Natural Laws of Leadership: Motion

Recently I was coaching a senior leader on the topic of operational improvements underway in the organization. There was general frustration that changes and new procedures weren’t being widely adopted by the staff in the department. He asked why people weren’t doing what they were being asked to do. I asked, “What he was doing to motivate a change in their behaviors to ensure people were doing things differently?” He said that he thought that the right solution should be enough to get people to want to adopt it.

While that idealistic thought might work in the fantasy of a Disney movie , it isn’t realistic in real-world leadership.

One reality of leadership is this:

Unless inspired or motivated to do so, people don’t generally possess the desire to do things any differently tomorrow than they did today.

In other words, just because you say something, or present a good idea, or a more efficient way of doing things, it doesn’t mean that people will jump to do it. It requires more than that from the leader. It requires the right amount of force in the right direction.

As a leader, your job is to know what direction you want to take your team/organization (have a vision) and to know those whom you are leading well enough to understand the proper amount and type of force to apply in the right place to change the direction (tension) I wrote about this topic in an earlier article.

This reminds me of the scientific truth of Newton’s 3 Laws of Motion . There is absolutely a Leadership correlation to those laws. I recently read an article by Vivek Mehrotra where he does a good job of identifying some basic correlations between Newton’s first two laws and leadership. I’ll elaborate on those thoughts here and add perspective to Newton’s Third law as it applies to leadership.

Without a doubt the leadership correlation to each of Newton’s laws are as true as the Laws of Motion themselves.

Newton’s First Law of Motion: Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

First Law of Leadership: An organization in its current state (status quo) is in an organizational “state of motion.” Things won’t change unless you apply force to cause them to change. Without that leadership force, it will continue to operate along its current path.

Newton’s Second Law of Motion: The relationship between an object’s mass (m), its acceleration (a), and the applied force (F) is Force = mass x acceleration.

Second Law of Leadership: The force needed to bring change to an organization depends on the size of the organization and the size of the change. If you want to make big changes fast, then you need to apply lots of force. If you don’t mind changes taking lots of time, then smaller but consistently applied force over time will work. The converse of this law is also true. If you expect big changes to come from the part time efforts of a few people, then get used to disappointment.

Newton’s Third Law of Motion: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Third Law of Leadership: Even when you provide the right direction and motivation, there will be a force that acts to negate the action you are undertaking. So, don’t be surprised when there seems to be resistance to changes you are trying to implement. Particularly in light of the First Law of Leadership, it means that you must continue to exert the right amount of force to continue to make things move until your goals are achieved.

Understand for yourself:

What kind of force is required to get your organization to achieve the results you have in your vision?
Are you aware of the reactions to your actions? Do you understand how your actions are driving the reactions of your people?

Always remember the natural laws of leadership.

A Leaderhip Urban Legend

There is an urban legend that goes something like this. A proud U.S. Navy aircraft carrier was sailing along one dark night when the navigator noticed a light directly ahead. He quickly notified the Captain who immediately got on the radio. Here is the exchange that followed:

Captain: “Unknown vessel, you are on a collision course to our position. Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision.”

Unknown Voice: “Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.”

Captain: “This is the Captain of a U.S. Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.”

Unknown Voice: “This is a Petty Officer 2nd Class. Please divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South.”

Captain: “THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS NIMITZ, ONE OF THE LARGEST SHIPS IN THE UNITED STATES’ PACIFIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. WE HAVE ON BOARD AN ADMIRAL. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH. THAT IS ONE-FIVE DEGREES NORTH, OR MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP!!”

Unknown Voice: “This is a light house. It’s your call.”

This story incidentally turns out to be completely untrue (I don’t want all my Navy readers to write me nasty emails). However, it is a prime illustration of how a leader’s Ego can allow them to create a perspective of reality that could be damaging, in more ways than one.

Can you see the Ego?

Eckart Tolle describes the Ego as that voice in your mind which tells you that you are better, or worse, than someone else. In this story, the Captain’s ego clearly is at work because he is placing his perceived importance ahead of situational awareness.

This story came to mind recently when I was working with some senior executives to implement new operational procedures to support a new computer system. These procedures were developed by a team of Subject Matter Experts from across the company who worked for the better part of a year to ensure they were consistent across the company.

As often happens, the new system and related procedures meant that some people and, in some cases entire departments, would have to change the way things get done. (The equivalent of the “divert your course” request.)

One senior leader, however, was particularly adamant that the new procedures placed an undue burden on their team and therefore were unacceptable. When asked why, they insisted that financial reporting would be compromised and that they would not be able to effectively execute ongoing initiatives. This leader further went on to say that they were going to escalate this to the business unit Finance Leader if things didn’t stay the way they were. (The equivalent of the Captain’s rant about the size and importance of the aircraft carrier.)

I then explained that the new system and related procedures were actually requested by the company Chief Financial Officer, who is the Finance Lead’s boss. (The equivalent of the “This is a lighthouse” notification.)

Did it really have to get that way?

Why do some people respond to situations, changes, or a difference of opinion with such a visceral reaction? Think about your own experiences when you have seen someone’s ego at work in a similar fashion. What were the circumstances? What pieces of information did the Ego not see?

The Ego tends to trip us up when we face a situation from inside our own mind rather than from the circumstances of the reality of the situation.

Now, don’t be confused we all have an Ego. It’s part of our human packaging. Your Ego is the voice that tells you the new guy knows nothing of value because their experience comes from a different company. And your Ego is the voice that tells you don’t have the right to question decisions because someone smarter than you must have determined that this is the best thing to do, even if it doesn’t seem so. The Ego is also part of our lives for a reason. It helps us to get up and want to succeed. But when left unchecked, it can take us on a dangerous path: like towards a light house.

A leader’s responsibility is to be aware of yourself enough to recognize when the voice that you are listening to is your Ego. This Self Awareness is also the first step in Emotional Intelligence.

A leader’s responsibility is to get out of your mind enough to listen to the people around you and see the situation for what it is.

Only then can you accurately respond to your environment and influence those people to whom you owe effective leadership.

Get out of your mind and Lead

So, the next time you find yourself in a difficult position and are feeling the weight of leadership, ask yourself if the voice you are listening to is really your Ego. Be honest with yourself. Get out of your mind and be a Leader!

________________

Dave Hasenbalg is Chief Operating Officer of Customized Solutions, LLC and does coaching and public speaking on Leadership and Operational Excellence. This article and others from Dave can be found at: www.linked2leadership.com He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Did you ever just have to get it off your chest?

Recently I was having a detailed, rational, intelligent conversation with a colleague about leadership. Okay, to be honest, it was really more of a bitch session about their boss. But isn’t that the way that leadership is really evaluated in the proverbial trenches? People will talk about their leaders with friends, co-workers, family, pretty much anyone who will listen. It’s one thing to be talked about. There is nothing you can do about it; it’s inevitable. It’s another thing entirely to be bitched about. I believe that leaders can control whether or not their people take complaints to this level.

Believe me, this was a true bitch session.

In this conversation, the main complaint was that the people who worked for the leader in question were constantly caught off guard. They didn’t know from one day to the next or one situation to the next exactly how the boss was going to react. It created an environment of unpredictability. This unpredictability led to unproductive behaviors, like always having to “CYA” (cover your actions).

Why is it that some leaders, whether consciously or inadvertently, foster an environment where your people really don’t know what to expect from you?

I was able to share with my colleague a lesson I learned as a young U.S. Army officer.

The commanding general of one of the posts where I was stationed in the early 1990s was Major General Thomas A. Schwartz. (He subsequently went from wearing those two stars to four stars.) Shortly after taking command of the division he shared a leadership technique with all of the officers on the post that I have taken with me and still use to this day.

Just remember the acronym T.I.P.S. I will paraphrase here and embellish the key points.

T.I.P.S.

Talk to your people

Keep them Informed

Be Predictable

Be Sensitive to their individual needs

Talk to your people. Find out what is really happening. You can’t learn much of anything if you aren’t talking to the people you are trying to lead. More important than just talking is listening to what they are saying. That is why God gave you two ears and one mouth. You are supposed to listen twice as much as you speak.

Keep them Informed. Let your people know what is happening. Let them know what you think. Admit to them the things that you don’t know. You may be surprised how much mileage this will get you with your people.

Be Predictable. Don’t make them guess. If they don’t know what to expect from you, they won’t trust you. If they won’t trust you, they won’t follow you. And, if they won’t follow you, then you can’t lead them. If that happens, you are no longer a leader but, rather, a box on the org chart.

Be Sensitive to their individual needs. Contrary to what some people may think, leadership is not a “one size fits all” model. The leader who interacts with everyone exactly the same is guaranteed to mis-communicate with 75% of their people. Take a minute to understand what drives your people, what they respond to, and how best to utilize their talents and abilities.

Thanks to General Schwartz for sharing this leadership model. I hope you can use this model to improve your own leadership style.

What are you doing to make sure that you are communicating effectively with ALL of your followers? Are you using these same techniques with your boss(es) and peers? What sort of feedback mechanism do you have in place to insure that you are hitting the mark as an effective communicator? Let me know how it works for you. I’d love to hear your thoughts!

—————————————————
This post, as well as others from Dave, can also be found at http://linked2leadership.com/author/dhasenbalg/

Dave Hasenbalg is Chief Operating Officer of Customized Solutions, LLC and does coaching and public speaking on Leadership and Operational Excellence.
He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

A Challenging Leadership Scenario

Below is a profile on leadership that tells of two different types of leaders. Both leaders have definite flaws in their leadership profiles, but I think that one of them can been seen as a more effective leader.

Can you relate to this scenario? Have you experienced something like this before in your organization?

(This situation is real but the names have been changed.)

The Micro-Meddler

Ben is the most senior ranking official at an organization of over 200 people. His preferred method of operating is to keep a fairly non-formal approach with all of the staff. He doesn’t like it when too many rules and procedures are implemented because it gets too “corporate.” When people bring something to his attention, he jumps into the details and quickly works with people until he feels that a resolution has been found. He isn’t a micro-manager, per se. After seeing him in action, I’ve actually coined the term “micro-meddler” to describe him more accurately.

You see, Ben seems to always get in the middle of things in an attempt to help, but he ends up messing things up. And as one might imagine, he then expects others to clean-up the mess that he creates.

The staff has all learned how to take advantage of this approach.

When they want something, they simply become the proverbial “squeaky wheel” until he takes action to come save the day. Although he thinks that he is helping, he is actually undermining a functional system with his various approaches to leadership. To make things worse, Ben tends to avoid confrontation, preferring instead to reward those whom he likes with surprise bonuses and giving little or no feedback to others. The lack of structure in his personal preferences seems to foster a hapless approach to his rigor-less leadership.

The Egregious Ego

Ben has more troubles. One of them is his direct reports, Chris. Chris has been in position for many years in a role that coordinates many of the projects and work efforts across the organization. Because Chris has been around a long time, he has become the subject-matter-expert in many areas. For many things, it seems that if you want something done you’re going to have to talk to Chris. Chris knows it and apparently he likes the power.

I’ve dubbed him the “egregious ego.”

Chris is not easy to work with. Different people throughout the organization have complained that Chris is rude, abrasive, argumentative, and quick to spread rumors. Over the years, the situation seems to have become more pronounced. But people have learned that when they want something from Chris they need to adjust their approach, just catch him on a “good day”, or find others in the organization with whom to collaborate so they can attain the same results without having to work with Chris.

So who is the most effective leader of the two?

Can you relate to either of the people identified in this scenario? Have you worked with anyone who behaved like either of them? It is clear that both people have some challenges as leaders. So, here is the question for you: Who is the more effective leader for this organization?

According to John C. Maxwell, the true measure of leadership is influence: the ability to influence the behavior of others. With that in mind, I would submit that Chris, the “egregious ego” is the more effective leader. While Chris’ behavior is arguably more dysfunctional to the organization, the end result is still greater influence on others.

There are many factors at play in any leadership situation and each factor impacts another. These are some key leadership elements at play here:

• Positional power vs. Task Power (Ken Blanchard)
• Abdicating authority
• Effective leaders vs. “good” leaders
• Obtaining results vs. “just doing things”
• Violating the natural laws of leadership

Stay Tuned

Please let me know your thoughts on this situation, particularly as it relates to the elements listed above. What similar experiences have you had and how did you deal with them? In a future post, I’ll highlight the input received.

In addition, I’ll introduce what I call the “Natural Laws of Leadership.” Specifically as it relates to this scenario, I’ll introduce the first Natural Law of Leadership: Empowerment Through Inaction.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

—————————————————
This post, as well as others from Dave, can also be found at http://linked2leadership.com/author/dhasenbalg/

Dave Hasenbalg is Chief Operating Officer of Customized Solutions, LLC and does coaching and public speaking on Leadership and Operational Excellence.
He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it