The Enlightened Leader E-Book

Peter Ten Hoopen

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 490

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

With the stunning public cases of leadership gone awry, the search is on for a type of leadership that incorporates human values in an otherwise exploitative business world. In this book, the authors take the scalpel and address deeply ingrained nefarious management theory, and show the way to healing, opening fresh fields of ambition, new degrees of passion, and creativity. A synthesis of the best Western thinking and Eastern wisdom teachings, the book introduces "The Chakras of Leadership," a model of leadership that differentiates seven levels of human energy use.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Legal Note

Title Page

Copyright Page

Foreword

Authors’ Note

Part I - Enlightenment in Theory

A Lofty Notion - Preface by Peter ten Hoopen

THE SURVIVAL OF THE HAPPIEST

What is Leadership?

DEFINITION AND SIZE-UP

LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT – RELATED YET FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT

Endarkened Leadership

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

LEAVE YOUR BRAIN OUTSIDE AND BRING YOUR BODY INDOORS

DOUBLE STANDARDS IN STANDARD CURRICULUM

WARNING: DON’T ENGAGE IN DUPLICITY IF IT’LL MAKE YOU SICK

THE CONSCIENCE-FREE CORPORATION

IMPOSITION OF WILL – HOW MUCH OF A FUTURE?

What is Followership?

THE LEADING ROLE OF THE FOLLOWER

THE HIGH ART OF INSPIRING OTHERS TO LEAD

What is Enlightenment?

PRACTICAL AND IDEAL ENLIGHTENMENT

What is Enlightened Leadership?

LEADERSHIP FROM WITHIN

HOW VALUABLE IS THE CORPORATE PERSONALITY?

How to Reach Enlightenment

HONESTY AS A FIRST STEP

THE WILL AS AID AND OBSTACLE

Enlightened Leaders Speak Out

BILL GEORGE, EX-CEO MEDTRONIC: COMMITMENT TO A PURPOSE OR MISSION

DEE HOCK, FOUNDER OF VISA INTERNATIONAL: INDUCED BEHAVIOUR

ROBERT E. STAUB: LOVE GENERATES MORE PROFITS

ANDREW COHEN, SPIRITUAL LEADER: BECOMING ONE WITH YOUR DESTINY

AVIV SHAHAR, FOUNDER OF AMBER COACHING: A NEW TYPE OF AWARENESS

JIM DREAVER, MANAGEMENT GURU: BEING PRESENT WITHOUT AGENDA

Part II - The Chakras

The Seven Chakras of Leadership

WHY CHAKRAS?

CHAKRAS AS CONTAINERS OF MEANING

HOW DOES THIS WORK IN PRACTICE?

THE CHAKRAS AND THE HUMAN PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT

CHAKRA TEST HELPS TO SEE YOUR OWN CHAKRAS

THE CHAKRA OF SURVIVAL

THE CHAKRA OF OUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE MATERIAL WORLD

THE ONE YOU NEGLECT AT YOUR PERIL

THE ROOT CAUSE OF MANY PROBLEMS

SHORT TERM ORIENTATION KILLING LONG TERM POTENTIAL

SOME FUNDAMENTAL STUFF

PARADOX AT THE ROOT LEVEL

THE CHAKRA OF CONNECTEDNESS AND CREATION

A PROBLEM-CHAKRA PAR EXCELLENCE

SEXUALITY – SUPPRESSION OR CELEBRATION?

FEEL FREE TO FEEL

DO NOT IDENTIFY WITH YOUR FEELINGS

EMOTIONALITY AS CHOCOLATE MOUSSE

ALL GREAT ART COMES FROM THE GUT

COMPETING FOR BEST COOPERATION

WHAT ROLE FOR RELATIONSHIPS?

GUT FEELING

CREATIVE SPARKLE

THE CHAKRA GOVERNING MANIFESTATION OF OUR WILL

POWER AND HOW TO APPLY IT

WOMEN’S WEAK SPOT

WOMEN’S SPECIAL GIFT

WILLPOWER AND HOW TO GAIN RESPECT

INNER-DIRECTED PUSH OR OUTER-DIRECTED PULL

AN ENLIGHTENING INTERMEZZO

IMPOSITION VERSUS ATTRACTION

THE CHAKRA OF THE HEART – IN ALL CONNOTATIONS

A FORCE FOR THE GOOD

THE CHAKRA OF INSIGHT INTO HUMAN NATURE

THE CHAKRA OF TURNAROUND

A PRIVATE EXAMPLE

LEADERSHIP WITH HEART POWER

COURAGE AND CAUTION, PASSION AND CONTROL

HEART POWER AND THE LACK OF IT

THE CHAKRA OF A YEARNING FOR PURITY

NEXUS WHERE INNER AND OUTER WORLD MEET

THE PATH OF INTEGRITY

A LOOK IN THE MIRROR

THE CHAKRA FOR CONTACT WITH THE HIGHER SELF

THE THIRD EYE HELPS SEE MORE DIMENSIONS

THE THIRD EYE AND THE PINEAL GLAND

INTUITIVE LEADERSHIP – WHEN TO BRING INTO PLAY?

HOW TO STRENGTHEN YOUR INTUITION

EVERYONE STARTS ENLIGHTENED

INTEGRATION IS OF THE ESSENCE

EGOMANIA GALORE

EGO AS THE DESTROYER OF VALUE

THE CHAKRA OF COSMIC CONSCIOUSNESS

EXALTED STATE OF BEING, OR CUNNING PRETENCE?

SUBTLE MASSAGE IN THE SERVICE OF EXPLOITATION?

THE CHAKRA THAT TRANSCENDS ALL

RECONCILIATION ACROSS A WIDE SPECTRUM

IS THERE LIFE BEYOND MASLOW?

Balanced Energy Economy

HOW HALLOWED IS THE HIGHEST?

RUNNING ON ALL SEVEN

Part III - Enlightenment in Practice

A Higher Reality in Sight

LIBERATION FROM INNER TYRANNY

WHAT IS WISDOM?

HOW IS WISDOM ATTAINED?

The Wisdom of the Sea Urchin

CLARITY IS ACHIEVED BY ELIMINATING DISTRACTIONS

OBSTACLES ON SOCIETY’S GROWTH PATH

The Courage to Stand Up

A DESIRABLE SHIFT OF FOCUS

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY – A COSMETIC EXERCISE?

BUSINESS AS AGENT FOR WORLD BENEFIT

THE WORK AHEAD

Appendix

Endnotes

Index

With due recognition of the increasingly important role that female leaders play in corporate life, this book follows the convention of using male forms in cases where both genders are meant – ‘mankind’ has always included women – but where it could be done elegantly both forms were used. All cases presented here are true to life, yet modified sufficiently to preclude recognition of individuals or organisations discussed.

Legal Note

All ‘Archetypes’ presented are ‘faction’: pieces of fiction, inspired by actual events, but so fundamentally altered as to not reveal any living person’s or any functioning organisation’s identity. All characters named with first name and initial are composites, created by arranging aspects of a variety of living persons’ personalities, similar to the manner in which characters are created in novels. While the authors regret this departure from truth in the literal sense, they feel that this way of presenting reality, while shielding individuals, offers them a reliable and effective way to present some core issues of personality and leadership, and that in the process verity is never compromised.

The Chakras of Leadership presented in this book come to life on www.chakratest.org

The greatest challenge for leadership in this era is to bring love into the corporate sphere

Copyright © 2009

John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England

Telephone [phone]

Under the Jossey-Bass imprint, Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco CA 94103-1741, USA www.jossey-bass.com

Email (for orders and customer service enquiries): [email protected]

Visit our Home Page on www.wiley.com

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except under the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or under the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4LP, UK, without the permission in writing of the Publisher. Requests to the Publisher should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England, or emailed to [email protected], or faxed to ([phone].

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The Publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

The views expressed in this book by the authors are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the publisher. The publisher accepts no responsibility for such views.

Other Wiley Editorial Offices

John Wiley & Sons Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741, USA Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, Boschstr. 12, D-69469 Weinheim, Germany John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd, 42 McDougall Street, Milton, Queensland 4064, Australia John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, 2 Clementi Loop #02-01, Jin Xing Distripark, Singapore 129809 John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd, 6045 Freemont Blvd, Mississauga, ONT, L5R 4J3, Canada

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hoopen, Peter ten.

The enlightened leader : an introduction to the chakras of leadership / Peter ten Hoopen & Fons Trompenaars; foreword by Dr Herman Wijffels.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-470-71396-9 (cloth)

1. Leadership. 2. Chakras (Theosophy) I. Trompenaars, Alfons. II. Title.

HD57.7.H65 2009

658.4’092 - dc22 2008052046

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 978-0-470-71396-9

Typeset in SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd., Hong Kong

Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ International Ltd, Padstow, Cornwall, U.K.

Foreword

Recent developments have exposed something which managed to remain hidden for decades: that a fundamental revision of the role of business in society is long overdue. What contribution to society do we expect from corporations? Is their duty limited to satisfying the shareholders – or do we expect something beyond this? Do we expect, for instance, a positive contribution to the world, environmental awareness, a dedication to civic causes? And in strictly pragmatic terms: while we claim that in our present economy, dominated by services and knowledge transfer, people are our most valuable assets, our cherished human capital, are we doing what we need to make this capital yield superior results?

In The Enlightened Leader, Peter ten Hoopen and Fons Trompenaars make us aware that as leaders, we are often too busy managing our organisations to notice that the world around us is changing rapidly, and that a new type of leadership is by now required. A leadership which celebrates sustainability as one of its core principles, is marked by a more humane and consequently more inspiring way of dealing with employees, and is based, not on the imposition of will, but on the creation and cultivation of shared passion. A type of leadership that we may variously call ‘enlightened’, ‘authentic’, ‘transformational’, or ‘resonant’, and which is grounded in authenticity and a sense of connectedness.

How do we attain this authenticity and sense of connectedness? Firstly, by becoming aware of who we really are as human beings, and of our basic connectedness across racial, geographic, religious and gender boundaries. Reaching this awareness is not an easy task, especially for business leaders, because most corporations are still chained to the old mechanistic paradigm, forcefully resist pressures to change, and exert tremendous pressure on both society and corporate leaders to stick to the established modus operandi. But a growing number of leaders around the world are starting to view organisations, not as machines, but as organisms or biotopes. In this conceptual context a new type of leadership emerges, the contours of which – thanks to an intensifying global public debate – are now starting to come into focus.

The authors’ way of drawing us into the dialogue helps our own process of awareness, so that we may formulate a clear and resolute answer to the question: ‘What kind of leader am I?’ And to the even more important question: ‘What kind of leader do I want to be?’

To confidently answer such questions, a fair level of self-knowledge is required. This book introduces a new system, the Chakras of Leadership, which helps to attain insight in the fortuitous and rather less fortuitous, or even detrimental aspects of our own leadership. Wholly apart from the merits of this specific system, any structured way to look at our own leadership is enlightening per se. Given the corporate world’s entrenched scepticism towards any views not canonised by MBA-courses, it is commendable that the authors have presented the yoga metaphor of centres of energy as a self-referential system, which requires no belief in chakras. The only mental state required is belief in the power of one’s own vital energy, and the resulting dedication to careful management of its application in the world.

The title, The Enlightened Leader, the authors state emphatically and repeatedly, is not about pretence, but about aspiration. It is not the exposé of some people proudly telling us how enlightened they are, and how enlightened we shall all become if we just follow them, but the modest report of people who are seeking, and share their findings. That report is written in a literary voice, caustic where unfortunate cases are presented, but with a noticeable lightness of being, and a kind of self-deprecating humour which helps us digest what is in essence deeply serious matter.

I strongly recommend The Enlightened Leader to anyone who feels that there must be more in the world than chasing ever greater profits, whatever the cost to self or society, and who further feels that his or her own talents, and the power of the organisation, should be applied to make the world a somewhat better place.

Dr. Herman Wijffels, Executive Director of the World Bank

Authors’ Note

Several people, no doubt all having our best interests at heart, have discouraged us from writing this book, or publishing it under this title. ‘Be very wary of introducing such terms in the corporate world. “Enlightenment” – what percentage of your target audience do you think is ready for that? You’ll end up marginalising yourself! When it comes down to it, no one is interested in anything but profits.’ Followed by more and similar advice, all equally well-intentioned. Coming from people who know the corporate world from many years of experience, and feel that the world is crying out for messages such as those contained in this book.

This all goes to show how much fear there is in the thinking of otherwise clear-headed people. Unfortunately, fear does not bring enlightenment, but endarkenment. And unfortunately we have seen much of that at the beginning of this century. Anyone desiring to bring more light into his life needs to start conquering fear, because only then can he live and grow in freedom, and attain the stature for which he was intended. To begin with, we have to speak our minds, write the books that well up in us – and read the books that challenge us to rise above our fears.

What wells up in us is an urge to speak to those we know best, corporate leaders, and challenge them to become truly great. The Chief Challenge for corporate leaders in this day and age of globalisation and diversification is to recognise, respect and utilise the power of the heart, because as human beings we are becoming ever closer, both physically and in terms of knowledge and shared (media) experience, and cannot keep our hearts closed to one another without causing conflict, disruption and impoverishment.

This book forms part of a collective work in which thousands of people all over the world are cooperating – all with their own unique contributions and limitations, their own insights, and their own language. It aspires to be no more than a contribution to this collective magnum opus; written, it is hoped, in a way that resonates and encourages one to join the effort.

Part I

Enlightenment in Theory

A Lofty Notion

Preface by Peter ten Hoopen

‘How can you pass on to your readers things you don’t know?’

‘They are not things I do not know. Everything written there is in my soul, is part of it, they are lessons that I have learned in the course of my life and that I try to apply for myself. I am a reader of my own books. They give me something that I already knew, but of which I was not conscious.’

Paulo Coelho, The Zahir

Enlightenment is a lofty notion – and who are the authors, that they may speak of it? Are they that enlightened themselves? No, unfortunately, there is still a long way to go. The title of this work therefore reflects not pretence but aspiration. To further banish any suggestion of self-aggrandisement, let me divulge the trade secret of gurus and management trainers worldwide: we teach what we need to learn.

The subject matter suggested itself to me because I am a seeker. Not in the sense of ‘desperately seeking’, but in the sense of ‘living consciously’ – conscious of our connectedness with all living things, of connectedness with our own personal destination. This seeking began around my twentyfifth with a three year journey to India1, and was later continued, with varying degrees of application and varying results. My only right to speak derives from this seeking. All seekers have a right to speak, because others learn so much from the accounts of their inner journeys, of their hope and despair, their discoveries and disappointments, the rocks on the path, the sun on the skin.

Stimulated by the strong undercurrent of enthusiasm for the theme of enlightened leadership that I encountered in conversations with friends in the corporate world – like Charles Handy2I found no dearth of hungry spirits out there! – I set off on this path by taking a good hard look at myself, by listening to the voices of masters, in person and in writing, and by pairing those impressions with my twenty-five years of experience in consultancy and communication – many of them devoted to helping shape and communicate corporate personality. Since joining up with Fons Trompenaars, serving as Senior Consultant for Trompenaars Hampden-Turner, I have been able to hone my thinking on the whetstone of multiple realities in a great variety of cultural spheres. Many insights were gained from often intense group sessions and individual work with people from fifty different countries, and of course from discussions with Fons, whose vast experience and clear-headed thinking has been a great source of inspiration. Our shared fascination is the relationship between the corporate personality and the personalities of those who give the organisation its face and voice, and are responsible for its stance in the world.

Building on these insights I have developed a structured approach to personality, the Chakras of Leadership, to shed light on personal aspects of leadership, and make it easier to come to grips with them. The companion ‘Chakra Test’ website (see www.chakratest.org) aims to provide users with new insights into core aspects of their personalities, by looking at the way they apply their life energy. It helps them answer fundamental questions such as: amI a more or less whole being, or do I neglect certain aspects of my personality? What do I really expend my energy on? Is that energy exerted positively or negatively? And which aspects of my personality show most potential for growth? Ideally, the Chakra Test is used in a coaching environment, in the context of leadership development.

A more elaborate version reserved for consultancy clients is being developed to chart the personality of organisations. It compiles the input of all participants, and provides an image of the current corporate personality juxtaposed with the desired personality. This juxtaposition graphically reveals the aspirations of the organisation. Because aspirations are the hidden drivers behind every energy application, the Chakra Test for Organisations is an effective tool for those directing change processes in organisations, especially mergers and acquisitions. Incidental use is indicated for ‘personality-critical’ processes, such as hiring key employees, outsourcing, and reorganisation. Once what I call the ‘energy economy’ of the organisation as a whole has been charted, the results of subsequent individual Chakra Tests give all or selected participants an opportunity to see how well their own aspirations and energy focus match those of the organisation.

THE SURVIVAL OF THE HAPPIEST

The goal is to create organisations in which people can discover and develop their full potential – not just because such organisations will be the sole survivors in the new struggle of the fittest, but also because it will create more happiness in the corporate environment, in my accounting a valuable goal by itself.

Very soon, in fact, happiness may well be the most valuable goal, even in a strict fiscal sense. In a world of freely moving talent, the talent will go where it is most happy. Ever more frequently we see highly talented people accept pay below their maximum earning potential to join organisations they love, respect, or simply feel at home with. This changes the rules of the game, certainly in the sectors where human contributions are most vital to the bottom-line.

Which forces us to consider: who really are the fittest these days? The ‘lean and mean’ shops that manage to pay the lowest hourly wage, no medical? The ‘world class combatants’ (as one of my clients once demanded to be portrayed) that squeeze the last ounce of juice out of their work force by setting ever higher performance targets? The companies, according to Canadian management-guru Harry Mintzberg, home to over half of all the employed in the USA, where people are scurrying around hectically, living in mortal fear of being fired?3

Fons and I – and in fact all of us at Trompenaars Hampden-Turner – believe that a case can be made that the happiest are the fittest, and that in the corporate world, what is really playing now is the survival of the happiest. Create happiness, or lose it.

This book grew from great mutual respect, joy in co-operation, and a shared conviction that being pragmatic should not preclude dreaming, and that dreaming should not preclude practical application. Our joint ambition is to enhance your capacity to dream of a better world, and provide tools that help you make this dream become reality.

What is Leadership?

To lead is to find a path forward, to get to where you have not yet been. To lead is to chart the way into unknown territory and make the seemingly impossible possible and actionable.

Aviv Shahar, Founder of Amber Coaching

DEFINITION AND SIZE-UP

Before we can get a clear view of ‘the enlightened leader’, we should first discuss the fundamental principles, the background that makes him/her stand out so glowingly. Enlightenment is mostly about awareness. Therefore we need to nail this down first: what is leadership, and what is enlightenment?

But far more important than finding the answers to these questions, is the asking itself. As Sue Howard and David Welbourn write in their thorough exploration of The Spirit at Work Phenomenon: ‘… definitions of terms are not as important as actually recognizing the territory and debating meanings together.’4 The first steps to increased awareness are taken during anamnesis, the exploration of our past: how did our notions about leadership get formed?

And why is it that enlightened leadership – going under this name or others, like authentic leadership, unifying leadership, principle-centred leadership, engaging leadership, et cetera – is such a live topic today? Have we become that endarkened, then? And if so, how did it happen?

So many books have been written on leadership that one might reasonably assume the subject to be exhausted. But the daily news demonstrates that there still is a lot to learn. One of the most quoted phrases in leadership literature is this sentence from James MacGregor Burns’ Leadership, his wide-ranging study of economic, social and psychological aspects of leadership, canonised as the Genesis of leadership literature: ‘Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth.’ 5 He wrote this more than a quarter century ago, but if he were asked today, thousands of books on the subject later, he would probably say the very same thing. Because the social environment constantly changes, and because leading is very difficult.

Why is leading so difficult? Because people don’t like to be led and therefore make their leaders’ lives hell? No, most people actually are quite keen to be led. The true reason why we keep wrestling with the theme of ‘leadership’ is, that most people do not like to lead, and therefore make the lives of their subordinates hell.

To preclude misunderstanding: we do not think that people in general are averse to telling others what to do. To the contrary, most people are quite willing or even eager to do so – even when it requires the application of milder, or even ruthless physical force. The Nazis, for instance had no trouble finding willing camp guards, and in Abu Ghraib there didn’t appear to be recruitment problems either. No, telling others what to do – people are queuing up for the job. Especially if they get to wear a uniform or a sharp suit. What we mean, is that only very few spontaneously exhibit behaviour that makes others want to follow them. Because that is the essence of leadership: inspiring others to follow.

Many people are allergic to the idea of ‘following’, of being a ‘follower’, because it brings to mind the sycophantic, fawning, adulating and brainless following exhibited for instance by some followers of the Hare Krishna movement: ‘I haven’t got a clue what to do with myself anymore, so I’ll just surrender my all to someone else, and then everything will turn out all right.’ A kind of spiritual peeing in your pants. A huge relief, and it feels nice and warm, for a while.6 Let’s be very clear about it: this is not the kind of following we are concerned with here. What we are talking about is following in the sense of ‘the choice to allow yourself to be directed by someone whose ideas mesh with your own, and who is more advanced than yourself in their development; or someone who makes you achieve insights that you might not have achieved alone, and that suit you so well that they are a constant source of energy’.

Leadership: The capacity to inspire others to follow.

One of the most enlightening texts on this subject is Robert Goffee’s and Gareth Jones’ classic article in the Harvard Business Review entitled ‘Why should anyone be led by you’7. A highly confrontational question that many of us should pose ourselves each morning in front of the bathroom mirror: ‘Why on earth should anyone be led by you?’ Goffee and Jones tabled the question for ten years while consulting for dozens of companies in the United States and in Europe. ‘Without fail,’ they report, ‘the response is a sudden, stunned hush. All you can hear are knees knocking.’

Why this stunned, probably mortified silence? Because the participants found it hard to enunciate why anyone should follow them, of all people. Before trying this yourself, leave alone doing it before the mirror, it may be helpful to take stock of the range of sensible motives to accept someone as your leader – and motives to drop him. Several more will no doubt come to your mind as you go along, but with this short list we cover a fair section of the field:

Reasons for following leaderReasons to leave leader•Leader has great strategic acumen, so that following him appears to offer wonderful opportunities to share in his success.•Leader makes some egregious errors of judgement, opportunities are lost or temporarily diminished.•Leader promises all who will follow him attractive incentives.•Incentives turn out to be less attractive than advertised. Or another leader offers yet more attractive incentives.•Leader has great charisma, that reflects on everyone who works for him or her.•Charisma is shown to be no guarantee for success (Cf. Jim Collins’Good to Great), or reflection is disappointing.•Leader intimidates and terrorises to such a degree that not-following appears to be a non-option.•Intimidation lessens or sensitivity to it attenuates as a result of dulling. Or a less threatening alternative presents itself.•.............................................•.............................................•Leader strives for the attainment of an admirable goal, thereby inspiring to rise to the occasion and make a great contribution.•None. (Except in extreme cases, such as dramatic lack of success.)Exercise: Tick the reasons why people should follow or leave you, or enter your own into the blank boxes.

Clearly, the last leadership model outperforms all others (except perhaps the one you wrote in yourself) in terms of retention of followers. But some questions remain. What, for instance, constitutes an admirable goal? What does it take to inspire people to make great contributions? And before we rush to applaud the leaders with the greatest host of followers: is follower-retention a sufficient or even a valid criterion for the quality and effectiveness of leadership?

The literature on this subject does not provide an unambiguous answer. To some authors, the single most important benchmark is the sheer number of followers or devotees. To them, Hitler and Gandhi were equally great leaders. Others make a substantial distinction and weigh the quality of the goals set (noble versus ignoble, realistic versus unrealistic), the type of motivation (coercion versus voluntarism or even spontaneity), and the perceived character of the efforts (the human, versus the bestial face).

It will become apparent soon enough where our sympathies lie, so they may as well be exposed right now: the authors of this work belong to the substantive persuasion. In our view, someone who brings death and destruction upon thousands or even millions, can never be called a great leader, at best a great monster. The enshrinement as ‘great leader’ is to be denied as well to anyone who contributes to despoliation of the environment, direct or indirect assaults on people’s health, moral corruption, psychological corrosion, exploitation, usurpation of others’ rights, and other negative contributions to the human condition.

A truly great leader has the faculty to unify his followers under the banner of an inspiring vision, based on morally sound principles and socially desirable values – such as integrity, trust, loyalty – and fired by a certain societal or spiritual goal, a shared passion.

To denote this type of leading, James MacGregor Burns coined the term ‘transformational leadership’, to clearly distinguish it from transactional leadership, the type of leadership which confers power by doing what accrues the greatest number of followers,8 in politics known as populism. The terminology may be different, but in fact MacGregor Burns is speaking of the same type of leadership that is the subject of this book.

A caveat is called for: the quality of enlightenment is hard to quantify, because we cannot rely on a mere census of the mass of followers, such as suffices for an evaluation of the quality of transactional leadership. Moreover, in the judging of transformational leadership, to stay with Burns’ term for a moment, a subjective element will inevitably crop up, because the sympathies of the person who does the evaluating will cast the decisive vote. To some Bush, Sharon, Bin Laden, Putin, Bashayev, Castro, Morales, Berlusconi, or Chavez are great leaders, to others they are devils incarnate. There is no resolving this issue, because the admissibility of subjectively defined desirability as a determinant of value is an essential aspect of this type of leadership.

Those who consider this a weakness, may well reconsider after weighing the potential difference in impact, in specific mass. Transactional leaders, the quintessential deal-makers, may score impressively from time to time, but may equally strike out spectacularly. The enlightened leaders, in their considered, careful, almost subliminal manner, may effect truly transforming changes, and wholly recreate their organisations: with a new sense of purpose, other relationships with stakeholders, another face to the outside world, in other words, another personality. Their effect tends to be far more substantial than that of transactional leaders, which is reflected in their stature.

LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT – RELATED YET FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT

When we got our first glimpses of the corporate world, in our early thirties, to be titled ‘manager’ meant that you amounted to something in the world, that you had it made – or at the very least that you belonged to the chosen who would make it one day, guaranteed. If you had a business degree such as Fons, to be given such a title or better for your entry level job was a basic assumption. Peter, as an advertising copywriter, laboured in a trade where, until one became agency owner, the title ‘manager’ was simply not in the offing. A creative person with sufficient ambition and love of meetings might one day be asked to join the so-called ‘management team’, but everyone in the agency knew that in terms of real power this team amounted to nothing, and that any real decisions were simply taken by the directors. So, there was no alternative than acquiring distinction through the excellence of creative work. What followed were many years of toil and hard graft …

Nowadays, everyone is a manager or has been a manager, and a new term has taken over the exalted position in the corporate vocabulary: ‘leader’. Now, when you are denoted leader, you amount to something in the world, you have it made – or at the very least you belong to the chosen who will make it one day, guaranteed. While in the past everyone with an eye on a career in business or administration made sure that he or she got general management training – Peter included, because one never knew – now all who know which way the wind is blowing take leadership training or study Chinese.

It is easy, and for authors not unappealing, to put this trend down as the new flavour of the month. But the issue is too significant for cynicism or flippancy. Management was and is traditionally practiced from a top-down perspective. With all due respect for the underlings, but still … You develop your vision, mission, and strategy and impose it. Where practicable without resort to violence, and ideally with some measure of tact. A relatively simple procedure, within the grasp of nearly all primates.

But leadership is not so easily practiced. Because leadership – this is still widely misunderstood – works from the bottom up. You are a leader, not because someone appointed you, but because others see and accept you in that capacity. At many management training institutes these days Leadership Development is the most popular theme. But in truth, how often have we seen anyone become a leader as a result of such programs? In essence you can only be a leader and strive to become a better one. The most important condition for embodying leadership is, that others feel that you are not out there to take care of number one, but that you are there for them, or for something even more all-encompassing. In short that you stand for something which transcends your self-interest.

This is so uncomplicated that you need no training course to get it. Yet for many of us it is so hard, that we gladly accept all the help we can get. Fortunately, at Trompenaars Hampden-Turner we can rely on a choice group of colleagues always ready to provide remedial teaching.

Leadership is closely related to management, but wholly different in fundamental aspects. The close relationship is caused by the fact that the one usually does not go without the other. To be effective, a manager needs to be a good leader. Equally, to be effective, a leader needs to be a good manager, or at least a passable one. In real life this combination is rare, because the qualities needed for leadership are so vastly different from the qualities needed for management that it is hard to master both in perfection. The difference is in the mental make-up:

Managers base their goals on what they deem necessary.Leaders base their goals on what they deem desirable.

Managers are good at directing people, making sure that they co-operate, that the things that need doing get done on time. Where necessary they rely on their status in the organisation – their power to hire and fire, humble or promote, create or crush careers – to achieve the set goals. The best of them deserve gold medals for drive and self-restraint. Leaders see opportunities beyond the horizon, dreams that might one day be realised, ideas too beautiful to relegate to the dustbin just because they seem unrealistic today. The best may not care much for medals, but are amply rewarded as they observe how their vision, fire and tenacity inspire those around them. They rely not on power, but on the respect in which they are held. Their relationship with co-workers is often highly personal and intense, and their demeanour may be chaotic and baffling at times – annoying even, but easy to forgive because of their palpable commitment.

The difference between leadership and management was beautifully elucidated by Abraham Zaleznik in his famous article in the Harvard Business Review, ‘Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?’9 Leaders, he said, are inspired, visionary people who are concerned with content, whereas managers are concerned with the process. Psychologically they have an entirely different reaction to order and chaos, and an entirely different concept of their role:

Managers

• hate chaos and insecurity

• tend to plunge into the process to sort things out and bring order

• strive for control and predictability

• find compromises

• try to find a workable solution as quickly as possible – often without having thought out all the ramifications of the situation

• do things right.

Leaders

• are highly tolerant of insecurity

• can live with lack of structure and even chaos for extended periods of time without becoming unduly stressed

• strive to inspire

• find reconciliations

• postpone decision-making till they have a clear picture of all aspects of the situation (like artists, experimental scientists and other creative thinkers)

• do the right things.

But for a leader to become a great leader, more is required than these instrumental differences. We trust that you have your own criteria to add, but these seem to be fundamental:

Great leaders

• pair leaders’ capacity to create something out of chaos with vision and passion

• inject the moral strength required to let their organisations play a role of importance in the world

• attain greatness less by doing than by being.

Endarkened Leadership

A corporate leader of our acquaintance who takes in vast amounts of management literature and read the manuscript of this book, advised us to omit this entire chapter. ‘Oh come on, Taylor and all that mechanistic stuff, there’s hardly an organisation out there where that still applies, is there?! Just start with enlightenment straightaway, because that’s new, that is what readers want to know about.’

The effect of this bit of advice was to reinforce our conviction that a brief look in the rear-view mirror was not just important, but essential for an understanding of what is happening today. There is no greater danger, every psychiatrist will confirm this, than thinking that you are healed when you are not. The stark reality is, that in spite of all the wise books written on the subject in the last decade, only a tiny fraction of all leaders and managers has outgrown the mechanistic model of organisations. And of that tiny fraction, only a minority has outgrown it not just conceptually but also in practice: noticeable in the way that they structure and run their organisations.

People tend to think that, now factory sirens have disappeared, or at least aren’t heard that much anymore, the concept of man as a tiny cog in the big machine (immortalised by Charlie Chaplin in Modern Times) has disappeared as well. Alas, the truth is far from there. The changes in our society run at such a precipitate pace, that the development of concepts to manage it simply cannot keep up. As a result, many organisations are run – even by young managers fresh from university – with a type of leadership that dates from the 1950s, and which is eminently unsuitable for our current socio-economic reality.

Yes, it all does look so much more humane, with those open plan offices stocked with drip fed plants and colourful display screens, but hundreds of millions of workers have not an inch more room to make a personal contribution than they would have had in the nineteenth century. In fact, thanks to ever more advanced software development, even what little room they have is further restricted by the day. Autonomous decision-making? Forget it, you just tap some parameters into the keyboard and the computer decides.

As Simon Head has pointed out in his The New Ruthless Economy,10 this is one of the most dehumanising and least noted aspects of modern corporate functioning, reducing millions of white collar workers to what is essentially assembly-line type of work, prescribed in minute detail in templates, scripts and service level agreements. The New Robots are not just among us, we are in touch with them everyday. Fortunately, other recent trends are leading in an opposite direction, for instance the trend towards greater focus on creativity, which requires a highly humanised, ‘people-friendly’ work climate. But the great majority of those on a payroll are still boxed in by the old paradigm of command and control. And don’t forget, being told what to do makes people feel miserable. As Nobel Prize winner Elias Canetti said in his 1960 classic Crowds and Power,11 being told what to do is a sting, and a sting which can never be removed.

One of the areas where progress has been made in the last decades, is the moral sphere – both as a result of nascent enlightenment and of the new phenomenon of transparency, which makes the moral high ground seem suddenly so much more attractive, and affordable, too. But still there are legions of leaders who either feel that morality simply has no place in the world of business (‘I’ll be damned if I’m gonna let my conscience stand in the way of making an honest buck’), or opt for a strict forensic interpretation of the rules: ‘As long as my actions do not set me on the path to jail, I am doing fine.’

But are we really doing fine when we limit ourselves to playing by the book? Is unindictability sufficient proof of great leadership? As Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall state in Spiritual Capital: ‘Corporations exist to make money. They define work simply as making money. In essence, however, people are spiritual beings. Our whole lives are spent looking for purpose and meaning. Ergo, corporate life negates all that is really important to us.’12

And for those to whom efficiency is still the guiding principle: how efficient is it really to keep all which is important to employees outside the gate?

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Let us briefly review the history of leadership. Beginning with the pharaohs and their pyramids. Under what type of leadership were the grand works completed? Is there a wealth of evidence that these massive tombs were built by voluntary effort? That it was a labour of love, inspired by the wishes of the people, the expression of a collective passion of the workers? To the contrary, all indications suggest that they were the fruit of brute force, the crude imposition of will.13 And wherever in the world we care to look in the ancient world – in the Chinese, Maya and Inca empires, in Assyria and Mesopotamia, in the realms of the moguls and czars – the typical leadership style was always and ever based on this simple principle: the imposition of one man’s will on countless others.

Equally typical, always and everywhere, was the support of a sacerdotal class, a clergy whose duty it was to explain to the masses that it was their God-given duty in this life to toil for the benefit of the ruling class, and that great rewards would accrue to them in the afterlife; so that, all considered, you really couldn’t drop dead on the job soon enough. And when – after thousands of years that we may as well skip because labour conditions for the common folk turned only a fraction more benevolent – the colonial times began, slaves, christened or otherwise, proved themselves good followers of the preachers, as indeed, die on the job they did, duly and by their thousands, rarely reaching the age of thirty. In the British Empire, the Dutch, French, and Portuguese colonies, whole nations were told what to do. In the Congo, the private domain of Belgian King Leopold I, vast regions (eighty times the size of his kingdom) were ransomed for ivory and rubber, some ten million people in twenty-three years sacrificed on the altar of a single man’s personal wealth.

Though there is a tendency to regard the slave trading of the Golden Age and the whole colonial experience as something that happened ‘far away and long ago’, the effect on the psyche of the traders’ and usurpers’ home land is not to be underestimated. Slave trading and the deployment of slaves on plantations and in factories, with its concomitant view on work forces and people without power in general, was a large step back into the dark ages, as it reconfirmed ‘the use of human beings’ as both common and advantageous. Leadership in those days could not be imagined without an element of ruthlessness. Even rulers whom history generally paints as benign would have been highly surprised to learn of a concept of leadership in which their capacity to impose their will might be less than absolute.

And of course, when in the mid-18th century the hallowed Industrial Revolution began, on account of proven effectiveness, the same despotic leadership style was continued, albeit with certain refinement. Corporal punishment for instance, the whipping up of the workers, gradually went out of fashion – even though as late as the early 20th century, many countries, notably the world’s model of industry, America, saw striking workers clubbed back to their workbenches by hired gangs of goons and tax-paid police forces. In many less civilised nations – members of the United Nations and all, yes signatories even of the Declaration of Human Rights – this is still happening today. In central India, in 2002, ninety-five members of the Sahariya tribe were rescued from a quarry where they had been slaving in captivity for ten to twelve years, men, women and children. 14 In China similar brutality is frequently heard of. But let’s stay with our own, Western line of development, because there is enough work here at home.

After World War II, labour conditions gradually improved, especially the physical conditions, mostly as the result of union organising. Machines were equipped with all manner of security features, in the more civilised nations new rules were introduced to protect workers’ jobs, and the life time pain of many workers, the fear of old age in dire poverty, was alleviated by the institution of government pensions, and politicians could promise their followers that soon they would all be driving cars, as indeed they did. But even in those heady days of a New Age of Modernity, the basic concept of leadership hardly changed. It was just refined with human touches.

‘I am strong, and you do as I say, or else …’

For thousands of years, this concept of leadership worked well, to this extent that it yielded what the powers that be wanted. We shall refer to this aspect of efficiency again later, because, although happiness is at the top of our personal agendas, we are also highly respectful of profit, and it is our conviction that behind all profit is the effective application of energy. The question is, if we, heirs to these millennia of exploitation, have the right mind set for effective application of talent in this day and age.

LEAVE YOUR BRAIN OUTSIDE AND BRING YOUR BODY INDOORS

Typifying the 20th century concept of leadership, largely of Anglo-Saxon pedigree, are Frederick Taylor’s mechanistic view of organisations, Milton Friedman’s exclusive focus on shareholder value, and Albert Carr’s advocacy of an amoral stance. This triumvirate of intellectual giants may be held jointly responsible for the consummate dehumanisation of corporate life.a

Taylor, whose 1911 publication of The Principles of Scientific Management15 would turn his name into a synonym for ‘scientific management’, is the man we have to thank for the concept of man as a cogwheel in a machine; or rather, man as an apparatus that needs to be adjusted scientifically to run as efficiently as possible. Taylor left no doubt about the need for this adjustment. He explained that most workers are not capable by themselves to find out how to work efficiently: ‘Now one of the very first requirements for a man who is fit to handle pig iron as a regular occupation is that he shall be so stupid and so phlegmatic that he more nearly resembles in his mental make-up the ox than any other type. The man who is mentally alert and intelligent is for this very reason entirely unsuited to what would, for him, be the grinding monotony of work of this character. […] He is so stupid that the word “percentage” has no meaning to him, and he must consequently be trained by a man more intelligent than himself into the habit of working in accordance with the laws of this science before he can be successful.’

Taylor’s influence was immense, and far-reaching. In no time all major industrial corporations in the US, and soon those in Europe as well, were converted to his beliefs. They employed whole armies of ‘scientists’ whose job it was to analyse the labour process stopwatch in hand, and to turn out minutely detailed directives for each and every action, similar to the assembly instructions now provided for Ikea wardrobes: ‘Slip ring D2 onto bar K while pressing D2 in hole C12 of panel P6’. Except that Taylor also prescribed how many seconds every action should take. His method increased production in many industries, sometimes dramatically, but its effect on the workers was highly detrimental. It aggravated the monotony of what wasn’t exactly stimulating work to begin with, produced constant stress to meet the countless mini-deadlines each day, and caused mental dulling through the banishment of even the most immaterial personal contribution to the production process.

Industrial psychologists Alan G. Carter and Colston Sanger in their article Thinking about Thinking: ‘Taylor gave us mass production before we had robots, by getting people to do the robots’ jobs. Perhaps that is an odd way of looking at it, but at Los Alamos [the lab where the atom bomb was designed, Ed.], they simulated spreadsheet programs by sitting secretaries at grids of desks with adding machines! He was such a control freak that he used to strap himself into bed every night to counter his morbid fear of falling out. His slogan was, “Leave your brain outside and bring your body indoors”. Our culture, from schools to legislation and concepts of status, is still riddled with Taylorism.16

The italics above are the authors’, intended as a call for reflection. Please note that this is not a quote from the middle of the previous century but from the very end of it. In your reflection include our contemporary call centres, with their service level agreements stipulating the maximum number of seconds per caller and the maximum promise of service – irrespective of the seriousness of the issue or the emotional state of the caller.b

When after this you are still in doubt, take a moment to meditate on the workings of our nursing homes. ‘Sorry Mr Taylor, an hour ago was time for wee-wee, now you just be a good boy and wait till bedtime.’ In modern establishments, the washing of the incontinent, once every x days (where x is a function of profit target over nursing fee), is effected by hoisting the patient into a cubicle fitted with water jets where caked on dirt is sprayed off them in seconds, pretty much as mud is squirted off the undercarriage of your vehicle in a car wash, in about the same amount of time and with minimal human intervention – a showcase of efficiency. ‘Oh come on, Taylor and all that mechanistic stuff, there’s hardly an organisation out there where that still applies, is there?!’

Frederick Taylor himself predicted the world-wide acceptance of his method. ‘That these principles are certain to come into general use practically throughout the civilized world, sooner or later, the writer is profoundly convinced, and the sooner they come the better for all the people.’ He may indeed have been a control freak, but one wonders if, had Taylor been alive today (‘Wee-wee now, Mr Taylor?’), he would really have been delighted to see that his devout wish has come true.

For those still weighing the trade-off of humanity for efficiency: it is important to understand that the most harmful impact of dehumanisation is not felt by the clients or patients, but by the employees forced to work with less than human, or downright inhuman, and therefore depersonalising priorities. It is particularly hard on care practitioners, many thousands of whom have left the profession in the last decades, on both sides of the Atlantic – not because they stopped caring, but because they could not stand being curtailed in their desire to give more. There is little as damaging to the soul as being forced to withhold care. Naturally, at a remote, the same holds true for the corporate leaders who do the forcing, such as directors of the more greedy HMOs and care facilities. We are told by reliable sources that a special place in hell is reserved for them. It is lived in during this life, often with outward appearance of prosperity, and experienced mostly as a bewildering failure to achieve real happiness.

DOUBLE STANDARDS IN STANDARD CURRICULUM

After Taylor had taken the functional side of human beings into his methodical forceps and dropped it into a mould like so much pig iron, tackling the inner moulding of workers was only the logical next step. We live with the results of this effort every day. The idea was to turn employees (especially those in the higher echelons) into robots, and force them to keep their personal feelings out of the transaction – ‘business is business’, ‘stick to the basics’, ‘keep yourself out of it …’c

‘Keep yourself out of it’, how often don’t we hear this? Or, heaven forbid, even say this? It is at the same time so common and so damaging.

This classical conception of corporate life, which most of our current managers and corporate leaders have been taught to subscribe to, is not only devoid of feeling, or at least short on sensitivity, it is also consciously and intentionally amoral. As Albert Carr taught the business world in 1968 with his classic article ‘Is Business Bluffing Ethical?’ published in the Harvard Business Review,17 business is to be conceived as a poker game, in which everything is allowed which is not expressly forbidden by the law, in which personal feelings are to be disregarded, and in which there is no other moral obligation than the enrichment of the shareholders.

Carr stated that business practices such as bluffing (speaking untruths, misrepresenting facts) must be judged by the rules of business and not according to ‘the ethical principles preached in churches’. He preached that in the corporate world it is practically inevitable to develop two independent sets of moral values, one for business life and one for private life. And he prophesied that all who take their private values to work, would fail to achieve real success in business.

This piece resonated deeply in the business world, in which, with all the daily fibbing, fiddling, cheating, manipulation and exploitation, many managers were troubled by their conscience. Thanks to Carr, they suddenly were up to it again: that conscience with its constant nagging should simply shut up, because it was talking from another, private morality, which should not even have come along to the office, but sneaked a ride in the back seat.

Anyone who subscribed to this with sufficient depth of belief, was instantly liberated from much psychological pressure, and could act immorally at his or her heart’s desire again, with the law as their only limitation – a limitation which, thanks to the armies of lawyers in corporate employ, could be given a wide interpretation, or ignored with impunity. This created a kind of Wild West culture, with the leisure loving sheriff as the only moral force in town. Guys who make the mistake of hurting the powerful are hanged, but other than that it is a free-for-all. Preachers, in supporting roles, are portrayed as either drunk or depraved. The lone individual with integrity is chased into the desert, vultures circling above him, to succumb to hunger and thirst. Alas, with a few magnificent exceptions – namely heroes who take over the town and clean it up – folks who want to keep up moral standards don’t survive in frontier country, they don’t make it in Fortune, pop. 500.

When we embarked on this project, we had often read about Albert Carr’s article, so had some inkling of the gist, but when we traced the actual text, we were surprised by the directness of his language. After the sub-heading Pressure to Deceive it reads: ‘Most executives from time to time are almost compelled, in the interest of their companies or themselves, to practice some form of deception when negotiating with customers, dealers, labour unions, government officials or even other departments of their companies. By conscious misstatements, concealment of pertinent facts, or exaggeration – in short, by bluffing – they seek to persuade others to agree with them. We think it is fair to say that if the individual executive refuses to bluff from time to time – if he feels obligated to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth – he is ignoring opportunities permitted under the rules and is at a heavy disadvantage in his business dealings.’

A heavy disadvantage in business dealings – who shall willingly inflict this on himself? It would be like robbing your own wallet. The most worrying of Carr’s piece is that it uses the well documented fact of daily practice, with all the immoral elements he mentions, as an argument to free oneself of any moral or other charges on account of them. Established practice as exoneration for the same. Would it do for eternal salvation? Says the archangel at heaven’s gate, staring into the register: ‘I am a little puzzled here by some entries on misrepresentation of fact in your business dealings. Would you please explain to me why you feel that your conduct was justified?’ ‘Well, so many people do it, that if I didn’t, I would be placing myself at an unfair disadvantage.’

Or, as the American novelist Sinclair Lewis, one of the earliest censors of corporate irresponsibility, had his protagonist, the real estate broker Babbitt, say in his famous novel Babbitt18: ‘And then most folks are so darn crooked themselves that they expect a fellow to do a little lying, so if I was fool enough to never whoop the ante I’d get the credit for lying anyway!’ In short, being honest in an environment where honesty is not appreciated, is not just useless, you deprive yourself of opportunity, and might cause your own social downfall.

Is this depiction of morality in the business environment, sketched in 1922, still up-to-date? One would hope not – but any such hope would be dashed by reading Joep Schrijvers’ The Way of the Rat: A Survival Guide to Office Politics,19