Follow up from Feb 28th post

As the Do part of the plan-do-check-adjust Deming cycle, this post is a follow up to the Feb 28th post. The boy leaders did well today. They invited the others to join in the reading program. They explained it to the other boys, and they had a discussion about how they wanted to reward themselves if they continue until the end of the year. In the end, all ten of them decided on a paintball game if they consistently performed. Some that did not seem too interested at first decided to join in too. We'll check up on their progress next week. It is a daily commitment.

What Can We Learn from Military Leadership (this one is not aimed at kids)

The United States military has a bit of an advantage over most small to medium businesses in how it develops leaders. Perhaps very large companies can afford to have extensive leadership training, but most companies do not seem to prioritize leadership to the same extent that the military in the USA does.

For example, the military had a long history of effective leadership. New people entering the organization see the examples all around them in a myriad of situations. They can observe various styles of leadership in various situations and put some of these methods into their own leadership toolbox.

Another example is the leadership schools used by the US military. They have the organizational structure and budgets to operate their own school system. These include basic and advanced leadership training at the direct leadership levels (tactical) and go all the way to indirect leadership (leading other leaders) and to enterprise-level (strategic) leadership for organizations. Most profit and non-profit organizations do not allocate this level of resources to leadership training in their organizations. Instead of building their own leadership schools, many non-governmental organizations will either create in-house or license pre-made courses for facilitators to use or for web-based training. Learning management systems are starting to be more common in medium-sized organizations. For smaller organizations, open source LMS systems like Moodle can be used too.

Another advantage the military has is that they split up leadership into two areas. Commissioned officers focus on collective performance of the entire organization (platoon, company, battalion, brigade, etc.) while non-commissioned officers (NCOs) focus on individual performance. This separation of roles is not common is the commercial realm or that of non-profits. This teamwork between multiple leaders in an organization can make a huge difference in the success of the unit under the stress and strain of combat. In most non-military organizations, one leader focuses on both the individual performances and the collective performance of the organization.

Part of the reason for the emphasis on leadership in the military is that they have to prepare people to succeed in combat. Combat is one of the most (if not the most) unstructured and chaotic situations people have to operate in and leadership in combat requires practiced effective leadership, sometimes called "in the muscle", rather than checklists or a new book, or ponder-as-you-go that might succeed in a slower-paced environment.

Teaching leadership is one thing. People do need the theoretical background. However, much more important is skill transfer to the job. This requires opportunities to practice and receive feedback in many different situations. This is another advantage the military has over most other organizations. The military system is designed to move people into various roles and assignments that provide opportunities for leadership application, feedback, and improvement. Some companies like General Electric in the US do this too, but many small to medium sized businesses hire people for their specific job skill set and use them in that role until they leave the organization. Although such specialization can be effective for specific performances, it sometimes robs the organization of the leadership talents of their people. In many hiring situations, leadership is not even acknowledged or suggested as hiring criteria by human resources groups. Individual hiring managers will select for leadership on their own depending on their personal experience and background. In some organizations, with poor leadership histories have started to improve when a person with leadership ability gets into a key position with hiring/firing authority and starts including leadership as a criteria for hiring, promotion, and reassignment. They may or may not have the full support from supporting business processes like human resources functional groups. They may make these improvements on their own until a momentum starts to build. This can take time, months or years.

So non-military organizations can learn from the military leadership system and apply the parts that seem applicable to their situation.

Here are some suggestions.

• Many organizations have implemented succession planning, but often stop there without the follow-up of developing the people they identified further.
• Watch for who effectively gets things done with others, getting both the results and keeping the group morale high. Offer them an additional project or two to confirm your observations. Then put them in charge of a more challenging situation or group. Support them with additional leadership training.
• Be careful that your actions to develop are not perceived as exploiting them until they burn out and leave. This can be done most effectively by sincerely feeling this way. People see through insincerity quickly.
• Pull together the executives who demonstrate the most effective leadership and ask them to help build the organization’s leadership capability. As a side effect, the organization will end up with a leadership development program. Focus on business objectives first keeps everyone focused on the best organizational outcomes.
• Key individuals can start to use effective leadership as criteria in their advancement choices when vacancies open up or when re-structuring occurs. Not all supervisors and managers know how to do this. Start with those who do and begin and get some successes. Then focus on training others on how to accomplish this. However, you’ll have more results from focusing on those that already know how and having them coach others than you will get trying to start from those with the least demonstrated leadership abilities. Apply Pareto analysis to figure out what 20% of your leaders get 80% of the results and begin with the 20% group.
• Human resources groups can provide hiring managers behavioral interview questions that include leadership questions for supervisory and manager positions. Most people can spot effective leadership, but many don’t know how to go about assessing the degree of its existence. Job aids like this can help.
• Executive hiring should always include leadership criteria.
• Supervisors and managers at all organization levels can be provided training on providing opportunities for less experienced people who demonstrate above-average leadership potential.

• However, manage expectations carefully with such a program so that people understand they are getting horizontal opportunities, not necessarily vertical opportunities. Some organizations have counted on specialized skills sets and have kept people in their same roles for 5, 10, 15 years. This does not typically offer promotional opportunities, but rather project opportunities.

Leadership is too vast of a subject for any one article to be comprehensive. Hopefully this has given you some ideas. How you improve is up to you.

Effective leadership is one of those intangible abilities that when present helps organizations in any endeavor.

Who Else Can Help?

NOTE: I found this article by someone else a long while back and I did not record the source at the time. The ideas are not mine. They are important for teaching leadership to children.

How do you find a way of leading that doesn't demand more than it gives back in return, that doesn't lead to burnout, or unfulfillment, or alienation, or drift? How do you teach a child to do the same?

You can't do everything yourself. If you do that, then why is a 'leader' of others even necessary? In addition to asking "How?" ask "Who?" Assume you're not the answer. Most of us ask "How?" How can I (or we) get this thing done? We begin assessing what it would take to turn the idea into something real. We begin thinking and planning. Many times we get overwhelmed. (All those details to handle! All that know-how required!) And we conclude, not unreasonably, that the idea can't be done. Or if it can be done, then usually the personal price paid by the leader — the knower of the answers — will be high.

But what if, instead, the leader presumes they can't do anything, at least not as well as someone else, and definitely not on their own. Instead of considering for a moment that you might be the person to execute the plans or projects that arise in the course of business, always assume there's a better option.

Instead of asking, "How can I do that?" ask "Who can do that?" "Who knows how to do that?" "Who can help me get that done?"

Management analyst Jim Collins (author of Built to Last and Good to Great: Why Some Companies
Make the Leap... and Others Don't ) likens the leader of an organization to the driver of a bus, Collins says that the bus driver's job is not to decide where the bus should go or how to drive it there, but to get the right people on the bus in the first place -- as well as to get the wrong people off the bus, and ultimately to get the right people into the right seats. The right people then will help the leader figure out where to drive and how to drive there. What's more, the right people will attract other right people and inspire them to stick around, diminishing the burden and anxiety felt by leaders who are in the position of having to motivate their flock by themselves. Although his example is more about hiring and staffing, it still has impact on project implementations.

By observing the who-not-how guideline, the leader is liberated to imagine. Since you don't assume you're the one who's going to have to do things -- or even that you're the one who has to know how to do things -- you're not limited to considering only the things you know you can do. Start thinking Who?, and the results are exponentially reinforcing: Once you find you can make things happen that you couldn't dream of doing yourself, you believe you can do anything. And so does everyone in or involved with your company, each of them able to see that the possibilities aren't bounded by their own know-how or even their leader's.

Don't try to be a super hero. Be a part of something. Resist emotional temptation—because the adulation that comes with charismatic leading is seductive. And when you stop building a charismatic organization, what you will lose is easy to see: You don't get to be a hero anymore. You'll lose something else, too, though. You'll lose your isolation. Do it together. Ask the right questions. Stuff doesn't have to be so hard."

If what you lose is obvious, then so is what you gain: Give up being a hero and, suddenly, you don't always have to perform like one anymore. Not only don't you have to supply all the momentum, all the know-how, all the emotion, you also don't have to fear that if you stop, so will everything else. When it's all about you —the cult of the charismatic leader—you're separated from others. Being a hero is lonely. Be a part of the organization you've created. You get to be fed. You get to be part of a community. You can be renewed while getting more done.

Find out the following.

• What do they know how to do?
• What knowledge or information do they have?
• Do they know how to get other resources?
• What would be helpful to know?
• What are their special skills?
• Their past experiences?
• Their hopes and fears?
• Their weaknesses as well as their strengths?
• Their goals and their attitudes?

When you find these things out, keep a small record of it so you can use their resources and knowledge and skills and goals when it helps the group.

Pride versus humility and their impact on leadership effectiveness

Let's consider leadership effectiveness and a character trait called pride or ego. Most of us think of pride as self-centeredness, conceit, boastfulness, arrogance, or haughtiness. All of these are elements, but the heart, or core, of this leadership weakener is still missing.

The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward other people. Enmity means “hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition.”1

Pride is essentially competitive in nature. We pit our will against others.

Pride, unchecked, allows desires, appetites, and passions to go unbridled. This can lead to "Do as I say, not as I do." hypocrisy in leaders.

Pride wants us to elevate ourselves above others and diminish them.

IF leadership is influence of others, THEN pride, or ego, can severely reduce leadership effectiveness.

The proud make every person their adversary by pitting their intellects, opinions, works, wealth, talents, or any other measuring device against others. In the words of C. S. Lewis: “Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. … It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest. Once the element of competition has gone, pride has gone.”

The proud often stand in fear of other people’s judgment. “What will people think of me?” weighs heavily. Fear of other’s judgment manifests itself in competition for other’s approval. Our motives for the things we do are where the problem is manifest. This concept is excellently portrayed in a book called Leadership and Self Deception. I strongly recommend this book, especially to newer leaders or to people exposed to ego-centered leaders in their development.

Some prideful people are not so concerned as to whether their wages meet their needs as they are that their wages are more than someone else’s. Their reward is being a cut above the rest. This is the enmity of pride.

When pride has a hold on us, we counter-intuitively lose our independence of thinking. Pride can readily be seen in others but is rarely admitted in ourselves. The Johari window seems to apply here. Some of us consider pride to be a problem of those on the top, looking down at the rest of us.

There is, however, a far more common ailment in many organizations—and that is pride from the bottom looking up. It is manifest in many ways, such as fault finding, gossiping, backbiting, murmuring, envying, coveting, withholding gratitude that might lift another, blaming and being jealous. These behaviors can bring consequences onto organizations just as onto individuals. Leaders need to work to remove these behaviors from their organizational culture. One-on-one discussions are needed, and for some regularly.

Lack of alignment or outright noncompliance with leader initiatives, defiance, disregard, insubordination, intractableness, and recalcitrance all describe essentially a prideful power struggle against someone in authority over us. A proud person hates the fact that someone is above him. He thinks this lowers his position. This highlights scarcity thinking patterns instead of abundance thinking patterns.

Selfishness is one of the more common faces of pride and ego. "What's in it for me?" and “How everything affects me” is the center of all that matters—self-conceit, self-pity, self-fulfillment, self-gratification, and self-seeking. Selfishness has been described well as self-destruction in slow motion. Addiction is a sad example of this self-focus taken to extreme. The news is regularly filled with the consequences of pride with stories of its impact on individuals and organizations. There is little room for it when effective leadership is desired.

To continue, another face of pride is conflict and contention. Arguments, fights, coercive leadership, generation gaps, abuse, and disturbances all fall into this category of pride. Conflict management is typically considered a leadership competency.

Contention in our organizations/families/teams drives many of our organizational members away. Such turnover is expensive to companies and devastating in families. Contention ranges from a hostile spoken word to larger conflicts.

The proud are easily offended and hold grudges. They withhold pardon to keep another in their debt and to justify their injured feelings.

The proud do not receive counsel or correction easily. Defensiveness is used by them to justify and rationalize their frailties and failures.

The proud depend upon the external environment around them to tell them whether they have value or not. Their self-esteem is determined by where they are judged to be on the ladders of organizational success. They feel worthwhile as individuals if the numbers beneath them in achievement, talent, appearence, or intellect are large enough. Pride is ugly. It says, “If you succeed, I am a failure.” It embodies scarcity thinking.

Pride limits or stops growth individually and organizationally. This is a key leadership principle. Look for it and its impact around you to verify this truth.

The proud are not easily taught. They won’t change their minds to accept truths, because to do so implies they have been wrong.

Pride adversely affects all our relationships—between spouses, parent and child, employer and employee, teacher and student, and all people. Our degree of pride determines how we treat other people. How we treat people shows others our degree of pride, especially children.

Think of what pride has cost us in the past and what it is now costing us in our own lives, in children's lives, and the organizations of which we’re a part.

Pride affects all of us at various times and in various degrees.

Pride is a universal problem with humans. The antidote for pride is humility.

• We can choose to be humble by conquering enmity toward other people.
• We can choose to be humble by receiving counsel and chastisement from mentors, leaders, peers, and followers.
• We can choose to be humble by concluding resentment, indignation or anger as a result of a perceived offense, difference or mistake, and ceasing to demand punishment or restitution from those who have offended us.

Humble leadership is more effective leadership. Proud leadership is less effective. Judge this principle for yourself. Compare and contrast all the examples of both you’ve come across in your life. Which type has a stronger positive influence on children, youth, teens, new graduates, mature adults, and on profit and loss statements? Which type has a stronger positive influence on organizations of which you’ve been apart? 

If we know these things, why is it so difficult to consistently do them? Because we’re human. The striving for effective leadership is constant, on-going, and never ending because we often slide back into less effective behaviors. 


This article intentionally pushes the extremes to make the point. Pride and ego hurt leadership. Humility helps leadership. Which will you apply today? Which will you model for children around you today?

Note: This article is based almost entirely on a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson in May 1989. I revised it for the purposes of this site, but the ideas are his, not mine. I have simply noticed how true the principles are in many situations in life since then. I noticed enough to make me want to share the ideas here.

1. Pride, Ezra Taft Benson in May 1989

Effective Learning and Teaching of Leadership from AAAS

One of the documents that I respect is from an organization called The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). This group is an international non-profit organization dedicated to advancing science around the world. Their Project 2061 developed a book called Science for All Americans which includes some real gems (see http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/Chap13.htm) that are largely transferable to the advancing of leadership around the world. I bought their book and recommend it.

Standing on the shoulders of these giants, and leveraging on what they have already done, I will offer some insights on applying what they use for Science instead to Leadership.

For anyone in the business of teaching or training, your experience, like mine, may validate their Chapter 13: EFFECTIVE LEARNING AND TEACHING and the principles identified therein. I'm only listing the ones here that apply. First I'll list their principles and then connect it to leadership learning.

• Learning Is Not Necessarily an Outcome of Teaching
• What Students Learn Is Influenced by Their Existing Ideas
  
  • People have to construct their own meaning regardless of how clearly teachers or books tell them things.
  • To incorporate some new idea, learners must change the connections among the things they already know, or even discard some long-held beliefs about the world.
• Progression in Learning Is Usually From the Concrete to the Abstract
  
  • Young people can learn most readily about things that are tangible and directly accessible to their senses—visual, auditory, tactile, and kinesthetic.
  • With experience, they grow in their ability to understand abstract concepts, reason logically, and generalize.
  • Many people need concrete examples of new ideas throughout life.
  • Concrete experiences are most effective in learning when they occur in the context of some relevant conceptual structure.
  • The difficulties many students have in grasping abstractions are often masked by their ability to remember and recite technical terms that they do not understand.
• People Learn to Do Well Only What They Practice Doing
  
  • If students are expected to apply ideas in novel situations, then they must practice applying them in novel situations.
  • Students acquire desirable skills as they are permitted and encouraged to do those things over and over in many contexts.
• Effective Learning by Students Requires Feedback
  
  • The mere repetition of tasks by students is unlikely to lead to improved skills or keener insights.
  • Learning often takes place best when students have opportunities to express ideas and get feedback from their peers.
  • Feedback ought to be analytical, to be suggestive, and to come at a time when students are interested in it.
  • And then there must be time for students to reflect on the feedback they receive, to make adjustments and to try again—a requirement that is neglected, it is worth noting, by most examinations and assessments.
• Expectations Affect Performance
  
  • Students respond to their own expectations of what they can and cannot learn.
  • If they believe they are able to learn something, they usually make headway.
  • But when they lack confidence, learning eludes them.
  • Students grow in self-confidence as they experience success in learning, just as they lose confidence in the face of repeated failure.
  • Thus, teachers need to provide students with challenging but attainable learning tasks and help them succeed.
  • What is more, students are quick to pick up the expectations of success or failure that others have for them.
• Start With Questions About Nature
  
  • Sound teaching usually begins with questions and phenomena that are interesting and familiar to students, not with abstractions or phenomena outside their range of perception, understanding, or knowledge.
  • Students need to get acquainted with the things around them—including devices, organisms, materials, shapes, and numbers—and to observe them, collect them, handle them, describe them, become puzzled by them, ask questions about them, argue about them, and then to try to find answers to their questions.
• Insist on Clear Expression
  
  • Effective oral and written communication is so important in every facet of life that teachers of every subject and at every level should place a high priority on it for all students.
  • In addition, science teachers should emphasize clear expression, because the role of evidence and the unambiguous replication of evidence cannot be understood without some struggle to express one's own procedures, findings, and ideas rigorously, and to decode the accounts of others.
• Use a team approach
• Do Not Separate Knowing From Finding Out
  
  • Science teaching that attempts solely to impart to students the accumulated knowledge of a field leads to very little understanding and certainly not to the development of intellectual independence and facility. But then, to teach scientific reasoning as a set of procedures separate from any particular substance—"the scientific method," for instance—is equally futile. Science teachers should help students to acquire both scientific knowledge of the world and scientific habits of mind at the same time.
• De-emphasize the Memorization of Technical Vocabulary.
  
  • Understanding rather than vocabulary should be the main purpose of science teaching. However, unambiguous terminology is also important in scientific communication and—ultimately—for understanding. Some technical terms are therefore helpful for everyone, but the number of essential ones is relatively small.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applying AAAS Principles to Leadership

So leveraging what they have already done, let's consider some insights on applying what they use for Science instead to Leadership. What do these transferable AAAS principles tell us about effectively teaching leadership skill to the next generations?

• Perhaps that the use of jargon should be avoided
  
  • Personal opinion: It seems to me that many leadership peddlers have imagined their own set of semantic ‘handles’ for labeling concepts that have been around since people have been around, and many have copyrighted their imaginative new terms so they can sell their advice about things that have not changed much in thousands of years.
• We need to find concrete experiences for new leaders. West Point does a great job of doing this. How can you?
• Leadership is especially one of those areas that has to be experienced, not just taught.
• Make early leadership experiences as tangible as possible.
• Another correlary to people constructing their own meaning is that until learner is ready, there can be no learning. An eastern idea is that if the tea cup (read mind) is already full, how can any more tea (read understanding) go in?
• Mentors or coaches that provide feedback to the relevant conceptual structure can be effective. This can be done in small groups or individually.
• Stories can provide the concrete grounding with context.
• Older learners can start to link their experiences to the theories that explain what occurred and give additional insights.
• Long-held beliefs about the world that may need to be discarded include:
  
  • Poor Examples. I have seen this play out with some people exposed to especially bad leadership examples. There is often a strong emotional response to some behaviors they were exposed to that can pose an obstacle to learning how to lead effectively.
  • Cultural Norms. Another example of this with leadership is cultural norms in various parts of the world. In many places it is expected that a “leader” will use coercion and compulsion, and disrespectful behaviors. Although these may work in the very short term, in the longer term, they are destructive with humans.
• New leaders need opportunities to practice over and over in many contexts.
• Effective learning of leadership requires feedback from a mentor, coach, peers, etc.
• Reflection is a key component of growth, processing what occurred. The Army and other organizations has found this effective with a process called an after action review. Coaches do it with game films.
• Especially with younger leaders in training, we have to find ways to help them believe they can, and scope the experience to have small successes, growing the scope as they increase in confidence and ability. Keep ability linked closely to confidence so it is well rooted.
• Be cautious about over-reaching relative to their abilities so as to not cause a loss of confidence in the face of repeated failure as an unintended consequence. There is an obligation on adults to watch for the younger ones learning leadership.
• Provide leadership students with challenging but attainable learning tasks and help them succeed.
• Project positive expectations in the next increment of scope of learning and practice of leadership.
• Start With Questions About Social Relationships and Leaders they have experienced.
  
  • Sound teaching usually begins with questions and interpersonal situations that are interesting and familiar to students, not with abstractions or situations outside their range of perception, understanding, or knowledge.
  • Students need to get acquainted with the human interactions around them and to observe them, describe them, become puzzled by them, ask questions about them, argue about them, and then to try to find answers to their questions.
• Emphasize clear expression for the same reasons they do for science. It is 100% transferable to leadership.
• Use a Team Approach.
  
  
  • The team provides leadership opportunities amongst each other as they learn in the context of team responsibility, feedback and communication.
• Do Not Separate Knowing From Finding Out.
  
  
  • Leadership teaching that attempts solely to impart to students the accumulated body of knowledge leads to very little understanding and certainly not to the development of intellectual independence and facility.
  • Help students to acquire both leadership knowledge and leadership thinking (habits of mind). Life is too dynamic for simplistic formulas or models to work in all situations. The goal is to anticipate and plan, but then to adapt depending on the situation.
  • De emphasize the Memorization of Technical Vocabulary. Understanding should supersede leadership terminology. Some technical terms are helpful for everyone, but the number of essential ones is relatively small. Jargon is less important in leadership than in science.
  • Link new concepts to their existing ones.

So there you have it. The application of concepts intended for other fields of endeavor applied to the challenge of teaching leadership to the next generation. Thanks to AAAS for their excellent work.

Who You Are Matters, Become Better

Example, becoming, and knowing yourself are crucial elements to leading effectively. You must know yourself and be aware of your impact on others. You have enormous responsibility. You do make a difference, mainly because of who you are.

Be comfortable with yourself first. Stephen Covey talks about private victories before public victories. Read about this and apply it. If you are not comfortable with yourself, you will tend to be a control freak, needing a constant reminder that you are in charge. Find ways to laugh. People don't want to work for someone who doesn't laugh. It also tends to correlate with people who are comfortable with themselves.

Communicate by example. Behavioral scientists call it modeling. Others recognize it simply, as setting the example. Whatever we call it, there is no substitute for it in effective leadership.

The most important influence you have on those you lead is the example you set. Your example provides indirect influence in all that you do. You are on stage, so to speak, all the time. Your character (integrity, maturity, and abundance mentality) identifies to your followers whether or not you are trustworthy.

Organizations tend to reflect their leaders. Have high standards in appearance and bearing. Be a role model.

The following poem applies to setting the example.

I'd rather see a sermon than hear one any day.
I'd rather one should walk with me, than merely show the way.
The eyes is a better pupil and more willing than the ear;
Fine counsel is confusing, but example is always clear.
The best of all the preachers are the people who live their creed.
For to see the good in action, is what everybody needs.
I can say, I'll learn how to do it if you let me see it done.
I can watch your hand in action though your tongue too fast may run.
Although the lectures you deliver may be very wise and true,
I'd rather learn my lessons by observing what you do;
for I may misunderstand you, and the fine advice you give,
but it's no misunderstanding how you act and how you live.
~ Author unknown

Treat people as volunteers even if they work for money. Yes there is often payment for services provided in many organizations, but there is typically more involved. Of the many areas that influence their decisions and reduce organizational turnover, right now I’d like to discuss one. What we have become.

Knowing, doing, and being are all important, but who we’ve become is often easier to ignore, pretending it is not relevant to our success and our happiness in life. Becoming also happens so slowly as to not easily notice it happening.

Followers, whether paid or volunteers, don’t decide to continue providing their labor and loyalty to us only because the sum total of our acts—what we have done. They also judge us on the final effect of our acts and thoughts—what we have become. For improved follower satisfaction, it is not enough for you just to go through the motions of leadership. You may skimp by, and they may stay if better opportunities aren't right there, but your organization/family/team could be so much stronger and better able to weather difficult challenges together.

A story may better illustrate this principle to help communicate what I mean.

A wealthy father knew that if he were to bestow his wealth upon a child who had not yet developed the needed wisdom and stature, the inheritance would probably be wasted. The father said to his child:

“All that I have I desire to give you—not only my wealth, but also my position and standing among men. That which I have I can easily give you, but that which I am you must obtain for yourself. You will qualify for your inheritance by learning what I have learned and by living as I have lived. I will give you the laws and principles by which I have acquired my wisdom and stature. Follow my example, mastering as I have mastered, and you will become as I am, and all that I have will be yours.”

As an aside, there was a 2007 movie about this idea called the Ultimate Gift, starring Abigail Breslin, Brian Dennehy, Bill Cobbs, Drew Fuller, Ali Hillis, Lee Meriwether and James Garner that might make such conversations easier to get started with a child.

.

To believe and say is to know and to declare. The more effective way of leading others challenges us to do and to become.

You can also be more effective in leading your child/followers/employees as you reduce your concentration on statistical measures of actions and focus more on what the people are now and what they are striving to become. This may not show up in official performance appraisals, but they can tell if you are considering these things about them.

Caring is not only an act but a condition or state of being. It is far easier to ask for stronger performance when they know you care about them and when who you’ve become elicits collaboration and respect. Get to know them. Have genuine interest and concern. Be natural, friendly, and warm. See their potential. Commit the time and effort to know those you lead.

• Understand what makes them tick.
• Learn what is important to them in life.

Be interested in the school/work and non-school/work lives of those you lead. Ask about their plans, problems, and desires. Know about their concerns and questions. Be available for listening to personal problems. Monitor workloads and show appreciation for extra effort.

Who you are matters. Know yourself and seek personal improvement in areas that you need to develop. Become better.

Note: This article is based largely on a talk given by Dallin H. Oaks in 2000. I revised it for the purposes of this site, but the ideas are his, not mine.

Set High Expectations

Do not be seduced by lowering expectations. Yes, that is the path of initial least resistance. It may even be less difficult for you the adult, but a much better path in the longer term is to clearly communicate your high expectations of the child to them directly.

Effective leaders don't aim for the minimums as goals. Of course, everything can't be the number one priority either.

As the adult, you must exercise judgment concerning which expectations are most important. Your child is sometimes required to perform many tasks that are not critical to their development as leaders. While some of these are extremely important, others require only a minimum effort. Striving for perfection in every area, regardless of how trivial, can quickly work an individual or even a team to death. On the other hand, the fact that a task isn't a first priority doesn't excuse a sloppy performance. Caring adults make sure the expectation of the child fits the task's importance.

Your values influence the child's behavior because the child may use them to decide between alternatives. You have the power to influence the child's values by setting the example and recognizing behavior that supports those values. You are the ethical standard bearer. Understand and be personally committed to the values that make leadership effective.

Confidence

The amount of confidence leaders possess affects the way they do their job. Lack of confidence in themselves or their followers may result in over supervision.

In contrast, confidence begets appropriate delegation with less direct supervision. Close supervision can be good where the aim is to develop people, but may retard the development of initiative, so vital for long term successful results.

Provide opportunities for children to gain confidence from their increasing capacity, not just feelings alone.

Help Kids Develop Improved People Skills

First of all, be an example. Help the child to...

Be approachable, be easy to talk to. Spend the extra effort to put other people at ease. Where needed, be warm, pleasant, and gracious. The Japanese people set a great example for graciousness. We can all improve this.

Be sensitive to and patient with the interpersonal anxieties of others in the organization you lead. Build rapport well. Listen well. Get informal and incomplete information in time to do something about it.

Show compassion. Sincerity is crucial. Genuinely care about people. Demonstrate concern about their problems. Be available and ready to help. For this to be effective, you have to demonstrate real empathy with the joys and pains of others. Children do this well from birth. It is trained out of some by the adults around them.

Stay cool under pressure. Being composed means not becoming defensive or irritated when times are tough. Act mature so others can count on you to hold things together during tough situations. Consider how well you handle stress. Are you easily knocked off balance by the unexpected? Be careful to not show frustration when resisted or blocked. You can be a settling influence a crisis.

Laugh a little. Develop and use a positive and constructive sense of humor. People are more at ease with those who can laugh at themselves and with others. Avoid crude humor. Be appropriately funny, using humor to ease tension.

Improve your interpersonal savvy. Relate well to all kinds of people, at all levels of your organization and other organizations. Develop the ability to build appropriate rapport. Relationships are so important. Be able to build constructive and effective relationships. Use diplomacy and tact, diffusing high-tension situations comfortably.

Effective leaders are patient. They are tolerant with people and processes. Listen and check your facts before acting. Do your best to understand the people and the data before making judgments and acting so you don't have to back track as much. Waits for others to catch up before acting where possible. Be aware of pacing. Some people can handle faster changes more easily than others. Follow establish process where appropriate.

Be open with others. Be easy to get to know for those who interact with you regularly. Admit mistakes and shortcomings. This may sound like weakness, but people appreciate the ability to acknowledge your own faults. Be open about personal beliefs and feelings without being pushy.

Harsh or tyrannical treatment

The following quote is memorized by all classes of cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. Read it as applied to children, not soldiers, a youth team, not an army. The principle is the same though the audience different.

The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be
gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more
likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and to give
commands in such manner and such a tone of voice to inspire in the soldier no feeling
but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to
excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing
with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander.
He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for
himself, while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward others, especially his
inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.



Major General John M. Schofield
Address to the United States Corps of Cadets, 11 August 1879


Proposed youth team version (with apologies to Schofield):
The discipline which makes the players of a free team reliable in the game is not to be
gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more
likely to destroy than to make an team. It is possible to impart instruction and to give
commands in such manner and such a tone of voice to inspire in the player no feeling
but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to
excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing
with teammates or players springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the team captain.
He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for
himself, while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward others, especially his
players, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.

Demonstrating Respect/Choice versus Force/Coercion

Most business and organizational leaders treat their customers respectfully. So can you think of any business leaders that use harshness, force or coercion with their customers? The first example that comes to mind is organized crime. We could probably look through law suit records to find other examples. Why do the majority use with customers behaviors in the respect domain rather than the coercion and force domain? Perhaps their experiences have proven interactions with customers more effective this way? Adults working with children to teach leadership will also find respect far more effective than force and coercion.

So with the same principle in mind, now lets change the perspective from customers to staff. How do most business and organizational leaders treat their own staff? Is respect or coercion more effective in leading others, whether kids or adults? What types of behaviors are involved and what are the consequences? This article discusses these issues in an effort to persuade leaders to use more effective means to get their ends. Let’s address the two ends of the spectrum clearly, allowing that there are gradients in between and that leaders don’t always stay in one area.

Regardless of the choice of using respect or coercion, a required condition is that you clearly articulate what performance is desired. This condition is a whole other subject that is beyond the scope of this article.
So you stated what you want the other person to do. Let’s start with a look at the force/coercion domain since human history is so filled with examples of this type of leader behavior. In this domain, let’s look at (a) the behaviors typically demonstrated, (b) the results to the individual and to the organization, and (c) the speed of occurrence. It has been said that many people, after noticing a real or seemingly real differential in power, unfortunately tend towards force and coercion. Compare your own experiences to this statement. What does the child see?

The types of behaviors typically observed in the fear / coercion domain include:
•    Threatening. Business leaders can threaten to terminate their job. Adults threaten children with any number of negative consequences. To be clear, threatening is the act of intimidating a another person to make them do something.
•    Although not seen often in the commercial world, physical force is sometimes used. Tragically, this happens more with adults and children than in the business world.
•    Another means of force is criticism, ridicule, and blame. Verbal abuse or harassment includes yelling at people in lower hierarchical position than the leader, regardless of their age. This can include taunting the other person, baiting them to get frustrated and retort emotionally (the body’s  stress response enters alarm stage and releases adrenaline which triggers the fight-or-flight response), and then using ‘boss’ position power to correct the person for inappropriate or overly 'emotional' response. Perhaps even giving them a lecture on emotional intelligence. This type of force includes criticism and sarcasm. Although in some social cultures sarcasm may seem benign, it is defined as witty language used to convey insults or scorn. Sarcasm inherently insults. It is especially damaging to any relationship or emotional bond between a coaching adult and a child.
•    Another use of force to compel compliance is verbally demeaning others, intentionally inflicting injury or discomfort on another person through words or name calling.
•    Another use of force is bullying. This is a form of harassment perpetrated by an abusive leader who possesses, or perceives themselves to possess, more power (physical, organizational, or social). Bullying is repeated, health-harming mistreatment, verbal abuse, or conduct which is threatening, humiliating, intimidating, or that interferes with work or some combination of these.
•    Subtle methods of coercion include manipulation. For example, parents sometimes do this with guilt trips. Although effective in short term, manipulation is not conducive to rearing the most capable adults or future adult leaders.

Let’s now consider the results of such leader behavior choices and how effective these behavior choices are. Let’s consider first, individual consequences, and second, organizational consequences.

Individual Consequences
•    Behavior can be forced in the short run. Force and coercion do typically provide immediate responses. That is why some people in leadership positions use it. "Jump when I say jump means now." Force can ensure that people will behave in a certain way in the short term, but will cause resentment and provoke resistance.  Leaders may employ it briefly or consistently. However in the long run, it always proves less effective than respect.
•    Force and coercion wears people down over time. Individuals who are persistently subjected to abusive behavior are at risk of stress related illness. The body’s second stage of stress response is called resistance. If the stressor persists, the recipient’s body attempts various means of coping with the stress. Although their body may try to adapt to the strains or demands of the environment, their body cannot keep this up indefinitely, so its resources are gradually depleted. Exhaustion is the body’s next stage of stress response. Here, all of the body's resources are eventually depleted and the body is unable to maintain normal function. If extended in duration, long term damage may result as the capacity of glands, especially the adrenal gland, and the immune system are exhausted and function is impaired resulting in illnesses such as ulcers, depression, diabetes, trouble with the digestive system or even cardiovascular problems. We don't want this for adult followers or for children learning leadership.
•    Force and coercion erodes confidence, increases anxiety, discourages, brings despair, aimlessness, doubt and disappointment, all of which may cause recipients to give up. Children are especially susceptible to giving up.
•    At a minimum coercion frustrates people of all ages. Ask employees. Ask teenaged children in an overly controlling home environment.
•    Negative behaviors increase uncertainty and keep organizational members off balance. Children need security for normal development. Even adults tend not to like constant uncertainty.
•    Leads to a decreased sense of control.
•    It reduces dignity as human beings.
•    Insulting or putting down others or belittling others causes “hidden hurts” that break down self-esteem and cause emotional distress.
•    Great damage is done through criticism, blaming, and fault-finding. A constant stream of criticism and disapproval sours relationships between people and organizations.
•    Verbal abuse is force and no less damaging psychologically than physical force.

Organizational Consequences
•    Just like stressors that wear down the individual’s system over time, the same principle applies to organizations in their life cycle. Reinforcing loops occur, to use systems thinking terms, that negatively spiral into a worse and worse situation for the organization.
•    In businesses, professional managers have an obligation to the shareholders to improve the return on investment. Intentionally or unintentionally draining the organization of its valuable human resources is not what backers / investors / sponsors expect of leaders in organizations they support.
•    In groups or teams of children the effect is often similar but faster. Additionally, with children there is a chance that some of them may think this example is the 'right' way to lead, causing future misery for others that have to follow them. Adults tend to know when a person is a jerk.
•    Interpersonal goodwill stocks get depleted with staff and potentially with customers. Just as lying becomes hard to manage individually and eventually spills over into other areas that were not intended, so too does force and coercion tactics in leadership behaviors.
•    Such negative behaviors hinder personal growth of organizational members. The rate of change (flow) of this consequence is gradual, so may not be noticed until the stocks are depleted enough to impact the business or organization.
•    Force and coercive behaviors from the leader conditions people, systematically desensitizatizing others throughout the organization. This increases the chances that this type of negative behavior will spread further in the organization like a cancer.
•    It weakens appropriate social skills in the recipients and the leader dishing this out, potentially impacting customers because people tend to perform in the crucial moment the same way they’ve practiced performing. Some customer-facing roles may inadvertently treat customers as the leader treats organizational members. Customers can walk away, reducing repeat business.
•    Weakened social skills in children undermine their future leadership effectiveness.
•    Other organizational members tend to follow the leader's behavioral example. They turn around and use coercive power on those with less power than themselves. This result is perhaps an unintended consequence. When others begin to perpetuate negative behaviors, the system reinforces and grows this type of behavior. It is well known in the field of management that “people rarely rise above their leadership.” This consequence is also described by systems thinking as a negative reinforcing loop.
•    Such behaviors result in higher turn-over in the organizational membership. There are typically costs associated with that turnover, even in volunteer or youth organizations. At the minimum, the organization has to retrain replacements, providing inconsistent organizational capacity and taking time and attention away from growing the business or accomplishing the collective purposes of the organization. Again, backers / investors / sponsors / and parents generally select the leaders to advance the organization.
•    The organization is not likely to get the best from the people participating. Individual’s discretionary energy gets applied elsewhere where the psychological rewards are higher.
•    As word begins to travel about the negative behavior, the organization may not be able to attract top talent.
•    Backers / investors / sponsors / parents may take their money / influence / support elsewhere if the leader doesn’t retain their confidence. Alternatively, these groups may replace the leader outright.
•    The receiving person will likely build up deep resentment and anger over a period of time towards the leader and the organization. Fear and insecurity may keep these feelings from surfacing immediately. Ultimately, it creates a very fragile organization which the receiving person may tolerate as long as possible and then just leave in despair or anger. If the people do stay with the organization, these deep feelings take a long time to heal with consistently improved leader behavior. The principle here is the law of the harvest. You reap what you sow. Another applicable expression is “An ounce of prevention or a pound of cure.” Many people are slow to forgive leaders for such behaviors even when the leader wasn’t aware of the impact of their behavior. It may necessitate replacement of the leader for the organization to recover from these behaviors if they were egregious.
•    Such a situation is a fertile breeding ground for depression and apathy on the one hand, and for subtle, hidden retaliation on the other.  Neither situation is conducive to an organization getting its best results regardless of the metrics employed to define success (e.g. financial, key performance indicators, market share, number of transactions, etc.)
•    The leader sincerely may not perceive a problem, and the person they lead is too timid or frightened to make the problem clear until the working relationship becomes irreparable.
•    In the USA, some high school students subjected to such behaviors have snapped and brought weapons to the workplace/school and shot others in retaliation. This may not apply to other organizations, but it points out the violent response that can be provoked.

How fast do these results happen? It differs. The compliance and submission behaviors happen quickly. The negative consequences, however, arrive little-by-little, not all at once. This delay in consequence feedback actually can encourage continued use of negative behaviors. It is analogous to spending the principle of your investments in addition to the interest. You seemingly get what you want in the short term, but leave yourself in a worse position in the long term. No one may see the “hidden” damage until it has grown to the point of causing second and third order effects.

Unfortunately, force and coercion behaviors do work. History is full of examples that testify to this. The catch, so to speak, is the timing. These behaviors work for short periods of time only. Because they seem to work quickly, they are seductive methods to many leaders. But the evidence in the turnover rates, the stories told by people leaving, (including children leaving their homes early) told to anyone who will listen, and objective observation all indicates that when you shift your perspective to the longer term, force and coercion are not effective because of the negative consequences they bring. Some leaders seem to get away with it because they use these negative behaviors for a short while and then move on to other organizations, leaving the legacy of negative consequences for the next leader that takes their place.

So if the less effective behaviors work in the short term, but the consequences may not seem to justify their use, what else is there? Let us consider the respect domain at the other end of the behavioral spectrum. Similarly, let’s look at (a) the behaviors typically demonstrated, (b) the results to the individual and to the organization, and (c) the speed of occurrence.

The Respect Domain

Respect as I mean it is not the same as obedience or submission to the leader’s will. I’m talking about means to an end, not the ends. Obedience is typically the end sought by leaders demanding respect. Typically ends are consequences of the means. Behaviors in this domain are not typically accompanied by immediate responses, but are more of an investment for a desired future state. Leaders that only care about expediency in the short term may not foresee or visualize the future state. Leaders whose formative experiences involved the force and coercion domain, by observation or as recipients of such behaviors, also may have no basis from which to trust that respect domain behaviors can lead to a better future for individuals and the organization.

The types of behaviors typically observed in the respect / choice domain include:
•    They get results.
•    Set a positive example in all that you do. Leaders communicate much by example. Intended or not, example tells others much about you. Behavioral scientists call it modeling. Others recognize it simply, as setting the example. The most important influence you have on those you lead is the example you set. Your example provides indirect influence in all that you do. You are on stage all the time. People are watching you whether they tell you so or not. Your character (integrity, maturity, and abundance mentality) identifies to your suppliers, those you lead, those to whom you are accountable (management, board, owners, parents, etc.) and your customers, whether or not you are trustworthy.
•    Clearly articulating performance standards.
•    Holding people accountable for meeting those standards or commitments.
•    Leaders and members are courteous and polite while applying accountability.
•    Honoring organizational members. Because this is less common, it may not be understood what is meant. To clarify, consider how Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mother Teresa showed respect towards others and were shown respect in return by many. Honoring leaders care about those in their stewardship. Those they lead choose to contribute because the leader is honored by them.
•    When people perceive their leaders to be honorable, they more easily trust them, indeed can be inspired by them, are more likely to engage or believe deeply in the goals communicated by them, and are more open to being led by them.
•    Honor (from the Latin word honos, honoris) is the evaluation of a person's trustworthiness and social status based on that individual's words and actions, which are the physical manifestation of their thoughts. Accordingly, individuals are assigned worth and stature based on the harmony of their actions, code of honor, and that of the society at large.
•    The leader provides direction through modeling and vision, often motivating through caring and inspiration, to build complementary teams based in mutual respect. To seed mutual respect throughout their organization, the leader must start with themselves and their own behavior towards all around them.
•    Respect is not about overlooking lack of performance so the followers feel good. It is not wishy-washy or softie. It involves setting high expectations for performance, and checking that the performance met the standard or that it is done again until it meets the standard. Respecting the dignity of others does not mean getting all soft and mushy or allowing staff to behave in inappropriate ways without consequence. Balancing both tasks and relationships with the people involved is the leader’s job. Both need attention. All task and no relationships makes for a sour place that people tend to leave. All relationship and no task will surely disappoint backers / investors / sponsors who expect collective results led by their appointed leader.
•    In the respect domain, one pattern in use is (a) preparing the situation to support the leadership task, (b) inviting those they lead to make commitments to accomplish specific ends using their knowledge and skills, and (c) following up to help them grow and to ensure the task is accomplished.
•    Leaders in the respect domain use sustained proactive influence.
•    Often those they lead believe in the same organizational values.
•    Leaders invite contribution.
•    Leaders provide guidance, listen, and respond, all aimed at helping the individual develop self-government.
•    Leaders in the respect domain offer a constructive alternative if a critique of another’s plan is necessary.
•    Leaders in the respect domain tend to know their staff and look out for their wellbeing. They care for them. They behaviors indicate they value other human beings. They tend to learn and understand what makes others tick. These leaders tend to learn what is important in the lives of those they lead. These leaders tend to commit the time and effort to know those they lead.
•    Respect domain leaders are sought out for advice and counsel. The small matters accumulate to shape how they are perceived by others.
•    Leaders hold the individual accountable for their work.
•    Leaders express adequate appreciation.
•    Leaders are willing to be presided over by the next level of leaders, or by backers / investors / sponsors. They don’t consider themselves “above the law” or above the performance standards set for those they lead.
•    Enabling organizational members. This includes anticipating needs and make them aware of available resources, not doing it for them. It means they keep staff informed so those they lead know enough context to helps them make decisions and execute plans within the leader’s intent. These leaders tend to encourage initiative within specific boundaries. To build their bench strength, whenever possible these leaders tend to explain the reasons for their decisions. Those they lead learn from these explanations in context and can eventually anticipate mostly correctly what the leader would have them do in various situations.
•    Leaders in the respect domain often try to develop a sense of responsibility in those they lead. Delegation shows trust. They tend to give challenges and responsibilities their staff feel they can handle. They give them more when they show they are ready. They teach, coach, and counsel. They appropriately supervise (not too much, or too little) and evaluate.
•    In showing respect, you often get respect in return. This is much more effective than demanding respect (or perhaps incorrectly equating respect with obedience or submission).
•    Leaders demonstrate interpersonal tact and diplomacy.
•    They create a positive environment.
•    Leaders that form bonds of trust with those they lead are more effective with these people. Trust lubricates most human interactions. Who they are and what they do helps form personal bonds with those around them. Their actions are perceived as virtuous conduct, and honor is given by those they lead and influence.
•    Although not always the case, leaders can direct organizations they lead to stand for something good so the members feel more dignified, and elevated  above their own self interest to a higher purpose outside themselves, worthy of commitment, giving additional meaning to their individual lives and energy to the collective purpose. This evokes the old story of the two workers toiling outside of a huge new structure. The first one was exhausted and disengaged and uninspired. "What are you working on?" he was asked by a passerby. "I'm cutting some stones," was the curt reply. The other worker was then asked the same question. "Sorry, can't speak too long," was the passionate response, "I'm in the process of building a cathedral."

Let’s now consider the results of such leader behavior choices and how effective these behavior choices are. Let’s consider first, individual consequences, and second, organizational consequences.

Individual Consequences
•    Builds people up. Strengthens people. Nurtures people.
•    Organizational bench strength is increased over time.
•    Human goodwill stocks are increased.
•    Enhanced confidence.
•    Dignity as human beings strengthened.
•    A respectful, sensitive attitude often brings a positive response from the other person.

Organizational Consequences
•    Attracts more Backers / Investors / Sponsors that bring their money / influence / support to the organization.
•    Reputation spreads making it easier to attract top talent.
•    Increases satisfaction and engagement. The organization gets more from the people. They apply more of their discretionary energy (analogous to discretionary money) toward organizational goals.
•    Organizational capacity is strengthened as staff grows individually in knowledge and skill.
•    Effectively led organizations can respond better and faster to environmental shocks from external forces.

Speed of occurence (system flows)
•    Little-by-little, Not all at once.
•    Because it takes time to see the return on investment, some discard these behaviors as non-effective for them personally.

In conclusion, leadership effectiveness is an results-multiplier for organizations. All of the parts are more than the whole. Well led organizations can get more done than those not led effectively. Allowing time for the returns on the positive behaviors to feedback is worth it over longer periods of time.  Leaders have control over their choices only, not the consequences that follow those choices. Regardless of what cultural background you come from and whether force or coercion behaviors are acceptable to others in the larger organization or society around you, you can be more effective with almost all human beings by recognizing their worth and treating them with respect. Holding people accountable for their commitments/assignments is another topic, and this can be done firmly with respect.

Mindset - Be sure you encourage kids toward 'growth' not 'born talent' with its fixed limits

In a recent article in Business Week, John Ryan states, "Recently I've enjoyed reading about the work of Stanford University psychology professor Carol Dweck, author of Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Her research explores and explains questions that have interested me for years as a leader. Essentially, she has found that people generally exhibit what she calls either "growth mindsets" or "fixed mindsets." Those with growth mindsets believe they can get better at what they do, that they have reservoirs of untapped potential. They realize that promise by working hard and making incremental improvements over time, whether they are athletes, or writers, or surgeons. Those with fixed mindsets, however, believe they can only go as far as their natural abilities will take them. They think talent, rather than hard work, is the fundamental component of success. They are often scared to challenge themselves because they are terribly afraid of failure—which, in their minds, is an indictment of their abilities rather than an opportunity to learn and do better next time"
 
Interestingly, a similar concept is covered in the Talent Code, quoting a study that showed that kids that were told, "Great work!" or "Wow, you really worked hard at this!" did much better than those told "You're so smart." for similar reasons. If the child told they are smart encounters more difficult challenges, they can easily jump to the conclusion that they are not smart after all, instead of improving like we do with any other skill using practice and working at it until we improve.

So to adults involved with teaching leadership to children, be sure to focus on how hard they worked and point out their progress. That is how we all improve. This approach can also help reduce the chance the child will feel they've peaked in their talent, and thus stop their growth. As we try to see the young person 10 years into the future, it may be easier to see their potential and to look beyond the foibles of their current age and abilities.

Then as we actively work to make the environment around them support their growth, they will grow.

Alumni looking for way to train new MBAs in leadership skills

I have a classmate from university that is an executive at a company and is now looking for ways to train newly minted MBAs in leadership.

This blog is not where I will talk about that, but I will say that if you start teaching them as children they will be more capable as adults with MBAs.