Tom Friedman: People WANT Liberal Arts

In considering the last post, on the value of liberal arts for leaders, one might apply the "free market" ideology that says, liberal arts are under siege because students don't want them.  Given the pathetic education many are subjected to prior to college (in a recent survey, only 17% of 12th graders could provide a name for a picture of the 16th president of the US:  Abraham Lincoln!!!!), that is not surprising.  It doesn't validate this ideology, but certainly puts on display one of its results.
That said, however, there is strong evidence that at least among some college students, liberal arts are desired.
I refer to today's (June 15, 2011) column by Tom Friedman in the New York Times. He cites world wide excitement for the classes (now available on line at www.JusticeHarvard.org) of Michael J. Sandel of Harvard.  He is a teacher of political philosophy.  People in the US, China and elsewhere, line up hours in advance to attend his lectures.  Friedman goes on to say, "Sandel’s recent book — “Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?” — has sold more than a million copies in East Asia alone. This is a book about moral philosophy, folks!"
What is going on here?  In Asia, at least, Friedman quotes enthusiasts who say Sandel's excursion into humanities and critical thinking offers antedotes to mechanistic, rote, technical learning.  He cites these reasons for the course's popularity:
"One is the growth of online education, where students anywhere now can gain access to the best professors from everywhere. Another is the craving in Asia for a more creative, discussion-based style of teaching in order to produce more creative, innovative students. And the last is the hunger of young people to engage in moral reasoning and debates, rather than having their education confined to the dry technical aspects of economics, business or engineering." 

Friedman concludes the article by quoting Sandel:

 “Students everywhere are hungry for discussion of the big ethical questions we confront in our everyday lives,” Sandel argues. “In recent years, seemingly technical economic questions have crowded out questions of justice and the common good.  I think there is a growing sense, in many societies, that G.D.P. and market values do not by themselves produce happiness, or a good society."

Amen. 

I guess what bothers me is that this notion expresses a minority opinion, at least as reflected in the actual decisions so-called "educators" (or panderers) make in terms of educational priorities and material resources.

Anyway, it is synchronicity at its best when such confirmation arrives so soon after venturing a thought.

THE HIDDEN VALUE OF LIBERAL ARTS: NURTURING OUR ASPIRING LEADERS

     THE HIDDEN VALUE OF LIBERAL ARTS:  NURTURING OUR ASPIRING LEADERS
       “Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.”
        W.B. Yeats
     
      I recently addressed an audience of faculty, students, administrators and guests from my alma mater, Dickinson College, in Carlisle, PA.  The substance of my talk centered on the idea that a liberal arts education informs, guides and deepens a leader’s aspirations.
      In the meantime, the value of a college education is being challenged. In all the conversations on the subject, the notion that a liberal arts education nurtures our leaders’ aspirations does not even show up.
      Take, for example, an article by Louis Menand, in the June 6, 2011 issue of The New Yorker.
      He cites three “theories” for investing in a college education:
      (1) gain qualifications to enter into elite professions;
      (2) provide people with “norms of reason and taste,” in order to provide social coherence; and
      (3) learn the specialized skills needed in advanced economies.
      These reasons refer exclusively to the economic value of a college education, as providing a means to increase earning power.  Most theories about the value of a college education take these tracks. There is a fourth theory out there, voiced meekly and almost apologetically, which rhapsodizes about the humanizing value of a liberal arts education. This theory mitigates the downside of the economic value theories by elevating the opportunity for a better quality of life over the earnings one accumulates in a lifetime.
      My proposal adds a fifth theory to the mix: a liberal arts education (in particular) provides graduates who envision taking on roles as leaders with the tools to enrich, cultivate, sustain and promote their aspirations.
      Aspirations are things of air: they are not designated in career paths; professions do not certify them; and they are not guaranteed by trends. Aspirations break through given circumstances and strive to offer people something more expansive and more encompassing than existing social and economic, or technological and institutional arrangements provide.
      To act on their aspirations, leaders come to rely on very substantial, deep and well-grounded skills of character and self-trust. To fulfill those aspirations requires a commitment of steel, to be sure; but it also requires envisioning wider worlds, and then envisioning a reasoned, sensible, grounded narrative if those aspirations are to be realized.  And leaders also need to learn how to recover, reset and start again when they fail.  To be sure, such aspirations do not require a liberal arts education, but, I would argue, such an education greatly increases the likelihood that a life of leading will not collapse into cynicism, despair or paralysis.
      How so?
      A liberal arts education provides aspiring leaders with key resources.  Among these are:
      (1) a breadth of knowledge that spans different discourses, cultures and different fields of endeavor, so that a vision of their cross-fertilization is possible – a basic requirement for organizations operating in complex economies;
      (2) a sense of the depth of commitment needed to bring a great idea to fruition – this we learn from accounts of all the great struggles that other leaders have endured;
      (3) a profound sense of being able to learn what needs to be learned in order to meet high standards and exacting goals; and
      (4) a deep source of recourse for refreshment, revitalization and restoration that will be needed when leaders confront inevitable failures and setbacks, and when the world changes beyond recognition, seemingly instantaneously.
      When looked at from this perspective, the standard theories only account for the most superficial of “economic values,” and do not even glimpse the underlying and most essential value of all: nurturing the aspirations of leaders.
      We do indeed have a crisis in education. But the real crisis for me consists of not seeing what it takes to prepare the myriad leaders we need in every nook and cranny of our complex world.  The crisis consists of neglecting the unimpeachable, irredeemable value of studying, learning and reflecting on the great figures of humanity -- exactly what a liberal arts education demands. This deficit starts accumulating long before a student goes off to college.  It starts with the reduction of early education to the mechanics of teaching to the test.
      By devaluing what the liberal arts offer – science and math, but also history and literature and philosophy and critical thinking -- we are asking our future leaders to proceed blindly into the complex, multi-faceted, highly international and financially integrated world they aspire to change. It is not that a liberal arts education is the only way to nurture and sustain a leader’s aspirations; but it is the best way we have come up with so far.
      Are we so willing to be blinded by all that glitters that we completely miss our most important asset: the leader’s aspiration?  What else, besides those aspirations and the hard work they impose, builds our shared future?  How much is educating, enriching and nurturing those aspirations worth?  How much does neglecting that education cost?
      What are your thoughts about the value of a liberal arts education?  If you are a leader who has this experience, what has it meant to you?  Maybe you could offer some words of encouragement to parents who are concerned about the costs or students who are concerned about their income prospects.
       Place your comments on the blog: leaderpathways.blogspot.com, or on the Leader Mentoring Facebook page.

Leader Mentoring: A Different Conversation

For both mentors and mentees, entering an Arch of Leadership leader mentoring
engagement for the first time can be disorienting. The people in our program are there
because they care about leading, have succeeded in leading, or want to succeed. But when at
the table, in their conversation, neither mentor nor mentee is a leader. Mentoring is a
different kind of conversation – for both parties. A short list of comparisons between the
roles of leaders and mentors shows how different the two processes are.

      1. Leaders are expert in forming collaborations that accomplish goals successfully.
      Mentors tend to aspirations. These delicate states of being need to be coaxed into
clarity, nurtured with reflection, recollection and self-trust, and need to survive beyond any
limited goal.
    
      2. Leaders must act with resolve, in the heat and complexity of the immediate
situation.
      Mentors must cultivate in the mentee an awareness of the kinds of feelings,
spiritedness and resolve that leaders need in their hearts and souls, if any goal of merit and
significance is going to be reached.
    
      3. Leaders have their own goals to put into practice.
      Mentors have only the mentee’s aspirations at heart. If a mentor approaches the
conversation with the same intense focus as a leader on meeting a goal, the mentoring bond
will be broken.

      For these reasons and others, confusing leading and mentoring can place the
conversation at cross-purposes, and dilute the outcomes for both participants. While informal
mentors who are cultivating new leaders are apt to make this mistake, the professional,
trained Arch of Leadership mentors do not.
      The confusion runs two ways. Leaders might think they are mentoring to make the
mentee like them. No. Many people who approach us to be mentors feel qualified for this
work because of their track record in successfully solving practical problems. They are
surprised to find that Arch of Leadership mentors bring success to the table, but they also
bring more to the engagement. Mentees can get confused as well. Some might think: “This
mentor sitting across the table from me is worthy of my respect, and she is taking the time to
listen to me, but won’t give me advice or clues as to how to solve my problems or meet my
deadlines and goals.”
      Mentors who have been successful leaders would love to offer their two cents’ worth
on solving that problem, but to be successful mentors they must put aside their desire to
dispense advice. Instead of thinking about solutions to problems, mentors sense, identify and
reinforce the qualities mentees can call upon within themselves in order to survive and even
thrive in the challenging life they have chosen, the life of leading.  The mentor then lays out
what the mentee can anticipate by taking up the life of leading (long after the immediate
problem is passed). The mentor senses the mentee’s attitude about life, and judges whether or
not that person is willing postpone or even sacrifice some ambitions in order to engage in
something more expansive and more encompassing. Finally, the mentor tests whether or not
the mentee has, exerts and nurtures the energy necessary in this life.
      For a successful mentoring engagement, both mentor and mentee must resist the siren
call to fix problems. Success in the mentoring conversation happens when the anxieties,
pressures and pitfalls of everyday leading are put aside, by both mentor and mentee; when
daily “doing” is deprived of its power to enthrall and overwhelm; when the mentor forgets
his sense of accomplishment and the mentee lets go of that crushing sense of urgency.
      Mentoring takes a step back from the front line for a moment. Together, mentor and
mentee realize this: because mentoring allows aspiration to rise to the fore in a clear,
informed and definitive way, leading happens.  
      Contact us to see how the professional mentors at the Arch of Leadership can
transform your aspirations into a commitment to the life of leading.

Creative Leaders Need Not Apply

A friend of mine and Arch of Leadership mentor sent me an article (from the Boston Globe, by Kevin Lewis, January 16, 2011) that summarized the findings from a study about to be published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology: (Go to: Creative Leaders Need Not Apply -- my title) "Those who were perceived to be more creative were perceive to have lower leadership potential.... Organizations may face a bias agains selecting the most creative individuals as leaders in favor of selecting leaders who would preserve the status quo by sticking with feasible but relatively unoriginal solutions."
Does that surprise you?  It doesn't surprise me.
Why do we mentor leaders?  To many it may seem that these people are blessed, the fortunate ones, the ones who made it.  Aren't we just picking out and skimming off the cream for our attentions?  Our answer is emphatically NO.
Leaders worthy of the name risk their careers and positions every day in order to transform visions of what is possible into real products, services and organizations that offer more expansive and more encompassing possibilities for others.  They are often shot down, as this article makes clear;  they often fail, as I have said in other articles (See, for instance: "Sincere Failures").   These creative leaders aren't often the "stars" who are hand-picked for succession. These are the people who are driven by their excitement for a new way, by their disturbing concerns that demand new approaches, and in order to act on these, make themselves vulnerable to the whims and judgments of others, most of whom have the status quo and shareholder dividends in mind.
The people we mentor are those who have tasted exactly what this article describes and instead of knuckling under have decided to lead others in order to make their living worthwhile and their efforts a matter of giving something and contributing something to the larger world.
My heart breaks to hear my own perceptions validated on such a large scale that it warrants publication in a major research journal.  I feel for the way these creative people's spirits are wounded;  I feel for the loss of initiative and vision that organizations perpetuate.
Our mentoring is intended to support the creative spirit in our leaders. By helping them discover the roots of their self-trust (see the blog post, "The King's Speech," for instance), we want to help these people find their voice.  Our mentoring helps these people to see that their resolve to lead is important and does mean something to those around them. We help these aspiring souls crystalize a leader brand that inspires others take on something great -- whatever the risks.
So despite the discouraging scene this study validates,  I am eternally grateful and personally and professionally enriched every day that I meet with those leaders who refuse rejection and take up that sacred mission of making the world more expansive, more encompassing, more alive, for us, for others, for the earth.

A Conversation on Self-Trust

      Welcome to the New Year.
      One of the joys of the holidays is receiving cards sent by friends from far away, from
parts of life left long ago. One of those missives came to me from Jane Kane (her real name
withheld on request). I have known her and her husband for more than thirty years.
Following up with each other on the states of our lives, she responded to my work on leader
mentoring with a thoughtful reflection.
      Her comments demonstrate what I saw as “self-trust” in action, and I thought the
readers of Leader Pathways might enjoy our exchange:
      Jane: “For the past eight years I’ve been a boss, a nurse manager, a director of a 25-
bed inpatient psych unit. I work my tail off, but not in managing so much as leading I like to
think. Here’s one of the quotes I just harvested that rings true for me for the work I do:
       ‘All of the great leaders have had one characteristic in common: It was the
willingness to confront unequivocally the major anxiety of their people in their time. This,
and not much else, is the essence of leadership.’ — John Kenneth Galbraith
      “Which is to say that people want somebody to be in it with them [my italics – MS],
and take the lead facing the hard stuff, the unknowns. It’s not so much the content of my
answers to the questions I get asked, but that I am willing to give answers. Daily I am
approached:  Jane, I have a question. I got answers, I say with humor, but even so, just that,
and the anxiety goes down.
      “The usual answer is that yes, what you were thinking is spot on. Good job. I have a
phenomenal staff and we have a norm of respect and support for each other. There
supposedly is this thing in nursing called lateral violence. It’s a hot topic, with articles and
conferences. I have no patience with it. I think it is ridiculous and exaggerated because I do
not see it here where I work, but folks from other systems tell me, ‘Oh it's real.’ Co-workers
stressed and unsupported, screwing each other with competition, rage, etc. That’s so sad to
me.”
      Michael: “I think your humor opens the way for people. You really get it: You lead
because you are able to make that next, difficult step seem to be what is exciting and joyful
to do. You and Gerry [a name I am using for her husband] always did that for me, always
uplifted my life with that sense that ahead something sparkling awaits.
       “Thus, I see the Galbraith quote, which is right on the mark, from the other side:  A
leader is only needed when people are in a state where change is upon them. When that is the
situation, anxiety is the primary and dominant state that they are in – along with excitement
and curiosity, for some. When you offer your humor, they see a leader who exhibits ‘self-
trust,’ a state in which she has just as much anxiety as everyone else, but takes a different
approach to it. She proceeds with resolve, trusting that each step will be worthy and will offer
up something from which everyone learns, and so improves on the next step.
      “Some people retire from jobs, but ‘Arch Three Leaders’ like you and Gerry never
retire from life. Whatever form that leading takes, wherever you and Gerry go, leading
happens.”
    
      Thinking of Jane and her constant, irrepressible humor, I am reminded that great
leading is not a matter of grave pronouncements on the one hand or prosaic motivators on the
other. Great leading exhibits steady, modest resolve that is ready and willing to take the next
step and accept that it is worthy. A worthy step is one that may be imperfect, but enables
people to learn and see forward to the next step.
      Great leaders often exhibit exquisite humor. I think of Lincoln, who used stories to
ease people to the next step. Of course, with speeches like the Gettysburg Address and his
second inaugural, he rose to transcendent levels of eloquence. But it is his self-trust, lived
lightly with humor from day to day in his endlessly dire decision-making, which kept his way
clear and open to a grander vision. (To appreciate this, I recommend strongly that you read
Eric Foner, Fiery Trial, as well as William Lee Miller’s Lincoln’s Virtues and President
Lincoln:  The Duty of a Statesman).
      Self-trust comes first, before the vision. It is a matter of living close to and at ease
with minutiae, answering one question at a time, so that a real concern, a real sense of what is
at stake, can mold the heart and soul to the terrain ahead. It is that resolve that keeps one’s
feet on the ground even as one’s hopes are given wings.
      And so I wish the readers’ of Leader Pathways good humor, self-trust and great
leading in 2011.

Review of Denning and Dunham's, The Innovator's Way

I promised readers that I would read and review two books that seemed quite interesting to me and seemed to offer something new on the subject of leading, creative leading and change.

Here is the first: a review of Denning and Dunham, The Innovator's Way.  This review is also available on Amazon.com at

 http://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Way-Essential-Successful-Innovation/product-reviews/0262014548/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

How Many Lifetimes?

I really like the essential orientation that Denning and Dunham bring to the subject of innovation. First, they define innovation in terms of a practice being adopted by a community. Immediately that puts their vision above and beyond the run of the mill notion of new gadgets competing for attention. Second, they orient their "advice" around practices: personal disciplines that are devoted to strengthening insight, questioning and gaining clarity. When a business book suggests journaling and meditation as frequently as do Denning and Dunham, something really good has to be going on. And finally there is the wide range of human activities that have to be brought to bear in order to establish an innovation -- I refer to the eight practices that constitute the core of the book. Finally I was moved by the idea that innovation transpires through conversations. As a professional mentor, I share that faith in the power of this great gift. That said, each of these potentials were diminished for me. I have to admit that I am no lover of business books -- having written a few myself. My problems with this one revolve around the idea that the book is about practices, but in no way does any person have enough of a lifetime to start, cultivate, benefit from and become a "master" of more than one or two of these practices, no less all the practices cited in the litany of the eight measures D&D prescribe. So, the book seems to be written for other consultants, to provide them with a check list of things they can look for in order to gain billable work in an organization, and not to consider either individual practice or community dynamics of adoption of innovations. And this shortcoming becomes a glaring failure to me for the missed opportunity. In my own study of the "breakout creatives process" I have seen how four completely different mindsets, lifeways and practices are involved in generating change. The eight practices cited here bear the stamp of each of these figures. Sensing and Envisioning bear elements of the mystic; Offering touches on the artist; Adopting and Sustaining have prophetic qualities; Executing, leading and embodying are qualities we speak of when mentoring leaders. My point is -- absolutely no one can take on all of those roles and adopt the practices required to master them. The opportunity missed here, in my mind, is a discussion of how each of these roles contributes to innovation and how conversations between and among the figures, at different stages of the process enrich, stabilize and generate affirming energy in the process. Instead we get explanations of innumerable terms and checklists -- typical consulting fare. Finally, I was disappointed that the authors who are obviously well read and support the intellectual enterprise did not make this kind of practice essential in any of their phases. Even a 'master" in their mind knows and learns about an area; but doing the hard work of study, of knowing the history and biographies of key figures in their fields, of studying texts that advance thought, the process of questioning and enhancing the ability for form new categories and new lines of conversation was never broached. Is intellectual pursuit too hot a topic to broach in a business book?  I do recommend this book as a way to stimulate new thinking about innovation and how individual practice contributes to it. It is also useful for consultants who want to give advice that helps hard-driving business people, devoted to the bottom line a reason and practices for taking a different look at the business life.   But if you are looking to gain insight into how to become a person that makes a significant contribution to the process of innovation by cultivating life practices, this isn't going to cut it.

TWO GREAT BOOKS, NOT TO MISS

As my friends know, when people begin our mentoring program, I ardently advise the participants:  Do Not Read Business Books.
Well, here I am going to recommend two books, and in so doing, break every rule in my book: first, these are books reviewed in the Business Section of the NYTimes (which I read every day, and especially the Sunday version), on Sept. 5, 2010.
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/05/business/05shelf.html?scp=1&sq=Off%20the%20Shelf&st
Second, I haven't read the books, only this review.
So, I promise to read and review these books ASAP.
Why the excitement, urgency, rush to break rules?
These two books do something I am very fond of: as the reviewer, Nancy F. Koehn says, "the challenges confronting our global village seem to have outstripped prevailing orthodoxy."  Right on, sister.
The first book she reviews is by Steven Johnson, Where Good Ideas Come From:  A Natural History of Innovation.  This book speaks about the "space of innovation."  We envision leading as opening up a separate space for collaborative innovation -- Johnson envisions the city and the Internet as such spaces.  He sees innovation as a result of a generative process of serendipities, communications, interactions and mutual comprehensions that "recur again and again in unusually fertile environments..." and he stresses the "inherently interconnected nature of innovation."  I love the sound of this.
For us, of course such environments spur innovations of different kinds:  art, new sciences, and sometimes, new products and services -- the last requiring leaders.  But, from my studies, I see that any innovation that is worth a damn requires collaborations, friendships and mentoring at all of these levels.
The second book is by Denning and Dunham, The Innovator's Way:  Essential Practices for Successful Innovation.  Normally, I find "practical" and "how to" books numbingly boring.  But this one seems to be located on the frontier of innovation -- where we are all amateurs and in constant need of new learning.
Two things excited me about Koehn's presentation of the book.
First, Denning and Dunham define "innovation" as "the adoption of new practice in a community."  I love that image.  Not a new gadget, not a trick for wringing out expenses, not a gimmick for generating sales, but a "new practice:" something that people have to engage in in order to be worthy of the name.  And then, "in a community."  Not something for one person's gain, but a way to make the human endeavor more expansive and encompassing.
Second, they identify stages of the process that track well with our own Breakout Creatives idea:  "sensing, envisioning, offering," track with the mystic;  "adopting, sustaining" require artistic and prophetic talents;  "executing, leading and embodying," are, of course, the contributions of the leader.
Read these books with me, and let's post some of our own comments on them.