Integral Leadership & Management Framework

After 20 years of application and refinement, this model has been shown to be highly relevant, practical and successful in helping individuals, teams and organizations develop to a new level of performance. One of the distinctive features of this approach is its inclusion of ‘Authentic Self’ qualities of human beings. This dimension has been shown by research to be an important determinant of highly effective leaders.

The four quadrants translate into the four ‘functions’ of leadership & management:

1. People leadership

2. Transformational/Visionary Leadership

3. Task/Performance Management

4. Strategic Goal Management

The functions of leadership & management incorporate the skills and behaviours of individuals, teams and organizations.

With Ken Wilber’s Integral Model at its core, the Integral Leadership & Management Framework was developed specifically for application to business and leadership by Dr. Ron Cacioppe after reviewing 30 years of research on leadership and management.

This Framework also incorporates the research of Harvard Professor, John Kotter, which describes the fundamental aspects and differences of leadership and management.

Dr. Cacioppe has also built this model upon the work of Robert Quinn’s Competing Values Framework. This Framework, one of the most recognized and researched in Europe and the USA, describes eight roles of leadership and management.

When Leaders Surrender Their Values

One of the things my mother used to say was, “life is full of choices and trade-offs” and “making a good decision in those situations is hard”. This motherly advice is still true today, especially for leaders, whether they are guiding a business or a nation. Unfortunately, over the last couple of years we’ve seen a dramatic increase in questionable decisions being made by leaders facing situations that involve difficult choices and trade-offs. Let me give you a few international examples that have occurred just in the last couple of years.

On August 25, 2017, Jay Y Lee (aka Lee Jae-Yong), was sentenced to five years in prison after being found guilty of bribery, embezzlement, capital flight and perjury charges (his sentence was later reduced to 2.5 years and he was released from prison in February 2018). Lee is the vice chairman of Samsung Group and widely considered to be the heir apparent to his father as chairman. He has been described as a serious business man but less autocratic than his father. What values did Lee surrender when he broke the laws of South Korea by embezzling money to bribe government officials?

Another recent example is Martin Winterkorn, the former CEO of Volkswagen (VW). In September 2015, US authorities charged VW with manipulating engine emissions tests and reporting false data. The charge affected a total of 11 million VW cars globally. When the charges were made public, VW’s share price plummeted immediately, and the stock continued to lose value in the following months. Winterkorn resigned within a month after acknowledging he had known about the manipulation and has since been charged with being part of a conspiracy that feigned compliance with federal regulations. Prior to the scandal, Winterkorn was known as an unforgiving boss who loudly berated subordinates who failed to meet his high standards of performance. By covering up the emissions test issue, did Winterkorn surrender the standards that were important to him?

A final example is Richard Smith, former CEO of the USA credit rating agency, Equifax. Smith abruptly stepped down as CEO in 2017, when it became public knowledge that there had been a significant cyber security breach at Equifax. Compounding the complexity of the situation were revelations that Equifax was made aware, months before it happened, that its’ cybersecurity system had flaws that hackers could use to their advantage. When the hack occurred, Equifax waited close to 40 days before acknowledging it publicly. Even then, the company initially under-reported the extent of the date breach, which ultimately impacted 145.5 million people. With 22 years’ experience at GE and 12 years at Equifax, Smith was viewed as a solid business leader with a high level of integrity. In this situation, did Smith surrender the values that helped him be a solid business leader?

Let’s be fair and acknowledge that all leaders face situations where they have to make a decision that requires them to assess possibilities and make choices and trade-offs. Periodically the choices and trade-offs are between great options, where no matter which option is selected, everything works out well. More frequently, however, the circumstances involve trade-offs where all options are bad. In these situations, all the analysis, Excel spreadsheets, and logical thinking a leader can consider, does not make the decision any easier. To use a colloquial phrase, in these circumstances, the leader is caught between a “rock and a hard place”. Regardless of what choice the leader makes, someone is going criticize the decision.

So, what’s the solution in these situations where there is no good choice? Clarity of values, specifically of one’s core values! In the leadership classes I teach at the Iclif Leadership and Governance Centre, I am constantly surprised by the lack of clarity senior leaders have when it comes to their own core values and how important they are for effective leadership decision making.

What are core values? Core values are the foundation for how we conduct ourselves. Core values represent what we stand for and what we believe is most important. They are the three-to-five ideas that guide how we live, approach work, and lead others. It’s important to note that our core values can’t be based on what others think they should be, or what we THINK they should be. Core values come from the heart. If you don’t know what your core values are, it’s time to invest in quiet reflection about what is most important to you and then work to infuse those values into your everyday leadership behaviour.

Core values are non-negotiable. Great leaders don’t surrender their core values for convenience, regardless of the circumstances or pressures they face. They are willing to take an emotional and physical beating, if necessary, to stay true to their values. Great leaders do not surrender their values in order to curry favour with others, hide mistakes, or avoid responsibility.

Core values guide the decision-making process. Great leaders take time to define their core values because they know it helps them make decisions faster, with greater ease, and with increased confidence, because they know that the decisions they make are in alignment with what is important to them. This is especially true for leaders who find themselves facing difficult decisions where none of the choices and trade-offs are appealing.

Core values are ranked in priority order. It’s not sufficient to simply identify core values; effective leaders rank order them. A case in point is the decision Google CEO, Sundar Pichai, made when he fired engineer, James Damore, in August 2017, over a controversial internal memo on workplace diversity. The response to Mr. Pichai’s decision was mixed. Detractors say the decision violated one of Google’s core values, freedom of expression. Supporters say the Mr Pichai’s decision reflects a prioritisation of one of Google’s other core values … workplace diversity. The point here is, it is not enough to simply identify your core values. Effective leaders rank their core values in order of importance.

So, the next time you find yourself facing equally undesirable choices and trade-offs, ask yourself the following question, “Which option best aligns with my core values?” By asking yourself this question, you will not run the risk of surrendering your values.

What is Eclectic Interior Design?

Sudah lama saya perhatikan rekabentuk dalaman 'eclectic' ini. Mula-mula saya tidak berapa berkenan tetapi lama-lama macam menarik pulak. Apa definisinya? Renungi penerangan berikut ...

Apa kata seorang penggemar rekebentuk dalaman 'eclectic' ini? Mari kita dengar kata hati beliau ...

Memang benar ... setiap perkara itu ada sisi baik dan buruknya!

The Truth About Trust

Servant Leadership. Putting others’ interests ahead of one’s own.

In addition to things like competence, honesty, and reliability, the above-mentioned attributes are usually the ones people mention when asked to describe a leader who they could trust. I’ve asked thousands across the globe, and these come up all the time. But many of the same people fall deathly silent when asked to honestly answer if they are truly selfless servant leaders who always put others’ interests ahead of their own, or if their people fully trust them.

My point is this: most people reference “self before others” type of attributes as prerequisites to trusting a leader. But if they are totally honest with themselves, they will admit that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to be selfless all the time. The basic human (survival) instinct is to take care of one’s own interest first. By expecting leaders to be selfless, are we demanding something that goes against the very grain of human existence? What if we were to accept putting one’s own interest before others’ as normal? Put another way, can we trust someone who is self-centered and wants the very best for himself first?

The answer to that question ought to be a big yes, but under one condition; the person also works equally hard to maximize your gain. In my experience, I have found that the best leaders don’t pretend to be who they are not . They fully acknowledge their own ambitions for themselves and take care of others’ needs equally. They don’t believe in zero-sum games, they believe in abundance. They practice what savvy negotiators refer to as win-win outcomes by working extremely hard to maximize their own gain AND working equally hard to maximize others’ gain. They understand that one’s gain need not be another’s loss. Metaphorically, they believe in growing the pie, so that when it is divided everyone gets an equally big slice. They also recognize that to reach a win-win outcome, it is important to fully understand the other sides’ concerns, needs, and priorities.

As an example of these principles, consider what happened to me recently. After several rounds of meetings during which we established a good relationship with a prospective client, we sent a proposal for a consulting assignment quoting $100,000. When our contact at the client company received our proposal, he balked at what he considered too high a price for the work involved. He called and told us there was no way he could do business with us for that price, and unless we were willing to negotiate, he’d go shopping with other firms. We checked our numbers and reconfirmed that the price we had quoted was reasonable and fair.

But before we walked away from the deal, we asked him what his concerns were, and if there was a way to make the numbers work. Upon further discussion, we learned that the company’s selection committee was skeptical about working with us because we were a small boutique firm and our pricing was very close to what was being quoted by bigger, established firms. Our contact told us he needed a basis to justify choosing us, so he needed a lower quote. He also said if we did a good job, there was significant potential for follow-on business.

While we appreciated his position, we found it impossible to lower the numbers. So, to address the selection committee’s concern about our small size and relatively lesser known brand, we offered to do a free two-hour presentation on digital transformation for their entire senior management before delivering on the larger consulting work. We also offered to refund 20% of our fees if we failed to deliver the desired results. With this offer, the client signed off on our full pricing.

What happened here? Through honest dialogue, we convinced our client that we had their best interests at heart and were willing to go the extra mile to give them exactly what they wanted. We saw the opportunity to present to their entire senior management as a good credibility building exercise, so we had no hesitation in offering this “extra value” to them. Furthermore, since we had completed many similar projects before, we were confident of delivering on our promises.

Hence it was not difficult for us to offer a refund in the event the client was not satisfied. By working to understand our clients’ concern, we were able to offer a win-win solution. The key here is, we did not give up on our own interest, but worked very hard to maximize the benefit for our client as well. Once we won their trust in this way, they showed no hesitation in signing on the dotted line … on our originally quoted price.

Instead, they will go out of their way to make me as successful as possible without giving up their own interest. Such a person would be acting in accordance with basic human instinct, not against it. That’s why I would trust them.

It is time to give up clichés about selflessness and embrace the pursuit of self-interest and ambition as normal. If you really want to achieve something, why pretend otherwise? The key is to think and act in a way that creates full satisfaction (win-win) for both parties.

wework - A Coworking Space Company

Out of no where, satu company startup dalam menyediakan coworking space, wework mendapat perhatian yang sangat luarbiasa. Siapakah wework ini? Tontoni video dibawah ...

Apakah business model yang dipakai oleh wework ini? Renungi satu pandangan tentang business model wework ini ...

Mampukah wework ini bertahan dalam industri baru ini? Renungi apa kata video di bawah ini ...

Sudah jelas, untuk kekal bertahan dalam satu-satu industri itu, kita perlu mengetahui apakah value proposition yang diperlukan oleh pelanggan. Bukan itu sahaja kita mesti mampu memastikan value proposition tersebut tidak mampu ditiru oleh competitor kita!

Leadership Redefined for the Open Source Era!

We live in interesting times. From Brexit to Trump we see the democratization of anger, frustration, and bigotry, while at the same time we are witnessing the democratization of technology, ideas, and capital. Change is inevitably paradoxical, and we are living through a history of bright, shiny possibilities and dark, dystopian currents in equal measure. How should we prepare future leaders?

There might have been a time when we relied on our political, business, and community leaders to interpret the world for us and give us reliable institutions of civic and commercial order. But now we live in the open source era where information is ubiquitous, ideas represent currency and where entrepreneurship is the dominant platform for business success.

Airbnb, Tesla, Apple, Alibaba, Google, Zappos, Uber, are good examples of “exponential organizations”, where output is disproportionally large because of new organizational techniques that leverage accelerating technologies. And while technologies such as artificial intelligence, nanothechnology, robotics, and digital biology are rapidly redefining the work environment, the practice of developing leaders for these organizations is lagging. What is the new model of leadership for 2020-2050?

Here are four ways we might better prepare our future leaders:

1. Unleash Innovation

Create the environment for anyone to propose new ideas with a net benefit for society, and allocate resources for test cases and pilot programs. Develop a start-up mindset. Be prepared for transformation and metamorphosis. New leaders will need to create a delicate balance between disruption and containment.

2. Leadership Being

Successful leaders in the open source era are “autocratic” or single-minded about their vision, mission, and purpose. But they also display an unshakeable adherence to their core values, a deep awareness of themselves, and a generally compassionate treatment of others. Leaders will need to be resilient, revolutionary, and remarkable in their purpose, yet considerate and empathetic in building collaboration.

3. Systems Architecting

Historians in the late Twenty-First Century will almost certainly judge us for dithering on climate change and on our collective failure to perceive the interconnectedness of all our actions. successful leaders of the open source era are able to conceive radically different systems of engagement of people and resources, of which Uber and Airbnb are classic examples. Systems thinking, imagining, and architecting will be essential skills for new leaders.

4. Leadership Coaching

Coaching has emerged as a highly specialized field of leadership development which is able to respond flexibly to changing operational environments and individual learning needs. Now, more than ever, we need capable and wise leaders who will make decisions for our common good, not just the good of shareholders. New leaders will need leadership coaches who can act like Sherpas, shouldering some of the load as they guide their clients towards their individual and organizational summits. They may also need leadership coaches who can behave like Shamans, wisely perceiving patterns and divining the future.

Does your leadership development curriculum consider these four approaches? If not, then you are most likely briefing your leaders for the past, not the future.

Coworking Space

Semenjak dua menjak ini, banyak coworking space diwujudkan. Apa yang kita tahu tentang coworking space ini? Renungi video di bawah ...

Satu contoh terbaik coworking space ini di negara ini ialah Colony yang terletak di KLCC. Bolehkah kita bekerja dalam keadaan sebegini? Renungi video Colony di bawah ...

Sememangnya cara hidup kita berubah dari segala segi!