Gibbs 1988 reflective cycle book

Leadership Book Review With Gibbs Cycle

Book review with Gibbs cycle

book in attachment

I added gibbs cycle definition and ' book ' (The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership) in attachments. I also added structure of paper in attachment.

Table of content and separating 'description' part to purpose, questions, information, concepts, assumptions, inferences, points of view, implications are important after that use other parts of 'gibbs cycle' such as feeling, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, action plan.(check photo in attachment)

The review should be between 22 - 25 pages. Apa style with references.

You should use some direct quotation from book which is fine for similarity score but not too much.

Plagraism is most important thing because they will check this article in turnitin database with similarity score. This is most important thing. No plagraism at all.

Use gibbs cycle to analyze this article. I added research about gibbs cycle.

I need this assignment in 6 days . You have 144 hours to complete this assignment otherwise it will be garbage for me.

Introduction

1. The Law of the Lid Leadership Ability Determines a Person’s Level of Effectiveness

Brothers Dick and Maurice came as close as they could to living the American Dream— without making it. Instead a guy named Ray did it with the company they had founded. It happened because they didn’t know the Law of the Lid.

2. The Law of Influence The True Measure of Leadership Is Influence—Nothing More, Nothing

Less Her husband had everything: wealth, privilege, position, and a royal title. Yet instead of him, Princess Diana won over the whole world. Why? She understood the Law of Influence.

3. The Law of Process Leadership Develops Daily, Not in a Day

Theodore Roosevelt helped create a world power, won a Nobel Peace Prize, and became president of the United States. But today you wouldn’t even know his name if he hadn’t known the Law of Process.

4. The Law of Navigation Anyone Can Steer the Ship, But It Takes a Leader to Chart the Course

Using a fail-safe compass, Scott led his team of adventurers to the end of the earth—and to inglorious deaths. They would have lived if only he, their leader, had known the Law of Navigation.

5. The Law of E. F. Hutton When the Real Leader Speaks, People Listen

Young John went into his first board meeting thinking he was in charge. He soon found out who the real leader was and learned the Law of E. F. Hutton in the process.

6. The Law of Solid Ground Trust Is the Foundation of Leadership

If only Robert McNamara had known the Law of Solid Ground, the War in Vietnam—and everything that happened at home because of it—might have turned out differently.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 3/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

7. The Law of Respect People Naturally Follow Leaders Stronger Than Themselves

The odds were stacked against her in just about every possible way, but thousands and thousands of people called her their leader. Why? Because they could not escape the power of the Law of Respect.

8. The Law of Intuition Leaders Evaluate Everything With a Leadership Bias

How is it that time after time Norman Schwarzkopf was able to sense problems while other leaders around him got blindsided? The answer lies in the factor that separates the great leaders from the merely good ones: the Law of Intuition.

9. The Law of Magnetism Who You Are Is Who You Attract

Why are the Dallas Cowboys, once revered as “America’s Team,” now so often reviled and the subject of controversy? The Law of Magnetism makes it clear.

10. The Law of Connection Leaders Touch a Heart Before They Ask for a Hand

Elizabeth Dole has mastered it. If husband Bob had done the same, he might have become the forty-third president of the United States. It’s called the Law of Connection.

11. The Law of the Inner Circle A Leader’s Potential Is Determined By Those Closest to Him

John already used time management to the fullest, but he wanted to accomplish more. His priorities were already leveraged to the hilt, and there were no more minutes in a day! How did he go to a new level? He practiced the Law of the Inner Circle.

12. The Law of Empowerment Only Secure Leaders Give Power to Others

Henry Ford is considered an icon of American business for revolutionizing the automobile industry. So what caused him to stumble so badly that his son feared Ford Motor Company would go out of business? He was held captive by the Law of Empowerment.

13. The Law of Reproduction It Takes a Leader to Raise Up a Leader

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 4/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

What do the top NFL head coaches have in common? You can trace their leadership ability to just a handful of mentors. That’s also true for hundreds of CEOs. More than 80 percent of all leaders are the result of the Law of Reproduction.

14. The Law of Buy-In People Buy Into the Leader, Then the Vision

The first time Judy Estrim started up a company, it took her six months to find the money. The second time it took her about six minutes. What made the difference? The Law of Buy- In.

15. The Law of Victory Leaders Find a Way for the Team to Win

What saved England from the Blitz, broke apartheid’s back in South Africa, and won the Chicago Bulls multiple world championships? In all three cases the answer is the same. Their leaders lived by the Law of Victory.

16. The Law of the Big Mo Momentum Is a Leader’s Best Friend

Jaime Escalante has been called the best teacher in America. But his teaching ability is only half the story. His and Garfield High School’s success came because of the Law of the Big Mo.

17. The Law of Priorities Leaders Understand that Activity Is Not Necessarily Accomplishment

Jack Welch took a company that was already flying high and rocketed it into the stratosphere. What did he use as the launching pad? The Law of Priorities, of course.

18. The Law of Sacrifice A Leader Must Give Up to Go Up

He was one of the nation’s most vocal critics on government interference in business. So why did Lee Iacocca go before Congress with his hat in his hand for loan guarantees? He did it because he understood the Law of Sacrifice.

19. The Law of Timing When to Lead Is as Important as What to Do and Where to Go

It got him elected president of the United States. It also cost him the presidency. What is it? Something that may stand between you and your ability to lead effectively. It’s called the Law of Timing.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 5/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

20. The Law of Explosive Growth To Add Growth, Lead Followers—To Multiply, Lead Leaders

How did a man in a developing country take his organization from 700 people to more than 14,000 in only seven years? He did it using leader’s math. That’s the secret of the Law of Explosive Growth.

21. The Law of Legacy A Leader’s Lasting Value Is Measured By Succession

When many companies lose their CEO, they go into a tailspin. But when Roberto Goizueta died, Coca-Cola didn’t even hiccup. Why? Before his death, Goizueta lived by the Law of Legacy.

Conclusion FOREWORD

YOU ARE GOING TO LOVE THIS BOOK—WHETHER IT IS THE FIRST LEADERSHIP BOOK IN YOUR COLLECTION OR THE FIFTIETH—BECAUSE YOU CAN IMMEDIATELY APPLY THE LIFE-CHANGING PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES IN YOUR PERSONAL, FAMILY AND BUSINESS LIFE. THERE IS NO “IVORY TOWER” THEORY IN THIS BOOK. INSTEAD, IT IS LOADED WITH UNCHANGING LEADERSHIP PRINCIPLES CONFIRMED BY THE REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCES OF JOHN MAXWELL AND THE MANY PEOPLE HE WRITES ABOUT.

The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership is a powerful, definitive statement of the timeless laws you simply must follow if you want to be a great leader—at home, on the job, in church, or whenever you are called on to lead.

In each chapter, John goes straight to the heart of a profound leadership law, showing you through the successes and failures of others how you can apply the law in your life. And you can apply each of the laws. If you’re a willing student, you can learn the 21 laws and put them into practice.

What a priceless treasure leadership authority John Maxwell offers as he boils everything he’s learned about leadership down to such a usable form! Once you apply these leadership laws, you’ll notice leaders all around you putting into action (or breaking) the Law of W.F. Hutton, the Law of the Big Mo, and the rest.

I heartily recommend The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership. It is helpful and easy to read, yet profound in its depth and clarity. It’s loaded with hope, direction, encouragement, and specific procedures. It’s principle-based with precise, clear-cut directions to provide you with the necessary tools to fulfill your leadership role.

If you are new to leadership, this book will jump-start your leadership career. If you are an experienced leader with blue-chip credentials this book will make you an even better leader. It’s

od—very good. go

Zig Ziglar Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 6/135

tagapayo@gmail.com

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I’D LIKE TO THANK THE MANY LEADERS WHO HELPED ME WHILE I WAS WORKING ON THIS BOOK. FROM INJOY: DICK PETERSON, DAVE SUTHERLAND, DAN REILAND, TIM ELMORE, AND DENNIS WORDEN. FROM THOMAS NELSON: ROLF ZETTERSTEN, RON LAND, MIKE HYATT, VICTOR OLIVER, AND ROB BIRKHEAD.

I must say thank you to Brian Hampton, my managing editor at Nelson, for his patience and assistance as we worked through the manuscript.

I also want to thank my assistant, Linda Eggers, whose great heart and incredible service make me a better leader.

Finally, I want to thank Charlie Wetzel, my writer, and his wife, Stephanie. This book would t have been written without their help. no

INTRODUCTION I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF TEACHING LEADERSHIP ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND AROUND THE GLOBE, AND I OFTEN GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE ATTENDING ONE OF MY CONFERENCES FOR A SECOND, THIRD, OR EVEN FOURTH TIME. AT A RECENT CONFERENCE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES, A MAN IN HIS LATE FIFTIES WHOM I HAD MET SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE CAME UP AND SPOKE TO ME DURING A BREAK. HE GRABBED MY HAND AND SHOOK IT VIGOROUSLY. “LEARNING LEADERSHIP HAS CHANGED MY LIFE,” HE SAID. “BUT I SURE WISH I HAD HEARD YOU TWENTY YEARS AGO.”

“No, you don’t,” I answered with a chuckle. “What do you mean?” he said. “I would have achieved so much more! If I had known these

leadership principles twenty years ago, I’d be in a totally different place in life. Your leadership laws have fueled my vision. They’ve given me the desire to learn more about leadership and accomplish my goals. If I’d learned this twenty years ago, I could have done some things that I had never even dreamed possible.”

“Maybe you would have,” I answered. “But twenty years ago, I wouldn’t have been able to teach them to you. It has taken me my entire lifetime to learn and apply the laws of leadership to my life.”

As I write this, I am fifty-one years old. I’ve spent more than thirty years in professional leadership positions. I’ve founded four companies. And I focus my time and energy on doing what makes a positive impact in the lives of people. But I’ve also made a lot of mistakes along the way—more than most people I know. Every success and every failure has been an invaluable lesson in what it means to lead.

As I travel and speak to organizations and individuals, people frequently ask me to define the essentials of leadership. “If you were to take everything you’ve learned about leadership over the years and boil it down into a short list,” they ask, “what would it be?”

This book is my answer to that often-asked question. It has taken me a lifetime to learn these 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership. My desire is to communicate them to you as simply and clearly as possible. And it sure won’t hurt if we have some fun along the way.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 7/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

One of the most important truths I’ve learned over the years is this: Leadership is leadership, no matter where you go or what you do. Times change. Technology marches forward. Cultures vary from place to place. But the true principles of leadership are constant—whether you’re looking at the citizens of ancient Greece, the Hebrews in the Old Testament, the armies of the last two hundred years, the rulers of modern Europe, the pastors in local churches, or the businesspeople of today’s global economy. Leadership principles stand the test of time. They are irrefutable.

As you read the following chapters, I’d like you to keep in mind four ideas:

1. The laws can be learned. Some are easier to understand and apply than others, but every one of them can be acquired.

2. The laws can stand alone. Each law complements all the others, but you don’t need one in order to learn another.

3. The laws carry consequences with them. Apply the laws, and people will follow you. Violate or ignore them, and you will not be able to lead others.

4. These laws are the foundation of leadership. Once you learn the principles, you have to practice them and apply them to your life.

Whether you are a follower who is just beginning to discover the impact of leadership or a natural leader who already has followers, you can become a better leader. As you read about the laws, you’ll recognize that you may already practice some laws effectively. Other laws will expose weaknesses you didn’t know you had. But the greater the number of laws you learn, the better leader you will become. Each law is like a tool, ready to be picked up and used to help you achieve your dreams and add value to other people. Pick up even one, and you will become a better leader. Learn them all, and people will gladly follow you.

Now, let’s open the toolbox together.

THE LAW OF THE LID LEADERSHIP ABILITY DETERMINES A PERSON’S LEVEL OF EFFECTIVENESS

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 8/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

I often open my leadership conferences by explaining the Law of the Lid because it helps people understand the value of leadership. If you can get a handle on this law, you will see the incredible impact of leadership on every aspect of life. So here it is: Leadership ability is the lid that determines a person’s level of effectiveness. The lower an individual’s ability to lead, the lower the lid on his potential. The higher the leadership, the greater the effectiveness. To give you an example, if your leadership rates an 8, then your effectiveness can never be greater than a 7. If your leadership is only a 4, then your effectiveness will be no higher than a 3. Your leadership ability—for better or for worse—always determines your effectiveness and the potential impact of your organization.

Let me tell you a story that illustrates the Law of the Lid. In 1930, two young brothers named Dick and Maurice moved from New Hampshire to California in search of the American Dream. They had just gotten out of high school, and they saw few opportunities back home. So they headed straight for Hollywood where they eventually found jobs on a movie studio set.

After a while, their entrepreneurial spirit and interest in the entertainment industry prompted them to open a theater in Glendale, a town about five miles northeast of Hollywood. But despite all their efforts, the brothers just couldn’t make the business profitable. In the four years they ran the theater, they weren’t able to consistently generate enough money to pay the one hundred dollars a month rent that their landlord required.

A NEW OPPORTUNITY THE BROTHERS’ DESIRE FOR SUCCESS WAS STRONG, SO THEY KEPT LOOKING FOR BETTER BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES. IN 1937, THEY FINALLY STRUCK ON SOMETHING THAT WORKED. THEY OPENED A SMALL DRIVE-IN RESTAURANT IN PASADENA, LOCATED JUST EAST OF GLENDALE. PEOPLE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HAD BECOME VERY DEPENDENT ON THEIR CARS, AND THE CULTURE WAS CHANGING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, INCLUDING ITS BUSINESSES.

Drive-in restaurants were a phenomenon that sprang up in the early thirties, and they were becoming very popular. Rather than being invited into a dining room to eat, customers would drive into a parking lot around a small restaurant, place their orders with carhops, and receive their food on trays right in their cars. The food was served on china plates complete with glassware and metal utensils. It was timely idea in a society that was becoming faster paced and increasingly mobile.

Dick and Maurice’s tiny drive-in restaurant was a great success, and in 1940, they decided to move the operation to San Bernardino, a working-class boom town fifty miles east of Los Angeles. They built a larger facility and expanded their menu from hot dogs, fries, and shakes to include barbecued beef and pork sandwiches, hamburgers, and other items. Their business exploded. Annual sales reached $200,000, and the brothers found themselves splitting $50,000 in profits every year—a sum that put them in the town’s financial elite.

In 1948, their intuition told them that times were changing, and they made modifications to their restaurant business. They eliminated the carhops and started serving only walk-up customers. And they also streamlined everything. They reduced their menu and focused on selling hamburgers. They eliminated plates, glassware, and metal utensils, switching to paper products instead. They reduced their costs and the prices they charged customers. They also created what they called the Speedy Service System. Their kitchen became like an assembly line,

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 9/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

where each person focused on service with speed. Their goal was to fill each customer’s order in thirty seconds or less. And they succeeded. By the mid-1950s, annual revenue hit $350,000, and by then, Dick and Maurice split net profits of about $100,000 each year.

Who were these brothers? Back in those days, you could have found out by driving by their small restaurant on the corner at Fourteenth and E Streets in San Bernardino. On the front of the small octagonal building hung a neon sign that said simply MCDONALD’S HAMBURGERS. Dick and Maurice McDonald had hit the great American jackpot, and the rest, as they say, is history, right? Wrong. The McDonalds never went any farther because their weak leadership put a lid on their ability to succeed.

THE STORY BEHIND THE STORY IT’S TRUE THAT THE MCDONALD BROTHERS WERE FINANCIALLY SECURE. THEIRS WAS ONE OF THE MOST PROFITABLE RESTAURANT ENTERPRISES IN THE COUNTRY, AND THEY FELT THAT THEY HAD A HARD TIME SPENDING ALL THE MONEY THEY MADE. THEIR GENIUS WAS IN CUSTOMER SERVICE AND KITCHEN ORGANIZATION. THAT TALENT LED TO THE CREATION OF A NEW SYSTEM OF FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE. IN FACT, THEIR TALENT WAS SO WIDELY KNOWN IN FOOD SERVICE CIRCLES THAT PEOPLE STARTED WRITING THEM AND VISITING FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THEIR METHODS. AT ONE POINT, THEY RECEIVED AS MANY AS THREE HUNDRED CALLS AND LETTERS EVERY MONTH.

That led them to the idea of marketing the McDonald’s concept. The idea of franchising restaurants wasn’t new. It had been around for several decades. To the McDonald brothers, it looked like a way to make money without having to open another restaurant themselves. In 1952, they got started, but their effort was a dismal failure. The reason was simple. They lacked the leadership necessary to make it effective. Dick and Maurice were good restaurant owners. They understood how to run a business, make their systems efficient, cut costs, and increase profits. They were efficient managers. But they were not leaders. Their thinking patterns clamped a lid down on what they could do and become. At the height of their success, Dick and Maurice found themselves smack-dab against the Law of the Lid.

THE BROTHERS PARTNER WITH A LEADER IN 1954, THE BROTHERS HOOKED UP WITH A MAN NAMED RAY KROC WHO WAS A LEADER. KROC HAD BEEN RUNNING A SMALL COMPANY HE FOUNDED, WHICH SOLD MACHINES FOR MAKING MILK SHAKES. HE KNEW ABOUT MCDONALD’S. THEIR RESTAURANT WAS ONE OF HIS BEST CUSTOMERS. AND AS SOON AS HE VISITED THE STORE, HE HAD A VISION FOR ITS POTENTIAL. IN HIS MIND HE COULD SEE THE RESTAURANT GOING NATIONWIDE IN HUNDREDS OF MARKETS. HE SOON STRUCK A DEAL WITH DICK AND MAURICE, AND IN 1955, HE FORMED MCDONALD’S SYSTEM, INC. (LATER CALLED THE MCDONALD’S CORPORATION).

Kroc immediately bought the rights to a franchise so that he could use it as a model and prototype to sell other franchises. Then he began to assemble a team and build an organization to make McDonald’s a nationwide entity. He recruited and hired the sharpest people he could find,

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 10/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

and as his team grew in size and ability, his people developed additional recruits with leadership skill.

In the early years, Kroc sacrificed a lot. Though he was in his midfifties, he worked long hours just as he had when he first got started in business thirty years earlier. He eliminated many frills at home, including his country club membership, which he later said added ten strokes to his golf game. During his first eight years with McDonald’s, he took no salary. Not only that, but he personally borrowed money from the bank and against his life insurance to help cover the salaries of a few key leaders he wanted on the team. His sacrifice and his leadership paid off. In 1961 for the sum of $2.7 million, Kroc bought the exclusive rights to McDonald’s from the brothers, and he proceeded to turn it into an American institution and global entity. The “lid” in the life and leadership of Ray Kroc was obviously much higher than that of his predecessors.

In the years that Dick and Maurice McDonald had attempted to franchise their food service system, they managed to sell the concept to just fifteen buyers, only ten of whom actually opened restaurants. And even in that small enterprise, their limited leadership and vision were hindrances. For example, when their first franchisee, Neil Fox of Phoenix, told the brothers that he wanted to call his restaurant McDonald’s, Dick’s response was, “What … for? McDonald’s means nothing in Phoenix.”

On the other hand, the leadership lid in Ray Kroc’s life was sky high. Between 1955 and 1959, Kroc succeeded in opening 100 restaurants. Four years after that, there were 500 McDonald’s. Today the company has opened more than 21,000 restaurants in no fewer than 100 countries. Leadership ability—or more specifically the lack of leadership ability—was the lid on the McDonald brothers’ effectiveness.

SUCCESS WITHOUT LEADERSHIP I BELIEVE THAT SUCCESS IS WITHIN THE REACH OF JUST ABOUT EVERYONE. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT PERSONAL SUCCESS WITHOUT LEADERSHIP ABILITY BRINGS ONLY LIMITED EFFECTIVENESS. A PERSON’S IMPACT IS ONLY A FRACTION OF WHAT IT COULD BE WITH GOOD LEADERSHIP. THE HIGHER YOU WANT TO CLIMB, THE MORE YOU NEED LEADERSHIP. THE GREATER THE IMPACT YOU WANT TO MAKE, THE GREATER YOUR INFLUENCE NEEDS TO BE. WHATEVER YOU WILL ACCOMPLISH IS RESTRICTED BY YOUR ABILITY TO LEAD OTHERS.

Let me give you a picture of what I mean. Let’s say that when it comes to success, you’re an 8 (on a scale from 1 to 10). That’s pretty good. I think it would be safe to say that the McDonald brothers were in that range. But let’s also say that your leadership ability is only a 1. Your level of effectiveness would look like this:

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 11/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

To increase your level of effectiveness, you have a couple of choices. You could work very hard to increase your dedication to success and excellence—to work toward becoming a 10. It’s possible that you could make it to that level, though the Law of Diminishing Returns says that the effort it would take to increase those last two points might take more energy than it did to achieve the first eight. If you really killed yourself, you might increase your success by that 25 percent.

But you have another option. Let’s say that instead you work hard to increase your level of leadership. Over the course of time, you develop yourself as a leader, and eventually, your leadership ability becomes, say, a 6. Visually, the results would look like this:

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 12/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

By raising your leadership ability—without increasing your success dedication at all—you can increase your original effectiveness by 500 percent! If you were to raise your leadership to 8, where it matched your success dedication, you would increase your effectiveness by 700 percent! Leadership has a multiplying effect. I’ve seen its impact over and over again in all kinds of businesses and nonprofit organizations. And that’s why I’ve taught leadership for more than twenty years.

TO CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THE ORGANIZATION, CHANGE THE LEADER

LEADERSHIP ABILITY IS ALWAYS THE LID ON PERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS. IF THE LEADERSHIP IS STRONG, THE LID IS HIGH. BUT IF IT’S NOT, THEN THE ORGANIZATION IS LIMITED. THAT’S WHY IN TIMES OF TROUBLE, ORGANIZATIONS NATURALLY LOOK FOR NEW LEADERSHIP. WHEN THE COUNTRY IS EXPERIENCING HARD TIMES, IT ELECTS A NEW PRESIDENT. WHEN A COMPANY IS LOSING MONEY, IT HIRES A NEW CEO. WHEN A CHURCH IS FLOUNDERING, IT SEARCHES FOR A NEW SENIOR PASTOR. WHEN A SPORTS TEAM KEEPS LOSING, IT LOOKS FOR A NEW HEAD COACH.

The relationship between leadership and effectiveness is evident in sports. For example, if you look at professional sports organizations, the talent on the team is rarely the issue. Just about every team has highly talented players. The leadership provided by the coach—and several key players—makes the difference. To change the effectiveness of the team, lift up the leadership of the coach. That’s the Law of the Lid.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 13/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

A sports team with a long history of leadership and effectiveness is Notre Dame. The school’s football teams have won more national championships than any other team in the country. Over the years, the Fighting Irish have won more than three-fourths of all their games (an incredible .759 winning percentage). In fact, two of their former head coaches, Knute Rockne and Frank Leahy, have the highest winning percentages in NCAA history.

Back in the early 1980s, Notre Dame hired Gerry Faust as its head football coach. He was following two great coaches: Ara Parseghian and Dan Devine, both of whom had won national championships during their tenure and both of whom were eventually inducted into the National Football Foundation Hall of Fame. Prior to coming to Notre Dame, Faust had compiled an incredible record of 174-17-2 during his eighteen years as the head coach at Moeller High School. His teams experienced seven undefeated seasons and won six Ohio state titles. Four teams he coached were considered the best in the nation.

But when he arrived at Notre Dame, it didn’t take long for people to discover that he was in over his head. As a coach and strategist, he was effective, but he didn’t have the leadership ability necessary to make it at the college level. During his five seasons at the university, he compiled a 30-26-1 record and winning percentage of .535, third worst in Notre Dame’s one hundred-plus-year history of college football. Faust coached only one other college team after that, the University of Akron, where he finished with an overall losing record of 43-53-3. He was another casualty of the Law of the Lid.

Wherever you look, you can find smart, talented, successful people who are able to go only so far because of the limitations of their leadership. For example, when Apple got started in the late 1970s, Steve Wozniak was the brains behind the Apple computer. His leadership lid was low, but that was not the case for his partner, Steve Jobs. His lid was so high that he built a world-class organization and gave it a nine-digit value. That’s the impact of the Law of the Lid.

A few years ago, I met Don Stephenson, the chairman of Global Hospitality Resources, Inc., of San Diego, California, an international hospitality advisory and consulting firm. Over lunch, I asked him about his organization. Today he primarily does consulting, but back then his company took over the management of hotels and resorts that weren’t doing well financially. They oversaw many excellent facilities such as La Costa in southern California.

Don said that whenever they came into an organization to take it over, they always started by doing two things: First, they trained all the staff to improve their level of service to the customers; and second, they fired the leader. When he told me that, I was at first surprised.

“You always fire him?” I asked. “Every time?” “That’s right. Every time,” he said. “Don’t you talk to the person first—to check him out to see if he’s a good leader?” I said. “No,” he answered. “If he’d been a good leader, the organization wouldn’t be in the mess it’s

in.” And I thought to myself, Of course. It’s the Law of the Lid. To reach the highest level of

effectiveness, you have to raise the lid—one way or another. The good news is that getting rid of the leader isn’t the only way. Just as I teach in

conferences that there is a lid, I also teach that you can raise it—but that’s the subject of another law of leadership.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 14/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

THE LAW OF INFLUENCE THE TRUE MEASURE OF LEADERSHIP IS INFLUENCE—NOTHING MORE, NOTHING

LESS

If you don’t have influence, you will never be able to lead others. So how do you measure influence? Here’s a story to answer that question. In late summer of 1997, people were jolted by two events that occurred less than a week apart: the deaths of Princess Diana and Mother Teresa. On the surface, the two women could not have been more different. One was a tall, young, glamorous princess from England who circulated in the highest society. The other, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, was a small, elderly Catholic nun born in Albania, who served the poorest of the poor in Calcutta, India.

What’s incredible is that their impact was remarkably similar. In a 1996 poll published by the London Daily Mail, Princess Diana and Mother Teresa were voted in first and second places as the world’s two most caring people. That’s something that doesn’t happen unless you have a lot of influence. How did someone like Diana come to be regarded in the same way as Mother Teresa? The answer is that she demonstrated the power of the Law of Influence.

DIANA CAPTURED THE WORLD’S IMAGINATION

IN 1981, DIANA BECAME THE MOST TALKED-ABOUT PERSON ON THE GLOBE WHEN SHE MARRIED PRINCE CHARLES OF ENGLAND. NEARLY 1 BILLION PEOPLE WATCHED DIANA’S WEDDING CEREMONY TELEVISED FROM ST. PAUL’S CATHEDRAL. AND SINCE THAT DAY, IT SEEMED PEOPLE NEVER COULD GET ENOUGH NEWS ABOUT HER. PEOPLE WERE INTRIGUED WITH DIANA, A COMMONER WHO HAD ONCE BEEN A KINDERGARTEN TEACHER. AT FIRST SHE SEEMED PAINFULLY SHY AND TOTALLY OVERWHELMED BY ALL THE ATTENTION SHE AND HER NEW HUSBAND WERE RECEIVING. EARLY IN THEIR MARRIAGE, SOME REPORTS STATED THAT DIANA WASN’T VERY HAPPY PERFORMING THE DUTIES EXPECTED OF HER AS A ROYAL PRINCESS. HOWEVER, IN TIME SHE ADJUSTED TO HER NEW ROLE. AS SHE STARTED TRAVELING AND REPRESENTING THE ROYAL FAMILY AROUND THE WORLD AT VARIOUS FUNCTIONS, SHE QUICKLY MADE IT HER GOAL TO SERVE OTHERS AND RAISE FUNDS FOR NUMEROUS CHARITABLE CAUSES. AND DURING THE PROCESS, SHE BUILT MANY IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIPS—WITH POLITICIANS, ORGANIZERS OF

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 15/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

HUMANITARIAN CAUSES, ENTERTAINERS, AND HEADS OF STATE. AT FIRST, SHE WAS SIMPLY A SPOKESPERSON AND CATALYST FOR FUND-RAISING, BUT AS TIME WENT BY, HER INFLUENCE INCREASED—AND SO DID HER ABILITY TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN.

Diana started rallying people to causes such as AIDS research, care for people with leprosy, and a ban on land mines. She was quite influential in bringing that last issue to the attention of the world’s leaders. On a visit to the United States just months before her death, she met with members of the Clinton administration to convince them to support the Oslo conference banning the devices. And a few weeks later, they made changes in their position. Patrick Fuller of the British Red Cross said, “The attention she drew to the issue influenced Clinton. She put the issue on the world agenda, there’s no doubt about that.”

THE EMERGENCE OF A LEADER IN THE BEGINNING, DIANA’S TITLE HAD MERELY GIVEN HER A PLATFORM TO ADDRESS OTHERS, BUT SHE SOON BECAME A PERSON OF INFLUENCE IN HER OWN RIGHT. IN 1996 WHEN SHE WAS DIVORCED FROM PRINCE CHARLES, SHE LOST HER TITLE, BUT THAT LOSS DIDN’T AT ALL DIMINISH HER IMPACT ON OTHERS. INSTEAD, HER INFLUENCE CONTINUED TO INCREASE WHILE THAT OF HER FORMER HUSBAND AND IN-LAWS DECLINED—DESPITE THEIR ROYAL TITLES AND POSITION. WHY? DIANA INSTINCTIVELY UNDERSTOOD THE LAW OF INFLUENCE.

Ironically, even in death Diana continued to influence others. When her funeral was broadcast on television and BBC Radio, it was translated into forty-four languages. NBC estimated that the total audience numbered as many as 2.5 billion people—more than twice the number of people who watched her wedding.

THE QUESTION OF LEADERSHIP PRINCESS DIANA HAS BEEN CHARACTERIZED IN MANY WAYS. BUT ONE WORD THAT I’VE NEVER HEARD USED TO DESCRIBE HER IS LEADER. YET THAT’S WHAT SHE WAS. ULTIMATELY, SHE DIDN’T MAKE AN IMPACT BECAUSE SHE ONCE HAD A TITLE. SHE MADE THINGS HAPPEN BECAUSE SHE WAS AN INFLUENCER, AND LEADERSHIP IS INFLUENCE—NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.

LEADERSHIP IS NOT … PEOPLE HAVE SO MANY MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT LEADERSHIP. WHEN THEY HEAR THAT SOMEONE HAS AN IMPRESSIVE TITLE OR AN ASSIGNED LEADERSHIP POSITION, THEY ASSUME THAT HE IS A LEADER. SOMETIMES THAT’S TRUE. BUT TITLES DON’T HAVE MUCH VALUE WHEN IT COMES TO LEADING. TRUE LEADERSHIP CANNOT BE AWARDED, APPOINTED, OR ASSIGNED. IT COMES ONLY FROM INFLUENCE, AND THAT CAN’T BE MANDATED. IT HAS TO BE EARNED. THE ONLY THING A TITLE CAN BUY IS A LITTLE TIME—EITHER TO INCREASE YOUR LEVEL OF INFLUENCE WITH OTHERS OR TO ERASE IT.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 16/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

FIVE MYTHS ABOUT LEADERSHIP THERE ARE PLENTY OF MISCONCEPTIONS AND MYTHS THAT PEOPLE EMBRACE ABOUT LEADERS AND LEADERSHIP. HERE ARE FIVE COMMON ONES: 1. THE MANAGEMENT MYTH

A WIDESPREAD MISUNDERSTANDING IS THAT LEADING AND MANAGING ARE ONE AND THE SAME. UP UNTIL A FEW YEARS AGO, BOOKS THAT CLAIMED TO BE ON LEADERSHIP WERE OFTEN REALLY ABOUT MANAGEMENT. THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS THAT LEADERSHIP IS ABOUT INFLUENCING PEOPLE TO FOLLOW, WHILE MANAGEMENT FOCUSES ON MAINTAINING SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES. AS FORMER CHRYSLER CHAIRMAN AND CEO LEE IACOCCA WRYLY COMMENTED, “SOMETIMES EVEN THE BEST MANAGER IS LIKE THE LITTLE BOY WITH THE BIG DOG, WAITING TO SEE WHERE THE DOG WANTS TO GO SO THAT HE CAN TAKE HIM THERE.”

The best way to test whether a person can lead rather than just manage is to ask him to create positive change. Managers can maintain direction, but they can’t change it. To move people in a new direction, you need influence.

2. THE ENTREPRENEUR MYTH

FREQUENTLY, PEOPLE ASSUME THAT ALL SALESPEOPLE AND ENTREPRENEURS ARE LEADERS. BUT THAT’S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. YOU MAY REMEMBER THE RONCO COMMERCIALS THAT APPEARED ON TELEVISION YEARS AGO. THEY SOLD ITEMS SUCH AS THE VEG-O-MATIC, POCKET FISHERMAN, AND INSIDE-THE- SHELL-EGG SCRAMBLER. THOSE PRODUCTS WERE THE BRAINCHILDREN OF AN ENTREPRENEUR NAMED RON POPEIL. CALLED THE SALESMAN OF THE CENTURY, HE HAS ALSO APPEARED IN NUMEROUS INFOMERCIALS FOR PRODUCTS SUCH AS SPRAY-ON RELIEF FOR BALDNESS AND FOOD DEHYDRATING DEVICES.

Popeil is certainly enterprising, innovative, and successful, especially if you measure him by the $300 million in sales his products have earned. But that doesn’t make him a leader. People may be buying what he has to sell, but they’re not following him. At best, he is able to persuade people for a moment, but he holds no long-term influence with them.

3. THE KNOWLEDGE MYTH

SIR FRANCIS BACON SAID, “KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.” MOST PEOPLE, BELIEVING POWER IS THE ESSENCE OF LEADERSHIP, NATURALLY ASSUME THAT THOSE WHO POSSESS KNOWLEDGE AND INTELLIGENCE ARE LEADERS. BUT THAT ISN’T AUTOMATICALLY TRUE. YOU CAN VISIT ANY MAJOR UNIVERSITY AND MEET BRILLIANT RESEARCH SCIENTISTS AND PHILOSOPHERS WHOSE ABILITY TO THINK IS SO HIGH THAT IT’S OFF THE CHARTS, BUT WHOSE ABILITY TO LEAD IS SO LOW THAT IT DOESN’T EVEN REGISTER ON THE CHARTS. IQ DOESN’T NECESSARILY EQUATE TO LEADERSHIP.

4. THE PIONEER MYTH

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 17/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

ANOTHER MISCONCEPTION IS THAT ANYONE WHO IS OUT IN FRONT OF THE CROWD IS A LEADER. BUT BEING FIRST ISN’T ALWAYS THE SAME AS LEADING. FOR EXAMPLE, SIR EDMUND HILLARY WAS THE FIRST MAN TO REACH THE SUMMIT OF MOUNT EVEREST. SINCE HIS HISTORIC ASCENT IN 1953, MANY PEOPLE HAVE “FOLLOWED” HIM IN ACHIEVING THAT FEAT. BUT THAT DOESN’T MAKE HILLARY A LEADER. HE WASN’T EVEN THE LEADER ON THAT PARTICULAR EXPEDITION. JOHN HUNT WAS. AND WHEN HILLARY TRAVELED TO THE SOUTH POLE IN 1958 AS PART OF THE COMMONWEALTH TRANS-ANTARCTIC EXPEDITION, HE WAS ACCOMPANYING ANOTHER LEADER, SIR VIVIAN FUCHS. TO BE A LEADER, A PERSON HAS TO NOT ONLY BE OUT FRONT, BUT ALSO HAVE PEOPLE INTENTIONALLY COMING BEHIND HIM, FOLLOWING HIS LEAD, AND ACTING ON HIS VISION.

5. THE POSITION MYTH

AS MENTIONED EARLIER, THE GREATEST MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT LEADERSHIP IS THAT PEOPLE THINK IT IS BASED ON POSITION, BUT IT’S NOT. STANLEY HUFFTY AFFIRMED, “IT’S NOT THE POSITION THAT MAKES THE LEADER; IT’S THE LEADER THAT MAKES THE POSITION.”

Look at what happened several years ago at Cordiant, the advertising agency formerly known as Saatchi & Saatchi. In 1994, institutional investors at Saatchi & Saatchi forced the board of directors to dismiss Maurice Saatchi, the company’s CEO. What was the result? Several executives followed him out. So did many of the company’s largest accounts, including British Airways and Mars, the candy maker. Saatchi’s influence was so great that his departure caused the company’s stock to fall immediately from $8 5/8 to $4 per share. What happened is a result of the Law of Influence. Saatchi lost his title and position, but he continued to be the leader.

WHO’S THE REAL LEADER? I PERSONALLY LEARNED THE LAW OF INFLUENCE WHEN I ACCEPTED MY FIRST JOB OUT OF COLLEGE AT A SMALL CHURCH IN RURAL INDIANA. I WENT IN WITH ALL THE RIGHT CREDENTIALS. I WAS HIRED AS THE SENIOR PASTOR, WHICH MEANT THAT I POSSESSED THE POSITION AND TITLE OF LEADER IN THAT ORGANIZATION. I HAD THE PROPER COLLEGE DEGREE. I HAD EVEN BEEN ORDAINED. IN ADDITION, I HAD BEEN TRAINED BY MY FATHER WHO WAS AN EXCELLENT PASTOR AND A VERY HIGH-PROFILE LEADER IN THE DENOMINATION. IT MADE FOR A GOOD-LOOKING RÉSUMÉ—BUT IT DIDN’T MAKE ME A LEADER. AT MY FIRST BOARD MEETING, I QUICKLY FOUND OUT WHO WAS THE REAL LEADER OF THAT CHURCH. (I’LL TELL YOU THE WHOLE STORY IN THE LAW OF E. F. HUTTON.) BY THE TIME I TOOK MY NEXT POSITION THREE YEARS LATER, I HAD LEARNED THE LAW OF INFLUENCE. I RECOGNIZED THAT WORK WAS NECESSARY TO GAIN INFLUENCE IN ANY ORGANIZATION AND TO EARN THE RIGHT TO BECOME THE LEADER.

LEADERSHIP IS …

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 18/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

LEADERSHIP IS INFLUENCE—NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. WHEN YOU BECOME A STUDENT OF LEADERS, AS I AM, YOU RECOGNIZE PEOPLE’S LEVEL OF INFLUENCE IN EVERYDAY SITUATIONS ALL AROUND YOU. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. IN 1997, I MOVED TO ATLANTA, GEORGIA. IN THAT SAME YEAR, DAN REEVES BECAME THE COACH OF THE NFL’S ATLANTA FALCONS. I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT. REEVES IS AN EXCELLENT COACH AND LEADER. THOUGH HE HAD MOST RECENTLY COACHED THE NEW YORK GIANTS, REEVES MADE HIS REPUTATION AS THE HEAD COACH OF THE DENVER BRONCOS. FROM 1981 TO 1992, HE COMPILED AN EXCELLENT 117-79-1 RECORD, EARNED THREE SUPER BOWL APPEARANCES, AND RECEIVED NFL COACH OF THE YEAR HONORS THREE TIMES.

Despite Reeves’s success in Denver, he didn’t always experience smooth sailing. He was known to have had disagreements with quarterback John Elway and assistant coach Mike Shanahan. What was the reason for the problem? It was said that during the 1989 season, Shanahan and Elway sometimes worked on their own offensive game plan, ignoring Reeves’s wishes. I don’t know if that was true, but if it was, then Shanahan, not Reeves, had developed greater influence with the Denver quarterback. It didn’t matter that Reeves held the title and position of head coach. It didn’t even matter how good a coach Reeves was. Shanahan had become the more influential leader in the quarterback’s life. And leadership is influence.

Shanahan left the Broncos at the end of that season, but he returned in 1995 as the team’s head coach. He became in title what he evidently already had been in terms of influence to some of the players: their leader. And that leadership has now paid off. In January of 1998, he led the Denver Broncos franchise and quarterback John Elway to their first Super Bowl victory.

LEADERSHIP WITHOUT LEVERAGE I ADMIRE AND RESPECT THE LEADERSHIP OF MY GOOD FRIEND BILL HYBELS, THE SENIOR PASTOR OF WILLOW CREEK COMMUNITY CHURCH IN SOUTH BARRINGTON, ILLINOIS, THE LARGEST CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA. BILL SAYS HE BELIEVES THAT THE CHURCH IS THE MOST LEADERSHIP-INTENSIVE ENTERPRISE IN SOCIETY. A LOT OF BUSINESSPEOPLE I KNOW ARE SURPRISED WHEN THEY HEAR THAT STATEMENT, BUT I THINK BILL IS RIGHT. WHAT IS THE BASIS OF HIS BELIEF? POSITIONAL LEADERSHIP DOESN’T WORK IN VOLUNTEER ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE THOSE TYPES OF LEADERS HAVE NO REAL LEVERAGE AND THEY ARE INEFFECTIVE. IN OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, THE PERSON WHO HAS POSITION HAS INCREDIBLE LEVERAGE. IN THE MILITARY, LEADERS CAN USE RANK AND, IF ALL ELSE FAILS, THROW PEOPLE INTO THE BRIG. IN BUSINESS, BOSSES HAVE TREMENDOUS LEVERAGE IN THE FORM OF SALARY, BENEFITS, AND PERKS. MOST FOLLOWERS ARE PRETTY COOPERATIVE WHEN THEIR LIVELIHOOD IS AT STAKE.

But in voluntary organizations, such as churches, the only thing that works is leadership in its purest form. Leaders have only their influence to aid them. And as Harry A. Overstreet observed, “The very essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate.” Followers in voluntary organizations cannot be forced to get on board. If the leader has no influence with them, then they won’t follow. When I recently shared that observation with a group of about 150 CEOs from the automobile industry, I saw light bulbs going on all over the

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 19/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

room. And when I gave them a piece of advice, they really got excited. I’m going to share that same advice with you: If you really want to find out whether your people are capable of leading, send them out to volunteer their time in the community. If they can get people to follow them while they’re serving at the Red Cross, a United Way shelter, or their local church, then you know that they really do have influence—and leadership ability.

FROM COMMANDER TO PRIVATE TO COMMANDER IN CHIEF

ONE OF MY FAVORITE STORIES THAT ILLUSTRATES THE LAW OF INFLUENCE CONCERNS ABRAHAM LINCOLN. IN 1832, YEARS BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT, YOUNG LINCOLN GATHERED TOGETHER A GROUP OF MEN TO FIGHT IN THE BLACK HAWK WAR. IN THOSE DAYS, THE PERSON WHO PUT TOGETHER A VOLUNTEER COMPANY FOR THE MILITIA OFTEN BECAME ITS LEADER AND ASSUMED A COMMANDING RANK. IN THIS INSTANCE, LINCOLN HAD THE RANK OF CAPTAIN.

But Lincoln had a problem. He knew nothing about soldiering. He had no prior military experience, and he knew nothing about tactics. He had trouble remembering the simplest military procedures. For example, one day Lincoln was marching a couple of dozen men across a field and needed to guide them through a gate into another field. But he couldn’t manage it. Recounting the incident later, Lincoln said, “I could not for the life of me remember the proper word of command for getting my company endwise. Finally, as we came near [the gate] I shouted: ‘This company is dismissed for two minutes, when it will fall in again on the other side of the gate.’ ”

As time went by, Lincoln’s level of influence with others in the militia actually decreased. While other officers proved themselves and gained rank, Lincoln found himself going in the other direction. He began with the title and position of captain, but they did him little good. He couldn’t overcome the Law of Influence. By the end of his military service, Abraham Lincoln found his rightful place, having achieved the rank of private.

Fortunately for Lincoln—and for the fate of our country—he overcame his inability to influence others. He followed his undistinguished career in the military with stints in the Illinois state legislature and the U.S. House of Representatives. But over time and with much effort and personal experience, he became a person of remarkable influence and impact.

Here is a favorite leadership proverb: “He who thinks he leads, but has no followers, is only taking a walk.” If you can’t influence others, they won’t follow you. And if they won’t follow, you’re not a leader. That’s the Law of Influence. No matter what anybody else tells you, remember that leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 20/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

THE LAW OF PROCESS LEADERSHIP DEVELOPS DAILY, NOT IN A

DAY

Anne Scheiber was an aged woman when she died in January of 1995—she was 101. For years she had lived in a tiny run-down rent-controlled studio apartment in Manhattan. The paint on the walls was peeling, and the old bookcases that lined the walls were covered in dust. Rent was four hundred dollars a month.

Scheiber lived on Social Security and a small monthly pension, which she started receiving in 1943 when she retired as an auditor for the Internal Revenue Service. She hadn’t done very well at the IRS. More specifically, the agency hadn’t done right by her. Despite having a law degree and doing excellent work, she was never promoted. And when she retired at age fifty-one, she was making only $3,150 a year.

“She was treated very, very shabbily,” said Benjamin Clark, who knew her as well as anyone did. “She really had to fend for herself in every way. It was really quite a struggle.”

Scheiber was the model of thrift. She didn’t spend money on herself. She didn’t buy new furniture as the old pieces she owned became worn out. She didn’t even subscribe to a newspaper. About once a week, she used to go to the public library to read the Wall Street Journal.

WINDFALL! IMAGINE THE SURPRISE OF NORMAN LAMM, THE PRESIDENT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITY IN NEW YORK CITY, WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT ANNE SCHEIBER, A LITTLE OLD LADY WHOM HE HAD NEVER HEARD OF—AND WHO HAD NEVER ATTENDED YESHIVA—LEFT NEARLY HER ENTIRE ESTATE TO THE UNIVERSITY.

“When I saw the will, it was mind blowing, such an unexpected windfall,” said Lamm. “This woman has become a legend overnight.”

The estate Anne Scheiber left to Yeshiva University was worth $22 million! How in the world did a spinster who had been retired for fifty years build an eight-figure

fortune? Here’s the answer. By the time she retired from the IRS in 1943, Anne Scheiber had

managed to save $5,000. She invested that money in stocks. By 1950, she had made enough profit to buy 1,000 shares of Schering-Plough Corporation stock, then valued at $10,000. And she held on to that stock, letting its value build. Today, those original shares have split enough times to produce 128,000 shares, worth $7.5 million.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 21/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

The secret to Scheiber’s success was that she spent most of her life building her worth. Whether her stock’s values went up or down, she never sold it off with the thought, I’m finished building; now it’s time to cash out. She was in for the long haul, the really long haul. When she earned dividends—which kept getting larger and larger—she reinvested them. She spent her whole lifetime building. While other older people worry that they may run out of funds before the end of their lives, the longer she lived, the wealthier she became. When it came to finances, Scheiber understood and applied the Law of Process.

LEADERSHIP IS LIKE INVESTING—IT COMPOUNDS

BECOMING A LEADER IS A LOT LIKE INVESTING SUCCESSFULLY IN THE STOCK MARKET. IF YOUR HOPE IS TO MAKE A FORTUNE IN A DAY, YOU’RE NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL. WHAT MATTERS MOST IS WHAT YOU DO DAY BY DAY OVER THE LONG HAUL. MY FRIEND TAG SHORT MAINTAINS THAT, “THE SECRET OF OUR SUCCESS IS FOUND IN OUR DAILY AGENDA.” IF YOU CONTINUALLY INVEST IN YOUR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT, LETTING YOUR “ASSETS” COMPOUND, THE INEVITABLE RESULT IS GROWTH OVER TIME.

When I teach leadership at conferences, people inevitably ask me whether leaders are born. I always answer, “Yes, of course they are … I’ve yet to meet one that came into the world any other way!” We all laugh, and then I answer the real question—whether leadership is something a person either possesses or doesn’t.

Although it’s true that some people are born with greater natural gifts than others, the ability to lead is really a collection of skills, nearly all of which can be learned and improved. But that process doesn’t happen overnight. Leadership is complicated. It has many facets: respect, experience, emotional strength, people skills, discipline, vision, momentum, timing—the list goes on. As you can see, many factors that come into play in leadership are intangible. That’s why leaders require so much seasoning to be effective. That’s why only now, at age fifty-one, do I feel that I am truly beginning to understand the many aspects of leadership with clarity.

LEADERS ARE LEARNERS IN A STUDY OF NINETY TOP LEADERS FROM A VARIETY OF FIELDS, LEADERSHIP EXPERTS WARREN BENNIS AND BURT NANUS MADE A DISCOVERY ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROWTH AND LEADERSHIP: “IT IS THE CAPACITY TO DEVELOP AND IMPROVE THEIR SKILLS THAT DISTINGUISHES LEADERS FROM THEIR FOLLOWERS.” SUCCESSFUL LEADERS ARE LEARNERS. AND THE LEARNING PROCESS IS ONGOING, A RESULT OF SELF-DISCIPLINE AND PERSEVERANCE. THE GOAL EACH DAY MUST BE TO GET A LITTLE BETTER, TO BUILD ON THE PREVIOUS DAY’S PROGRESS.

THE FOUR PHASES OF LEADERSHIP GROWTH

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 22/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

WHETHER YOU DO OR DON’T HAVE GREAT NATURAL ABILITY FOR LEADERSHIP, YOUR DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRESS WILL PROBABLY OCCUR ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING FOUR PHASES: PHASE 1—I DON’T KNOW WHAT I DON’T KNOW

MOST PEOPLE FAIL TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF LEADERSHIP. THEY BELIEVE THAT LEADERSHIP IS ONLY FOR A FEW—FOR THE PEOPLE AT THE TOP OF THE CORPORATE LADDER. THEY HAVE NO IDEA OF THE OPPORTUNITIES THEY’RE PASSING UP WHEN THEY DON’T LEARN TO LEAD. THIS POINT WAS DRIVEN HOME FOR ME WHEN A COLLEGE PRESIDENT SHARED WITH ME THAT ONLY A HANDFUL OF STUDENTS SIGNED UP FOR A LEADERSHIP COURSE OFFERED BY THE SCHOOL. WHY? ONLY A FEW THOUGHT OF THEMSELVES AS LEADERS. IF THEY HAD KNOWN THAT LEADERSHIP IS INFLUENCE, AND THAT IN THE COURSE OF EACH DAY MOST INDIVIDUALS USUALLY TRY TO INFLUENCE AT LEAST FOUR OTHER PEOPLE, THEIR DESIRE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SPARKED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE SUBJECT. IT’S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE AS LONG AS A PERSON DOESN’T KNOW WHAT HE DOESN’T KNOW, HE DOESN’T GROW.

PHASE 2—I KNOW WHAT I DON’T KNOW

USUALLY AT SOME POINT IN LIFE, WE ARE PLACED IN A LEADERSHIP POSITION ONLY TO LOOK AROUND AND DISCOVER THAT NO ONE IS FOLLOWING US. THAT’S WHEN WE REALIZE THAT WE NEED TO LEARN HOW TO LEAD. AND OF COURSE, THAT’S WHEN IT’S POSSIBLE FOR THE PROCESS TO START. ENGLISH PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN DISRAELI WISELY COMMENTED, “TO BE CONSCIOUS THAT YOU ARE IGNORANT OF THE FACTS IS A GREAT STEP TO KNOWLEDGE.”

That’s what happened to me when I took my first leadership position in 1969. I had captained sports teams all my life and had been the student government president in college, so I already thought I was a leader. But when I tried to lead people in the real world, I found out the awful truth. That prompted me to start gathering resources and learning from them. I also had another idea: I wrote to the top ten leaders in my field and offered them one hundred dollars for a half hour of their time so that I could ask them questions. (That was quite a sum for me in 1969.) For the next several years, my wife, Margaret, and I planned every vacation around where those people lived. If a great leader in Cleveland said yes to my request, then that year we vacationed in Cleveland so that I could meet him. And my idea really paid off. Those men shared insights with me that I could have learned no other way.

PHASE 3—I GROW AND KNOW AND IT STARTS TO SHOW

WHEN YOU RECOGNIZE YOUR LACK OF SKILL AND BEGIN THE DAILY DISCIPLINE OF PERSONAL GROWTH IN LEADERSHIP, EXCITING THINGS START TO HAPPEN.

A while back I was teaching a group of people in Denver, and in the crowd I noticed a really sharp nineteen-year-old named Brian. For a couple of days, I watched as he eagerly took notes. I talked to him a few times during breaks. When I got to the part of the seminar where I teach the Law of Process, I asked Brian to stand up so that I could talk while everyone listened. I said, “Brian, I’ve been watching you here, and I’m very impressed with how hungry you are to learn

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 23/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

and glean and grow. I want to tell you a secret that will change your life.” Everyone in the whole auditorium seemed to lean forward.

“I believe that in about twenty years, you can be a great leader. I want to encourage you to make yourself a lifelong learner of leadership. Read books, listen to tapes regularly, and keep attending seminars. And whenever you come across a golden nugget of truth or a significant quote, file it away for the future.

“It’s not going to be easy,” I said. “But in five years, you’ll see progress as your influence becomes greater. In ten years you’ll develop a competence that makes your leadership highly effective. And in twenty years, when you’re only thirty-nine years old, if you’ve continued to learn and grow, others will likely start asking you to teach them about leadership. And some will be amazed. They’ll look at each other and say, ‘How did he suddenly become wise?’

“Brian, you can be a great leader, but it won’t happen in a day. Start paying the price now.” What’s true for Brian is also true for you. Start developing your leadership today, and

someday you will experience the effects of the Law of Process.

PHASE 4—I SIMPLY GO BECAUSE OF WHAT I KNOW

WHEN YOU’RE IN PHASE 3, YOU CAN BE PRETTY EFFECTIVE AS A LEADER, BUT YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT EVERY MOVE YOU MAKE. HOWEVER, WHEN YOU GET TO PHASE 4, YOUR ABILITY TO LEAD BECOMES ALMOST AUTOMATIC. AND THAT’S WHEN THE PAYOFF IS LARGER THAN LIFE. BUT THE ONLY WAY TO GET THERE IS TO OBEY THE LAW OF PROCESS AND PAY THE PRICE.

TO LEAD TOMORROW, LEARN TODAY

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 24/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

LEADERSHIP IS DEVELOPED DAILY, NOT IN A DAY. THAT IS THE REALITY DICTATED BY THE LAW OF PROCESS. BENJAMIN DISRAELI ASSERTED, “THE SECRET OF SUCCESS IN LIFE IS FOR A MAN TO BE READY FOR HIS TIME WHEN IT COMES.” WHAT A PERSON DOES ON A DISCIPLINED, CONSISTENT BASIS GETS HIM READY, NO MATTER WHAT THE GOAL. BASKETBALL LEGEND LARRY BIRD BECAME AN OUTSTANDING FREE-THROW SHOOTER BY PRACTICING FIVE HUNDRED SHOTS EACH MORNING BEFORE HE WENT TO SCHOOL. DEMOSTHENES OF ANCIENT GREECE BECAME THE GREATEST ORATOR BY RECITING VERSES WITH PEBBLES IN HIS MOUTH AND SPEAKING OVER THE ROAR OF THE WAVES AT THE SEASHORE—AND HE DID IT DESPITE HAVING BEEN BORN WITH A SPEECH IMPAIRMENT. THE SAME DEDICATION IS REQUIRED FOR YOU TO BECOME A GREAT LEADER.

The good news is that your leadership ability is not static. No matter where you’re starting from, you can get better. That’s true even for people who have stood on the world stage of leadership. While most presidents of the United States reach their peak while in office, others continue to grow and become better leaders afterward, such as former president Jimmy Carter. Some people questioned his ability to lead while in the White House. But in recent years, Carter’s level of influence has continually increased. His high integrity and dedication in serving people through Habitat for Humanity and other organizations have made his influence grow. And now he has been recognized in Mali where he was knighted for his work eradicating Guinea worm disease. People now are truly impressed with his life.

FIGHTING YOUR WAY UP THERE IS AN OLD SAYING: CHAMPIONS DON’T BECOME CHAMPIONS IN THE RING—THEY ARE MERELY RECOGNIZED THERE. THAT’S TRUE. IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHERE SOMEONE DEVELOPS INTO A CHAMPION, LOOK AT HIS DAILY ROUTINE. FORMER HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMP JOE FRAZIER STATED, “YOU CAN MAP OUT A FIGHT PLAN OR A LIFE PLAN. BUT WHEN THE ACTION STARTS, YOU’RE DOWN TO YOUR REFLEXES. THAT’S WHERE YOUR ROAD WORK SHOWS. IF YOU CHEATED ON THAT IN THE DARK OF THE MORNING, YOU’RE GETTING FOUND OUT NOW UNDER THE BRIGHT LIGHTS.” BOXING IS A GOOD ANALOGY FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT IS ALL ABOUT DAILY PREPARATION. EVEN IF A PERSON HAS NATURAL TALENT, HE HAS TO PREPARE AND TRAIN TO BECOME SUCCESSFUL.

One of this country’s greatest leaders was a fan of boxing: President Theodore Roosevelt. In fact, one of his most famous quotes uses a boxing analogy:

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement; and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 25/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

Roosevelt, a boxer himself, was the ultimate man of action. Not only was he an effective leader, but he was the most flamboyant of all U.S. presidents. British historian Hugh Brogan described him as “the ablest man to sit in the White House since Lincoln; the most vigorous since Jackson; the most bookish since John Quincy Adams.”

A MAN OF ACTION TR (WHICH WAS ROOSEVELT’S NICKNAME) IS REMEMBERED AS AN OUTSPOKEN MAN OF ACTION AND PROPONENT OF THE VIGOROUS LIFE. WHILE IN THE WHITE HOUSE, HE WAS KNOWN FOR REGULAR BOXING AND JUDO SESSIONS, VIGOROUS HORSEBACK RIDES, AND LONG, STRENUOUS HIKES. A FRENCH AMBASSADOR WHO VISITED ROOSEVELT USED TO TELL ABOUT THE TIME THAT HE ACCOMPANIED THE PRESIDENT ON A WALK THROUGH THE WOODS. WHEN THE TWO MEN CAME TO THE BANKS OF A STREAM THAT WAS TOO DEEP TO CROSS BY FOOT, TR STRIPPED OFF HIS CLOTHES AND EXPECTED THE DIGNITARY TO DO THE SAME SO THAT THEY COULD SWIM TO THE OTHER SIDE. NOTHING WAS AN OBSTACLE TO ROOSEVELT.

At different times in his life, Roosevelt was a cowboy in the Wild West, an explorer and big- game hunter, and a rough-riding cavalry officer in the Spanish-American War. His enthusiasm and stamina seemed boundless. As the vice presidential candidate in 1900, he gave 673 speeches and traveled 20,000 miles while campaigning for President McKinley. And years after his presidency, while preparing to deliver a speech in Milwaukee, Roosevelt was shot in the chest by a would-be assassin. With a broken rib and a bullet in his chest, Roosevelt insisted on delivering his one-hour speech before allowing himself to be taken to the hospital.

ROOSEVELT STARTED SLOW OF ALL THE LEADERS THIS NATION HAS EVER HAD, ROOSEVELT WAS ONE OF THE TOUGHEST—BOTH PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY. BUT HE DIDN’T START THAT WAY. AMERICA’S COWBOY PRESIDENT WAS BORN IN MANHATTAN TO A PROMINENT WEALTHY FAMILY. AS A CHILD, HE WAS PUNY AND VERY SICKLY. HE HAD DEBILITATING ASTHMA, POSSESSED VERY POOR EYESIGHT, AND WAS PAINFULLY THIN. HIS PARENTS WEREN’T SURE HE WOULD SURVIVE.

When he was twelve, young Roosevelt’s father told him, “You have the mind, but you have not the body, and without the help of the body the mind cannot go as far as it should. You must make the body.” And make it he did. He lived by the Law of Process.

TR began spending time every day building his body as well as his mind, and he did that for the rest of his life. He worked out with weights, hiked, ice-skated, hunted, rowed, rode horseback, and boxed. In later years, Roosevelt assessed his progress, admitting that as a child he was “nervous and timid. Yet,” he said, “from reading of the people I admired … and from knowing my father, I had a great admiration for men who were fearless and who could hold their own in the world, and I had a great desire to be like them.” By the time TR graduated from Harvard, he was like them, and he was ready to tackle the world of politics.

NO OVERNIGHT SUCCESS

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 26/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

ROOSEVELT DIDN’T BECOME A GREAT LEADER OVERNIGHT, EITHER. HIS ROAD TO THE PRESIDENCY WAS ONE OF SLOW, CONTINUAL GROWTH. AS HE SERVED IN VARIOUS POSITIONS, RANGING FROM NEW YORK CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER TO PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, HE KEPT LEARNING AND GROWING. HE IMPROVED HIMSELF, AND IN TIME HE BECAME A STRONG LEADER. THAT WAS FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT HE LIVED BY THE LAW OF PROCESS.

Roosevelt’s list of accomplishments is remarkable. Under his leadership, the United States emerged as a world power. He helped the country develop a first-class navy. He saw that the Panama Canal was built. He negotiated peace between Russia and Japan, winning a Nobel Peace Prize in the process. And when people questioned TR’s leadership—since he had become president when McKinley was assassinated—he campaigned and was reelected by the largest majority of any president up to his time.

Ever the man of action, when Roosevelt completed his term as president in 1909, he immediately traveled to Africa where he led a scientific expedition sponsored by the Smithsonian Institution. A few years later, in 1913, he co-led a group to explore the uncharted River of Doubt in Brazil. It was a great learning adventure he said he could not pass up. “It was my last chance to be a boy,” he later admitted. He was fifty-five years old.

On January 6, 1919, at his home in New York, Theodore Roosevelt died in his sleep. Then Vice President Marshall said, “Death had to take him sleeping, for if Roosevelt had been awake, there would have been a fight.” When they removed him from his bed, they found a book under his pillow. Up to the very last, TR was still striving to learn and improve himself. He was still practicing the Law of Process.

If you want to be a leader, the good news is that you can do it. Everyone has the potential, but it isn’t accomplished overnight. It requires perseverance. And you absolutely cannot ignore the Law of Process. Leadership doesn’t develop in a day. It takes a lifetime.

THE LAW OF NAVIGATION ANYONE CAN STEER THE SHIP, BUT IT

TAKES A LEADER TO CHART THE COURSE

In 1911, two groups of explorers set off on an incredible mission. Though they used different strategies and routes, the leaders of the teams had the same goal: to be the first in history to reach the South Pole. Their stories are life-and-death illustrations of the Law of Navigation.

One of the groups was led by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen. Ironically, Amundsen had not originally intended to go to Antarctica. His desire was to be the first man to reach the North Pole. But when he discovered that Robert Peary had beaten him there, Amundsen changed

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 27/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

his goal and headed toward the other end of the earth. North or south—he knew his planning would pay off.

AMUNDSEN CAREFULLY CHARTED HIS COURSE

BEFORE HIS TEAM EVER SET OFF, AMUNDSEN HAD PAINSTAKINGLY PLANNED HIS TRIP. HE STUDIED THE METHODS OF THE ESKIMOS AND OTHER EXPERIENCED ARCTIC TRAVELERS AND DETERMINED THAT THEIR BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO TRANSPORT ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES BY DOGSLED. WHEN HE ASSEMBLED HIS TEAM, HE CHOSE EXPERT SKIERS AND DOG HANDLERS. HIS STRATEGY WAS SIMPLE. THE DOGS WOULD DO MOST OF THE WORK AS THE GROUP TRAVELED FIFTEEN TO TWENTY MILES IN A SIX-HOUR PERIOD EACH DAY. THAT WOULD ALLOW BOTH THE DOGS AND THE MEN PLENTY OF TIME TO REST EACH DAY FOR THE FOLLOWING DAY’S TRAVEL.

Amundsen’s forethought and attention to detail were incredible. He located and stocked supply depots all along the route. That way they would not have to carry every bit of their supplies with them the whole trip. He also equipped his people with the best gear possible. Amundsen had carefully considered every possible aspect of the journey, thought it through, and planned accordingly. And it paid off. The worst problem they experienced on the trip was an infected tooth that one man had to have extracted.

SCOTT VIOLATED THE LAW OF NAVIGATION

THE OTHER TEAM OF MEN WAS LED BY ROBERT FALCON SCOTT, A BRITISH NAVAL OFFICER WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY DONE SOME EXPLORING IN THE ANTARCTIC AREA. SCOTT’S EXPEDITION WAS THE ANTITHESIS OF AMUNDSEN’S. INSTEAD OF USING DOGSLEDS, SCOTT DECIDED TO USE MOTORIZED SLEDGES AND PONIES. THEIR PROBLEMS BEGAN WHEN THE MOTORS ON THE SLEDGES STOPPED WORKING ONLY FIVE DAYS INTO THE TRIP. THE PONIES DIDN’T FARE WELL EITHER IN THOSE FRIGID TEMPERATURES. WHEN THEY REACHED THE FOOT OF THE TRANSANTARCTIC MOUNTAINS, ALL OF THE POOR ANIMALS HAD TO BE KILLED. AS A RESULT, THE TEAM MEMBERS THEMSELVES ENDED UP HAULING THE TWO-HUNDRED-POUND SLEDGES. IT WAS ARDUOUS WORK.

Scott hadn’t given enough attention to the team’s other equipment. Their clothes were so poorly designed that all the men developed frostbite. One team member required an hour every morning just to get his boots onto his swollen, gangrenous feet. And everyone became snowblind because of the inadequate goggles Scott had supplied. On top of everything else, the team was always low on food. That was also due to Scott’s poor planning. The depots of supplies Scott established were inadequately stocked, too far apart, and often poorly marked, which made them very difficult to find. Because they were continually low on fuel to melt snow, everyone became dehydrated. Making things even worse was Scott’s last-minute decision to tale along a fifth man, even though they had prepared enough supplies only for four.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 28/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

After covering a grueling eight hundred miles in ten weeks, Scott’s exhausted group finally arrived at the South Pole on January 17, 1912. There they found the Norwegian flag flapping in the wind and a letter from Amundsen. The other well-led team had beaten them to their goal by more than a month!

IF YOU DON’T LIVE BY THE LAW OF NAVIGATION …

AS BAD AS THEIR TRIP TO THE POLE WAS, THAT ISN’T THE WORST PART OF THEIR STORY. THE TREK BACK WAS HORRIFIC. SCOTT AND HIS MEN WERE STARVING AND SUFFERING FROM SCURVY. BUT SCOTT, UNABLE TO NAVIGATE TO THE VERY END, WAS OBLIVIOUS TO THEIR PLIGHT. WITH TIME RUNNING OUT AND DESPERATELY LOW ON FOOD, SCOTT INSISTED THAT THEY COLLECT THIRTY POUNDS OF GEOLOGICAL SPECIMENS TO TAKE BACK—MORE WEIGHT TO BE CARRIED BY THE WORN-OUT MEN.

Their progress became slower and slower. One member of the party sank into a stupor and died. Another, Lawrence Oates, was in terrible shape. The former army officer, who had originally been brought along to take care of the ponies, had frostbite so severe that he had trouble going on. Because he believed he was endangering the team’s survival, it’s said that he purposely walked out into a blizzard to relieve the group of himself as a liability. Before he left the tent and headed out into the storm, he said, “I am just going outside; I may be some time.”

Scott and his final two team members made it only a little farther north before giving up. The return trip had already taken two months, and still they were 150 miles from their base camp. There they died. We know their story only because they spent their last hours writing in their diaries. Some of Scott’s last words were these: “We shall die like gentlemen. I think this will show that the Spirit of pluck and power to endure has not passed out of our race.” Scott had courage, but not leadership. Because he was unable to live by the Law of Navigation, he and his companions died by it.

Followers need leaders who are able to effectively navigate for them. When they’re facing life-and-death situations, that necessity becomes painfully obvious. At other times, even though the consequences are not as serious, the need is just as great. The truth is that just about anyone can steer the ship, but it takes a leader to chart the course. That is the Law of Navigation.

NAVIGATORS SEE THE TRIP AHEAD GENERAL ELECTRIC CHAIRMAN JACK WELCH ASSERTS THAT, “A GOOD LEADER REMAINS FOCUSED … CONTROLLING YOUR DIRECTION IS BETTER THAN BEING CONTROLLED BY IT.” WELCH IS RIGHT, BUT LEADERS WHO NAVIGATE DO EVEN MORE THAN CONTROL THE DIRECTION IN WHICH THEY AND THEIR PEOPLE TRAVEL. THEY SEE THE WHOLE TRIP IN THEIR MINDS BEFORE THEY LEAVE THE DOCK. THEY HAVE A VISION FOR THEIR DESTINATION, THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WILL TAKE TO GET THERE, THEY KNOW WHO THEY’LL NEED ON THE TEAM TO BE SUCCESSFUL, AND THEY RECOGNIZE THE OBSTACLES LONG BEFORE THEY APPEAR ON THE HORIZON. LEROY EIMS, AUTHOR OF BE THE LEADER YOU WERE MEANT TO BE, WRITES, “A LEADER IS ONE WHO SEES MORE

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 29/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

THAN OTHERS SEE, WHO SEES FARTHER THAN OTHERS SEE, AND WHO SEES BEFORE OTHERS DO.”

The larger the organization, the more clearly the leader has to be able to see ahead. That’s true because sheer size makes midcourse corrections more difficult. And if there are errors, many more people are affected than when you’re traveling alone or with only a few people. The disaster shown in the recent film Titanic was a good example of that kind of problem. The crew could not see far enough ahead to avoid the iceberg altogether, and they could not maneuver enough to change course once it was spotted because of the size of the ship, the largest built at that time. The result was that it cost more than one thousand people their lives.

WHERE THE LEADER GOES … FIRST-RATE NAVIGATORS ALWAYS HAVE IN MIND THAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DEPENDING ON THEM AND THEIR ABILITY TO CHART A GOOD COURSE. I READ AN OBSERVATION BY JAMES A. AUTRY IN LIFE AND WORK: A MANAGER’S SEARCH FOR MEANING THAT ILLUSTRATES THIS IDEA. HE SAID THAT OCCASIONALLY YOU HEAR ABOUT THE CRASH OF FOUR MILITARY PLANES FLYING TOGETHER IN A FORMATION. THE REASON FOR THE LOSS OF ALL FOUR IS THIS: WHEN JET FIGHTERS FLY IN GROUPS OF FOUR, ONE PILOT—THE LEADER—DESIGNATES WHERE THE TEAM WILL FLY. THE OTHER THREE PLANES FLY ON THE LEADER’S WING, WATCHING HIM AND FOLLOWING HIM WHEREVER HE GOES. WHATEVER MOVES HE MAKES, THE REST OF HIS TEAM WILL MAKE ALONG WITH HIM. THAT’S TRUE WHETHER HE SOARS IN THE CLOUDS OR SMASHES INTO A MOUNTAINTOP.

Before leaders take their people on a journey, they go through a process in order to give the trip the best chance of being a success:

NAVIGATORS DRAW ON PAST EXPERIENCE

EVERY PAST SUCCESS AND FAILURE CAN BE A SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND WISDOM—IF YOU ALLOW IT TO BE. SUCCESSES TEACH YOU ABOUT YOURSELF AND WHAT YOU’RE CAPABLE OF DOING WITH YOUR PARTICULAR GIFTS AND TALENTS. FAILURES SHOW WHAT KINDS OF WRONG ASSUMPTIONS YOU’VE MADE AND WHERE YOUR METHODS ARE FLAWED. IF YOU FAIL TO LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES, YOU’RE GOING TO FAIL AGAIN AND AGAIN. THAT’S WHY EFFECTIVE NAVIGATORS START WITH EXPERIENCE. BUT THEY CERTAINLY DON’T END THERE.

NAVIGATORS LISTEN TO WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY

NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU LEARN FROM THE PAST, IT WILL NEVER TELL YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW FOR THE PRESENT. THAT’S WHY TOP-NOTCH NAVIGATORS GATHER INFORMATION FROM MANY SOURCES. THEY GET IDEAS FROM MEMBERS OF THEIR LEADERSHIP TEAM. THEY TALK TO THE PEOPLE IN THEIR ORGANIZATION TO FIND OUT WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE GRASSROOTS LEVEL. AND THEY SPEND TIME WITH LEADERS FROM OUTSIDE THE ORGANIZATION WHO CAN MENTOR THEM.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 30/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

NAVIGATORS EXAMINE THE CONDITIONS BEFORE MAKING COMMITMENTS

I LIKE ACTION, AND MY PERSONALITY PROMPTS ME TO BE SPONTANEOUS. ON TOP OF THAT, I HAVE RELIABLE INTUITION WHEN IT COMES TO LEADERSHIP. BUT I’M ALSO CONSCIOUS OF MY RESPONSIBILITIES AS A LEADER. SO BEFORE I MAKE COMMITMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO IMPACT MY PEOPLE, I TAKE STOCK AND THOROUGHLY THINK THINGS THROUGH. GOOD NAVIGATORS COUNT THE COST BEFORE MAKING COMMITMENTS FOR THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.

NAVIGATORS MAKE SURE THEIR CONCLUSIONS REPRESENT BOTH FAITH AND FACT

BEING ABLE TO NAVIGATE FOR OTHERS REQUIRES A LEADER TO POSSESS A POSITIVE ATTITUDE. YOU’VE GOT TO HAVE FAITH THAT YOU CAN TAKE YOUR PEOPLE ALL THE WAY. IF YOU CAN’T CONFIDENTLY MAKE THE TRIP IN YOUR MIND, YOU’RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE IT IN REAL LIFE. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU ALSO HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE FACTS REALISTICALLY. YOU CAN’T MINIMIZE OBSTACLES OR RATIONALIZE YOUR CHALLENGES. IF YOU DON’T GO IN WITH YOUR EYES WIDE OPEN, YOU’RE GOING TO GET BLINDSIDED. AS BILL EASUM OBSERVES, “REALISTIC LEADERS ARE OBJECTIVE ENOUGH TO MINIMIZE ILLUSIONS. THEY UNDERSTAND THAT SELF-DECEPTION CAN COST THEM THEIR VISION.” SOMETIMES IT’S DIFFICULT BALANCING OPTIMISM AND REALISM, INTUITION AND PLANNING, FAITH AND FACT. BUT THAT’S WHAT IT TAKES TO BE EFFECTIVE AS A NAVIGATING LEADER.

A LESSON IN NAVIGATION I REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME I REALLY UNDERSTOOD THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LAW OF NAVIGATION. I WAS TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OLD, AND I WAS LEADING FAITH MEMORIAL IN LANCASTER, OHIO, MY SECOND CHURCH. BEFORE MY ARRIVAL THERE IN 1972, THE CHURCH HAD EXPERIENCED A DECADE-LONG PLATEAU IN ITS GROWTH. BUT BY 1975, OUR ATTENDANCE HAD GONE FROM FOUR HUNDRED TO MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND. I KNEW WE COULD KEEP GROWING AND REACH MORE PEOPLE, BUT ONLY IF WE BUILT A NEW AUDITORIUM.

The good news was that I already had some experience in building and relocation because I had taken my first church through the process. The bad news was that the first one was really small in comparison to the second one. To give you an idea of the difference, the changing room in the nursery in Lancaster was going to be larger than the whole sanctuary in the original building of my first church!

It was going to be a multimillion-dollar project more than twenty times larger than my first one. But even that was not the greatest obstacle. Right before I came on board at Faith Memorial, there had been a huge battle over another building proposal, and the debate had been vocal, divisive, and bitter. For that reason, I knew that I would experience genuine opposition to my leadership for the first time. There were rough waters ahead, and if I as the leader didn’t navigate us well, I could sink the ship.

Encoded by: Dhon Reyes NOT FOR SALE! 31/135 tagapayo@gmail.com

CHARTING THE COURSE WITH A NAVIGATION STRATEGY

AT THAT TIME I DEVELOPED A STRATEGY THAT I HAVE USED REPEATEDLY IN MY LEADERSHIP. I WROTE IT AS AN ACROSTIC SO THAT I WOULD ALWAYS BE ABLE TO REMEMBER IT:

Predetermine a Course of Action. Lay Out Your Goals. Adjust Your Priorities. Notify Key Personnel. Allow Time for Acceptance. Head into Action. Expect Problems. Always Point to the Successes. Daily Review Your Planning.

That became my blueprint as I prepared to navigate for my people. Back then, I knew exactly what our course of action needed to be. If we were going to keep