When we take on the issues of others rather than keeping our own counsel

Some of the most challenging situations I faced as an organizational leader involved individuals who would call my office angry, unhappy, and irrational over issues they had no firsthand knowledge of. They had taken up someone else's problem and gone on a crusade.

The reason these are such difficult situations is this. First, because they don't have firsthand knowledge, one cannot have a rational conversation about what really happened. All they know is what they "heard" happened, and in the context of anger, hurt, and raw emotions. Thus, this is not a conversation about facts but perceived facts and emotional reactions. Conversations that cannot be focused on objective facts are usually conversations that cannot be resolved. 

Second, the conversations are crazy-making because those who take up others' offenses usually do not reveal that fact. It is clear from the conversation that there is an underlying issue (someone else's offense), but it is never stated, making it challenging to address. If I sense there is an underlying issue, I will often probe as to what it is and try to get to the heart of the matter. Dealing with side issues does not help one resolve the real underlying issues. Unless that is put on the table, there is no resolution.

Third, since these conversations are not about facts due to the absence of firsthand knowledge, they ultimately become about perceptions and anger. Perceptions of others are usually wrong, and anger cannot be resolved without dealing with facts. And facts cannot be established without those with firsthand knowledge present. 

Finally, these are no-win conversations because those who take up the offense of others have no way to move on because they cannot resolve "facts." So while the person whose offense they picked up moves on eventually, those who picked up the offense do not and cannot.

When there is conflict, the goal must always be to achieve reconciliation. The goal is to come to an understanding and achieve a level of peace. When I take up someone else's offence, however, I am doing just the opposite, enlarging the conflict rather than minimizing it: I cannot solve it for others; my own anger spills over to others; I have no objectivity in the situation, and because it is not my issue, I cannot find resolution. It is a no-win situation and does nothing to bring reconciliation or peace.

Picking up someone else's offense is foolish, demonstrates poor EQ, and causes relational havoc beyond what is necessary. It is one thing to seek to help resolve an issue in a healthy and productive manner. But once you take up another's offense, there is no good way out.  

One of the hallmarks of good emotional intelligence is that we can empathize with others without getting enmeshed in their issues. This does not mean that we do not care, provide counsel, and support. It does mean that we don't allow the problems of others to become "our" issues. 

A key to this is what I call "keeping my own counsel." Everyone has a perspective on issues, but they are not always accurate or fair. It is their perspective. This is especially true in relationships. I often hear negative things about others. In line with keeping my own counsel, I seek to listen and, when appropriate, ask questions, but ultimately I must make my own judgments based on my own personal experience rather than on the perspective of others. It is not wise, fair, or healthy for me to simply take the opinions of others when my experience does not line up with theirs or when I have no firsthand knowledge. 

In addition, I want to avoid enmeshment because I cannot solve other people's issues for them. I can encourage them to resolve their issues with whoever they have those issues. I can offer to mediate a meeting between them for resolution. But ultimately, I am responsible for my problems and not for theirs. All manner of relational chaos is caused when I take up the offense of others without firsthand knowledge and based on their information alone. 

Getting sucked into the issues of others takes a relational breakdown between two people and multiplies it among others, where they were never part of the original breakdown and have simply taken on the stuff of others rather than keeping their own counsel. This is often the stuff of organizational conflict and church splits. What was an issue between two parties becomes an issue between multiple parties, and what was a minor problem now becomes a significant issue. What was complicated now has become exceedingly complex. What might have been resolvable is now often not resolvable.

When we have issues with others, we always have the choice as to whether we draw others in and seek to influence their opinion of the one we have problems with, or whether we keep our own counsel, seek to resolve the situation, but not to influence the opinions of others. It is not my place to hurt the reputation of others, but to ensure that my own behavior is healthy. 

This is all about demonstrating wisdom in our relationships with others, living with healthy emotional intelligence, and being peace makers rather than stoking conflict.

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

When none of your options are good options

Let me pose an interesting dilemma. There are times that we face situations in our ministries where a crisis has occurred, or a decision must be made, and all available options seem to be bad options. 

Here is an example: A financial crisis needs to be addressed, but the process will be painful due to the lack of viable solutions. Any and all decisions on the table are tough choices that will inevitably bring some kind of pain. Or you have a personnel decision that needs to be dealt with, but there seems to be no upside in the choices you have in dealing with it. There are times when the only options we have are bad.

I have seen a variety of responses to situations where all the options are bad. One response is for leaders to not act at all because they want a good option, and they see none. Humanly speaking, this is understandable as none of us want to deal with the fallout of bad choices. Of course, this simply delays the inevitable, and the options rarely get better by waiting. 

The exception is with personnel issues, where waiting can be a viable option if behaviors known to a few become evident to many by giving the issue time, thus minimizing the fallout when a decision is made. However, this is not ignoring the issue but choosing to wait on the issue - a strategic difference.

A second response is to face the bad options realistically and choose the best of the bad options. This is often true in financial situations or where a staff member has caused a situation that is going to be painful to address, no matter what. 

I recently moderated an international situation where neither party could expect a favorable outcome due to past decisions made by others. While closure was needed, it was going to be a closure that both parties had to swallow hard to accept. This is often the case in church conflict situations as well, where the conflict has become so complicated and contentious that in the short term, all that will be experienced is pain. 

There is good news, however. If leaders wisely choose a course of action, knowing they have no good current options and that it will cause short-term pain, they can achieve long-term gains simply by being willing to do the hard work of tackling the issue despite the pain in the process. Choosing the best of bad options today can lead to closure and health down the line. 

At times, leadership is nothing more than choosing between bad and painful options. But being willing to make the choice for the sake of a healthier future.

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

A quick start to understanding the culture of the organization you are a part of

Take a moment to reflect on the organization you are part of. Answer these questions with a simple yes or no. You might also consider asking a few colleagues to do the same and then compare your responses. Be honest, and don't worry about your answers. If you are a leader, remember that your staff as a group may have a different perspective than you do. But questions like these can help you at least think more deeply about the culture that currently exists in your organization. Answer with a simple yes or no.

• We have a remarkably healthy culture in our organization.
• Most relationships here can be characterized as healthy.
• I genuinely enjoy working here and intend to remain with the organization.
• We can engage in robust dialogue where any issue can be discussed openly without personal agendas or hidden attacks.
• Staff members are listened to and actively invited to participate in decision making where appropriate.
• Some individuals here do not treat others well, showing unkindness and creating difficulties for their colleagues.
• Our mission, values, direction, and expected behaviors are clearly defined.
• I can articulate our mission, values, direction, and behaviors quickly.
• There is alignment throughout the organization concerning these principles.
• There are some areas with an unhealthy culture within the organization.
• All people on our staff have an appropriate voice at the table.
• We confront and address toxic behaviors effectively.
• Our staff is highly engaged in their work.
• I would describe our leaders as humble, approachable and non-defensive.
• My supervisor knows the name of my spouse (if married) and my children.
• There exists an underlying level of cynicism among staff members towards leaders.
• My supervisor often engages me in meaningful dialogue and listens rather than issuing unilateral directives.
• I feel empowered to perform my job effectively, with minimal micromanagement.
• There are individuals in the organization whose competencies are questionable and who create challenges for those around them.
• At times, I feel more like a means to an end rather than a unique individual with particular gifts and abilities.
• My strengths are fully utilized in my work.
• I am free to share any concerns regarding the company with my supervisor without holding anything back.
• I believe I am compensated fairly for my contributions
• If there were a job opening, I would encourage my best friend to apply.
• I would appreciate discussions about the importance of a healthy culture and its implications for our organization.
• If asked, I could identify at least three areas of our culture that could be improved. 
• The dominant culture actively works to welcome, include, and appreciate members of minority cultures within our organization.
• Knowing what I know now, I would apply for my job again.
• We strive to ensure that our portrayal aligns with our true identity.
• We allow poor behavior to go unchallenged.
• I would describe our leaders as level five: humble, serving their staff well, open and non-defensive, and contributing to a great workplace.
• We have unspoken rules that are only revealed when one crosses a hidden line.

Having considered these questions, what are your observations about the culture of the organization you are a part of?

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

·   

·    

Leadership curiousity and organizational excellence

Why are we not more curious about what is happening in our organizations? I suspect we often resist good questions because they can make us uncomfortable.

In her excellent book Atlas of the Heart, Brene Brown suggests that “Choosing to be curious is choosing to be vulnerable because it requires surrender to uncertainty. We have to ask questions, admit to not knowing, risk being told that we shouldn’t be asking, and, sometimes, make discoveries that lead to discomfort.”

This is a profound statement when it comes to understanding our organization. It is those discoveries that lead to discomfort that cause us to learn, grow, and get better.

Comfort is not what causes us to get better. Discomfort is.

The best leaders are not those who choose comfort but those who are willing to be uncomfortable and, in that discomfort, discover and dialogue about things they would otherwise not discuss.

Organizations tend to gravitate toward comfort and predictability. It is why they become institutional over time, losing their missional bent. The rule becomes, “don’t rock the boat, and those who do rock the boat can be labeled as troublemakers and irritants. Yet, these individuals may be the most valuable staff you have.

The best leaders create discomfort. They create waves without sinking the ship to discover new answers and confront the uncomfortable. They always look beneath the hood to see what is there. They are sleuths seeking to understand what is happening beneath the surface. For them, “bad or problematic” findings are “good news” because they have found something that can be made better. They are not afraid of candid evaluation of the organization but embrace it. The truth of what is there does not create defensiveness but rather instills hope and promise that things can become better.

My goal is to change our mindset about looking candidly at our organizations. Rather than seeing such an evaluation as a threat, we should view it as an opportunity to grow and improve, and everyone benefits. When we react defensively, everyone loses because nothing gets better.

Leaders, whether staff or board members, often fail to ask the right questions and instead guard the status quo, rather than embracing the vulnerability of curiosity and the discomfort that comes with it. If you want to break the ice, do a whiteboard session where everyone is invited to ask the hardest questions they can about the organization. Not to criticize but to challenge the status quo, create discomfort all around, and see if we are satisfied with our answers.

I once worked with a non-profit where the interviews with constituents raised significant questions around common themes. The discomfort of the senior leader and certain members of the board caused the results to be put on ice, and the conversation stopped. There was a lack of curiosity and honest discussions at the senior level. There was only defensiveness and a desire to keep the status quo. Yet the vast majority of those below them saw that the organization needed to make significant changes. Leadership, however, was either unwilling to examine the culture map or to consider reevaluating the outdated and ineffective leadership paradigms that were present.

It is in choosing to be curious, as Brene Brown says, that we make discoveries that lead to discomfort. And it is there that we can get better. But we must be open to curiosity and challenging questions to get there.

Peter Drucker, the renowned management guru, had a deep understanding of what was happening in industry and business. How did he know? Every morning for many years, he would call “line operators” in various companies and ask probing questions. He didn’t call the presidents, vice presidents, or leadership team, but those who directed the work. And then he listened and asked a lot of questions.

One of the most strategic things any leader can do is invest time in talking to staff at all levels. In those conversations, ask questions, listen carefully, and follow the trails that emerge.

Understanding your organizational culture may be one of the most challenging tasks for a leader. Not because it is hard to do, but because it can reveal truths that can be hard to accept. This discipline requires living out the commitments: “Nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide.”

Understanding your current culture is a humble undertaking. Beneath the shiny exterior, there will always be some rust and corrosion you don’t want to find. You may find pockets of dysfunction, people in the wrong seats, leaders who don’t empower and release, a lack of alignment, and systems that are broken.

If you can shift your mindset from viewing these discoveries as negative to seeing them as opportunities for growth and improvement, and if you can embrace discoveries that lead to discomfort, as Brené Brown suggests, you will be on your way toward a healthier culture and a better organization. But it always starts with the willingness to be uncomfortable… in order to become better!

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

Healthy cultures are built by humble leaders

Healthy leaders can build amazingly healthy cultures if they set their minds to it and make it a priority. There are several traits of healthy leaders that can directly contribute to making the culture you have better, healthier, more effective, and better serve your mission. It starts with a posture of humility.

If ego is the enemy, then humility is your best friend. While some may view humility as a sign of weakness, it is, in fact, a sign of strength: the strength to see things as they truly are, the strength to listen to perspectives we may not naturally agree with, and the strength to accept difficult feedback. At every level of life, humility represents strength under control. Only truly strong individuals can embody humility.

Humble leaders embrace the belief that they have nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide. They don't need to be defensive. Instead, they focus on guiding a mission rather than pursuing a personal agenda. They lead collaboratively, recognizing that diverse perspectives contribute to the best solutions.

A key trait of a humble leader is their genuine care and concern for others. Unlike ego-driven leaders, who use people to achieve their own goals, humble leaders prioritize serving others. They strive to help individuals reach their full potential while working towards a shared mission. This approach fosters an environment where people are valued, their talents are nurtured, and the collective mission is successfully achieved. Humble leaders genuinely value and care about their team members!

The humility of leaders fosters a culture of humility throughout the entire organization, creating a powerful ripple effect. When an organization believes it has everything figured out and acts from a place of pride, it often becomes resistant to change. In contrast, organizations embodying corporate humility are more likely to seek better solutions and embrace innovation and new ideas. There is no substitute for humble leadership.

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

Egos, defensiveness and leaders

The defensiveness of many leaders to being challenged significantly affects a healthy culture because it shuts down needed discussion and dialogue and keeps staff from speaking fully and truthfully to leaders. In these situations, leaders must either learn new skills or be replaced if a healthy culture is a goal. Where there is not a free and welcome exchange of ideas, you have leaders who need to control others rather than release them. They shut down important candid dialogue, and their ego issues destroy and prevent a healthy culture.

When leaders cannot be challenged, and there is no free exchange of views, ideas, and opinions, a healthy culture cannot exist. In this context, ego becomes the enemy!

Ego is the enemy of good leadership and a healthy culture. Humility is your friend, while ego and pride are your enemies. Why do I say this? Ego causes leaders to overestimate their ability and underestimate the input of others. As a result, ego-driven leaders limit the input from others, don’t engage in robust dialogue, and listen to others poorly.

A fundamental principle of healthy leadership is the commitment to the mindset of "Nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide." Many leaders feel the need to prove themselves, which can lead them to exploit and pressure others to achieve their desired results. This behavior often results in impatience, anger, and a lack of forgiveness towards those who let them down.

What they risk losing is their pride and their agenda. Their leadership is often motivated more by their desire to succeed than by the organization's mission. Ironically, this drive is often fueled by personal insecurity, which hinders them from listening to others or considering advice that does not align with their views. As a result, their ability to access diverse wisdom and perspectives is severely limited.

Ego has a particularly insidious side; it can give rise to narcissism, where life revolves entirely around oneself. While one might believe this behavior stems from a place of security and confidence, it more often originates from deep insecurity. The outward confidence in one’s correctness and the bravado that comes with it often serve as a facade to conceal underlying insecurity.

Over time, the outward displays of confidence and bravado become protective barriers created by the insecure person within. These walls often prevent individuals from recognizing what is happening around them and understanding their role in contributing to organizational dysfunction.

I have had memorable conversations with leaders after conducting extensive interviews within their organizations. What stands out in these cases is the leaders' absolute denial of reality and difficulty in allowing outside perspectives to penetrate their protective walls. Their responses often include disbelief (my staff must be mistaken, or you, as a consultant, misunderstood), anger at their staff for expressing such views, or outright belligerence (I don’t care; I am the leader and will do it my way, regardless). In these situations, the protective barriers are so thick that the culture is unlikely to improve without a change in leadership. The problem is that such behaviors harm everyone around them, creating significant toxicity within the culture.

Ego issues fueled by insecurity hinder individuals from perceiving reality accurately. Secure individuals listen attentively, are willing to admit their mistakes, and are committed to addressing their blind spots and the more challenging aspects of their leadership. They can do this because they are comfortable in their skin and exhibit more humility than pride.

The more secure I feel, the more open I can be. In contrast, the more insecure I feel, the more I tend to hide my deficiencies and weaknesses. As a result, I cling to my ego, feeling that I have too much to prove and too much to lose.

The irony is that our staff knows our strengths, weaknesses, quirks, and deficiencies. When we deny who we are and pretend to be someone we’re not, they can see that we are not being authentic. Insecure and ego-driven leaders often fail to recognize that their refusal to accept reality breeds cynicism among their team members. This cynicism is harmful to a healthy workplace culture, and the leaders themselves foster it.

The adverse effects of ego are numerous. It prompts individuals to belittle others to elevate themselves. Those with inflated egos tend to blame others for their failures and take credit for achievements that belong to someone else. This mindset hinders honest and open discussions because leaders feel too insecure to address differing opinions. An ego-driven person often lacks respect for their staff and disregards the commitments outlined in the Leadership Contract. By trying to elevate themselves, they inadvertently diminish those around them.

In instances where I’ve shared the results of Culture Audits with senior leaders who were perceived by others as unhealthy or lacking leadership skills, they have been utterly shocked and disbelieving of the interview findings. This reaction highlights their poor self-awareness, understanding of those around them, and their resistance to engaging in open and honest dialogue with colleagues.

In one instance, individuals had been telling the leader for decades that he should step aside and take on a different role due to his inadequate leadership abilities. Instead of heeding the advice of the many who expressed their concerns, he listened only to the few who praised him as a great leader and stubbornly refused to step down. In the meantime, the organization suffered a severe decline; key staff members became disillusioned and left, and there was an urgent need to re-envision the mission and plan for the future.

The individual's deep-seated insecurity and ego blinded them to the realities of their abilities, the needs of the organization, and the feedback from those around them. This organization faced multiple issues that required attention, and it is unlikely to make progress with this leader in position. It is a tragic example of how ego can undermine the development of a healthy culture. A resolution is unlikely to be achieved in situations like this unless boards take action.

Unfortunately, even when a board is in place, there are often inadequate feedback mechanisms to assess the health of the organization's culture. Typically, problems become severe before any effort is made to understand what is happening. During this time, valuable staff members leave, demoralizing the remaining employees. In the case mentioned above, exit interviews with staff revealed significant issues with the senior leader, yet there was a lack of initiative to address the situation. Consequently, the cost to the organization was substantial. Ego can truly undermine a healthy culture.

A leader's maturity can be gauged by their willingness to engage in open and honest dialogue about any issues that affect the team or organization's success. The most effective leaders encourage and promote candid discussions surrounding important topics because they understand that open dialogue leads to the best solutions. They do not shy away from being challenged; rather, they welcome it.

As a leader, do you promote open and honest dialogue? Do you encourage a genuine exchange of ideas and allow your team members to challenge you? If your answer is no, what insecurities are holding you back? Are you afraid of not having all the answers or not getting your way? Whatever the fear may be, it often stems from your own insecurities, and these insecurities can significantly impact your leadership.

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

Stop the blame game and play the learnng game

A key difference between selfish and unselfish leadership is our posture when things go wrong. And they will! Few things strike fear in the hearts of staff more than knowing that they made a significant error. Selfish leaders can be quick to blame those whom they hold responsible for failures. In fact, selfish leaders love to take credit for success and blame others for failure. As Jim Collins points out, Level 5 leaders give credit to others for success and take responsibility for failure—a major difference in posture.

How we deal with failure in our feedback with staff says much about our leadership. When I led a large organization, I popularized a concept called SDR. Now, bear in mind that I led a global religious organization. I remember the meeting where I laid out the SDR concept. It was a large gathering of leaders, and I wanted to get their attention. When I told them what the words meant, there was a moment of silence, shock, and then laughter. They never forget what it meant.

SDR stood for the Shit Disclosure Rule. Stuff hits the fan. Bad things happen! So this is what we meant by the rule. When things are going wrong, or have gone wrong, you must tell us. We know bad stuff happens. We know people make mistakes. We don’t want surprises, so when bad stuff happens, tell us. No surprises!

Our responsibility as leaders,  I told them, was twofold. First, we will help you fix whatever needs to be fixed. We are here to help you determine what needs to be done. Not to blame, but to help you solve the problem.

Second, one of our guiding principles was “Autopsy without blame.” This was a commitment to figure out what went wrong and why. And then to learn from the situation so that we don’t experience it again. We would do an autopsy, but it was not designed to assign blame. It was designed to help us learn. SDR allowed staff to engage leaders when stuff went south, and an autopsy without blame gave staff the confidence that we viewed failure as a learning exercise and not a blame game.

This kind of relationship with staff allows supervisors and leaders to provide valuable feedback and collaborate with them rather than simply being their boss and supervisor. It is a major trust builder. Of course, if staff violated the values and commitments of the organization, we would hold them accountable, and on some occasions, that resulted in their dismissal. But that is a very different situation from staff who make mistakes or try something new with unintended consequences. 

No organization can encourage new ideas and innovation if it then blames staff for failures. Without failures, we are not trying hard enough to do things better!

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

 

Moving your organization from mom and pop to mature

According to Google statistics, “Approximately 20-24% of small businesses fail in their first year. After five years, that number rises to about 50%; by the tenth year, nearly 65% have failed.” Why? In my experience, it has much to do with a lack of a culture of discipline, accountability, and results.

It is not that those who start these businesses are not bright and smart. In fact, entrepreneurs are individuals whom I admire greatly. They find niches, take risks that others would not take, and often, through sheer energy, grit, and willpower, manage to get things off the ground and see significant profits in the short to medium term, only to see the business fail in the long term.

Why does that happen? Often, they never transitioned from the mom-and-pop, seat-of-your-pants, unorganized, and unfocused start-up phase to a more mature organization with clarity, discipline, and scalable internal structures and culture, which could allow it to grow with stability.

New businesses are often run in a hub-and-spoke management style. The hub is the entrepreneur, and the spokes are everyone else. Frequently, in this management style, the owner makes major decisions and directs their staff to perform various tasks. Decision making is centralized in one person, and because they got the business up and running, they often find it challenging to share decision-making responsibility with others. They are the experts, and they know what needs to happen…or so they think!

In that environment, there is often no team culture where people can strategize, plan, and make corporate decisions together. The founder finds it challenging to give up control, so he/she is bound by what he/she knows how to do. They are also bound by the hub and spoke system, which limits their growth to the size they can personally control. In other words, scalable systems are not developed, people are not truly empowered, and there is a delegation of responsibility but not authority, which remains with the owner.

This is what happened with one organization I worked with. They grew to a $25 million operation over several years and contracted to a $15 million operation in one year. The lack of internal discipline, team processes, clarity of roles and responsibilities, and reliance on the owner who always had the final say meant that the business had a functioning structure but not internal stability, and it collapsed quickly when it did. The owner had worked in the business, but not properly on the business, and it had never moved from a mom-and-pop management style to a mature organizational style. It worked until it didn’t! And you can imagine the pain of losing 10 million in revenue in one year. The business almost did not survive.

Perhaps you recognize some of these challenges in your business or organization. If you do, I encourage you to get the help you need to move to a more mature organization with a healthier culture. These principles apply equally to not-for-profit as well as for-profit organizations. 

How does this go unnoticed? First, because there are sales and momentum, we assume that all is ok. It is no small thing for a business to be doing 25 million a year in sales. Further, we get used to doing things a certain way, and are comfortable. However, the management needs of an enterprise when it is new differ significantly from those when it is growing in staff and revenue. Third, the skill set of the leader who, through grit and determination, made things happen is critical in a start-up, but not all that the organization needs long term. Finally, the ego of the founder is often a barrier to learning new skills and ways of doing work. 

What are some of the differences between mom and pop and mature organizations?

In a mom-and-pop structures:

• One leader often calls the shots in a hub-and-spoke system
• There is often not great clarity around processes and procedures
• Things change rapidly
• There is not a well-defined organizational culture
• There is often loose accountability because of the lack of organizational clarity
• Not a great deal of attention is paid to the internal structures
• Staff training and development is an afterthought if it happens at all

Remember that in a start-up phase, these are to be expected. What works in that phase, however, can harm the organization if it is not modified in the long term. Unfortunately many organizations languish in the mom and pop far longer than they need to and leave tremendous opportunity on the table as a result. 

In mature organizations:

• There is a defined senior team that makes collaborative decisions under good leadership
• Mission,  vision, and direction are clear to all, and while methodology may change, the philosophical boundaries of the organization are constant
• There is great clarity at all levels
• There is a high degree of accountability, and promises are kept
• There are regular, carefully crafted management meetings for alignment and accountability
• A clear and healthy organizational culture is in place and adhered to
• Internal structures, processes, and procedures are clear and consistent

Moving from mom and pop to mature usually takes a coach, as the skills and behaviors are very different. A mature organization that is healthy is far stronger than mom-and-pop structures. The sooner you can move from one to the other, the stronger you will be. 

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

The secret of being a self defined leader who can also stay in relationship

One of the key elements of Emotional Intelligence is the ability to negotiate relationships. It is the inability to negotiate relationships successfully that is at the root of a great deal of unnecessary conflict. One of the critical skills of good EQ is being self-defined. A self-defined individual can tell you what they think even when they know that you will disagree with their position. They don’t insist that you see the world as they do, and they are OK if you don’t.

However, the second part of self-definition is also important. I can disagree with you and still be in a relationship with you. Think about that in terms of the political divisions that are tearing up America and much of the world.

This is what it means to be able to negotiate relationships in a healthy way. Poor EQ will state a position and insist that you agree with it. If you don’t, you are marginalized and demonized. After all, you don’t get it. Good EQ, on the other hand, can negotiate relationships with people who are very different from us. This skill is needed in a diverse world, whether inside or outside the workplace. The ability to disagree, engage in honest, candid dialogue, and still stay connected would prevent a lot of conflict. 

This ability for leaders is crucial to creating cultures of open and candid dialogue. By taking a position that may not be popular (which is how all innovation or improvement usually begins) a leader is encouraging others to do the same. It is then in the clash of these views and perspectives that the best solutions are typically found. The alternative is the common groupthink behavior that stifles and hinders progress. 

To this point, healthy leaders don’t have a problem with apologizing when necessary. Even when they don’t really need to, they do it because it will alleviate stress or controversy. I recall a time when I made what turned out to be a controversial decision (the right decision, but one that was hard for my organization to swallow). Being a blogger, I wrote a blog post for my staff entitled “Just get over it!” My intention was to explain the decision further and then encourage people to move on.

Unfortunately, many took offense at the blog title. I apologized (though I didn’t need to, but I wanted to lower the angst) and wrote a new blog titled “Build a Bridge and get over it.” It was a way to apologize for how my prior communication had come across and give me another chance to move us forward. It worked, but I had to apologize for it to work.

Healthy leaders keep short accounts. One of my practices is to “Walk toward the barking dog.” If I have offended someone or created an issue, rather than walking the other direction, I will engage the individual, seek understanding, and do whatever is necessary to put the issue to rest so we can move on.

These may seem like small things, but they are not. Much of our leadership capital is based on relationships. The ability to negotiate healthy win-win relationships is a key to good leadership and reflects good EQ.

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.

How Emotional Intelligence training can change your organization

Many organizations have a significant commitment to training and staff development. Often, however, the issue of emotional intelligence training is not on the radar. Yet, the implications of healthy or unhealthy EQ impact everything the organization does and affect every relationship and interaction.

In Daniel Goleman’s words, the cost of emotional intelligence illiteracy is high. It can include unresolved conflicts, lack of cooperation, silos, politics within the organization, turf wars, competition for power, and a range of dysfunctional and toxic behaviors that can hinder our desired outcomes.

Take a moment and consider the financial cost of toxic behaviors: unresolved conflict, turf wars, lack of alignment, lack of cooperation and organizational silos. EQ deficiencies and immature EQ behaviors can be like an aircraft carrier anchor dragging behind a 36-foot sailboat. All deficient EQ behaviors impede, slow down, and cost the organization money. In the case of not-for-profit enterprises, it costs in terms of Return on Mission.

This is a powerful reason to help leaders grow in their EQ as they set the pace for the organization and provide ongoing training to raise the staff's EQ literacy. Here is something to consider. Most behaviors that hold an organization back from being all it can be are EQ in nature. Grow your EQ, and you grow yourself, your organization, and your return on mission.

What would you do as a leader to see the following changes in your business, church, or non-profit?

• Getting everyone on the same page
• Eliminating ego-driven dysfunction for humble leadership
• Moving from competition to cooperation
• Creating an open culture where candid dialogue can take place around any issue
• Building a culture of promises kept and excellent execution of work
• Seeing conflict resolved quickly and cleanly
• Eliminating the politics and turf wars that get in the way of cooperation and a common mission· 
• Creating scalable and clear systems for your processes and workflow
• Eliminating defensiveness and replacing it with a desire for the best solutions possible throughout the organization
• Growing the EQ maturity of all staff all the time
• Seeing toxic behaviors replaced with healthy ones
• Creating a culture that supports all that you do and eliminates all that holds you back
• Rather than settling for what is, create a commitment to what could and should be
• Moving from emotional illiteracy to emotional literacy

·   Each transition or commitment is possible if you commit to continuous EQ training. Each improvement in these areas enhances your ability to generate profits, achieve a better return on mission, retain top talent, and foster innovation and improved solutions.

You can train in all kinds of skills and should. However, without training in emotional intelligence, you cannot address the primary issues hindering your organization: unhealthy EQ and its implications. And all of these are directly related to culture, so you improve your organization’s culture in direct proportion to an improvement in its emotional intelligence.

What it takes is for senior leaders to make this a priority for themselves and then for their entire organization. It can and should be done. 

TJ Addington is an executive and leadership coach, an organizational consultant, and a culture specialist. I am a certified master coach with Intelligent Leadership (John Mattone Global). You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. My passion is to help organizations and individuals maximize their gifts and potential.