Looking For The Go(o)d In Everyone.

“Walk cheerfully over the earth answering that of God in everyone”, was a simple statement written by one of the founders of Quakerism George Fox. In the book “Insights On Leadership”, Richard P. Nielsen uses this quote from Fox in the chapter he wrote titled “Quaker Foundations for Greenleaf’s Servant-Leadership and “Friendly Disentangling” Method”, to discuss the importance of looking for the “Go(o)d” in everyone.

Too often it becomes easy to avoid looking for the good in others, and instead to focus on the “bad”. It has been my own experience that when I focus on the bad, I fail to give others a fair hearing. It is the realization that there is good in all people despite their religious, political, social, or other believes that is the great equalizer of us all. Nielsen asks the question “Do we start from what we have in common that is good, or do we start from what is not so good and from how we differ?” The answer that makes the most sense is the first choice. So as we move into a New Year, looking for the “Go(o)d” in everyone is indeed an excellent resolution to follow.

A Season of Hope.

On this day when we celebrate the birth of one of the greatest servant-leaders, it is important to remember that the birth of Jesus is a reminder of the birth of hope.

Parker Palmer reminds us, in his book "Let Your Life Speak", about the implications of leading from a place of hope. He writes, “We do not have to lead from a place of fear, thereby engendering a world in which fear is multiplied. We have places of fear inside of us, but we have other places as well – places with names like trust and hope and faith. We can choose to lead from one of those places, to stand on ground that is not riddled with the fault lines of fear, to move toward others from a place of promise instead of anxiety.”

Too often we choose to lead from that place of fear, and react in anger and violence. It is that place of hope that ultimately leads us to the peace that this season is really all about.

Intelligent Design And Servant-Leadership.

All the news about the legality of the Dover Area School District decision to promote Intelligent Design has got me thinking about how the creation of the universe relates to servant-leadership. I have been reading Don Frick’s biography of Robert K. Greenleaf and was somewhat amazed to learn that Greenleaf’s degrees were in mathematics and astronomy. At one point in the book, Don wrote about Greenleaf’s experience of looking through a telescope at a great nebulae. Greenleaf described the experience as follows, “What a sight! I shook with awe and wonder at the majesty of all creation. This primitive unstructured feeling, the powerful sense of awe and wonder, is to me the source of religious feeling at its greatest depth.”

What struck me about Greenleaf was that the “religious” experience did not compel him to lead a life of trying to force his experience or his belief on others, but instead led him to understand that that religious and scientific experience needed to be understood and accepted by the individual on their own terms. Based on Greenleaf’s servant-leadership practices, it seems to me that he would have agreed with another student of the stars, Albert Einstein, who’s quote adorns his monument in Washington D.C. “Joy and amazement at the beauty and grandeur of the world of which man can form just a faint notion”.

It seems to me that what is important in life is not so much that we know how the universe came about, but that we appreciate the great mystery behind it all. It is that mystery that really gives meaning to life, not answers.

Greenleaf Institute has a new home

The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership recently moved to a new location. While still in the Indianapolis area, they are now located in their own building just north of the city.

Here is the article in the Indianapolis Star discussing the move, along with some details about the new Greenleaf Center building.

Links for Wednesday, December 21st

Here are a few links from the past week or so that you might find of interest:

• A great article on Servant-Leadership and Nursing. A senior policy fellow at the American Nursing Association says that around 20% of nurses walking away from the profession would stay around if there was a less autocratic leadership style and instead a servant-leadership model approach.
• The servant-leadership model that is used in the military's officer training appeals to many evangelical chaplains and their desire to serve. There has been a recent push to move towards "nonsectarian prayer" in the armed services, and there are many who are none too pleased. You can read about it here.
• John Kontopuls is president and CEO of Elite Show Services, the largest provider of security for special events in the San Diego area. Here is a great article about his leadership style, which includes some high praise from Ken Blanchard.
• Two executives, the CEO of JetBlue and the president of Toyota USA, describe their leadership style and the importance of being a servant. Well worth the time, the short essays by each can be found here. (h.t.: Slacker Manager)
  

Mediation & Servant-Leadership

With the N.Y City transit strike on (see here), questions arise about the role that servant-leadership plays in mediation and not only resolving strikes but keep them from happening in the first place.

If there are any readers who work in mediation, I'd love to hear from you. How do the principles of servant-leadership fit into the work you do? Can a servant-leadership culture within an organization actually help prevent parties from getting to the point of threatening a strike?

I've blogged many times about Southwest Airlines and their culture of Servant-Leadership. When is the last time you've heard of anyone at Southwest going on strike? Coincidence?

What playing bridge can teach us about servant-leadership

OK, this is admittedly a very light-hearted post. I came across this article tonight about how Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, both very serious contract bridge players, have put up $1 million to teach junior high kids how to play the game. They've even both agreed to take on the winners of a school tournament if anyone decides to take them up on their offer.

Buffett says that what bridge has over chess and poker is that it requires players to work with someone else. "You have to learn to understand your partner, to be tolerant, sympathetic, encouraging. Those are skills that are not bad to have in life."

Agreed, Mr. Buffett. Although I can think of one or two things that junior high schools should be teaching kids before teaching bridge, I do think kids would learn at least a few more life skills (some even related to being a good servant-leader) playing bridge over the lunch hour rather than playing Texas Hold 'Em (here and here).

Good intentions gone awry

Here is a recent article that I found very interesting. The State Board of Education in Michigan recently approved a new graduation requirement for high school students: Every student must take at least one on-line course before receiving a diploma. The reasoning they use is that colleges and jobs are becoming more technology-focused and they want to make sure students are prepared.

Good intentions, wrong course of action. Let me provide two reasons:

1) I have taught several on-line courses, and my expectation is that students come into the course with a basic understanding on how to use technology. The platform we use (Blackboard) takes care of the rest. Prior experience taking an on-line course is certainly not required. What would be helpful, for both on-line and 'traditional' classroom students, is: understanding how to attach documents to e-mails; how to use footers, headers, and footnotes in documents; how to decipher between quality websites and those that are not; proper on-line etiquette; how to use Powerpoint, Excel, and Word both individually and as an integrated whole; and the like.

2) There is something that is always missing from on-line courses: a sense of community, and a genuine depth of discussion. While there are certainly good discussions that take place in an on-line course, rarely, if at all, have discussions gotten as far as they would in a traditional classroom. Perhaps this is because of my lack of abilities in teaching on-line. But it is always harder to form a true dialogue/argument when people are logging in at various times throughout the day.

What should the State Board be requiring? A specific set of abilities, such as those mentioned above, that each student must prove they have mastered prior to graduation. If the State Board were to survey college professors I think they would obtain a great list of requirements that can, and should, be taught in a traditional computer course. I don't know of any colleagues, even those who frequently teach courses on-line, who would argue that taking an on-line course in high school would contribute to the success of students in college on-line courses.

Seeking input and listening to those who will be hiring high school students, or admitting them into their college or university, would have been the prudent thing to do and provide a good example of servant-leadership in action. Anyone want to venture a guess as to whether the State Board of Education in Michigan did this?

It comes to an end.......

Well, the semester is finally over. Sorry for a rather short week of posts. It was a busy couple of weeks correcting papers and final exams. And then came the joy of posting grades and listening to the student questions (Why did I get a 'C' on the final exam? etc. etc.) and replying as kindly as possible (Because you didn't follow directions/answer the question. etc. etc.) I so thoroughly enjoy teaching graduate students and returning adults. And while there are a lot of great traditional undergrads around here, there are those who take up so much of my energy.

But the semester is over and now it is time to start focusing on next semester. It will be here far too quickly. The blogging should pick up in short order, which will make me happy and will hopefully do the same for you.

OK, that seemed to fix it!

I use Newsgator for my News Reader in order to read all my news and blogs...it seems that the feed is now working again. If you use Bloglines, or another news reader, and still have problems reading both the headline and this text in your reader, send me an e-mail at: servantleadership@viterbo.edu

What exactly happened? I added the new 'FeedFlare' service in Feedburner. It is supposed to give those of you who read this blog in a news reader the opportunity to e-mail the post to others, add to del.icio.us, etc. Well, I activated it and immediately all my posts went to the Headline/Title only. I then deactivated it and sent my last post, and it has now seemed to clear up. At least it has in Newsgator.

Thank you all for your patience and understanding. HTML and technology are not things I completely understand. I will contact FeedBurner and see what I did wrong (when it comes to this kind of stuff, I just assume it is my fault!). Hopefully I can get their new 'FeedFlare' service working for all of you subscribers. Thanks again!

Testing for some bugs

Ran into a little difficulty today with my feed; it now seems to be appearing only with the title, rather than with the title and full text (it isn't even publishing a partial text).

So, I am working on the problem...and I'll see where it ends up. I will try a couple of things and may have a few more test posts....thanks for your patience!

The Crisis of Technology?

There is a common trend in a number of the issues Trevor has been posting on lately regarding how society deals with crisis. In the post regarding providing free internet to the residents of New Orleans, and in the post on providing free computers to folks in developing nations, the answer to the problems seems to be to throw technology at the issues and then hope people will use this technology to solve their problems. What was interesting in the various stories that covered these issues was what was lacking in the stories, namely that no one asked what it was that people were supposed to do with the laptops or free internet service. With out those questions, there was no answer that explained how the use of those technologies would really make peoples life’s better. What seemed to be assumed was that technology was naturally good and therefore would make life better.

Having lived through the evolution of the use of computers and the internet, what I am most struck by is how computers have gone from being a simple tool that helps to speed up calculations and store and analyze data, to miraculous devices that somehow magically transform our lives. The reality is that computers really have not changed our lifes, except that we probably spend more time using them to do things we used to do on paper. They have increased the speed in which we do calculations and provided us with the ability to look at more data, but does increased processing speed and data availability really equate to becoming better human beings?

What also is highlighted by these examples is that more frequently our government leaders have fallen into the trap of believing that more and better technologies do indeed equate to better well being. It seems that more often then not that thorough evaluations are not done on what is the best use of resources to help people grow. My hope is that the people proposing these solutions do indeed want to help those they are trying to serve and if so that they take more time to simply listen those people. It is through that listening that true understanding can come of what it is they need to help them better their own lives.

There is also a need for leaders to spend some time to understand what needs really are. Too often it seems that providing ways to satisfy needs, replaces the ultimate goal of helping to empower people to find ways to satisfy their own needs. I came across a chapter from a book titled Real-Life Economics that had a chapter written by the Chiliean economist Manfred Max-Neef that helps to better define what governments role should be in developing better ways to help empower people, and what the needs really are. Times of crisis might be times to step back and do some reflecting before we rush forward with technological solutions (and coming from an engineer, that is a scary thought).

Those are my thoughts for what they are worth.

Tom

Keeping our eyes on the mission

Recently Tulane University announced a major restructuring as they prepare to re-open their doors on January 19th. See here and here. The announcement included laying off 10% of its faculty (about 230) and the elimination of 5 undergraduate majors and 14 doctorate programs. Several other doctoral programs will be combined. Prior to Katrina, Tulane offered 45 doctoral programs; that number will be cut to 18!

On the one hand, it is sad to see this happening to such a wonderful university. Yet the question that this restructuring brings up is this: Why does it take a disaster to get a university to focus their energies on being as efficient and focused as one should be? I will grant you that some of these programs are being cut, namely in the medical school, because of the needs of the city. But the lessons of Tulane are ones that we should all pay attention to.

Are our organizations growing? If so, is the growth in line with our mission? Will this growth in any way take away from current operations? If we are not growing, is it because our operations are eating up our resources and not allowing us to move forward?

I could probably add another 8-10 questions here. The point, however, is that whenever we grow or expand our organization we should always make sure that: 1) it will add some value to our mission; and 2) it does not take away from current operations and their contribution to the mission. If it can't do both of these things, then we need to re-think our plan.

King over at SCSU Scholars has some great comments about the situation here. King is an economics professor at St. Cloud State and is someone I make sure I read every day.
His comments have to do with putty and clay. Great analogy for the situation and well worth the read.

Are highest priority needs being met?

There has been a lot of news lately made of this story: Researchers at MIT have developed a $100 laptop for the rural poor children in developing nations so that they may access the internet. It seems that the United Nations is backing the idea. And someday the plan is to get them into the hands of all American children as well. This past week the chairman of Intel blasted the idea, calling it a mere 'gadget'. Of course, as Bill over at Achievable Ends correctly points out, since they don't contain Intel chips it sounds mostly like sour grapes on the part of Intel.

I'd like to take another angle on this story: Catholic Social Teaching, as well as Servant-Leadership, reminds us that we must always ask if people's highest priority needs are being met. It is this concern that lead to the great Catholic social documents in modern times. (Rerum Novarum, Centesimus Annus, Economic Justice for all, among others)

In my travels to developing countries, primarily in Central America, I have seen children struggling with amazing obstacles: hunger, disease, etc. And yet many of them were very happy with the little they had. Certainly they need help. But I'm not sure if low-cost laptops are even in the top half of that list. Will laptops with internet access put food in their bellies? Will it cure disease? It will certainly eliminate barriers children in these nations need to access the internet, and perhaps even inspire them to further their education; and in an ideal world it may even help inspire these young kids to go on and develop ways to eradicate disease and hunger from their country. But in the meantime, children are still dying of hunger and disease.

Giving the poorest of the poor in the world a laptop is indeed a great and noble idea. But there are greater priorities in developing nations. Servant-Leadership calls us to make sure those needs are met first.

Margaret Wheatley and Servant-Leadership as a Natural.

Back on October 19, Trevor mentioned Dr. Margaret Wheatley and listed some of her books. One of my favorite books on leadership is her book Leadership and the New Science- Discovering Order in a Chaotic World.

A section of her book that I enjoyed was in the first chapter titled “Discovering an Orderly World” where she wrote about sitting by a stream in the Rocky Mountains and trying to understand what streams could teach her about organizations. She wrote, “I am attracted to the diversity I see, to these swirling combinations of mud, silt, grass, water, rocks. This stream has an impressive ability to adapt, to change the configurations, to let the power shift, to create new structures. But behind this adaptability, making it all happen, I think, is the waters need to flow. Water answers to gravity, to downhill, to the call of ocean. The forms change, but the mission remains clear. Structures emerge, but only as temporary solutions that facilitate rather then interfere. … Streams have more then one response to rocks”.

Reading that passage and the rest of her book helped me to accept some things I had tried to do in the past but struggled with. And that was to let things naturally evolve, and not try and force where they would go. The idea that relationships, whether they be work related or personal, were natural processes much like the process of water flowing to the ocean was a powerfully freeing one. For me, that meant I did not have to try to be in control of how I talked to someone, how I planned my day, or how I tried to motivate others. I had always struggled with trying to keep set schedules, following to-do lists or trying to influence other people’s decisions. Realizing that it was ok to respond to the events that happened to me in a day, rather then trying to control those events was a big source of energy for me and a source of much motivation.

Some of Dr. Wheatley other writings can be found at her website and some other interesting leadership information can found at the Berkana Institute website that she is involved with.

Tom

Welcome to our newest blogger

We have a new blogger here at the Servant-Leadership Blog. His name is Tom Jablonski and he is a graduate of our MA in Servant-Leadership program! If you have been visiting the site, rather than just reading our posts via subscription, you probably have come across some of his insightful comments to recent posts.

I thought that having a graduate of our program post, in addition to faculty, would bring a great perspective. Like so many, if not all, of our graduates, Tom has a great sense of the importance of spirit and reflection in trying to live as a servant-leader and be leaven in the world. I think you will find his posts both insightful and challenging. (I'm not putting too much pressure on you, am I Tom?) :-)

Tom will be posting as his schedule allows. In case you didn't notice, he blogged his first entry last night, which you can find here. After reading it I think you will not only be able to see why I invited him to post, but will also look forward to reading his future entries.

Welcome Tom!

Servant Leadership in the Biotic Community

One of my favorite servant leaders is Aldo Leopold . In his classic book A Sand County Almanac, Leopold wrote the essay “The Land Ethic”. In the section titled “The Outlook” (which can be read at the end of the attached link), he wrote, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”

This simple statement could guide many individuals (and organizations) to operate in a servant-leadership mode. It is likely that the reason more servant-leadership type organizations do not exist is that somewhere along the way human beings have forgotten that we are indeed simply a part of the “biotic community” and not somehow separated from or perched on top of it. Leopold also wrote, "We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect."

It is the separation from the rest of creation that also allows us to separate ourselves from other groups of people and develop hierarchical organizations that are designed to primarily benefit those sitting on the top, and use the people below in the same manner as we have treated the land, namely as a commodity. It seems that sooner or later when you do not take care of the community that supports you, the support will eventually collapse, and down will come the leader. At least that is what happens in the biotic community.

I would be interested to see others thoughts on this.

Tom Jablonski

A wonderful partnership leads to teaching servant-leadership

I try to keep the self-promotion to a minimum here on the blog. I first created the blog as an outgrowth of our Master's program, not as a way to try and bring attention to it. That said, I would be remiss if I didn't mention a recent story about one of our faculty members.

This past September we opened a new building on campus, the Amie L. Mathy Center for Recreation and Education. It is a unique collaboration between the area Boys and Girls Club and Viterbo. It provides a facility on this side of town for the Boys and Girls Club, gives us some much needed space for student recreational activities, and gives our faculty, staff and students great opportunities to serve area youth who frequent the Club.

Tom Thibodeau, a member of the Religious Studies department and whose idea it was to begin offering the MA in Servant-Leadership, wanted to include the young kids who use the Boys and Girls Club in the servant-leadership culture of Viterbo. He has begun offering servant-leadership dinners and meetings every week for these future leaders of our community. Please take the time and read about it here.

remiss
Remus's
Remus
REMs
rems
Edit...
Revert to "remisss"

The Common Good

An important part of Servant-Leadership is reaching a consensus which best serves the common good. In fact, one of our core courses in the Master's program is entitled The Common Good.

A recent headline got me thinking about this. The City of New Orleans has decided to launch a free wireless internet network across the entire city. This is the first time a city or municipality of this size has offered such a service. They believe that this will not only give a boost to the economy, but will help those wanting to come back who still do not have telephone and internet service due to washed out telephone lines.

Does this seem like a good idea? Is this a good way to reach out to residents of the Big Easy and do the greatest possible good for the greatest number of people? Is this program hurting anyone in the process?

There are some obvious business concerns here and, while not an expert in economics and business law, some things stand out: Is it the role of city government to be offering these sorts of services?; What about government regulations of the telephone/cable/internet companies?; and is this just taxpayer-funded (read: government) competition? I'm sure there are many other questions you can come up with as well.

Using a strict utilitarian ideal in defining the common good, this seems like a great opportunity for the residents of New Orleans. Yet at least one company is not happy.......

It seems BellSouth was ready to donate a damaged building to the city for use by the police force. And when they got word of the New Orleans wireless plan, they quickly rescinded the offer. At least that is the way city officials tell it. BellSouth disputed this version of the story and have since said that they are still negotiating the terms of the donation.

What are your thoughts? Is this a good use of taxpayer monies? Does this infringement on BellSouth's business negate the positive impact that this service could have for the residents?

What would you do if you were BellSouth and you lost this business? Would you just shrug your shoulders and say that since it is such a great benefit for people that you don't mind?

What if you were the City of New Orleans? Would you back down in the face of a potential lawsuit or stand your ground?

Nobody said that servant-leadership decisions were easy!

It's the most wonderful time of the year......however..

For Christians, this is the advent season where we prepare ourselves for the birth of Jesus our Savior. It is also an opportunity to prepare our hearts, minds and, most importantly, our hands for the upcoming year when will will minister to those around us.

For professors, this is also the season of final exams and students scurrying to get final projects done. We have finals next week, and it seems that every time I get a chance to sit down and blog there is yet someone else waiting at my door to see me.

So I apologize for the light posting over the last couple of weeks. I will get a post or two in today, and hope to do the same for the rest of the week. And by the middle of next week I hope to resume the number of posts (8-10/week) that you have grown accustomed to.

Servant-Leadership & Healthcare: Are doctors showing empathy?

Most all of us have a horror story, or at least a negative experience, based on a doctor or hospital visit. And while I think that most hospitals have tried to make great strides in improving the patient experience, this recent article in the NY Times demonstrates that there are still too many doctors who display terrible bedside manner.

The reality is that some doctors come out of medical school with very elitist thinking: They are the doctor, therefore they know better than the patient. It is always refreshing to hear a doctor say "You know your body better than I do, help me understand how I can help." Unfortunately, these folks are few and far between.

But some medical schools are starting to change the way they train their doctors. And some hospitals are starting to look at better ways to train, and reward, those with high patient satisfaction. Some hospitals have turned to having residents examine an actor posing as a patient to observe their ability to exhibit empathy; others are taking away bonuses with low customer satisfaction numbers; and others are having those with low customer satisfaction numbers spend a day with those who score well with patients.

These are all things that are long overdue. There was a time when no one would question a doctor's decision; then again, there was a time when doctors made house calls too! Those days are long gone, and patients now expect more from a system that keeps taking more and more of our paycheck each year.

What do we expect of our leaders?

What adjectives come to mind when you think of leaders? OK, those who read this blog may have a little different view of leadership. So what adjectives do you think most of society would look for in their leaders? Most would use words like bold, decisive, strong. These would all be good qualities to describe a leader.

But what about Humble? Well, there are some who would agree that this describes a good leader. But most see humility as a weakness. Consequently, the perception is that leaders should not exihibit signs of humility.

As servant-leaders, we wrestle with the value of being strong and decisive, yet also exhibiting humility. We sometimes struggle with understanding the strength that comes from being humble. It is a paradox that takes a lifetime for most of us to master.

There has been a lot written on the web lately about humility. First, Ira Williams published an essay (.pdf download) entitled: "Speak Softly: What's happened to American Humility." It is a great little manifesto on humility. Ed Brenegar over at Leading Questions wrote this column on humility, and also talks about it more in this post. Bill Kinnon at Achievable Ends, whose site I ran across when I first started blogging, has a wonderful post on humility as well.

Take the time to read what Ira, Ed and Bill have written about humility. It is indeed an important part of being an effective servant-leader. More to come soon......