Sometimes Quitters Do Win

Why would a popular and successful executive willingly resign his position when everyone expected him to keep his power? Why do it twice? We'll explore this question for the next several weeks.

George Washington twice resigned his executive power: first when he resigned his position as commander and chief of the continental army and second when he chose not to seek a third term as President (he still got 2 electoral votes in the 1796 election).

Shortly before Washington resigned his military command, a group of soldiers wanted to march on congress in response to unresolved grievances. After quelling that near-rebellion, he rode to the continental congress, meeting in Maryland, to surrender his sword. He was met by huge cheering crowds in three different cities - in a scene not unlike the triumph processions of Roman military generals.

Washington could easily have become a military dictator. The English revolution that preceded him by less than 200 years ended with such. Why didn't Washington follow that path?

There are a variety of reasons. One of those was his ability to pick up and lay down executive power at will. Even more impressive, he could lay down this power and not be diminished in any way. In fact, his decision to resign his military command made him even more heroic. I believe in this act Washington demonstrated something of the character that Christ discussed when he said, "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth."

IDEA LEADER: Not only were Washington's executive positions full of authoritative power, but they were also symbols of status. What status symbols could you give up to enhance your leadership? How would your organization benefit if you shared power with others?

Government and Servant Leadership

Robert Greenleaf provides a fantastic test for servant leadership:

"Do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And what is the effect on the least privileged of society; will he or she benefit, or, at least, will he or she not be further deprived?" ("The Servant as Leader," 1991, p. 7).

As I ponder the election season before us, I am looking for a candidate who can somehow espouse these values in a practical political platform. But perhaps I am asking too much. Is it even possible that a large institution (in this case, the federal government) can effectively (1) facilitate a society that encourages freedom, (2) provide incentives for us to serve each other, and (3) ensure that the most vulnerable in our society are not left to fend for themselves?

Hopefully this election season will answer that question affirmatively.

IDEA LEADER: What does servant leadership look like in a political candidate? Which candidate best represents these values?

Photo: Sanja Gjenero

Excellence vs. Perfection

"Commit to excellence rather than to perfection."

Ken Shelton suggests this in the February 2008 issue of Leadership Excellence. What a concept! Too often I equate the two when they really are different. Excellence allows for dynamic growth processes where we are constantly under the positive tension of striving for "superior" over "average." Yet it has the benefit of leaving room for failure and forgiveness. After all, to strive for excellence requires risk. Perfection is almost the opposite in nature: static, legalistic, and merciless. A commitment to excellence over perfection is a must for servant leaders.

Shelton's simple advice grants freedom. Commitment to excellence rather than perfection gives me the freedom to strive, to fail, to forgive, and to sleep at night when I've given my best rather than worrying about meeting someone else's standard.

Lately I've confused excellence and perfection. Have you?

IDEA LEADER: Where have you pursued "perfection" instead of "excellence"?

Photo: Dominik Gwarek

Smile and the world smiles with you

Mother Teresa's 1979 Nobel Prize lecture suggests that world peace begins with love. That is certainly no new idea and neither is her next assertion: love begins at home. What makes the speech interesting is her insistence that love begins with a smile.

From anyone else, I would dismiss that as pure silliness. However, Mother Teresa's life earns her a second consideration. Teresa says that we should smile even when it is difficult, because true love does the difficult thing.

Now I think she is on target. As I've mentioned before, I tend to be melancholy, so I appreciate the fact that smiling is not always an easy thing to do. Considering the horrors that Teresa saw as she ministered among some of the poorest people in the world, I would think smiling would be difficult for her too.

So after reading her speech I am resolved to smile more. Both at work and at home. And I trust that the effort it takes will also be an effort made toward experiencing peace - maybe not world peace, but more peace at home and at work.

IDEA LEADER: How often do you smile while leading others?

Photo: Darren Hester

What is your vocation?

Last week dealt with the issue of where to lead. This week I'd like to introduce you to a servant leader who found the answer to that question through downward mobility. Henri Nouwen was an ivy-league professor who left his prestigious academic post to work with a handicapped community. You can read his story here.

I appreciate his accurate description of the none-to-gentle tug-of-war between the desire to do something "successful" verses doing something "meaningful." Plato's Laws discusses the importance of an education that teaches citizens to find pleasure in virtue. Perhaps in a similar way, the servant leader's education teaches him to merge "successful" and "meaningful."

IDEA LEADER: How distinct are your concepts of being "successful" verses doing something "meaningful"? Do you know anyone who has found peace by merging the two?

Photo: Teri Holzmann

Where should I lead?

If it really is true that everyone can be a leader, then the next logical question is "where should I lead?" This question deals with leadership context.

Though all are leaders, not all are equally gifted for every situation. Sometimes in our pursuit of status we may pursue leadership opportunities that don't match our gifts. We can easily become a fish out of water, with the natural result that we gasp desperately for air.

Let me propose a simple test. If a good leader never asks people to do more than he is willing to do, then ask, "What am I willing to do?" In the pursuit of excellence, in what area are you willing to push yourself the most? If you discover that you are willing to make the biggest sacrifices for your current context, then congratulations! You seem to have found your leadership-calling (at least for the present).

IDEA LEADER: In what areas of industry or personal life am I willing to make the most sacrifices for the sake of excellence? Does this match what I am currently doing?

New Year's Evaluation

Though my New Year's resolutions aren't yet official (other than to stop procrastinating, which I'll start working on tomorrow), I have completed my New Year's Evaluation.

Every semester I ask my students to evaluate my teaching, and this year I used a particularly simple evaluation: stop, start, continue. Students wrote out what they thought I should stop doing, what I should start doing, and what I should continue doing. Knowing what to continue is particularly helpful.

Stop, start, continue provides 360-degree feedback because I also completed a self-evaluation before asking my students to evaluate me. Interestingly, some of the things I felt that I needed to stop or start were not mentioned by my students, so those things may not be issues after all.

If you have not made resolutions this year, why not try a stop, start, continue evaluation? If you are bold enough, have those you lead do the same as an evaluation of your leadership.

IDEA LEADER: It seems to be human nature to focus on what we should stop or start, but what do you need to continue doing as an effective servant-leader?