Virtuoso Teams

As NancyLP commented to an earlier post, Harvard Business Review has a July 2005 article by Bill Fischer and Andy Boynton:

Virtuoso Teams: "Managing a traditional team seems pretty straightforward: Gather up whoever's available, give them time and space to do their jobs, and make sure they all play nicely together. But these teams produce results that are often as unremarkable as the teams themselves. When big change and high performance are required, a virtuoso team is far more likely to deliver outstanding and innovative results. Virtuoso teams are fundamentally different from the garden-variety work groups that most organizations form to pursue more modest goals. They comprise the top experts in their particular fields, are specially convened for ambitious projects, work with frenetic rhythm, and emanate a discernible energy. Not surprisingly, however, the superstars who make up these teams are renowned for being elitist, temperamental, egocentric, and difficult to work with. As a result, many managers fear that if they force such people to interact on a high-stakes project, the group just might implode. In this article, Bill Fischer and Andy Boynton put the inner workings of highly successful virtuoso teams on full display through three examples: the creative group behind West Side Story, the team of writers for Sid Caesar's 1950s-era television hit Your Show of Shows, and the high-powered technologists who averted an investor relations crisis for Norsk Hydro, the Norwegian energy giant. Each of these teams accomplished enormous goals and changed their businesses, their customers, even their industries. And they did so by breaking all the conventional rules of collaboration--from the way they recruited the best members to the way they enforced their unusual processes and from the high expectations they held to the exceptional results they produced."

I find the teams that they selected to be interesting, especially given the timeframes! Is this possible in our fast-moving, information-centric world? What are the best ways of handling this?

What does it take to lead?

As I enter a new round of leadership with brilliant people--all volunteers--I am considering once again what it takes to lead.

It helps to have the respect of those you are leading. Of course, the only way to earn that respect is to focus on it. Make no mistake, it is always earned. The days of respect following the promotion are long gone. Today, a position or title is far more likely to earn disdain than respect. That means you actually have to overcome the baggage of the role and earn additional respect on top of that. How you do that depends on the position and the team you will lead.

You may have a team that includes former peers. Some of them may think that they are better suited for leadership than you are. Some of them may actually be better suited for it. How will you address this?

Others would prefer you just stay out of their way. This has historically been my preference with most leaders, since most leaders are far more likely to reduce my productivity than improve it. Perhaps you've had the same experience in your past--or even know with a superior. Take some time to consider why you feel like this and then avoid doing the things that would lead your team to think this of you.

Still others will fear you and want to avoid you. For them, you are the fastest path to being led out the door, so they are going to hide from you and try to stay under the radar.

The key for you is to really understand the role of a leader in your organization and for your team. First off, why does the team need a leader? Probably, because you're trying to get something done, and you need a rallying point. There may be other reasons, though, so take some time to consider what they might be. Second, what can you be doing to help the team achieve? Perhaps there are gaps in expertise or training. Perhaps there are issues with resources or the environment. Look for small, quick wins early, and continue to study longer-term and more expensive opportunities for moving the team forward. As a leader, you need to show up as someone who is serving them and getting stuff done that they need to have to get their work done. This is absolutely critical!

...and part of what it takes to lead.

Leading is not Doing

One of the biggest challenges for a leader is to lead without doing. To allow others to do what you do well. To let go of both outcomes and process other than to make sure that the ultimate goals are reached. And to simultaneously still recognize that you are leading and what you're doing is vitally important.

I am back at Interop this week. (If you'd like more detail about what I'm doing, feel free to drop by the official Interop blog or my own personal and more "inside" view.) As a result of my leadership role here, I got to thinking about the topic of this post. The teams at Interop are among the elite on the planet at what they do. As a result, leading them is a true exercise in leadership, and presents some real challenges. For example, since I delegated very high-level divisions of labor to experiences and skilled Interop engineers, there is very little technical for me to do. Instead, I run interference, make sure that they get what they need when they need it, participate in brainstorming around decisions that need to be made, and generally stay out of the way so that they can get their tasks done.

And it can really be difficult at times.

Difficult to not feel like I am actively "getting things done" together with them. Difficult to feel that I am taking up space better occupied by another technical person. Difficult to not make use of the skills that I have that apply to the problems we're solving.

Have you ever been there?

But, the bottom line is that leadership is critical. Helping our teams to maintain focus. Leading by allowing them to grow, change, learn, and use their skills to accomplish what we've agreed is the primary objective.

Have you ever had this kind of experience?

Leading Talented People

I have said before that leadership is the stewardship of the talents of others, and I truly believe it. As I enter another season of working with Interop and the incredibly brilliant people who populate the core of engineering staff to make the show network and labs work, I realize that leading highly talented people presents a series of challenges that are even more great than leading more typical groups.

Many folks think that leading talented people must be easier than leading more typical groups, but I can tell you that such a thought is far from the truth. With highly talented people, challenges of conflict, interpersonal dynamics, and decision making all become far more difficult. For example, how do you decide between five really good options for a decision instead of only between a couple? How do you mediate between equally strong and brilliant people and their conflicting ideas?

It's a difficult path to find, but one that the fortunate leader must if she is to bring out the best possible results. The more talent that you steward, the more challenge there is in leadership. But, ultimately, the more joy there is in the outstanding results that you can be part of accomplishing.

Question Authority... the Consequences

Some of us are old enough to remember the 1960s mantra, "Question authority." It has lived on, certainly, and isn't rare on bumper stickers and other cultural communications. However, have you considered the consequences of this mindset? It's important that we examine it, because we are reaping in leadership the natural result of this thinking.

As an introduction, let's consider 19th Century leadership. Largely as a result of the culture of the military and monarchy, the positions held by men (almost exclusively) led to respect of and obedience by their underlings. An officer had the unquestioned following of his men, in fear or habit or love or trust, they followed.

But, peaking in the 20th century, as a result of men thinking more of themselves than they ought--not to mention exceeding their own competence--those they led rebelled, resulting in labor unions, organized opposition, and fundamental questioning of authority.

This progression led to the loss of structure that had supported leadership for centuries. Followers of those authoritarian leaders were far more educated than had historically been the case, and many were at least as educated as those leaders. As a result, the followers were able to assess for themselves the validity or folly of their authority's ideas.
To a point, of course, this is good and healthy. A title, position, or benevolence doesn't necessarily mean that the titleholder has what it takes to lead. It also doesn't meant that they don't! And there's the rub.

What has happened as a result of the mantra to "Question Authority" is a wholesale loss of respect for anyone in authority, regardless of their actual capabilities or credentials. Even credientials that have historically demonstrated competence are now ignored, belittled, or worse.

The bottom line is that position gives the leader little leverage.

Instead, it may be a handicap!

So, it is even more incumbent upon the leader to understand her team. And to learn their motivations for being involved in the team's objectives. On top of that, the post-modern leader needs to capture the respect of his team members starting when the team is formed, and continuously thereafter. We'll talk about this in more detail in a later post...

All of that said, here're the keys:

1. As a leader, recognize that you have to win the respect and following of your team every day
2. As a follower, realize that your leader may actually have a lot of experience to guide you, but you'll have to pay attention to find out.

Leadership....or politics?

The unfortunate fallout from Hurricane Katrina continues. As we do everything we can to ensure the survival and healing for all of the individuals who have been impacted by the devastating storm, there also needs to be a focus on what happened at the level of leadership--and why.

Politics or leadership?

The actions and words of those responsible for the various levels of government response demonstrate a very critical distinction: Politics and leadership.

Politics, by my definition here, encompasses the words and actions necessary to maintain the popularity contest that modern elections have become. Leadership is a different beast entirely. But, before we focus there, let's consider the implications of our over-saturated media environment.

Even though blogs and other emerging person-to-person media are slowly changing the way that we learn about events like Katrina, the core of our mass-media influence remains under the control of the few major "news outlets". This means that the opinions and bias of a relatively few individuals impacts a great many people. Furthermore, since emotional responses from viewers and listeners keep them viewing and listening, modern "news" focuses on capturing the hearts of the audience before addressing their minds.

Why is this important? Simply because the popularity contest that has emerged as the American electoral system requires that those hearts belong to those competing for the prize. This is why so much of politics has become a blame game. Everyone wants to look good so they focus on keeping the negative from sticking and having the positive build them up.

Leadership

A leader does not concern him- or herself with what others think. For one thing, doing so requires far too much energy that needs to be applied elsewhere (toward leading!). For another, it is impossible to please all the people all the time, so trying to do so becomes self-defeating. Leaders recognize this. As a result, they focus on what needs to get done. What's important. What is worth the time and effort of the leader and the team. If you really are trying to get something done, it's clear that this is where your focus should be.

What now?

I am not going to use this medium to express my personal opinion about blame or to articulate the root cause analysis I've done to this point surrounding the response to Karina of those in authority. What I will do is to encourage you, as a leader, to realize that to lead, you need to stay focused on what needs to be done and why--and ignore the opinions of those who choose to pontificate while maligning you and impugning your character. That always happens to real leaders.

We trust history as our judge. Sooner or later, reality emerges.

Levels of Leadership

Leadership is a much misunderstood term, I think. It is so wrapped in the filters of experience that many of us lose track of what it really means. According to dictionary.com, a couple of meanings of leadership include "the capacity or ability to lead" and "guidance, direction". It is in the context of these definitions that I write this article.

Leadership actually occurs at multiple levels in life. Specifically:

1. Personal
2. Marriage/family
3. Team
4. Organization

At each of these levels there are challenges in and of our leadership, but the fundamental components of leadership remain across all of them. It is a few of those fundamentals that I'll challenge you to consider now.

Most of us do not think about leadership in the context of us alone. We usually believe that leadership requires someone else to lead. I argue, however, that for man of us personal leadership is the most difficult kind of leadership we ever undertake. One reason, I suspect, is that we can't fool ourselves! We can't overcome our personal doubts by acting confident and knowledgeable. We know the truth. We may not be 100% confident that we'll be able to overcome the challenges that we'll face along the path we've chosen. We may be facing fears or a lack of knowledge. We can't fool ourselves! We know the truth!

So, how do we lead ourselves? First, by digging deep. Remember all of that stuff about emotional commitment? If we are going to accomplish the transformations we seek, we need to connect at the deepest level of our psyche with why we seek them. If we are going to reach the objectives we lay before ourselves, we had better understand the true motivation for desiring them. Without that burning desire to acheive them, we have a much lower likelihood that we will be successful. There is simply not enough reason to press through the obstacles that undoubtedly arise. As Zig Ziglar has said, "You've got trouble in front of you." Without the compelling commitment, that trouble will be enough to cause us to give up.

I'm willing to bet that you've experienced that one or twice in life. At least.

If you spend the time and energy necessary to learn to lead yourself, it will serve you well in your other realms of leadership. Besides the underlying motivation to reach your personal objectives, there are other components of self-leadership.

Do you know what they are?

More next time...

Making progress

This week, I was reminded that our emotional commitment is necessary for everything we set out to do in life. For example, any goal that you or I will attain requires us to be emotionally committed to it. Without that commitment, the goal becomes a want and is quickly relegated to the "wouldn't it be nice" section of your brain.

However, a goal supported by an emotional commitment is an empowered potential.

The question to ask yourself about this is, "Why would I want to do this?" Then, focus your answers on those characteristics of your life about which you care very much.

Let me illustrate with an example:

Let's say that I'd like to drop my body fat to a healthy 15% or less by October 15th. That is a good, worthy, and specific goal.

Now, I ask myself, "Why?"

If I answer with, "Because it would be good for me," or "because I should," I am going to find it very difficult to see the accomplishment of the goal as something really worthy of my focused attention. On the other hand, if I recognize that there are specific and powerful (for me) reasons to reach the goal (perhaps to reduce my risk of specific health problems, increase my energy with my children, or win a particular competition), the goal suddenly has its own attraction. It is worthwhile.

It is not difficult to see how this ties in with the last post here on emotional commitment. As leaders, we need to do the same thing for our individual team members and also for the team as a whole. Ideally, as we lead, we meet individually with the team members, help them see how their own commitments are met by the team objectives we have developed, and then tie their commitments directly to the rally cry for the objective. It's building a bridge between the individuals' commitments and the way the team will discuss the team objectives.

What are you doing to recognize that your team consists of emotional human beings? How are you wrapping all of their humanness into your leadership? Share it with me if you would, I'd love to hear about it.

Emotional Commitment

As I mentioned earlier, it is the underlying emotional commitment to some ideal or desire that provides the energy for motivation and accomplishment of specific steps. It is interesting to me that Stephen M. Shapiro's Goal-Free Living link showed up in my Google Ads on these pages. In spending some time reading his thoughts, I discovered that even someone who has spent as much time as Mr. Shapiro has considering and studying goals doesn't really understand what they are or why they are.

In fact, I would postulate that Mr. Shapiro is adept at setting and achieving goals of his own making, as evidenced by the development of his book.

Why do I mention this? Because it may be that I have not communicated the idea of goals and objectives due to the widespread mis-application of the overloaded terms. Therefore, let me be rightly understood: your goals and objectives--and the plans to reach them--are entirely within your own control. If the thing is not worth the work and other costs to achieve it, then of course you should not pursue it. If it is forced on you, why would you even consider its pursuit?

And yet, apparently, people do.

I can think of nothing so twisted than someone forcing goals and objectives on others and expecting them to go after them with gusto.

This is where emotional commitment enters the picture. As I have written here in the past, it is the role of a real leader to understand what is important to the members of his or her team, and to tie the team objectives to those deeply-held personal commitments. It is the task of each individual to determine whether or not the objectives teams on which they participate are compatible with their own commitments.

When they are in harmony, the results--both in terms of visible accomplishment and personal joy--are amazing. It is those results that make it worth the real effort required.

Why are you doing?

So many people effectively wander through life trying to do what they think they "should" do in order to effect some result. Usually, the result is something like "be happy" or "feel good" or "make money" or some other equally abstract and effectively meaningless statement. Besides their general vague nature, these "reasons" are weak because they do not connect deeply with our own motivation. As a result, they do not actually provide us with the necessary emotional commitment to propel us to a rewarding future.

I am convinced that many people--perhaps the vast majority--pass through life as a "wandering generality" rather than a "meaningful specific" (to steal a pair of phrases from Zig Ziglar). The generality steals from us the emotive power of clear focus, and leaves us with the burden of obligation without the reward of success. Don't believe me? When will you achieve "being happy?" When will you cross the finish line of "feeling good?" When will you celebrate "making money?" The answer, of course, is that you won't. You'll never be able to recognize your own success, so you'll never accomplish what you think you seek.

Now, compare those to these far more concrete objectives: Have $150,000 in investments by April 15th, 2007. Improve my marriage by increasing communication and eliminating Love Busters. Create my weekly schedule so that I have time for a round of golf twice a week.

I don't know what gets you excited, obviously. But, I know that these more concrete objectives are far more focused and more likely to connect with my emotional commitments (both those that I know and those that I haven't discovered, yet) than are the amorphous reasons that I wrote at the beginning. It is the connection with our core emotional commitments that make the difference between success and failure. Many of us have no idea how important those core commitments are, and very few of us have actually spent the time and effort to mine them and put them to work. When we do, we discover motivation that we had no idea that we have. We discover the energy to accomplish the necessary to achieve our objectives. And, above all, we begin to understand more clearly our purpose in the grand scheme of life.

Take the time to understand yourself better. Find ways of uncovering the deep wells of desire that actually provide you with a reason for doing what you will do. When you do, you'll find that life takes on a clarity, focus, and meaning that you had never seen before. As a result, you'll accomplish more in less time than you could before. It will still be work, but it will be work for a reason. And the reason will be one about which you have a great desire. It will be worth it!

What are you doing?

Last night, I sat down and went through my current projects, making sure that my next actions for each project were clear to me, especially since I am on-site with a client this week and have a number of objectives for my time here. This got me to thinking, "How many of us know that what we're doing right now is the most important thing that we can be doing right now?"

Clearly, this ties into my comments last time about self management. It also ties into objectives, both in terms of long-term goals and in terms of the stepping stones for reaching those goals.

David Allen has published the clearest outline for self management that I have seen, although Mission Control also presents very interesting ideas about this. One of the more interesting concepts introduced by Mission Control is the idea of answering the "Why?" question for each activity that you plan to do. This is a very powerful idea, indeed. Do you work on things because you feel like you should? Or because they seem like the right thing? Or for so many other good reasons? But always remember that the good is the enemy of the best! You may be doing what your doing for reasons that do not align with your objectives, goals, and purpose. As a result, you feel frustrated, busy, overloaded, and maybe even a bit depressed. All of these emotions are there for one of two reasons. Either you are engaged in activities that you know, perhaps even subconsciously, that are not really important to help you get to where you want to go, or you don't really know why you're doing what you're doing.

So, here's the fundamental question: where are you going in life? What will it take for you to really be fulfilled?

In the next few entries, I expect I'll be spending a bit more time on defining those things.

By the way, if you're reading this, do drop me a line or stuff in a comment to let me know how this is landing for you. Thanks...

Time Management

One of the stranges phrases that I've seen in the leadership and performance management information that I've read and heard over the years is this one: Time Management. I don't know where the term began, or who coined it, but there is a fundamental problem with it: One cannot manage time! There is only one thing that happens with time, and that is that it passes. Moment by moment, day by day, time moves inexorably forward, and there is nothing that anyone can do to "manage" or otherwise control it. It is the effort to manage time that frustrates so many, and leaves many of us trying to understand "where the time went" and trying to "save time."

So, what is it that attracts us to Time Management enough to generate dozens of books, seminars, audio lessons, and effectively a complete industry? It's that we know that we are not accomplishing what we think that we can and should, and so there must be a way to harness time to help us.

Truth is, there isn't.

There is only one thing that we can harness or manage to help us, and it is that thing which we do almost anything we can do avoid. Do you know what it is? We need to learn to manage... Self.

You see, we really cannot control or manage anything else, can we? We can't actually control another, no matter how hard we try or think that we can. But, that means that we need to take full responsibility for controlling and managing the one person that we actually can: Self. The person who accepts full responsibility for him- or herself, who is willing to be held accountable for failure as well as success, who recognizes that only she controls her accomplishment has truly embarked upon a life worth living and one based on truth.

So, the next time you consider that you need to manage time better, realize that it is not time you need to manage, but yourself. Take inventory. Are you giving yourself enough of what you need and demanding of yourself what you ought? Life is worth living only if it is you who are living it.

Motivation

Can you actually motivate someone else? Think about it.

Can someone else motivate you?

Actually, no. The only person that can motivate you is you, and the only person that can motivate your team is the individual members themselves. Motivation is an internal result of what matters to an individual. It is the juxtaposition of those internal concerns with external stimuli that encourage or discourage action by each of us. If we see that certain actions on our part will lead to ends that we desire, we are motivated to take those actions. The key is that the actions must map to something that concerns us.

It's clear, then, that as leaders we cannot simply "motivate" someone by telling them why we think that they should do something. Rather, it is our task to understand them as human beings well enough to make our communication effective. Furthermore, the best leaders are those who understand their team members so well that they actually consider whether or not the team members' motivations are inclined towards any of the activities necessary to complete a project. Then, they adjust team assignments to keep those motivations aligned with necessary activities. If there are those not clearly motivated by the projects, it is the role of the leader to determine how best to engage them or, possibly, re-assign or otherwise find valuable activities for the team members that resonate with their own motivations.

This is the key! Spend some time with this idea. Consider all of the team failures that you've seen. Consider the fear-filled teams you've seen (or, God forbid, joined) and consider the source of the fear and the demotivation resulting from it. Where did it originate? Simply put, it starts in the lazy "motivation" efforts of a leader. Often using one of the basic fears that plague human beings, a weak leader will attempt to rule by force. Such an approach is never successful for long, and often will cause teams to spin out of control in one way or another.

As a leader, please understand that your team members are human beings. They are motivated by their emotional desires and responses in life. Help them to move towards those things that attract them and away from those things that repel, and you can be a very successful leader. Be a lazy leader and try to "motivate" your team members and you will not find lasting success--and will also very likely be miserable.

Movement or Progress?

It seems that many people think that they can be a leader, and that leadership involves some minimum set of "getting people to do what you want them to do." Unfortunately, such thinking is fuzzy at best, and very distant from what leadership actually entails.

During conversations yesterday, a friend (who, it may be noted, is one of those folks who participated with me in those tremendous and synergistic projects I mentioned earlier) mentioned the challenge that so many corporate managers seem to have differentiating between movement and progress. The classic example is that of a "worker bee" at an organization being asked to spend a certain amount of time--perhaps even during certain hours--at their desk. It seems to not matter whether or not they are able to get specific tasks done or goals advanced. Only that they show up, sit down, and shut up (effectively).

Why?

What is it about "being there" that has a typical manager feeling like they are somehow leading, while the typical team member feels confined and frustrated? The perhaps obvious answer is that it is far easier to see whether or not someone is present than it is to take the time and effort necessary to determine whether or not real progress is being made. It is this distinction that separates leaders from impostors.

If you are a leader (or are growing in that direction), it is your primary task to keep the team's objectives clearly in sight, and to be in action regarding the set of activities necessary to keep the team moving in the right direction. Furthermore, you need to be actively ensuring that the team members understand the objectives, have the resources that they need to accomplish their activities, and are doing so within an environment that enhances their chances for success.

Stop trying to control others! It never works! Instead, work with them to develop that environment, keep communication open so that everyone is on the same page, and don't withhold the resources that are needed for accomplishment. After all, everyone wants to be successful in all things! Our job is to help them make it to the celebration of success.

The Interpersonal Explosion

If you have never been a member of a group of people who worked together to accomplish a good work, you have missed one of the joys of life. For me, I have had the blessing of being involved with the InteropNet since the fairly early days (1993) and have, in fact, written some notes about my experience there this year with a bow to the earlier years.

The InteropNet NOC Team is an amazing group of technical experts who, for many years, put together a bleeding edge network to provide communication technologies across the show floor as both a production network and demonstration of the capabilities of emerging technologies. As a result of the knowledge, skills, and commitment of each member of the team, we were able to do some truly exciting and amazing technological wonders over the course of a number of years.

As a critical part of that work, members of the team met over the course of the year prior to an event to discuss what we would try to show, how we would show it, and how we would endeavor to mitigate the significant risks of failure in using technology just beginning to see the light of day. The discussions would be emotional, opinionated, and strongly expressed. But, interestingly enough, during breaks and our long dinners into the night, deep friendships were created and strengthened--even (or, perhaps, particularly)--between those who were strongly opposed during the meetings. We all knew what we were trying to do, we were all committed to doing it, we all knew that we were in it together, and we were above all committed to one another in our joint success.

These are characteristics that create an empowering, fulfilling, and synergistic environment that results in far more than could be done by even these brilliant individuals working alone.

In my view, life is far too short to work in any other environment. Find work that you love and do it with those with whom you can synergize. Then, let everyone cut loose...

The Disorganized Conspiracy

I have been observing lately the general tendency of so many in our society to intensionally tear down alliances rather than join them and advance the cause. Using quarelling, belittling, sarcasm, and other techniques, people believe that they are advancing themselves while tearing down others. In fact, however, they are simply sabotaging the opportunities for accomplishment that emerge from synergy.

It is, of course, easier to belittle another than to understand them and to work with them to see what you can together create. Furthermore, not everyone is an appropriate partner in the discovery process. However, it is far better to simply avoid the energy of lashing out at others and focus your energy on those actions that will move you in the direction of your definite major purpose.

I cannot help but think that so many of our challenges today are due to the deliberate division generated by the press and sarcastic skeptics that belittle every idea. The creation of excellence now has the roadblock of those without the imagination or initiative to do anything on their own.

It is essential for all of us to realize that this is the case, for this is an insideous danger that lurks for all who desire to do a good work. Set yourself up to overcome the comments, criticism, and complaints of those who seem to live to tear down. Instead, be very careful to share your goals only with those who will support their achievement. Keep the thoughts within close company until you have the momentum and strength to overcome the naysayers.

...and thus achieve what you set your mind to do...

The Path to Synergy

There is a guy I know who is incredibly brilliant, but a real detractor in any group he joins. I tend to avoid him, as do most--really all--of the other bright people that I know. Why do they avoid him? Because his caustic interpersonal style destroys teams, quiets insights, and generally shuts down communication. He is a stereotypical technogeek loner. From my perspective, even given his vast knowledge and skillset, having him on a team is too disrupting to allow it to happen. As a result, it is better to live without his knowledge than to try to make him the part of a team.

Conversely, I know others who are not nearly as brilliant or as experienced, but who are open, willing to help, interested in seeing the result of team effort, and a pleasure to get to know. I am more than willing to populate teams with such people as these, since the combined skills collaborating in a harmonious group with a common purpose will without a doubt achieve more than a smaller more brilliant group of people who cannot agree to a common goal or who are unwilling to work in harmony with one another.

In other words, one of the undoubted keys to success is harmony within the team. Without it, success is difficult or perhaps impossible to achieve. With it, success is almost assured.

As a result, there are two questions to ask when you desire teamwork that will lead to success:

1. Do we have a clear purpose that is understood by all of us?
2. Are we in harmony as we work together to achieve it?

We'll talk more about these in future entries, but for now, think about it: are you a person that harmonizes well with others? Or are you the caustic person I mentioned at the beginning? This is a very telling self-analysis if you perform it honestly. It can explain a lot...

The temptation of tools

Have you ever read one of the advertisements for a great time management, financial management, or communications device or application and thought, "Man, that's just what I need!" I cannot count the times earlier in my professional life that I would attend a seminar, buy a product, or try a new approach in an effort to solve my challenges. I had so much that I wanted to accomplish, and I just couldn't find a way to make it happen.

So, in my office, there are pile of PIMs (personal information managers), the remains of my old Day Timers, materials from a number of seminars on "time management" (more on that misnomer in a future entry), and half a dozen PDAs (personal digital assistants). While some have proven themselves useful at some level, none were a panacea.

...and yet the temptation is always there for a "quick fix." I might think, "If I just have a tool to help me do this, it will all come together." This is a symptom of our time; the idea that somehow something outside of me will give me what I need to be successful in life and with the challenges that I face. What do you think? Is that even possible?

...til next time...

Where are we going?

It seems to me that one of the greatest challenges most of us have is the temptation of dissipation. That is, the natural tendency so many of us have to allow our time, energy, and other resources to be simply lost because we don't really have a consistent focus.

As I mentioned yesterday, this was clear to me this year in the recreational pursuit of skiing, however I don't think it's limited to physical activities. In fact, I would argue that the value of focus in those activities (sports and recreation) is simply more visible evidence of a universal truth: having a target generates focus, and the focus provides concentrated effort that leads us as close to the target as we can get.

How many of us really have a target for our lives? How many of us really know where we plan to go and where we really would like our focus to be?

The way that I like to say this is, "Why should I bother to get out of bed in the morning?"

Without that sure knowledge, we will invariably decay to a state of existence that is little more than waiting to die. Sure, that's a strong statement, but if we don't have a purpose; a reason;a focus for life, then all of life becomes a series of events--fortunate and unfortunate--over which we exert little control. It is no wonder, then, that so many lives are spent before they result in much that brings us joy, delight, and a sense of accomplishment.

For what are you living? Where are you going?

Ode to a season

As winter rolls into spring here in Colorado, the ski season winds down and I refocus on technology, business, and leadership. For the past six months, I've been splitting time between Boulder and the mountains, meeting new people, learning new concepts, getting back in touch with how my body moves, and developing concepts as a result of living in an alternative context.

This season, I was on-snow more than 30 days--far more than I have spent in decades. As a result, my skiing improved dramatically, especially as a result of time spent on EpicSki, at the EpicSki Academy, and with the Copper Mountain Over the Hill Gang. I noticed that it took me about 12 days on-snow to really begin to hit "the zone". Before that, each day seemed to be a new experience. Even though I have 34 seasons on-snow, each day was a challenge to get my balance back, to find the "sweet spot" on the skis, to "learn to turn", in a sense. But, around day 12, I began to ski mostly in a place of intuition.

There is a parallel for life in there. When we do not spend the time and focus consistently on an area of our life that we'd like to improve, we find ourselves virtually starting over every time. This provides the foundation for focus in life. Most of us are so scattered that we never really get moving well in any particular direction before we find ourselves pulled away to do something else. As a result, we never build momentum and make really positive progress towards our real objectives in life.

What are you seeking? Do you know? Are you staying on-plan?

I have to ask myself these questions frequently. How about you?