Proceed Until Apprehended

I’m one week complete in my new role with iQmetrix. It was intense, but also really great. I’ve got enough work and opportunity that it’s easy to get lost in the avalanche, but I’m not overwhelmed.

Overwhelmed is a choice.

Starting a new job, I had some of the expected upheaval: New computer, new policies to learn, new procedures, new names and faces, products, acronyms that don’t mean anything, work assignments, papers to sign, planning meetings about responsibilities I’ve just received, a litany of background documents that will orient me to the organization and my role… and I was invited on my first day to prepare and facilitate a session with our Leadership Development Program participants 24 hours later, before I had a desk or a phone.

At home, the dishwasher and the sink both decided to sprout leaks.

And I was asked to speak at the kid’s school open house last minute.

And the neurologist’s office called and I have to call them back between 10 and 12 or 1 and 4. (If I can find a phone.)

And Passport Canada requires me to call and confirm a friend’s passport application as soon as possible.

In the middle of all this, on Wednesday morning, I started a blank document on my computer and wrote at the top, “Stop. Clear your head. What’s important right now?”

Then I answered the question. It took some real effort to quiet all the “noise” that was going on, but I knew I needed to find some space to determine what direction was right for me, for the organization, for my mission… not just to respond to the invitations the environment presented.

My answers didn’t contain anything about plowing through the reports or becoming familiar with the phone system or organizing my desk or finding the supply cabinet and getting a pen. It said “learn about your co-workers.” It said “get a sense of the culture.”

I wrote these items down, and I’m pleased with myself for having the perceptiveness to do that, but I’m most proud of the fact that I then went and did those things. Standing up from the urgent items at my desk was scary, but identifying and pursuing the most important things I could do feels deeply satisfying at the end of the week.

One of the most fun and energizing weeks I’ve had in quite a while.

If you prompted some people I’ve worked with, they’d say I have two glaring weaknesses – I’m stubborn and I’m impatient.

Yet another group might say I have two clear strengths – I’m persistent and I bring a sense of urgency to my work.

They’re both right, of course. It seems to depend on the context of the situation, and also the paradigm of the person you ask.  One thing’s for sure, though. A big part of my story is my tenaciousness and how hard and fast I push… for better or for worse.

I feel like my acknowledgment of this component of my character is helping me mature as a leader. In the past couple weeks, I’ve been invited to participate in a couple of committees. My answer? Well, I thanked them, first. Then I said, “I’ve never met a committee I didn’t disagree with,” explaining that I’ve learned that I’m not always at my best when I need to coordinate an opinion and an action with a group. Sure, I share their desire for outcomes and positive change, I’ll even work with them, but joining the committee? I’m not sure that helps anyone.

That’s not to say I can’t work with others, but committees put a lot of agendas in a room. To come out of it with agreement there often needs to be compromise. For some problems, a reconciliation of diverse agendas isn’t the answer we need. Sometimes, it just prolongs the time until we can get to the heart of the matter.

I think there’s hubris in that statement, but I’d also like to think there’s also an unwillingness to compromise a vision for the security of a team approach.

I wrote just a little while ago about “Beware the Invitation.” Sometimes, committees are a big, distracting invitation. They offer a venue for you to roll up your sleeves and to “see and be seen” working the issue. If your passion and knowledge of an issue drives you to act, it will likely also generate these invitations to align yourself with others. I’d suggest you need to ask if it is going to help you or hinder you in pursuing your original reason for action.

Sorry committees. I didn’t mean to rail on you. I think I’ve just realized that you’re not always a fit for me and it’s OK to say no.

Commenting on a previous post, Chris asked me about my “mentor network.” Specifically, he asked,”How you selected it and nurtured it and what you seek to get from it and also contribute to it?”

A number of years ago I set up a network of individuals that I wanted to remain connected to even though I wasn’t going to be working with them on a regular basis – a mentor network.

Just a point about mentors – I think your supervisor or boss is sort of an “obligated” mentor. They should be coaching you, developing you and paying attention to your needs. However, they don’t always do this, and if they do, it’s only part of the coaching story. You’ve got to presume their loyalty lies with the organization, not with your personal growth. Sometimes you need some perspective from a different filter. Having a supervisor as a mentor certainly doesn’t hurt, but it’s not the complete package I would feel comfortable with.

With a desire for a diversified network, I identified three individuals that I appreciated and knew I could learn from. They had careers and roles that were pretty close to my definition of success.

I had worked with a couple of these individuals. Another, I had met once through doing informational interviews – I was simply curious about different career options and set up a meeting. I got a good vibe and knew he would be a good mentor for me.

As you’ll see in the letter below, I had some particular skills I wanted to grow, and I identified potential mentors that I felt were “best in the field” at these skills. They didn’t have to be a perfect model of what I wanted to be, they just had to have some strengths that I wanted to learn more about.

I established with my employer that I was starting the program and got approval to take time off of work each month for the meetings. I called each of my desired mentors up and asked if they would consider mentoring me. I didn’t ask them to decide on the spot. I said I’d share a letter that outlined my intentions.  This is what I shared:

Dear XXXX,

Re: Personal Mentoring Program

In the past six years, since I completed university, I’ve attained more from my career than I had ever envisioned. I’m happy with my success, but I’m at my best and most fulfilled when I’m growing. I’d like some help surpassing what I see as a potential plateau. I’d like to regroup, do some planning and some strategizing for the next phase of my life, and I’d like your help.

Let me show you what I mean. I hope to improve, among other things: 

• My ability to balance work and family
• My value in the employee marketplace
• My leadership skills
• My perspective and knowledge of Saskatchewan, Canadian and World industry and politics
• My salesmanship, both within a company and outside of it

This engagement clearly benefits me, providing me with:

• Access to your experience and knowledge
• Your guidance on the practical matters of the day
• Your guidance on the strategic direction of my career
• Clarity on steps I can take to improve my value in the marketplace

But I believe it also benefits you through:

• The personal reward of seeing someone successfully move on a planned career path
• Networking, both through my current and future contacts, increasing your influence and visibility
• Opportunity to share the things you’d wish “someone had told me at your age.”
• Perspective and enthusiasm from an “up and comer”

The minimum commitment I am asking from you would be for a monthly meeting at a time of your choosing. I have arranged for time to be allotted from my work schedule for our meetings, so any time of the day that is suitable for you will be suitable for me.

During this monthly meeting, I envision you sharing your experience and knowledge with me, as I would likely have prepared questions for you. The first meeting would include such questions as:

• What has been your career path?
• Was it through planning?
• Was it by choice?
• What do you credit your success to?
• What are the things that make a career fulfilling for you?
• Has your education been useful?

In subsequent meetings, we could discuss strategies for success, and actions and plans that should be incorporated to achieve career goals.

In addition, each meeting would be followed up with a summary of our conversation, for your records and for review at our next discussion.

The meetings suggested are a proposal. If you are willing to participate in this protégé/mentor relationship, I’d like to work with you to make sure that the meetings are an efficient and effective use of your time.

I believe there are other things that can take place in a mentoring relationship, and perhaps I leave these for discussion: 

• Using my skills or perspective to help you with your business needs
• Increasing my network by introducing me to your network
• Thinking of me when you’ve got a community activity that requires energy, enthusiasm or my skill-set
• Keeping in contact through email and phone conversations

Thanks for your time. The development of this program will benefit me greatly. I hope that it will benefit you, as well. I intend to build a happy family, a successful career and relationships that will last a lifetime, right here in Saskatchewan. I hope that you can help me fulfill that dream.

Please contact me at xxx-xxx to let me know your thoughts on my initiative. If I’m on the right track, perhaps we can arrange a time for our first meeting.

Thanks,

Nevin

Certainly, this isn’t the letter I’d write today. For one, I no longer have the gall to call myself an “up and comer.” I would also try and manage my apparent fascination with bullet points. I cringe a little bit at what I wrote and how it’s written, but I do like some notions I seemed to have at the time.  For one, I didn’t think anyone would say no to somebody saying “I think you’re successful and I want to learn from you.” They didn’t. For another, the idea of having a sustained, direct relationship with these individuals felt like it had long-term potential to create mutually beneficial opportunities. I think that’s come to pass, as I go to work for one of them in two weeks.

The relationships have morphed over the years. They aren’t nearly as formal as they once were. The key to sustaining a mentor relationship? I only have my experience, but this is it: I have in my calendar a regular reminder every six weeks – set up a lunch with your mentor. I don’t ignore it.

The Chinese bamboo tree doesn’t grow upwards until the fifth year after the seed has been planted. For four years, the seed is watered and cared for with seemingly no results.  It’s roots are growing, but you can’t tell. In the fifth growing season, the bamboo grows upwards at an incredible rate, reaching it’s mature height of 80 to 90 feet in just three or four months.

There’s a lot to be said for having a willingness and a commitment to do things even if they don’t show immediate results. Arguably, that’s a definition for leadership – even if the payoff is so far off as to be unimaginable (and perhaps, impossible), you do the right thing.

I like to picture the bamboo farmer patiently, deliberately, even lovingly watering the spot where the bamboo seed is planted. He knows his investment of care and time will be returned, but there’s more to it. A four year commitment without results is about the journey. It’s about the process of watering and caring, not the resulting tree.

My own bamboo shot up this week. I have accepted a job with iQmetrix. They’re beyond progressive, they’re wildly successful and they’re putting me to work right here in Regina. I’m ecstatic to be joining them in a role that suits me to a T, Manager of Employee Development.

I feel like I do many things that won’t ever pay. I blog, I volunteer for my kid’s school and I tell my bosses things they don’t want to hear. Except these things did pay. They paid when I did them (because it felt like the right thing) and now they’ve paid with a career-changing opportunity.

There’s no doubt my passions and my commitment to honesty played a significant role in my appeal to iQmetrix. Meeting with leadership in my new role, it’s immediately apparent that they actively seek those behaviours, and I naturally fit. No pretending. I’m going to an organization that desires truth, desires honesty and encourages individuals to challenge convention.

I’ve been told many times I’m too much of an idealist. Wait ’til you see me now that I’ve been validated.

When Kerri and I got married, we chose to keep the wedding small. It was limited to our immediate family – parents, siblings, spouses and a nephew. It was a fantastic day, of course, and I believe it was in large part because the fun and joy of the celebration was contained and focused on a small number of guests we really wanted to share with. There were others that could have helped us celebrate, of course, but it’s a slippery slope to include more, all the while thinning out the direct contact and interaction with those that are there. It seemed there was a finite amount of happiness to be shared and we concentrated it among a few.

I’m reminded of this today as Kerri got a blank stare of non-recognition from a bride we saw get married a month ago. Evidence, perhaps, that size doesn’t denote quality.

There’s a moral here for our daily endeavours, as well. How much we’re taking on isn’t an indication of how much we are doing effectively.

Here’s a statement for your consideration: You have a limited amount of thoughtfulness and quality to offer.

The energy and skills with which we do stuff have finite properties, at least until you undertake a long-term effort to increase them. It’s pretty hard to quantify the quality you offer, but a limit is there. And if it is limited, how should you use it?

When you look at the way you’re using this limited capacity now,

• Are you creating quality connections or multiple relationships?
• Are you communicating with focus or responding to all the inquiries?
• Are you creating effective ideas or solving as many problems as possible?
• Are you pursuing meaning or juggling activities?

While I’ve written them as either/or propositions, they aren’t exclusive. Both options are arguably necessary. I’m simply asking if you and I are spending your time where we should.

Paradoxically, computers, the internet and social media create an environment where your finite thoughtfulness can be multipled and shared many times. We often misinterpret this as an increase to our limited capacity. Not so. All these advances simply offer a better distribution system for what we’re able to create.

This isn’t a comment about limits for your success or a containment of the reach of your brilliance, then. It’s the opposite. Your ideas can go further than ever before.

This post is a comment about an individual’s fixed capacity and the importance of treasuring it. When we acknowledge we have a fairly immovable constant, it can create a healthy sense of urgency… if this is all I have, am I using it right while time ticks away?

Invitations are exciting things. We’re so pleased when we get them. Someone thought of us, someone cares.

Not all invitations are good for you. For some, we need to be wary. These invitations ask you to solve problems, provide answers, make decisions and define the course. It actually presents itself like any other invitation. People are deferring to your wisdom. They value your input. They want you to join the party.

That feels nice, and it feels nice to accept the invite, swoop in and make stuff happen… except this invitation has strings. Accepting this invitation establishes that the inviter doesn’t do the heavy lifting, the invitee does. The inviter doesn’t need to think through the issue, make a plan or take responsibility for the breakdown. They just have to flag you down and point to the flat tire.

Accepting this invitation creates a relationship where you take on responsibility for the outcome. That’s all well and good if it’s your role, but if you’re trying to get others to engage in the work, this invitation creates a sustainability problem. The responsibility you’ve just taken with such mastery and confidence was taken from someone who was gingerly holding it, hoping they wouldn’t have to do it themselves. You just took them off the hook. They learned they don’t have to take the risk. You will.

Here’s the counter-intuitive punch line: Establishing yourself as a person that eats problems for breakfast is exactly why you got promoted in the first place, and now it’s exactly what you do not want to do when you’re coaching others.

Spotting and skillfully redirecting unhealthy invitations is one of the key distinctions between good workers and good leaders.

A recent post of mine was about the library, of which I’m a huge fan and user. I’m passionate about the museum, too, but it’s a different kind of love. I don’t particularly like going there, I just like what it represents and what it could be.

I work directly across from our Provincial museum, the Royal Saskatchewan Museum (RSM), and right next door to their annex. They house three collections, a biological collection, a paleontological collection and an Aboriginal artifacts collection. I’ve had the opportunity to tour through the annex, which is not open to the public. It’s more interesting than the museum itself by a factor of ten.

I think this goes for many museums, but I’m picking on the RSM. The museum is, unfortunately, much too static. This is because of money, of course, but it also seems to be because they’re presenting a history of Saskatchewan through mostly physical artifacts, and those don’t change over time. Once you’ve tweaked your presentation, you’re largely into preservation, right?

As you might guess, I don’t agree. I think the RSM should be all about the interpretation. This shouldn’t be too much of a stretch. The tour guides are called interpreters, after all.

Right now, the museum presents the facts, and just the facts. By “interpretation,” I mean that the museum should be in the business of helping me understand what all the history and the worldview they present means for me right now.

The museum offers a picture of reality that is not warped or diluted by other noise. It’s a view of our world that hasn’t been overly polished, manufactured or “defined” by someone else. It’s contact with a reality you can really trust, and that’s exceeding rare in our lives… check that… the lives of people like me, living in the city and going to work each day.

The museum says: These are the environmental regions of our province. This is the bedrock beneath our feet. These creatures once roamed our land. These creatures now roam our land. These people and these cultures defined this province. This vegetation naturally covers our landscape… When I spend all my time outside on paved roads and my indoor time in the air-conditioned comfort in front of a screen, these things can be forgotten.

Somewhere along the way, museums defined their role as protectors of history. They are preservationists to the point that most of the collections are hidden away from public view. The mandate of a museum ends up being, “We protect things that are irreplaceable.”

I think there’s a relevance problem here. Museums need to be challenged to make these collections and this ”real” look at our world relevant to the public. The museum I dream of would be dedicated to helping others understand the world, past and present, so they can make better choices for their future.

Leadership is often understood to be “principle-centred.” You figure out what’s important to you and then you stick to that path. You establish the path that’s integral to you, and even when distractions try and pull you from it, you know what’s important. I see the museum offering a reality-centre. It can be trusted. It can help you buildi an understanding of yourself and your world, offering a solid foundation from which you can develop principles that govern your behaviour. The museum offers an excellent foundation for leadership.

The museum offers bedrock in more ways than one, but we need help using it. It’s not enough just to be there.

Museum, thank you for helping me understand the past, and thank you for helping me understand the present. Please help me plot a path for the future that is grounded in reality.

At the moment, there’s limited transition between “What we know to be true,” and “What we should do now.” I’m inspired by the Human Factors exhibit at the RSM, which connects our human influence to the world’s current state, but it only implicitly invites a tough self-examination. For most, the principles at the centre of their behaviour are  left untouched after a museum visit.

I’d like to see the museum:

• provide examples of leaders who stuck to reality, even when it made them appear unreasonable
• ask me to make a personal commitment to respond to something I learned today
• organize our community to take action on important issues that are largely ignored
• reach out and engage the community in interpreting current events through a scientific and historical lense
• offer orientation for public servants and any organization that’s committed to Saskatchewan
• lead a movement of choice and change based on a trusted understanding of the world
• when I’m physically in the building, engage me in a dialogue. Pull scientists from the back room and focus on engaging with the public.

I’m sure this is easier said than done. There’s undoubtedly a laundry list of items and infrastructure that just need maintenance. Here’s my tradeoff: I’m OK with seeing historical artifacts suffer damage if it means people’s future decisions are more thoughtful, deliberate and grounded in reality. I say that, but I don’t think it would get that far. In truth, becoming more relevant is the first and most important step in getting more funding.

In these days of economic turmoil, there is a growing gap between successful organizations and those that are on the slow path to failure.

There seems to be a huge difference in the kinds of employment experiences these organizations offer, as well. It’s a virtuous circle, or “runaway” as Seth Godin calls it, as successful companies engage their employees, get better results, recruit better employees, engage them even more, get even better results, etc. The troubled companies? It’s a circle too (or spiral), but not quite so virtuous.

When we’re considering employment opportunities, it’s important that we ask how we can recognize the good companies. There’s a bit of “greener grass” when you look at any potential employer, but what really makes the difference? Here’s my list.

Real leadership

Topping the list of desired traits in an engaging employer is a leader… a real leader. Leadership can take many forms, and at first glance, many business heads look the part and they certainly have the title. Figuring out if they can actually drive engagement and excitement is something altogether different than appearance or title, though. Jim Collins defines a leader really well in Good to Great. He calls it ”Level 5 Leadership,” and these leaders distinguish themselves through a combination of Humility and Will. I can’t do his full description justice, but my takeaway is that Leaders often put their ego in check as they make choices that are for the good of the company. I’d suggest there’s a simple test: Does your potential leader work on things that create results today and tomorrow or do they work for some distant future? The former makes them look good and feel good. The latter serves the organization more than themselves.

A healthy relationship with ideas

A healthy relationship would mean a conversation takes place… ideas would not be met with a response based on how it’s different than the conclusions that exist already. Are ideas examined or are they disputed? Are external ideas a distraction from the agenda or an opportunity to get better? Ideas need a meritocracy, not a pass-fail response. An engaging environment gives ideas a fair chance.

A reliance on their employees

Speaking of meritocracy, what’s the relationship with employees? I’ve yet to see a business that doesn’t say some version of “Our people are our greatest asset.” It’s come to the point that it’s now meaningless to say it. As with so many concepts, there is often a gulf between word and deed. I think this is most easily seen in the nature of the delegation. Are employees simply researchers for the boss’s agenda or are they asked to help find the direction? The creation of an engaging environment is one where the employees are empowered to pursue and develop the direction even when the boss isn’t around. In the unhealthy ones, the work happens when the spotlight is on, but it dies away when the boss’s attention is elsewhere.

As an off-shoot of this kind of orientation, I find I’ve got a hyper-sensitve response to job ads. When I read a description of an opportunity, I almost immediately classify it as an employer looking for labour or an employer looking for thoughtfulness. I’m sure I shouldn’t be so quick to judge so as to keep options open, but I suspect I’m saving a lot of wasted time, too.

A progressive business model

Another book with some fantastic concepts about successful, engaging businesses is Jeff Jarvis’ What Would Google Do? In it, he presents this gem: “There’s an inverse relationship between control and trust.” This is the foundation of some really exciting businesses. Google, of course, and Zappos, the online shoe-seller, are a couple examples of organizations where the leadership of the organization has ceded significant discretion and decision-making power to the individuals that are doing the work… in some cases suppliers and partners. If the organization is designed in an elegant, thoughtful way, letting go of control puts you in the centre of something infinitely more valuable. A business model that thrives on openness and transparency is also a lot more sustainable and, of course, engaging for employees. This one’s perhaps a bit more subjective to read, but in a conversation with people at the top of the hierarchy, are the gripping the steering wheel or looking for ways to hand over the keys?

I’m sure there’s many other essential elements important to a healthy employer. This is just the list that comes to mind for me. I invite you to share what makes a good employer for you in the comments.

I love books and I love quiet places. By extension, I love the library. I could spend hours in the library just reading near-random books off the shelves. In reality, though, my relationship with the library is somewhat transactional. Primarily, the library serves as an exchange, a place where I check in (online), request pre-identified books, physically go in to drop off and pick up books and pay the occasional fine. I think I’m only using about ten percent of my library. The rest, at least to me, is irrelevant.

Aside from access to printed paper, the library is a quiet refuge, a place to focus a little more internally and find some organized information in a steady stream rather than the firehose of the internet. In truth, there’s lots of places to do that. Any number of coffee shops are happy to have you do that for the price of a cup of coffee. Is the physical space and the money devoted to a library worth it?

To be fair, I can think of a few other things the library offers. It’s a place of “trusted” information with professionals that can help you find data and knowledge that’s vetted, tested and approved. There’s also education programs and lots of obscure books that can introduce you to new worlds. There is support for businesses and access to databases.

The fundamental contract we have with the library – we’ll pay tax dollars so you can make information available – is a deal whose death knell is fast approaching. It’s not that libraries haven’t kept their end of the bargain, it’s just that the internet makes it faster, cheaper and infinitely more efficient to stay home and get the same. I certainly love the focus on ideas that comes with reading a printed book, and I want that from the library. I could do without the big, air-conditioned building and all the administration. I suspect that there’s an Amazon-style model of book exchange that could lower our taxes by a good touch.

I don’t think the library is going to go anywhere anytime soon, though, and its disappearance would not be my first choice.  My first choice would be to rethink libraries and shift them from a role of providing information access to leading us in learning how to manage our information. We’re experiencing an epidemic in our society right now. We’re losing ourselves, our purpose and our intentions to a glut of information. Libraries can be a big part of the solution.

Many of us don’t know how to manage all of the information that’s now so easily accessible. Heads bent down in the Blackberry prayer, texting at inappropriate times, the interruption of important conversations for the randomness of a ringing telephone, pulling an all-nighter in Second Life, watching another episode of Deadliest Catch instead of going to bed at a decent hour, mindlessley surfing Fail Blog… all this media can easily sidetrack us. Often, we don’t choose to apply our attention, our attention is simply stolen by whatever is in front of us. The library is the antithesis of “unplanned” attention, and building our capacity to be deliberate with our attention could be their cause.

If the library’s mission were to be, “We help people control the information,” they could:

• Help their users develop strategies to sort their daily stream of information
• Provide classes on keeping a clean email in-box
• Help users prioritize their information needs
• Communicate the importance of being deliberate with one’s attention
• Provide coaching on how to find and establish information feeds that are meaningful (I’d go to a course called ‘Getting Value from Twitter’)
• Help their users make personal learning plans to pursue their interests
• Research 101: Provide formal instruction on how to find information (and determine its credibility)
• Developing simple, flexible guides/frameworks for individuals to undertake self-directed study

I see this as being more valuable than a university education in many ways. Who needs university when the information on any topic is at your fingertips?

If you can find it when you need it.

Information and learning is now DIY. With information’s ubiquity, the barriers to knowledge are now our ability to search, sift and absorb. We would thrive with teaching focused on how to do this well. The library is in a pretty ideal position to take on the role.

Have you ever been intensely frustrated with a work team that doesn’t seem to get it? It may be that the roles are ill-defined, the processes are haphazard and inefficient or there is simply no purpose to align efforts. Forget about “systems thinking,” these teams are organized for knee-jerk reactions. When an issue comes up, watch the thrashing that ensues. Ultimately, the team isn’t getting to any results.

If you’re seeing this, what’s the right response? If we look around us, it’s clear that one of the most common responses is to wait it out for a bit and see if things get better.

Seriously, have any of these things ever gotten better on their own?

More likely – actually, always – this results in a continued ineffective organization. The problems remain undefined, the potential solutions go unexamined and those that are propagating the problems continue their path unabated.

Wishfully thinking the mess will resolve itself is not a realistic strategy. It’s a defense mechanism that keeps you from taking emotional risk. It keeps you safe on the sidelines, smug in your knowledge that it sucks.

But that’s OK. Fair enough. If you don’t want to get in the fray, I think that’s your right. However, this strategy should not be accompanied with your continued frustration with the situation. You don’t get that right. If you are choosing to quietly wait for someone else to lead the way out, you’re making a decision to also endure it until it gets better. You’ve gotta pay that price. By the way, it’s your burden, and yours alone. You don’t need to unload it on an unsuspecting confidant so you can temporarily feel better. Sit with it. Stew on it. Maybe, if it becomes uncomfortable enough, you’ll realize you shouldn’t just wait it out.

If only the wishful thinker would propose a solution, the benefits are tremendous.

• You focus a conversation on a problem that others haven’t seen, or at least have been afraid to acknowledge. Groupthink can drive a wedge between a committee and reality. Diverse perspectives can bring a committee back.
• You introduce an alternative path. This often defines the parameters of future conversations. Everybody gets busy supporting or fighting your plan… others aren’t even considered.
• You make a statement about what kind of participant you are. You are one that bring solutions, not problems. That puts you in a special, rare category.

The cost for all this? Well, as Ghandi said, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” On the first attempt, in all likelihood, they ignore you. Perhaps you’ll be so fortunate as to get some eye-rolls or scoffs. They at least heard your point. If you keep it up, you’ll have the success of your audience sitting up ramrod straight and telling you all the reasons it can’t be done. That’s when you’ve got them right where you want them. With persistence, I believe you can make a difference.

More plainly, the cost is how it makes you feel. It’s not particularly comfortable in the moment. It’s just right. That’s integrity, and it has the ability to make you feel unsettled and at peace in the same moment.

I’m in a pretty timid organization, a bureaucracy where having eye-to-eye conversations about real issues is to be avoided at all costs. I would LOVE to have more ridicule and more fighting of my ideas. As it stands, I’m pretty sure I could propose the purchase of a beaver to sharpen our pencils and I wouldn’t get a response. You know what, though? I feel a lot better pushing for what’s right and getting nowhere than remaining silent and by default becoming a supporter of what’s wrong.