People Strategies: Leadership defined by ability to think through issues

Linda Bower is a speaker, executive coach and human performance improvement consultant in Rogersville.

Many people agree that companies, big and small, need some kind of defined approach to leadership that directs the actions of executives and managers.

Most of the time I find leadership books to be about techniques and tools, rarely about how to think for oneself as a leader. That is why Peter Koestenbaum's book "Leadership: The Inner Side of Greatness" is so refreshing. It doesn't tell one what to do, but how to think about what to do.

When I lived on the East Coast, I had the opportunity to work with a global high-tech company to help 1,500 managers adopt Koestenbaum's philosophy. The essence of the corporate message and of Koestenbaum's book was to develop one's ability to think through issues and be able to take action even in the face of dilemmas.

Koestenbaum defines terms uniquely as he describes the most common opposing forces that managers face: Vision versus reality and ethics versus courage. Here's how he describes each leadership attribute.

Vision A visionary leader sees the larger perspective, for visioning means to think big and new.

Reality A realistic leader responds to the facts, for realism means to have no illusions.

Ethics An ethical leader is sensitive to people, for ethics means to be of service.

Courage A courageous leader claims the power to initiate, act and risk, for courage means to act with sustained initiative.

Any one of these attributes is manageable to most people some of the time. To manage all the attributes consistently as they conflict with each other is a completely different matter and a worthy goal.

One way to use Koestenbaum's work is to explore the tension between vision and reality as one axis, then the tension between ethics and courage as a second, intersecting axis. Both axes are considered together as a decision is concluded. Considering these axes forces a leader to think through the implications of his actions before he acts.

Vision vs. reality

This is the age-old question of understanding where you want to be versus where you are now. Koestenbaum doesn't just say, "Create a vision and make it a reality." He challenges people to think about decisions in the context of vision and reality, frankly, like executives are used to doing.

In the case of the high-tech company I referenced earlier, it required that decision-making be driven to lower levels in the organization to improve customer satisfaction. Managers were being asked, for the first time, to go beyond policy and solve customer problems in the field to think for themselves.

This meant, as Koestenbaum urges, that leaders needed to learn big-picture thinking to consider relevant factors in a situation. By focusing on how managers should think as leaders, instead of what they should think, they were far more equipped to handle adversity in the field.

Ethics vs. courage

Koestenbaum doesn't define ethics as we typically see it defined. In his mind, it's not about choosing right from wrong. Ethics, in the context of leadership, embodies how people are treated. Courage is the degree to which we can act on our decisions.

Managers are often imbalanced in this regard. They tend to be either sensitive to people's feelings, but not very courageous when it comes to the tough decisions. Or they have no problem courageously confronting people, but they cut them off at the knees in the process. Either extreme isn't effective.

With the high-tech managers, the dilemmas were largely employee-based rather than having to do with customer interactions. For them, it was about having the courage to give tough feedback, to fire people or make competitive promotion decisions. Again, Koestenbaum doesn't suggest the answers; he suggests how to think about the questions.

Opposing forces

Managers can think through any dilemma they face by looking at the tension between all four opposing forces. Test it for yourself. Think of a decision you have had a difficult time making.

Ask yourself how each of the options fit your vision, are realistic to implement, that best serve the people in your company and to what degree you have the courage to act on each of them.

The high-tech managers overwhelmingly stated that their decision would have been very different had they not gone through this thought process.