Thursday, December 25, 2008

Passion Part VI - Sacrifice

This is the last in a series of posts about passion as a force multiplier in an organization and the creation of passion through individuals who know their role, are convinced their role matters and see the good of their work.  Throughout the last few weeks, I argued that leaders must focus on the following elements to create and sustain passion; vision, culture, principles, and style.  I received great feedback on these topics and invariably someone says, "this is an interesting point Alex, but how do you actually get something like this done?"  To answer that question, I must conclude the discussion of passion with the topic of sacrifice.  

We can make speeches, write emails, pound our fists on a podium and exhort those around us, but nothing changes unless leaders make believable observable sacrifices.  Sacrifice is a difficult word, for many it has a negative, punishing overtone.  Yet sacrifice merely means giving up something valuable or important for somebody or something else considered to be of more value or importance.  Sacrifice, therefore, is making a choice.  People watch leaders make choices and knowingly or unknowingly choose what the leader has chosen.  Fair?  Maybe not, but it is the reality of the relationship between the leader and their team.  I quoted Robert E. Lee in the post about culture, and I have to repeat him here, "You must be careful how you walk, and where you go, for there are those following you who will set their feet where yours are set"

Choice by itself will not do the deed; the choice must be believable and observable.  Why believable?  A choice that is believable cannot be discounted; the human brain must pay attention to it. Observable?  The choices must be planned out and visible.  We have all heard it said, "Don't just talk the talk, but walk the talk".  Right; but we must also talk the walk.  People have to see the choices occur.  Some things should not be done in the dark.

There are four believable observable sacrifices a leader can make.  We must consciously understand these sacrifices and strategically plan and use them to create and sustain passion.  As you consider the vision you have, the culture you want, the boundaries you set and the style you preach, you must make these sacrifices to imprint your will on the team.

  1. Sacrifice time – How we use our time shows what we value.  My son came home from school once and told me, "Dad - today we learned how to spell love; T-I-M-E".  Go back through your calendar for the last six months and look at the use of your time.  Is your time connected to your vision?  Does it support the culture and boundaries you want in the organization?  Let's say you want to be customer focused.  Are you using your time to understand the customer?  Have you cancelled an important internal meeting to be with a customer?  What believable, observable choices do you make with your time?
  2. Sacrifice money - What choices do you make with the funds inside your organization? Strategy without resource allocation is just a wish.  Let's say you have preached about leadership development.  Have you allocated resources to teach and engage the front line leadership in the organization? Don’t tell me where your priorities are. Show me where you spend your money and I’ll tell you what they are. - James W. Frick
  3. Sacrifice ego – The first two are easy to understand, the last two require a bit more effort.  Sacrifice ego?  What does that mean?  Being right can get in the way of what you want to get done with your team. What are you willing to be wrong for?   Sacrificing your ego and going through the pain of "being wrong" in front of your team is humbling and tough.  Publicly acknowledging when you personally break one of the values of the organization is an important way we sacrifice our ego.  If I say, "Customers are our business" and then damage a customer relationship for financial results, will I stand in front of the team and say, "I am sorry I made a choice against our culture"
  4. Sacrifice values - In every journey there are moments of truth.  These are moments where you choose between the way it was and the way it will be.  These are moments where you must publicly slay a previous value.  In one post, I talked about boundaries.  Let's say you have implemented a Getting it Done and Doing it Right set of boundaries and Doing it Right includes the value of teamwork.  What if your #1 producing employee is selfish and contributes nothing else to the team?  Will you remove that employee and will your team know why you removed the person from your team?

Many of you have seen the movie, "Saving Private Ryan".  In that movie there is scene with all these sacrifices on display.  General Marshall is approached by two War Department colonels and informed of the deaths of the Ryan brothers, and of the lone surviving brother in the 101st Airborne Division. Marshall reads a letter that had been sent to Lydia Bixby by President Lincoln concerning the loss of her sons during war, and orders that Private Ryan be found and returned home.   Time? The chief of staff of the Army makes time within days of the largest military operation in the history to discuss one man.  Money? Taking a decision to send a group of men after one man is a reallocation of resources.  Ego? Marshall pulls out a letter and it is obvious that he has memorized this letter by Lincoln consoling a mother of several sons who have died and used this letter frequently to remind himself of who he really is and the importance of all soldiers to their mother.  Previous value? Marshall overrides his staff that recommends that it is an unwise use of resources given everything else they are working on. We are all left with a deep sense of who Marshall is and what he believes.

One more example from history rather than film.  Regardless of your own personal belief system, today most scholars estimate there are a little more than 2 billion people in the world that call themselves Christian.  This is the largest religious group making up over 32% of the world's population.  The religion originated with one man 2000 years ago, a man who is acknowledged by other major religions including Islam who sees him as a prophet and Hindus who regard his teaching as solid moral, ethical and social commentary.  If the measure of leadership is related to sustained influence over people across time, then this one man had a level of influence above most others we can study.  And in the end, it was his believable, observable sacrifices that inspired and continue to inspire.

2 comments:

Sethu said...

I like your series on leadership especially the focus on qualities such as passion, culture, style and principles and read them with great interest. There are many leaders in their own respect who are endowed with, and led with these qualities, but would like to refer to three of them - Churchill, Hitler and Gandhi for a reason - to enable a comparison of their principles, styles, passion and beliefs. Also at the outset, I would like to mention that I am no way extolling Hitler or his style of leadership.

All of them were exceedingly passionate about what they wanted to achieve and motivated millions with the mere power of the spoken word. They led by example, and had the courage and conviction to break insurmountable barriers in pursuit of their goals. I always wonder, what is the ingredient that fueled their passion? I have mulled over this time and again, and am led to believe that ‘purpose’ precedes ‘passion’, especially from a leadership standpoint. In fact purpose not only precedes passion but also provides the foundation to shape the vision and strategy, and energy to drive operations and its execution. Purpose combined with passion breaks the limits of logic and rationality and often times creates something altogether new, perhaps rewrites history.

If I try to draw a horizontal line to plot these leaders in terms of their styles and behavior, Gandhi and Hitler would occupy the extremities of this line, with Churchill somewhere in between. They had some commonalities - it is told that Gandhi and Hitler were teetotalers. Their value system and belief convinced thousands, if not millions to follow and worship them.

While Gandhi was an epitome of non-violence, Hitler was the opposite. One was an epitome of ‘active aggression’, the other an icon of ‘passive resistance’. One led the world to a path of destruction, and the other inspired the world to a path of tolerance and acceptance. Now Churchill unlike the other two had indulged generously in alcohol. Also, apart from a foe in Hitler, he hated Gandhi and often referred to him as a naked fakir. Despite these commonalities and differences, leaders they were.

One common quality observable in each of these individuals is an overarching purpose, though the purpose itself may have changed during the course of their lives. Hitler thought the Treaty of Versailles to be skewed against Germany and at that time his sole purpose was to correct it, Churchill’s purpose was to contain Hitler, and protect Britain and her colonies, and in midst of all this Gandhi’s purpose was freedom from British colonialism. It was this purpose that shaped their vision, strategy and operations.

Likewise, if leaders today are able to define the purpose and reason for an organization’s existence, and articulate that purpose in the corporate vision, then strategy and its execution can perhaps be more meaningful, realistic and achievable. Every individual in an organization would then be motivated to accomplish the common goals, dictated by the overarching purpose.

Alex Shootman said...

Sethu - thank you so much for your comments. I agree with you on the value of purpose toward driving passion. I would like your critique on the part a few weeks ago on Vision for it is within that post that I was trying to capture what I think you are writing about with purpose. I would very much like to know if we are in sync on that piece.

Also, with respect to Hitler, he was driven by purpose even deeper than the Treaty of Versailles; if you decompose Mein Kampf his thesis is simple. Man is a fighting animal; therefore the nation, being a community of fighters, is a fighting unit. Any living organism which ceases to fight becomes extinct. Any country or race that ceases to fight also will become extinct. So his essential purpose was to turn the German race into the ultimate perpetual fighting machine.

In Hitler's basic thesis, he could not have been more opposite of Ghandi.

Three good men to study who were able to exert their will on a large population through the strength of their vision/purpose