RLL #12: "Lazy, Selfish, and Ignorant--Human Nature and Leadership, Part 1: The Problem of Pride"

RLL #12: "Lazy, Selfish, and Ignorant--Human Nature and Leadership, Part 1: The Problem of Pride"

Caveat-- I think this is important information, but I would ask one favor of the reader: DON’T read this post unless you are willing to come back and read the next one (due out next Sunday), because this post may come across as a bit pessimistic. In order to fully understand the point, you’ll need to read next week’s, which will balance out the apparent pessimism with hope. Thank you! - Joel

Last night, my wife and I were at dinner at a relatively upscale restaurant with some friends in Birmingham. We chose this particular restaurant because our friend is the manager, and his wife (and their young son) was one of our dinner companions, and at this time of year his busy work schedule means that this is one way for them to steal a few extra minutes together. While we ate, Steve (the manager-friend of ours) came by the table a couple times to check on us and see his wife, and it was a very enjoyable dinner. Just before the end of the meal, Steve reached over and patted his son, the almost-two-year-old Baby David (as he’s known in our circles) on the back, only to discover that when he drew his hand back it was sticky and dripping with a sticky, gross, suspiciously fecal substance.

Baby David had unfortunately been having some tummy trouble in recent days, and apparently was not as “over it” as we had all believed before we went to dinner. He had had what parents refer to as a “blow-out,” with his diaper failing to contain the seemingly gravity-defying (and frankly mind-boggling) amount of little kid poop that he had expelled sometime during the meal. I’ll leave out any more details, in respect to those who don’t enjoy these sorts of stories (I enjoy telling them, probably because I’m a guy and poop jokes and stories still make me laugh at age 35 as much as they did when I was a child of 10); suffice it to say that, in an instant, Steve had grabbed the diaper bag, I had picked up Baby David, high chair and all, and without another word, we had whisked him off to the changing station in the restaurant bathroom. We got him cleaned up, changed, and ready to rejoin the group (and the high chair also got cleaned up, as well as the floor around the table…) in under 10 minutes. We were pretty impressed with ourselves, actually.

Now, it’s almost Christmas, on a Saturday night, in a busy and crowded restaurant during the height of the dinner rush. Steve was at work and had a job to do, but in the instant he realized that his son had had his blow-out, a new set of priorities had taken over. His reaction was immediate, decisive, and ultimately effective. Because he is a good manager, his section of the restaurant survived and thrived without his being able to answer questions or put out fires while we were dealing with Baby David, and because he is no longer a new father he was able to quickly deal with the poop-crisis. Steve was trained to make quick decisions about rapidly-changing circumstances to try to deal with the situation in the most expedient way possible, and in that moment, his work as a father and his work as a manager came together in a very positive way.

Unfortunately, what most people don’t realize is that Steve’s reaction was not natural or even normal. It was learned, and it was intentional, much like most aspects of leadership. The lesson here is two-fold--first, the bad news: leadership is work, either constant growth or regression, consistent learning or steady forgetting; second the good news: leadership is also learned, a set of behaviors, philosophies, and practices that can be cultivated over time. Certainly some people have specific gifts, skills, or traits that are helpful, but the truth is that everyone can learn new (or improve already-existing) leadership skills if they put in the effort.

Why is this important? Because the truth is that human beings, in our natural state, are not positive creatures. Bear with me, because this will bother some readers; I apologize in advance, but if you will read on with humility and honesty, I believe you will also come to see the truth of what I am going to say. In my classroom, I often remind my students that human beings are four things (in varying amounts and to varying degrees, yes; but we are all of these things at different times): 1) lazy, 2) selfish, 3) ignorant, 4) apathetic.

If given the choice to do work that we don’t want to do or to shirk that task in favor of some more enjoyable (but often less productive) activity, most of us will choose to shirk most of the time. We are lazy; I see this in myself most often when it comes to grading essays on tests (or stalling by doing ANYTHING else). If there is one piece of pizza left and two of us, I know that I want the piece of pizza, and if I have to I might share; we are selfish. If we are not forced to go to school, or get more training for work, or learn something new about ourselves, most of us (unless it is a subject we enjoy anyway) will simply be content to stay ignorant (n.b. Ignorant is not an insult but rather a statement of fact: it simply means “not knowing”) of whatever that information may be. And finally, until a problem touches or affects us personally, most often we are content to not care enough to stir ourselves into addressing the problem because we are apathetic. I know these things are true of me. And, I suspect, if we are all honest, we can admit that these things are true of all of us at various times.

The truth of these statements can be seen or experienced by almost everyone who has worked in a daycare, a church nursery, or an elementary school. No one has to teach children to pitch a fit, to snatch away toys, or to not want to clean up after activities. Yes, there are stories of children helping each other on the playground, or befriending someone very different from themselves. But do these stories not touch us so much in large part because they are such an exception to the general rule? No, no one has to teach children to be lazy, selfish, ignorant, or apathetic. We must be taught to be better.

We must be taught to that hard work is a virtue to be cultivated, rather than simply a duty to perform; and we must be taught that hard work doesn’t mean do the bare minimum (how many of us heard that from parents, teachers, instructors, etc.?). We must be taught to share, to let others go in front of us (rather than breaking places) in line, to hold the door for others. We must be taught that knowledge is power, that education really can change the world and our futures, and that putting in the effort to learn is always worth it in the end. We must be taught to be concerned about others, even when the issues we see may not negatively affect us personally. And, perhaps even more importantly, we must be reminded of these things over and over again, for the rest of our lives, lest we forget the simple Golden Rule of kindergarten: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” As C.S. Lewis said, “We need to be reminded more often than we need to be taught.”

What does all this have to do with leadership and pride? First, we need to recognize that every role we experience in life is either a leadership role or it is preparation for a future leadership role. As a parent, a teacher, a restaurant manager, an athlete, an employee, an entrepreneur, or anything else, we must realize that we need to consciously work on becoming better every day, even if that ‘better’ doesn’t translate to a bigger paycheck. Second, we must apply realize that our task is to help both ourselves and our audience become less lazy and more hard-working, less selfish and more giving, less ignorant and more educated (not necessarily formal education; more on that in my book!), less apathetic and more concerned about helping others. We’re all part of humanity, and therefore when one of us is affected, all of us are affected.

Third, and finally, the root cause of all of these issues is pride, or self-centeredness, or self-focus. [Here, this means only the negative aspects of pride; for a more in-depth look at this issue, please read the chapter called ‘The Great Sin’ in C.S. Lewis’ ‘Mere Christianity’ where he distinguishes between different meanings of the word. I strongly recommend this book for many reasons, whether a person is a Christian or not.] We want to be the center of attention, the center of our own universes, and this is not something that we have learned. We simply are that way. Until we know any better, we can’t really help it: we want what we want, and that seems the end of the matter. It is only as we get old enough to have conscious thoughts that we realize other people also want what they want, and sometimes these things conflict. That is where we run into problems because pride is also inherently competitive: it is interested not just in having its own way, but in having its own way even at the expense of others.

Just this evening I saw a child have no interest in a cracker on her plate, until her father tried to give that same cracker to another child; all of a sudden the first child demanded the cracker back and yelled when the father refused it to her. This child is under two years old, and no sane parents would teach their child this type of behavior, so we can assume this is something they are trying to address and correct in their child. This is the beginning of the child learning how to be a better person by following her parents’ leadership and teaching.

Leadership, if you recall, is the art of positively influencing the people around you to become better versions of themselves. It is crucial that we do this and do it well, and in order to do that we must first admit the problem: that we ourselves need to improve in order that we may also help others improve. We must confront the problems of our laziness, our selfishness, our ignorance, and our apathy head-on in order that we might overcome them in time and with the aid of others.

One final note: if you are not any of the four things mentioned above, then I apologize and wish you the best, and I look forward to learning from you how you overcame those things in your life. But, if you think you have never been those things, I would humbly ask you to reconsider and reevaluate: another word from C.S. Lewis to close: “If you think that you are not conceited [another word for prideful], it means that you are very conceited indeed.”

Action Step: This week, take 10 minutes to honestly evaluate your leadership and find one area where pride has negatively affected you, and commit to addressing that problem. Then email me and let me know how you did it or how I can help you. I look forward to hearing from you, and Merry Christmas!

RLL #11: "Art, Animals, and Adaptability: G.K. Chesterton and Leadership as Art"

Real Life Leading #11

Art, Animals, and Adaptability: GK Chesterton and Leadership as Art

“Art is the signature of man,” so wrote G.K. Chesterton in The Everlasting Man, first published almost a hundred years ago (1925, to be exact). In that book, one of Chesterton’s goals was to lay out an argument that humans are fundamentally different from animals, despite the increasing acceptance of arguments to the contrary . One of the main parts of his argument is that throughout history, going all the way back to cave drawings of animals, humans have created art, whereas animals do not. He does concede that animals build: beaver dams, bird nests, etc.; but these are built out of instinct and necessity and for functionality, making it fundamentally different than the artwork created by men and women for thousands of years. He goes on to drive the argument home by pointing out that cows don’t write voluminous histories of their goings-on, and even if they did, who would want to read them; birds don’t make grand nests with carvings of other birds for beauty’s sake. No, he says, in art we see that mankind is fundamentally different than the animals.

I believe that Chesterton’s argument is compelling, and I also believe that it has a certain applicability to leadership: namely, that leadership is an art form that must be trained, honed, and adapted to various situations in the same way that different art forms and movements have held sway at different times and locations in history. It is debatable whether there is such as thing as “right” art or “wrong” art, though there are obvious differences between “good” and “bad” art, even if some of those differences are in the eyes of the beholders. So in leadership, there are many different styles, and many different traits and skills, all of which are useful in different situations and at different times. Thus, there is no magic pill or silver bullet approach to leadership: there is no one ‘right’ style or approach that is always the best in every situation.

We must take a moment here to be clear: I am not saying that there are not any fundamental principles or traits. I am not endorsing a postmodernist approach to leadership in which everything is relative. (In fact, I’d argue that a postmodern approach to leadership would simply be Machiavelli by another name, but that’s another topic for another day.) Just as in coaching sports, there is no “one size fits all” approach to the game that will always yield victory, so in leadership there is no “one size fits all” style that will produce the best results in every situation. No, in leadership, one should always be committed to core principles, worldview beliefs that form the foundation of all that one does as a leader (things such as integrity, character, honesty, respect for others, etc.) while also being willing to adapt and change approaches as necessary.

We’ve all heard parents, teachers, or coaches say things that begin with, “Back in my day…” and then go on to lament how things are no longer the way they were in some more or less idealized past. Perhaps the best example of this is the grandfather in the beloved classic movie ‘The Princess Bride,’ who says, “In my day, television was called books!” Often these statements are simply thinly veiled complaints about how things have changed. However, there is also often a grain of truth (and sometimes more than a grain) in them when we consider that things DO change, and not always for the better. However, as Chesterton taught us, humanity is still humanity, even when cultures, countries, and even currencies change.

The art of leadership, then, is learning 1) which approach is best suited to each situation, and 2) when/how to adapt to various styles based on the differing factors. Let us consider some of these factors and explore ways in which we may need to adapt our leadership based on them. One of the major things to consider as a leader are the various demographics of the audience you are leading: age, gender, size of the audience, background, etc. If this seems obvious, that’s ok: it should be. And yet, until we have actually led diverse audiences, we may be unaware of just how our leadership should adapt.

For example, it wasn’t until I taught both fifth graders and ninth graders during the same school year that I realized just how different students are at age 10-11 compared to age 14-15. Same thing with coaching different age players: the needs are different, the skill levels are different, and so my style and approach must be different. In the same way, I have spent the past four years coaching high school girls soccer, and in those years, I have learned that my approach must be drastically different than it was in my previous six years of coaching mostly high school boys. Again, perhaps that should have seemed obvious to me (and no doubt it is obvious to people more observant than myself), but it was not until my second year, after having had numerous players reduced to tears due to the tone of voice I used when correcting mistakes, that I realized I needed to change the way I coached since these were teenage girls, not teenage boys. Full disclosure: I am thankful every day for these lessons, as I now have a teenage daughter of my own, and I have no doubt that I would be a worse father had I not had a few years of ‘practice’ with coaching girls this age.

Other factors to think about when considering your leadership approach include the purpose of the group and the (for lack of a better term) lifespan of the group. If the group is academic in nature (as in a classroom), then the approach will be somewhat different than toward a group that is either athletic or of a business nature. Many of the leadership principles are the same, as evidenced by the high degree of applicability of leadership books written by coaches (for a great example, read RLL #6 about Coach K’s book ‘Leading With the Heart’, at https://www.speakerjoel.com/real-life-leading-blog/ms22tdejfnrg4mdych8xgr2s68dmnw). Nonetheless, one does not lead a company or corporation in the exact same way that one leads an athletic team or a classroom or even a family.

Finally, a leader must consider the ‘lifetime’ of the group in question. For example, I have coached at a few different college soccer camps (Methodist University and Duke University in North Carolina), and when I did so, I had to remember that these were players I would only interact with for less than a week. Therefore my approach, though demanding, was not the same as it would have been toward a team committed to a whole season, or toward a soccer program that I plan on building for many years. In addition, I approach leading my family differently than all of these other situations because the lifetime of my family is longer than any athletic program, classroom, or business with which I affiliate.

So, as Chesterton pointed out, art is what separates man from the animals, and the art of leadership involve both a commitment to one’s principles as well as a willingness to adapt our approach to different situations depending on numerous different factors. We must all use our natural gifts and talents to best serve those we lead, while remaining committed to what we believe to be right and true. In addition to all of those things, we must also be open to continuing to learn more about how to grow, how to adapt, and how to lead in different situations.

Action Step: this week, look at your various leadership roles and think of at least one example of how you lead differently in each one, and then email me to let me know what you came up with.

Real Life Leading #10: "The Illusion of Enlightenment" -- The Danger of Thinking We Know More Than We Do

Real Life Leading #10

“The Illusion of Enlightenment” -- The Danger of Thinking We Know More Than We Do

Last February, I was involved in a significant car wreck while traveling home from soccer practice. It was dark, it was raining, and while I was driving at 65 mph down Highway 431 in Alabama a large truck pulled out from a gas station when I was about fifty yards away. For some reason, the truck was slow to pull across my two lanes, and so as I approached, I was faced with having to make one of three choices: 1) pull my car right, off the road, and into a ditch; 2) go straight into the side of the truck (I drive a small sedan) at high speed; 3) pull my car left into oncoming traffic. Now, when I tell this story to my high school students, the typical question I get is, “Why didn’t you just hit the brakes?” usually asked in a tone of condescension reserved only for those who are blissfully ignorant of key aspects of a discussion.

In response, depending on my level of patience that day, I (either patiently, or less patiently) explain a few things to my students (mostly freshmen and sophomores whose average driving experience is less than a year): 1) that hitting the brakes on a wet road at 65 mph wouldn’t have actually stopped the car in the space available; and 2) it might cause hydroplaning, causing me to have even less control of the car; and 3) it’s always interesting that people who don’t really know how to drive suddenly seem to feel qualified to give advice to people who do.

To be fair to my students, all generations have the tendency to assume they know better than previous generations, and so my students may or may not be any more arrogant than we were as children. In fact, I would argue that the propensity to assume we know much more than we do is something of which we are all guilty, especially in today’s society fueled by smart-phones and internet access.

That is, as leaders and simply as people, we often have a tendency to assume that we know much more than we actually do. Students are convinced they don’t need to study because they can simply look up whatever they need to know using wikipedia or similar sites; parents are convinced that they know as much as doctors because they spent time researching on webMD; and people like myself are convinced that we’re smarter than everyone else simply because we try to remain informed about news, sports, current events, etc.

As if this illusion of enlightenment wasn’t enough, the tendency to have our preconceptions or assumptions confirmed is furthered by the self-imposed echo chambers of social media. On our facebook, twitter, and instagram feeds, we are often only exposed to articles or statements that confirm our own opinions, confirming what we already know, or think we know. This in turn reinforces our belief that we know what we think we know, and it also lessens the likelihood that we’ll continue our research with openness, since we’re already convinced that we’re right. And as leaders, this is extremely dangerous territory.

If we are to lead well, we must 1) be aware of the dangers of this illusion of enlightenment, and 2) take steps to avoid it and to lessen the effects of it when we have already fallen prey. In leadership positions, we are often the decision makers, the managers, the ones responsible for making things function the way they are supposed to. As a result of that, we are in danger of, as coaches are often warned about, “believing our own press,” or becoming satisfied in our own knowledge and expertise. When that occurs, our leadership is likely to stagnate, since we are no longer pursuing ways to improve because we are already convinced that we know what we’re doing. We may not think of it in these terms, but this pattern can be observed in many situations: husbands who become inattentive of their wives, coaches who lose the commitment of their players, teachers who refuse to consider new methods or different classroom projects, etc. In all of these situations, the result is the same: the illusion of enlightenment leads to a lack of continued intellectual growth.

Thus, after becoming aware of these dangers and the negative results that inevitably follow, we must examine our current leadership situations and see where we have already become stagnant, and we must takes steps to correct this. In short, we must begin anew the process of becoming a leader, an expert, a student. The solution, then, is humility: we must be willing to admit that we don’t know as much as we think we do, and we must back this up by seeking information even when we think we are already experts in our given areas. We must purposefully seek out new information, even from sources we know we disagree with. We must humbly ask others for guidance or suggestions, and we must be willing to consider their answers, rather than immediately rejecting them based on our previously held assumptions.

The purpose of leadership is to positively influence others in whatever roles we are in. This can be accomplished in a wide variety of ways, in different stages, at different times. But throughout all of those, the danger of becoming self-satisfied, of becoming prideful, of being convinced that we know best, is ever-present. The danger of the illusion of enlightenment is very real, and thus our response must be conscious, it must be intentional, and it must be continual. Good leadership is crucial, and in our ever-changing world, good leadership requires constant learning, an open mind, and a willingness to entertain alternate viewpoints while remaining true to our worldview and underlying beliefs.

Action Step: This week, identify one area in which you feel like an expert, and then go and spend ten minutes researching that same area. You’ll be amazed at how quickly you find something new that you didn’t know, or a new perspective to consider.