perfectionist, meaning, “there’s a right way to do everything, and I know what it is.” About this time, I became interested in assessments. I became fasci- nated by one assessment in particular, and my enthusiasm was an early clue to my life’s purpose and vision. In fact, I was so interested in this assessment that I called the company and told them that I wanted to learn from them. In order to expedite my learning, I invited them to come and work with one of the leadership teams in the organization. They sent the founder’s wife! She was quite talented, but she had a different model of how to lead the work than the one in my head. Of course, since I am an expert perfectionist, she was wrong and I was right. She could not find a way to work with me, and so, eventually, we parted company. Effectively, I ran her out of the organization. Ten years later, I created a workshop to help senior leaders become aware of their Reactive patterns and see how they tend to recreate patri- archal systems even as they try to transform them. In this workshop, we used the aforementioned assessment. I wanted my colleagues, who would be leading this workshop, to be well-grounded in it. So, I asked the founder of the assessment company (let’s call him Doug) to teach us the elements of the assessment. Doug was a brilliant man, a walk- ing encyclopedia on leadership, how to measure it, and how to see it in action. After one extraordinary day with him, we decided to schedule a second day. A month later, we met again. I said something to start the meeting, and Doug quickly interrupted me, saying in his gruff voice, “Bob, can I give you some feedback?” I said, “Yeah, sure.” He said, “Well, after our last session, I went home and talked to my wife! We searched our database to see if there were any other Bob Ander- sons from Toledo, Ohio, that we worked with 10 years ago. We could not find any, and so we concluded that you are the same Bob Anderson. Is that accurate?” I said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you still want the feedback?” I said, “Yes.” He said, “You are not the same asshole you used to be.” A bit stunned by this statement, I looked around the room and everybody in the group was nodding in agreement as if to say, “Yeah, he is right about that.” Since Doug was an astute observer of human behavior, he precisely described the shift he saw in me over 10 years. Again the group nodded in agreement. After giving me this feedback, he said, “I do not know what you are doing, but keep doing it because it is working.” When he said this, I went “click, click, click” in my head—this practice, this practice, and this practice. I knew exactly what I was doing. I knew the practices that had caused this change in the way I was now leading. I had a regular practice of distilling vision, of focusing on what I most wanted to create and to become. I also had a practice of exploring my underlying Reactive beliefs and assumptions whenever I noticed that I was getting in my own way. In the practice of Knowing Our Doubts and Fears, we face what Ralph Stayer, the CEO of Johnsonville Sausage, called “terrible truth number one”—I am the problem” (Belasco, 1993). We learn to notice (perhaps with the help of feedback from others) when we are not acting on our vision or acting in ways that do not support its realization. Then we take the path of descent in service of transcendence. We enter into the fear, anxiety, or inner conflict that is reactively running behavior that is inconsistent with our vision. In this practice, we move toward our doubts and fears. We become a student of them. We get beneath them and listen to the silent inner conversation we have with ourselves. We track that conversation to its source: the identity beliefs and assumptions that run our Reactive IOS. We face these beliefs and assumptions fiercely and compassionately until we see the illusion in them, and we see how this illusion is causing us to behave, act, and lead in ways that are inconsistent with the person we want to be, the results we are pursuing, and the vision we are creating. We are then liberated to act in ways that embody more of what we want. This practice means learning to navigate the Descending Current. To be transformed, we must descend into the parts of ourselves that are not yet ready to embody our vision—that are too small, too scared, too reactive, too controlling, too cautious, etc. This is descent in service of transcendence. We often hear people say, “The key to transformation is to get rid of the Reactive, or fix your Reactive, or get out of your Reactive.” No! This approach is, in itself, Reactive (fixing or getting away from what we do not want). The Path of Descent is Creative if it is in service of creating what matters. We are the agent of creation, and so, when we discover that we are the obstacle to our own vision, we must do the work of freeing ourselves up to, as Gandhi said, “be the change we want to see in the world.” Our vision depends on this practice. We stalk our longing until it dis- tills into vision. The vision then challenges us to transform ourselves into an effective and powerful vessel for realizing the vision. The new vision will challenge the status quo of who we are, how we live and lead, and how our organization is performing. Vision challenges and evolves the current state of things. If we cannot see our contribution to the current state of things and change our mind (rewrite the IOS code that runs us on autopilot), then we will likely continue to act in ways that undermine the very thing to which we are committed. The inner game runs the outer game. We are never “done” with purpose or vision. If we are tracking it and stalking it, it keeps pulling us toward becoming the ever-larger per- son/leader that wants to emerge. It stretches us. When we are stretched by vision, when we choose to “step up,” we meet our doubts and fears at the door. The spark behind fear smolders inside—always this energy, always this tension. Every time we go to a new edge, we are terrified. However, we have learned to not take that story so seriously. Reactive Mind is governed by fear. We react to those unconscious assumptions because they have us, and we believe their story is true. When this happens, we are into our favorite habitual Reactive strategy before we know it. We have chosen comfort over challenge, but it is not really comfortable. What appears to be a choice for comfort and safety is actually a managed level of anxiety. When we choose safety over purpose, we override the fragile sense of purpose. The vision is compromised without notice, and we are left wondering why it is so hard to make progress. The alternative is to continue to give ourselves over to the pull of pur- pose, distill it into vision, and then deal with the fear and the doubt that inevitably arise. These three practices work together. Purpose gets dis- cerned and then distilled into vision. Vision challenges us to think and act differently, perhaps in ways that are not supported by our current set of beliefs and assumptions. When vision outstrips our current mental models and contradicts our well-worn identity structures, we feel fear, doubt, and other forms of inner conflict. This natural feeling simply means that we are being adaptively chal- lenged to re-think ourselves, to be restructured. Restructuring happens when we reframe our limited Reactive ways of understanding ourselves. As we reframe our self-limiting assumptions we boot up a new, creatively structured operating system designed to manifest the vision we are hold- ing. Creative structure seeks vision. Since we are designing our Creative IOS in relationship to our Self- Authored vision, we are tailoring its design to optimally support the unique purpose and vision coming through our lives and leadership. The best description for how to work with the Reactive parts of our- selves comes from a book called Feeling Good by David Burns (Burns, 1980). In his Vertical Thinking process, he gives precise instructions on how to listen beneath Reactive feelings to the silent thinking that is running our habitual patterns of behavior. He shows how to track that think- ing back to its source— the core identity beliefs that are running the show. Finally, he shows how to rewrite, over time, our IOS code at the Creative Structure of Mind. We have found no better source for learning how to navigate the Descending Current as we transition from Reactive to Cre- ative Mind. Each of us is a unique spiritual entity. With that comes our own unique longings, gifts, and a passion for expressing that uniqueness in the world. We also have a host of experiences and waves of conditioning that make our uniqueness difficult to identify and take seriously. We are accultur- ated and taught to define our self-worth and safety upon getting ahead, winning, gaining approval, and meeting others’ expectations. When pur- suing our purpose, as vision conflicts with these maps of identity, it is easy to lose sight of our deeper longings. Our soul is then held captive by our well-conditioned Reactive Mind, making it impossible to stalk our purpose, let alone stand for it, when we are in the habit of reacting to stay safe. Again, we cannot pursue both safety and purpose simultaneously. We must make a choice. The soul is not interested in safety. The soul knows what it longs for, it is up for the adventure, and it is unwilling to compro- mise. This is the key choice we make in life. It will determine the nature and quality of our leadership. Without a practice of descent, to know our doubts and fears, it is likely that we will live a compromise. PRACTICE 4: ENGAGE IN AUTHENTIC, COURAGEOUS DIALOGUE There is no safe way to be great. And there is no great way to be safe. Transformation requires courage. There is no way around it. Reactive Mind orients on safety in whatever form that takes (Complying, Pro- tecting, or Controlling). The practice of Authentic Courage directly con- fronts all our play-not-to-lose strategies and, if practiced, reliably cat- alyzes the evolution of Creative Mind. The courage required in organizations is not the courage required on the battlefield. We do not risk life and death, although it may feel that way at times. Mostly, the courage required is the courage to tell the truth. Honest conversation happens in organizations, but mostly in the bathroom, not in the meeting room. In the meeting room, we all agree that we are making great progress. In the bathroom, we often hear a different story. When caution prevails, the truth is obscured. Collective effective- ness and intelligence rapidly erode. Performance suffers. We fall short of the vision we espouse. Change efforts come off the rails. Since authentic, courageous conversation is the lifeblood of high per- formance, this dimension is top-dead-center on the LCP. Authenticity in the LCP combines Courage, the willingness to bring up difficult issues and engage them in a great way, and Integrity, embodying our values by walking the talk. Authenticity is highly correlated to Leadership Effec- tiveness (.80), to Purposeful Visionary (.82) to Teamwork (.68) and to Business Performance (.50). It is one of the central defining capabilities of Creative Mind. This Practice requires the previous three practices. Courage requires that we are committed to something bigger than our fears, something worth the risk (Discerned Purpose and Distilled Vision). It also requires that we know our fears and that we can separate real risk from the fear we make up when subject to our Reactive illusions. Bob: Five years after I discovered that I needed everyone to like me as a leader, I was consulting to a large manufacturing organization. One day we met with the top 80 managers. I was not leading the discus- sion because they wanted to explore a topic that was outside my area of expertise, so I called in another consultant to work with me. I made a few comments before the morning break. At the break, my client, the CEO, a rather rough and tumble type, took me aside and said, “Bob, I was just talking to my Vice Presidents at break, and frankly, they did not appreciate your comments. I think it best if you just keep your mouth shut the rest of the day.” I was shocked. I wondered, “What could I have said that was so con- troversial?” I went back to my seat licking my wounds and said nothing for the next few hours. Mid-afternoon an amazing “coincidence” happened. A woman stood up and said, “I feel like it is not safe to say what you really think in this room. After meetings like this, the senior managers caucus and discuss who said what. They make conclusions about us that impact our cred- ibility and our future here.” No one knew quite what to say. Then the conversation continued, and within 30 seconds the group swept the issue under the rug by concluding that it was safe to say what you really think, that there was no issue with speaking up in this group. In the meantime, my heart is beating loudly. What this woman had just described happened to me today. I found myself in a moment of choice: courage or safety. Mind you, I am sitting right across the table from the CEO. How am I going to play it? While the group was disposing of this issue, I was riding the Ascend- ing and Descending Currents of the first three practices. “How do I want to show up in this moment? What is my vision of great consulting in a moment like this? How do I best serve my client? What do I care about that is worth the risk?” These questions reminded me of well-practiced clarity that had come from the practices of Discerning Purpose and Dis- tilling Vision. I was also riding the Descending Current. So this is the point where I always make up that if I stand up I will get shot. I know this familiar voice of caution all too well. I know that I constantly tell myself that my future depends on always being liked, admired, and val- ued. I do not have to listen to that voice in this moment. I chose to speak up. I stood and said, “What you said (pointing to the woman who had raised the issue) happened to me today. A meeting happened at the break and someone in senior leadership, and I will not mention names, took me aside and said that it was probably best if I kept my mouth shut the rest of the day.” The group gasped. “No way! It could not happen here.” I said, “Yes. It did happen here. It happened to me today.” The group then had a two-hour discussion about the level of hon- esty, caution, truth telling, authenticity, and inauthenticity that was in the room. It was a breakthrough conversation for them. As they left the meeting, they agreed that the last two hours had been the best conversation they had ever had as an Extended Leadership team. As the group was leaving, quite exuberant over their breakthrough conversation, I was trying to pack up and make it out of the room with- out making eye contact with the CEO. I caught myself in the act. This is the practice. I noticed that I was afraid to face him. Ascending Current: What is my vision of service to my client in this moment? Descending Current: What am I telling myself is at risk? Oh, that same familiar voice of caution again. Choice: I looked the CEO in the eye and said, “What did you think about what I said?” He responded, “What do you mean?” I said, “Well you told me it would be best if I kept my mouth shut.” He said, “You were talking about me?!!” When he asked this, I envisioned myself laughing and saying, “No. Never mind.” Instead, I said, still looking him in the eye, “Yes, I was talking about you.” He responded, “Well I was just looking out for your welfare. I need what you are bringing to this organization, and I want you to live to fight another day!” I pondered this comment and then said, “I get that you were looking out for my welfare. I appreciate your intent. Here is what I would like you to get: In that moment, you were a conduit to me for all the caution and fear that was just expressed in your leadership team.” He glared at me for what seemed like a long time and for a moment I honestly thought this might well be my last day consulting with this organization. He then said, “Huh! I did do that, didn’t I? Wow. That was helpful! I need more of that from you. When is our next meeting?” Courage is the willingness to be authentic, to speak and act in ways that express and embody our vision of greatness. The whole culture is going on in every meeting: the level of honesty or withholding, caution or courage, vision or compromise, integrity or manipulation, clarity or lack of clarity. It is all happening in every meeting. To change the culture is to change the moment. The vision lives or dies in moments of courage. We either opt for purpose and take the risk of saying what we really think and feel, or we opt for safety. In this choice we either advance the vision or hold it back. The power to create the culture we want lies in authenticity. The Promise of Leadership cannot be fulfilled if leaders cannot tell the truth to one another. Most of our work with senior teams is long term. After a year of working with them, we often hear this feedback: “The difference that has made all the difference is that we can now tell the truth to one another. A year ago, too many issues were un-discussable and caught in the politics of caution and ambition. Now we can readily cut through complex issues, and it is fun.” Authentic, courageous conversation is necessary for high performance. Collective effectiveness lives or dies with the ability to speak honestly and with high integrity to each other. Collective intelligence depends on it. This practice is a hallmark of Creative Mind and leadership and practicing it as a discipline evolves Creative Mind and leads to Integral Mind. PRACTICE 5: DEVELOP INTUITION, OPEN TO INSPIRATION Finding leverage points within systems that are so complex they defy rationality—or as Peter Senge says are un-figure-out-able—requires that leaders trust a way of knowing that is beyond rationality and deductive logic. Leaders must learn to use data and rational analysis as far as it can go and then listen to their gut, their intuitive knowing about the best or right thing to do. This requires a level of maturity in the IOS that can balance reason with intuition for guiding the development of the organization’s vision, strategy, decision-making, and creative innovation. We do not Discern Purpose or Distill Vision solely with the ratio- nal mind. We do not balance our checkbook with intuition. Mastery in most disciplines, including leadership, requires strong rational capability balanced by strong access to intuitive knowing. Purpose, vision, insight, innovation, creativity, authenticity, and wisdom characterize great lead- ers. None of these capabilities are merely rational. They depend on intu- ition as the source of inspiration. Daniel Webster defines Intuition as, “The power or faculty of attaining direct knowledge or cognition without reference to data, evident rational deduction, or inference.” In other words, we just know, and we do not know why or how we know. Most of us have experience with this kind of knowing and we also have experience with what happened when we did and did not follow it. Intuition is a capability we all have and it can be developed. Like any talent, intuition is normally distributed; some are more gifted than others, but all of us have the capability. Intuitive capability atrophies in most of us. Usually our cultural bias tells us to ignore our intuition (unless we are from a rare culture that is deeply intuitively informed). Intuition is largely discounted in the workplace. As such, we limit our leadership effectiveness, individual and collective. Most cultures are primarily Reactive, and Reactive Mind is conditioned to dismiss intuitive insight as irrelevant and untrustworthy. Reactive Mind, in pursuit of safety and predictability, wants proof. It is designed to think “within the box,” not to make innovative leaps “out of the box.” Intuition, in most of us, lies fallow until consciousness develops beyond Reactive Mind. Since it is an innate capability, intuition can develop at any stage, but it typically begins to emerge as a powerful leadership capability as Creative Mind evolves. In his book, Value Shifts, Brian Hall suggests that intuition does not develop until the Self-Initiating phases of development (another label for what we call Creative Mind) (Hall, 2006). Creative Mind develops intuition as a powerful tool. This intuitive capability tends to reach its full potential at the Integral level. Bob: Intuition can be a powerful tool in many situations. It can be helpful, for example, in a courageous conversation when we do not know what to say next to move the conversation forward. I was once coaching a senior executive in a program at the University of Notre Dame. We administered the LCP and then conducted a one-on-one debrief session with each manager. It was my last coaching session of the day. I had started at 6:30 a.m., and it was now 6:00 p.m. When I walked into the coaching room, the man was looking down at the table. He did not look up at me. As I sat across from him, he pushed the LCP binder across the table at me and said, “I do not understand this arrogance crap—explain to me what these results mean.” I tried to talk to him about what Arrogance meant and how it may show up in leadership. Nothing I said landed. I was getting nowhere. He was arguing with me at every turn. I was at a loss for what to say to him that would be helpful, and then, an idea popped in. When it did, I imme- diately had the gut sense that this idea held the key to our conversation. I then knew what I needed to say/do, but the idea scared me because it required that I trust my gut and take a risk with him. After double- checking my intuitive insight, I said, “Let me show you what arrogance looks like. When I walked into the room, here is how you looked (I put my head down and stared at the table). Most people would make eye contact, perhaps smile, or shake my hand. Knowing that I have been in these coaching sessions for 11 hours, they might even say, ‘Man, it has been a long day for you, how are you doing?’ Instead, you pushed this binder at me with your head down and said, ‘Tell me about this arro- gance crap.’ That is what arrogance looks like.” He rocked back in his chair, glared at me for a minute, and said, “You know if people see me outside of work, they do not recognize me.” I asked, “What do you mean? He said, “When I am not at work, I have my ball cap on, a beer in one hand, and a smile on my face. I am actually a fun guy, but when I walk into work, I put my game face on. At work no one really knows me. I make sure of that.” We then went on to have an extraordinary conversation. In fact, the conversation was so transformative that when he stood up, and started to walk out of the room, he stumbled slightly and said, “Oh, I need to be careful. I feel a little woozy.” I said, “Yeah, that was a big shift.” In order to lead effectively, we need access to every kind of informa- tion available to us. We need access to forms of perception beyond the bounds of our usual organizational rationality. We need to see relation- ships and interconnections that are invisible to linear, logical methods. This discipline of leadership asks us to take intuition seriously, to rec- ognize that intuition is real, that we all have it, that it can be developed through practice, and that, in the words of the philosopher Schopen- hauer, “there is in us something wiser than our head” (Schopenhauer, 1974).
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

check this and let me know if you need any help

Running head: CREATIVE ORGANIZATIONS AND STRATEGIC CHANGE

Creative Organizations and Strategic Change
Instructor name
Student name
Date

1

CREATIVE ORGANIZATIONS AND STRATEGIC CHANGE

2

Comment 1
Mark Zuckerberg would not have accomplished the great success if he would not have
taken a chance with his creativity for his vision related to Facebook. The effective leadership of
Mark Zuckerberg has made Facebook be the most used social networking site worldwide. In 2004,
Zuckerberg took a chance for his vision of Facebook by the use of technology, internet, and social
media. Initially, Zuckerberg had the vision to make the Facebook a medium to connect with family
and relatives, a perfect way of interaction without actually seeing or touching them. The idea was
accepted globally and the business raised connecting not only friends and family members but also
the business professionals. (Adam & Anderson, 2016).
However, most of the people believe that the Facebook is one of the best...


Anonymous
This is great! Exactly what I wanted.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags