We can't define 'leadership'.
How do you study or learn to be something that you can't define?

What is 'IT'?
Where does 'IT' come from?

When you consider the gravity and greatness of the examples that we're taught about... your first thought may be...
I'm pretty sure I don't have 'IT'...

But maybe it should be...
How do I know that I've got it? That I'm doing it? That I can do it?

Subscribing to the belief that effective leadership is simply the result of one 'thing' means that statistically.... there are very few leaders.

Again, this is where we really have to stop romanticizing the greatness of leaders as this unattainable 'thing'. Because lets face it... Greatness is retrospective outcome, most of the time.

SO... What about the rest of us? What about those of us who make things happen on a daily basis? Who keep organizations running? Are we not leaders? Are we really going to tell our kids, our young talent that if their face doesn't end up on the side of a mountain, that their efforts, their abilities don't matter?

Fallacy number one: that you must be born to be a leader. If you weren't born with an innate set of traits, then you were not born to lead... maybe manage, but not lead.

Good news, the 'great man' theory has been dead for awhile now!

More recent theories on leadership focus on identifying strengths that can be leveraged given a situation. Your job is to understand what your strengths are and how and when to leverage them. Your other task is to take stock of areas in which you can improve and seek opportunities for development, mentorship.

Experience... Ahhh the bane of every millennial's existence. No longer is the great existential question, "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" but rather, "entry-level position: experience required".

A large barrier for ascending a leadership position is the inevitable comparison to someone else. This is especially difficult if your predecessor was well liked or extremely effective. You may be telling yourself, I can't compete with ______... they have years of experience, they know what they're doing. Who am I to think I can hang with that caliber of leader? The simple answer will always be... you can't. And the comfort there should be that you don't want to. The more you focus on being someone else, the closer to failure you will edge because you will NEVER be them. Even if you follow the same rules, guidelines, policies, practices... you will never be them. Stop comparing, start doing. Use the greats as a compass, not a map.

Another HUGE barrier in transitioning into a leadership role is the assumption that because you are 'in charge', that you have to A)know everything about everything B) know what to do in every situation. This is categorically untrue. Those of you in leadership positions can likely attest to the fact that there are several instances, especially when you first took a leadership position wherein you were operating on pure faith (and tenacity). YOU do not need to have all of the answers... you simply need to know when you do not have the answers, and how to find the answers... isn't that what we tell our students in clinical? When the Joint Commission comes around and everyone is avoiding eye contact?

What if we reframed our understanding of what a leader is?

What if we accepted the fact that it is quite likely that each of us have qualities that lend themselves to leading people? The ability to influence, initiate, and manage change at various levels?

Rather than focusing on what effective leaders do, let's focus on how effective leaders make us feel.


I have an assignment in the first course in my program wherein students are asked to compile a list of traits/behaviors of managers and leaders that they find valuable. Almost overwhelmingly, the majority of the traits and behaviors listed as essential to leadership, across all students, can be categorized into these types of elicitations.

This is unsurprising, because as you look through the literature on what 'it' is that make leader effective- these words are mentioned consistently as attempts to describe the symptoms of leadership.

This is the first step in developing your leadership identity.

Understanding what self-regard is:
Self regard is
1. Knowledge of your strengths
2. The capacity to nurture those strengths and the ability to understand the fit between your strengths and weaknesses and needs of the situation.
3. You're proud of your work

Positive self-regard = positive other regard for followers.

Leaders are not followed because of who they are, but how they make us feel.

The ability to make someone feel good about even the most monotonous or minute detail of daily work is imperative for leaders.
Self-Regard is contagious. It's a direct result of self esteem

Goal: Establish the standard for thinking about what is possible. Your goal is to identify your best self, in your best environment, to create an atmosphere of excellence.

The question becomes how to assess your strengths and weaknesses while maintaining a positive self-regard.

The purpose of self-scanning, as I like to call it, is not to nit-pick your abilities. As simple as it may sound, it's about identifying the experience that make us feel 'good' versus those that make us feel 'uncomfortable'. The analysis of those experiences help us to deconstruct our abilities.

Think about the projects you've worked on or the pieces of your job that you love. Think about why you love them. The root of that enjoyment can likely be attributed to a strength.

When you think about things you prefer not to do... why? Do you truly not enjoy them? Or is it because you don't know how to do them? or do them well? Is it because you're afraid of the F-word?

You know how they say that talking about the things that scare us makes it less scary... Well, let's just say it.

FAILURE

I get it. It's terrifying to think of ascending into a position of leadership only to think of what will happen if you are... gulp.. ineffective.

Bennis and Nanus (2007) interviewed 90 leaders. In their discussions... the word 'failure' didn't come up.

This is because the leaders interviewed never thought about failure.

The societal construct of failure is of course negative. It's final. It means that you tried... and were found wanting.
How does that make you feel? Uncomfortable.. I know! This feeling is enough to impact your self-esteem-your self regard... enough to make you think that you CAN'T do it again.

The beauty of a construct is that we can re-construct it. We can assign a different meaning to the process. Several leaders interviewed by Bennis and Nanus viewed 'false steps' as learning opportunities.

Learning to lead is not unlike other forms of learning. All types of learning involves some degree of 'failure'. You may stumble, you may not make the right decision all the time, you will not be a perfect leader for everyone in every situation; however, a focus on failure will almost certainly ensure that you 1) never try and 2) when you do, you will fail. If a decision doesn't pan out... Make another one.

Establishing a vision sounds scary but it's not.

A vision is simply the creation of a focus, it's an agenda:
This must articulate a realistic, credible, and attractive view of what you want to be, where you want to go, or what and where you want your organization to go.

A vision provides a bridge between the present and the future and creates the purpose that binds followers both together and to the leader.

Leaders with a clear and communicable vision make decisions as though they are steps across the bridge to the future.

In considering the development of self as a leader, understanding what you WANT to be is essential in making the decisions that will support the achievement of those goals.

As Simon Sinek explained in his analysis of why companies are successful, he explained that people do not 'buy' the 'what' you're selling.. they buy the 'why'. Typically if you can identify the 'why', both the 'how' and the 'what' become evident.

A clear vision is essential to being an effective leader. In addition to keeping yourself focuse, a communicable vision keeps those you are leading 'on board'. It keeps them coming to work because they share your 'why' and they understand your take on the 'how' and the 'what'.
This about this- If you can't articulate why you're doing something, or you don't understand why... how can you expect anyone else to?

Think about money. Are any of us Respiratory Care Providers because it'll make us rich? NOPE. Most of us are here because we want to make people healthier, we want to teach people the skills they need to make people healthier. That's our why.

Imaginable: Conveys a picture of what the future looks like
Desirable: Appeals to the long term interests of people who have a stake in what you're doing
Feasible: Comprised of realistic, attainable goals
Focused: Clearly articulated to provide guidance
Flexible: General enough for individual initiative and alternative responses in anticipation for change.
Communicable: Easy to communicate- can be explained in 5 minutes.


I feel like I should mention 'mission' here also. To differentiate 'mission' from 'vision', a mission is a formal summary of your aims, values, and/or goals. Your vision is how you're going to get there.

In order to understand leadership we have to talk about POWER.

Power is currency. And there are several ways to exchange currency.

The reciprocal of power is empowerment.
Think about trying to find some degree of homeostasis. If you consider distributing power more evenly- say from an area of high concentration to an area of low concentration. Sharing the distribution of power in a more equitable way will more than likely make you more powerful. Then in turn, make your followers more powerful

This goes back to the 'why' people follow good leaders. There's a tendency to gravitate towards things that make us feel good.

When it comes to our work, what makes us feel good?
1. Significance: Communicating the fact that our contributions make a difference, an impact. We strive to be important, we strive for meaning. Effective leaders create environments wherein followers feel seen and integral to the objectives. They translate intentions into realities that affect people's lives.

2. Competence: Work should be a form of education. The support of development and learning increases motivation and value of followers. When learning is seen as an investment in the person rather than a manipulation- it makes people feel as though YOU see them as worthy of that investment. It's likely that you'll see the return on that investment through loyalty, innovation, better outcomes.

3. Community: Part of the job of a leader is to pull followers in a forward direction, toward their vision. Creating an environment wherein followers feel joined together by a common purpose and a reliance upon one another to achieve that purpose should be at the forefront of a leader's mind.

4. Enjoyment: Gone are the days wherein people choose jobs to fulfill basic needs. Younger generations are choosing jobs based on the fulfillment of needs that go beyond the basic transaction of money for time. Now, environments have to be 'worth the time'. When people enjoy their work- they show up, and they do it well. Your job as a leader is to identify opportunities for people to do what they enjoy.

It's important to remember that it's hard to empower people towards something that's unclear. You have to have a clear vision in order to distribute power and receive the benefits of an empowered following. You have to COMMUNICATE.

In addition to developing a positive self regard, a cohesive vision, and working toward empowering followers, effective leaders are excellent communicators.

Think about it. Who's your favorite boss? Why? They make you feel valued, empowered, and supported. A big part of that is their ability to communicate.

Leaders are only as effective as the ideas that they can communicate

It's important to know that as a leader, communication is does not refer simply to your ability to articulate your vision or be the loudest voice in the room.

Communicating as a leader has to do with consistent behavior.

It's about closing the loop. About DOING rather than just speaking.

Effective communication is about establishing, earning, and fostering a sense of trust.

A trust in your ability to listen
A trust in your vision
A trust in your efforts
A trust that you'll pull rather than push.

I mentioned earlier that trait based theory of leadership was dead. We've ushered in a new era of theory. The basis of these new situation and contingent theories is that the leader can A) suss out the needs of a situation and adapt his or her style to the needs of the situation or B) understands the requisite strengths required for the needs of the task-at-hand and can identify a leader best suited for that situation. We can get on board with this, right? Say you work in the ICU and are eating in the cafeteria and an infant begins choking. You can attend to the child and because you are awesome, you can likely meet the objectives of resuscitation; however, would you do it as well as a NICU RT would have?

The idea is to first understand and hone your skillset and then to match the your skillset to the ideal situation. It would be as if you were a flower and you could pick your ideal pot in which to bloom.

Would Theodore Roosevelt have been as successful if he had to rely on social networking to spread his message? Would he have understood how to navigate today's challenges given his skill set? Would his vision have matched the challenges of the time? Would his methods have empowered followers in the same way?

Similarly, what would have happened if Jobs had lived in another time? Would this have worked? Maybe.. we'll never know, but the point is- you need a leader whose strengths fit the needs of the situation. Who understands how to leverage and share those strengths toward the collective organizational mission. Who understands how to empower people with the 'why'.

Leaders who have taken the time to build an identity also understand that the shaping of this leadership identity will play a key role in shaping the culture of the organization in which they lead. A leader has the power to be a social architect.

Effective leaders understand the environment in which they operate and work to assign the meaning and garners the commitment of their followers.

Not understanding the environment in which they operate, or misreading the situation can be detrimental

Pursuing an opportunity just for the 'what' or the sake of progressing, regardless of your fit is like picking the wrong pot. Would you attempt to plant an orchid in conditions where only a dandelion would bloom?


Now I like to think that there are two ends of the leadership spectrum in terms of leaders, especially when acting as an agent of change. These ends of the spectrum may represent good leaders, intrinsically, but are equally ineffective for very different reasons... they didn't understand the environment:

This is the leader as a change agent who failed to assess the environment before coming in, guns blazing. Blinded by their own agenda, these leaders often mean well and are often hyperfocused on objectives. They utilize change leadership in a way that actually creates more of an inequity in the dynamic of power because they failed to either 1. Evaluate their strengths, 2. Create a vision 3. Empower their followers 4. Communicate their vision effectively. OR, in real train wreck situations: a combination of several of those.

These leaders often underestimate the existing social and cultural dynamics within the organization. The errors made by wrecking balls often end up disempowering followers by threatening follower significance, competence, community, or enjoyment. I think we've all experienced leader like this... Going to work for these people, or at least in this type of transition, feels like rubbing your hand against the grain of unprocessed wood because it undermines the trust in that leader to uphold the qualities of your work that you love.

This type of leader failed to assess the environment at all... basically sliding into the fray and maintaining the status quo. Typically this type of leader creates a power imbalance in the opposite direction. Their lack of vision or inability to communicate typically results in the immediate undermining of their role as the leader.
Typically, it is leaders who have not taken the time to understand their strengths and weaknesses who end up on this end of the spectrum.
A general lack of self-esteem in the form of leadership confidence often results in the inability to either create a vision or to communicate it effectively. Followers are confused about the leader's role, their role, or expectations. Typically a mismatch here translates into a lack of motivation, support, and trust.

Now that we understand a little more about the role of the leader, let's turn our focus to the situation.

Understanding the environment in which you are operating is essential to your success as a leader-Just as we discussed why neither Teddy nor Steve would likely have thrived in different historical contexts given their respective strengths. How do we avoid being at the ineffective ends of the spectrum?

When you go into an emergency situation, you take a look around. You wouldn't rush into a code and start doing the RN's job...

What works in an outpatient clinic or in an educational setting may not work in an acute setting.

How do you end up somewhere in the middle?

We've talked about how to develop yourself as an effective leader. The importance of self-regard, vision, empowerment, and communication.

SO- How do you understand the environment? And it is important to understand the environment.. as Fullan states, "the driver of sustainability is the peer culture"

You can use framing techniques to better understand the forces that influence the social, cultural, and organizational environments and you can utilize frameworks to help guide change.

Many leadership mis steps can be attributed to a lack of awareness about forces or nuances that shape the organization.

Framing is a tool used by leaders to better understand the scope of a situation, organization so as to better understand the undercurrents that may either support or threaten the success of your agenda or decision

To remind us: a frame is a set of ideas or assumptions that help you understand and negotiate a situation

One of the most popular of these types of tools is Bolman and Deal's Four Frames Analysis:


Structural:
The central idea in this frame is that there exists a suitable array of roles and responsibilities within an organization that will maximize efficiency by aligning roles and relationships. Doing so will help to achieve both collective goals and individual differences.
This frame helps leaders to qualify goals and objectives as priority and to devise strategies to reach those goals. Strategies include: Appropriate division of labor & matching of abilities and tasks. Leaders using this lens must use rational thinking over personal agenda. Leaders must consider the current circumstances of the organization and operate within those boundaries. When there are structural flaws- the solution is identification and restructuring.

In a nutshell, this frame details the logistical workflow of what keeps the organization running

Human Resource:
This one is all about the people. The core assumption here is that people's skills, attitudes, energy, and commitment are vital resources that make or break an organization.
When using this lens, leaders must assume a symbiotic relationship between people and organizations... That is, organizations need ideas, energy. People need careers, salaries, purpose. Consideration of a situation through this task addresses that because of this relationship, when one party suffers, so does the other; conversely, when one benefits, so does the other: this is particularly true in terms of fit.

Political:
Ahhh... politics. They're not going anywhere and the best thing a leader can do is understand that. What you can do is work to understand the role politics play in the decisions that need to be made, the dynamic of power between the authority and the partisans. Conflict plays a role here; typically in competition for scarce resources. This competition undergirds goals and decisions through bargaining and negotiation.
This can be one of the hardest frames for novice leaders to utilize. This can be for a range of reasons; but I encourage practice through this lens because the political undercurrents of organizations have a huge impact on the social culture within the organization and because the leader is the social architect, overlooking utilizing this lens may undermine leadership efforts.

Symbolic:
The symbolic frame provides an opportunity to view a situation through the meaning assigned by those most central to that situation. When utilizing this frame, leaders must realize that it is not what happens, but what it means and that activity and meaning, although coupled, are interpreted differently by those who experience or are affected by that activity. When things go wrong, people search for the meaning in it an of it and you as a leader must be prepared to both understand and communicate that meaning. I have found that this one is very hard for clinicians to utilize, simply because it's a bit more abstract that we're used to. This is because we've been taught to 'anchor' ourselves in one perspective. This causes us to see only what we're expecting to see, rather than what's actually before us.

Environmental scanning frameworks enable a leader to take a guided approach to introducing or addressing change.

Let's face it... Change is hard. We're wired to bristle at the discomfort caused by change, even change that is good. Utilizing a framework, such as Kotter's 8-step approach.

I know what you're thinking... 8 is a lot.. I could maybe commit to 4. But, I assure you that this framework is laid out in a way that is pretty intuitive. You may have already completed steps within this framework toward the implementation of change.

1. Establishing a sense of urgency
2. Creating a guiding coalition
3. Develop a vision and strategy
4. Communicate the vision
5. Empower employees for action
6. Generate short-term wins
7. Consolidate gains and produce more change
8. Anchor new approaches in the culture.

When we say 'light the fire' what Kotter really means is: Establish a sense of urgency.

You need the urgency to rally cooperation and combat complacency

How do you challenge the status quo? Combat complacency:

Remove or minimize the impact of sources of complacency

Depending on the source or the level of complacency- this may call for bold measures.
This can be difficult because this is not talked about in overmanaged and underled organizations.

A few of Kotter's suggestions:
1. Create a crisis
2. Eliminate obvious examples of excess
3. Change the rules. Set targets so high that they cannot be met by conducting business as usual.
4. Stop the "happy talk" be transparent about problems so that people understand the need for change.
5. Create opportunity and a plan for people to take advantages of the opportunities through a new plan.

Remember, this is not about throwing a grenade into the middle of a problem to get your way. It's about framing. Remember, you can utilize framing here. Changing the lens through which people look can help you garner both support and motivation toward your vision for change.

Creating a guiding coalition is about coming to terms with the fact that neither change, nor leadership really comes from a single, larger-than-life individual alone.

When selecting people for a team, it is imperative to consider the needs of the effort. Here are some things that Kotter discusses as essential considerations for developing a team:
1. Position Power: Are enough KEY players on the team? These are people who have the ability to make the change happen and ensure that others cannot block the progress of the group.
2. Expertise: Are the points-of-view at the table diverse and relevant enough to make sure objectives and interests are represented well?
3. Credibility: Do the people at the table have 'good' reputations, or relationships with people that will garner support? or ensure that the task is taken seriously?
4. Leadership: Are the members experienced enough to know what they do not know? To know what they know?

Who should you avoid?
1. Big Egos: Those who suck the air out of the room or steamroll progress
2. Snakes: Those who create mistrust by undermining the dynamic of the group.

We've talked a lot about the reasons that a vision and strategy are required for success at a personal leadership level. However this is just as essential in a group setting
It's:
Imaginable
Desirable
Feasible
Focused
Flexible
Communicable

This is because you cannot expect people to follow you if you don't know where you're going.

The leader's style will affect this tremendously

Simplicity: Say what you want to say. Get rid of the jargon and the double talk

Relatability: A verbal picture is a useful tool. Find an analogy or metaphor to use that speaks to people

Multiple ways: say it in every meeting, big or small, in memos, newsletters, interactions, be consistent in your message and say it often

Multiple times: Repetition is key here. In order for it to become less novel, it needs to be heard frequently. This helps to make known the dedication to the shift. It's not just something someone mentioned in a meeting one time and never followed through with... it's happening.

Lead by example: Leaders and those with high levels of social or organizational clout must 'walk the walk' and 'talk the talk'. If key stakeholders are acting or speaking off-message, it undermines the entire effort

Address Inconsistencies: If something happens that is inconsistent with the message, address it. Otherwise it undermines the effort.

LISTEN: Two way communication is more effective than is one way. People want to be heard, not just told. Receive and hear feedback, incorporate it when you can, if you can't communicate that.

What does Kotter mean when he says 'broad based' action. He means empower those to own the vision.

This means that you have to address barriers to empowerment. Common barriers include:
1 . Structural barriers: There are real and tangible barriers to the execution of the vision. That is the processes for making things happen don't allow the people to deliver on the vision-based promises
2. Skills: The people are unprepared or underprepared to make or implement changes. Spending real time on how you will develop staff is essential to implementing change.
3. Systems: Ensure that all systems which both affect or are affected by the changes are prepared to handle that change or are supported. For example, if you have things tied to compensation, it will be imperative that HR and payroll systems are prepared to deliver on any incentives tied to the new vision. When people do not receive what they were promised or have not been fairly for a job done, it will undermine the effort.
4. Supervisors: If you have resistant supervisors, or other authoritative positions that are resisting the change because they 1) do not understand the 'why' 2) feel threatened by the change 3) are not empowered by the change, it can severely hinder progress. It is imperative to rally these 'high ranking' officers around the vision.

The point of celebrating small wins is because the journey to achieving an organizational mission or vision is a LONG road- which is purposeful; however, people need to see that the change is worth it

Don't hide in 'upper level' meetings wherein progress is shared only with key people or in spreadsheets that people don't understand or care about

Provide some degree of tangible proof of progress at relatively short intervals in the process:
1. Reinforce the efforts- provide evidence that sacrifices or costs are worth it
2. Reward change agents publicly: A public pat on the back or recognition of solid effort or work in a public forum is great for motivation.
3. Fine-tune vision: STW give the guiding coalition concrete data on the viability of plans. It helps to answer the question of 'is this feasible' or 'are we doing the right things'? There's no point in continuing down a dead end if there is little to no success in sight!
4. Undermine cynics or resistors: It's hard to argue with tangible progress. Celebrating STW helps to make clear that we're going in the right direction.
5. Keeps the bosses on board: Again, evidence to the key stakeholders that you're on the right track- that resources allocated are being used wisely.
6. BUILDS MOMENTUM: Momentum turns neutrals into supporters, reluctant supporters into active helpers

Another downfall is letting short term wins, or the celebratory phases overpower your sense of urgency.

Don't confuse short term wins with a ' the job is done' sense of the atmosphere. This can happen when there is too much back-patting and not enough re-focusing on the next challenge or the next milestone.

Kotter says to consolidate gains and produce more change.

You need momentum to help produce change in organizations which are highly interdependent. This is something with which we're familiar with in healthcare right? You want to change a service, but it's never just 'respiratory' that's affected- those changes influence other disciplines, other policies that have to be considered.

Don't forget that short term wins won't always 'win' over those who truly resist an initiative. If you've managed to quell their resistive influence, they will be waiting for an opportunity to undermine the transitions. Continue the momentum to integrate change, to ingrain the initiative into the culture.

We've talked about this too- how important the culture is in affecting change because culture exerts and influence and operates outside of people's awareness.

The culture of a place is what makes things so difficult to change. Because it operates without a lack of intent, it is difficult to change.

Ideally your goal is to indoctrinate a group of individuals towards a collective belief in your vision.

This means that new practices must replace the old culture:
for example, you cannot hire new people under the old practices and expect them to subscribe to a new paradigm

Finally, a true shift in cultural prioritization or change is often the last phase of the transition cycle. That means that you cannot reasonably expect a shift in a short period of time.

What does anchored change look like?
Well, it will depend on the results- your results must clearly indicate that the new way is better than the old way

It requires dedication- and lots of talking. Change takes verbal support... constant verbal support to sway reluctant people to the validity of new practices

Don't be surprised if there is turn over. Let's be honest... not everyone will love you. Not everyone will get on board, and that's ok. As Kotter says, sometimes the only way to change a culture is to change key people.

This also means that succession planning is crucial. Hiring and promotional practices must be consistent with the newness- or you'll see a resurgence of the old culture.

1. Develop your self regard
Frame yourself with the goal of establishing your personal standard. Your vision.

2. Find your opportunities
Successful leadership is dependent upon not just the leader's abilities, but also the constraints of the situation.

3. Understand the Environment
In order to understand how to lead, you must take a look around, observe, and assign meaning to understand how you fit and how you can affect change

We talked about a framing tool. A set of lenses through which to view an organization or a situation through. A frame is a set of beliefs which form a lens that enables you to more clearly understand what's happening around you. This is helpful because of in our current world, we are so overloaded with information that we filter out most of what we see, choosing only to see what seems important and consistent with our current mindset. We fill the gaps in with our current beliefs.

4. We learned about how change happens.
Often because we operate with a limited scope of vision and with limited information, the choices we make are a default of the 'path of least resistance'. This means that integrating change is difficult. Kotter gives us at least a lens through which to view change as a systematic undertaking

5. It's a cultural shift
Believing in yourself is one thing
Creating a realistic vision is one thing
Communicating that vision is one thing
Shifting the culture is another thing. It takes all of these components. It takes time. It takes perseverance and it takes a strategic approach.

Consider the environment
Go forth with a plan for change

Most of All:

You can LEARN to lead.
How?
Understand yourself
Develop self regard
Develop a personal professional vision
Understand the concept of empowerment
Develop effective communication skills
Be comfortable with failure