Sobering

From time to time, I encounter a concept that takes me aback.  Usually, it’s not something that is completely foreign to me, but rather it is the skillful framing of a powerful idea.  Sometimes those personal “epiphanies” occur in the form of metaphor, sometimes they are captured in some kind of graphic representation, sometimes the artful stringing together of words. 

I recently was brought face-to-face with one of those powerful conceptualizations:

What we teach our children……...

                                                       we teach their children.

 If ever there was a reason to be purposeful, deliberate, and persistent in the choices we make about what we teach, why we teach it, and how we teach it, that is it.

Sobering.

Defining Ourselves

It’s a lot easier to define ourselves and our organizations by describing the things we're not (or don’t want to be).  It’s much harder to be crystal clear about where we want to go, why we want to go there, how we plan to get there.

I recently saw a news byte on a local television station about a hotly debated issue related to the progress of our community.  The TV journalist decided to do one of those man-on-the-street interviews to gauge public sentiment on the issue.  The reporter approached an older gentleman who was wearing a ball cap, flannel shirt, and denim overalls.  The reporter started the conversation by saying something like, “Sir, we’re doing a survey to see how folks feel about…”  Before she could finish the sentence the old man said, “I’m agin’ it!”  

Interesting to me was the fact that he didn’t really care what the topic/issue was, he just knew he was “agin’ it.”  Clearly, he had no clear conception of, nor interest in, the public policy issue at hand, especially if it meant some kind of change in the current status.  The community leadership, which was promoting movement toward a better future, had certainly not made a compelling case for their initiative (for this gentleman, at least).

Every organization, every community, every team has the I'm-agin'-it group. Sometimes they can be convinced of need for improvement, sometimes not.  They will never be convinced if a clear and believable better future hasn't been articulated and defined.  The way we define ourselves is critical in gaining support for continuous improvement efforts. 

Defining ourselves, personally and organizationally, 

     in positive ways, 

          aligned with noble intentions,

               with clear and doable action steps (even if baby steps), 

is a prerequisite to meaningful movement toward betterness (yep, I invented that word).  

Far better than taking a this-is-not-me/us approach is to:

1) know who/what we want to be,

2) commit to pursuing those goals relentlessly, and

3) saying so publicly and in a positive way.  

Somebody has to make that case.

Trophy Dust

For years I charaded as an athletic coach.  Those experiences were most formative for me as a professional, and informative for me as a person.  I am grateful that I was allowed to experience some “losing” early on.  Not “winning,” not getting what you think you want, has a powerfully grounding effect on one.  When those unfulfilled goals/dreams slap you around a bit, one is faced with a choice – either figure out ways to get better, or wallow in victimhood (excuse making, blame throwing, etc.). 

Thanks to numerous worthy mentors and models in my life, I learned that the former approach is the one with the most fidelity.  The game, the season, the day, the fiscal year, the initiative always end with a balance sheet of pluses AND minuses (whether you finish first or dead last).  The worth in the process is how you pursue the journey, how you take stock of the outcomes, and how you choose to proceed from that point.  From those blessed mentors, models, and experiences I learned that the power is really in the journey, the growth, the getting better - on purpose, every day.

To be fair, along the way I was blessed to have experienced some “wins,” too.  We won some games we shouldn’t have, got some honors, received some acknowledgements, experienced some successes.  We won some trophies!  The thing about those trophies is that they are terribly efficient dust collectors.  Once the moment of elation is past, trophies promptly begin collecting dust.

Today’s wins are but flashes in the pan.  Same goes for the losses.  Success is a journey.  Reflection is a requirement. Self-assessment must be a compulsion.  Adaptability should be trained into our psyche.  Somewhat ironically, we can learn and grow as much from the “losses” as we do from the “wins.”

So thankful for those mentors and models who patiently taught me how to proceed with a balanced view of “winning” (and “losing”).   

The Don't-Quote-Me Gang

In working with mentees over the years, one frequently noted workplace frustration I hear from them is when they describe working for/with folks in leadership positions who seem unwilling to "own" or put their decisions in print.  It is extremely frustrating to not be able to get a straight answer from those leaders, even if the answer is simply (and often most appropriately) “it’s your call.” 

Leaders who operate in that don’t-quote-me type of mentality seem to want it both ways – the title and the money that goes with leadership roles, but none of the accountability that accompanies those roles.  Faux leadership seeks to dodge bullets, to stay below the radar, and to live a Teflon-like existence.  That same mindset also gains for them the general disdain of those who find themselves down the chain of command.  Their subordinates constantly feel as if they are walking on a tightrope, with no safety net or support from “the boss” in place.  Those willing to step up and make tough decisions often get bloodied up (while the boss is conveniently well-distanced from the catastrophe and/or the accountability). 

This sort of don’t-quote-me leadership tends to foster a state of inertia in the organization.  Team members who don’t feel empowered and supported frequently exhibit very little in the way of boldness and risk-taking in the interest of pushing organizational objectives.

Having witnessed this dynamic time and again, I determined NOT to treat the folks with whom I work in similar fashion.  A far better approach, I think, is to give them autonomy, give them authority, invest in their development, and coach them in the ways of right thinking and service orientation.  As my friend and mentor, JK, is fond of saying, “If they act within policy and law, support their decisions.  If you don’t like their decisions, discuss it privately with them and coach them up.  But never publicly cut their legs out from under them.” (JK would have said it in a much more entertaining way).

You can quote me on this.

Understanding (or just knowing)

I know my lovely bride of 36 years (quite well, actually), yet my understanding of her is still in its infancy.  I know the cottonwood tree we planted outside our kitchen window 15 years ago, yet I don’t fully understand the biological processes that cause it to grow and wax and wane.  I know the periodic table (or at least, I used to), yet I don't fully understand the intricacies of its individual components, much less the complex interactions that occur between the elements.  I know how to teach, yet my understanding of how learning occurs within the minds of individuals is primitive, at best. 

Knowing appears to be a superficial coating, a facade, a veneer, to understanding.  In fact, too often the appearance of knowing effectively masquerades as understanding.

In public education policy, we have made a huge deal about trying to measure what students KNOW.  In fact, we spend billions of dollars crafting schemes and developing tools to measure that knowledge.  Those machinations often charade as measurements of intelligence.  Really?  Seems a bit naive to me (but it makes for good press, for advancement of political careers, for good resume polish, for ways to rank and rate and berate students/schools/teachers/communities).  

Perhaps we should be focusing on enhancing our students’ (and our own) understanding, rather than just knowing.  Understanding seems a much richer goal. 

As we change, 

     as conditions change, 

          as the universe changes, 

               as our relationships change, 

then certainly our understanding of each will change as well.  

Understanding is a much more dynamic concept that knowing.

I think we should call the pursuit of understanding the process of LEARNING.

Uh oh!  What if the purposeful pursuit of understanding (over simply knowing) is harder to accomplish?                           Another one of those dastardly choices...