Formulating a Shared Vision- Role #4 in Stage #2 of Neocharismatic Leadership- part 2

As all leaders know, an organizational vision does wonder in motivating people when it represents their aspirations and highest values. To achieve that, a Neocharismatic Leader makes sure that everyone in the organization feels connected to it in a way or another.

This episode explores how to do this in startup groups and small organizations, through strategic leadership.

Listen to it on YouTube here
https://youtu.be/__iXuImUI8o
Listen to it in your favorite app on your smart device
http://www.neocharismaticleadership.org/podcast-en
For the book
http://www.neocharismaticleadership.org/ncl-book/

Transcript

Introducer: 0:03

Welcome to this podcast series on Neocharismatic leadership with author, leadership expert and coach Dr. Ghadah Angawi. And executive leader Martin Hedley, where they will both explore the recently published book, Neocharismatic leadership, and the coaching topics it covers.

Martin Hedley: 0:30

Welcome back to our listeners, and good to see you again, Ghadah. I want to thank those listeners that have put comments or questions into us through the website. These comments are useful, and we can adjust the content of our podcasts to address your concerns and ideas. In fact, we've already done so, one question that comes up a lot, though, is, that's fine in a big organisation, but what about my small company or my social community group? I think you have something planned for us, right, Ghadah?.

Ghadah Angawi: 1:02

Yes. Today we're going to look again, at stage two, the fourth role, which is formulating a shared vision, from the perspective of a leader in a start up or a social or community enterprise. Last time, we mentioned that some people may still see these leaders in a negative way and feel emotional about the transformation that is about to happen or happening, as it has disrupted the norms of their lives in the organisation. In small groups, however, this is less likely to occur, as the mission is very personal to everyone in the group. And the distance from the leader is usually very short. Do those leaders also feel the pressure of having to fulfil their obligation towards the vision or the decision they have declared? Yes, they do and I leave you, Martin, to answer this question from your experiences.

Martin Hedley: 2:01

Thank you. Well, yes, the simple answer is yes, the pressure is exactly the same on leaders of small groups. But it's a different type of pressure. It's a pressure born of the hopes of all the group members and yourself, there was a reason for starting the group, right. And generally, every group member wants to contribute aggressively towards the goal. It could be a social injustice, it could be something we're doing to the environment, it could be age, it could be anything. But typically, you're going to have a group of passionate people around the subject, the motivation piece of the puzzles is really taken care of, and a smaller group, because you formed it, because you were motivated to make this particular change and that's great. Also, the status quo is the world around them. Whatever we do today that they would like to see changed. It's not the risk of fear of being changed, as in a company change, that's remote, it's unlikely that that feelings going to emerge. In fact, very little exists and the group members have the job of creating or the norms, the rules and the culture of this new group. And that's really exciting. So where does the stress come from? Actually it comes from keeping people focused. Energised, committed, and engaged, people come up with all sorts of ideas and schemes, all very good and innovative, some more useful than others. But the resources of the group at this stage are highly limited and every resource counts, the goal has to be met. So every dollar spent, every minute of people's time also has to be very well spent. Reminding group members of this fact is challenging, it's constant. I think harder to tell excited people with good intentions, no, then people with very little intentions that they have to change. I think that's where the stress comes from.

Ghadah Angawi: 4:14

Yeah, and there are still many great tasks ahead of these leaders, time will always seem a stretch, as the creation of an organisation seems to take much longer than it should. So as they move forward, they discover more obstacles around them as a group. And yet, the goal still must be achieved with limited resources. So the neocharismatic leader knows that to get to the goal time moves very quickly, and they must work diligently with their team, if anything of what they promised is to happen. Many of formulating the shared vision role is directed to navigating people's thoughts and emotions, on a constant basis, making sure that every day week and month passes, people are still committed to a shared vision that they have spent enough time and continuous effort in crafting previously, to the point that it becomes integrated with every action and process they come up with. So there is a process of building self awareness taking place as a leader, empathetically listens, the values are dug into, and there is a constant dialogue around past, present and future in place, continuous coaching for individuals, and the team as a whole is happening on a daily basis. The leader in this role is the strategist, coach and mentor. The culture is formulated as people speak their minds. This is what happens within teams in large organisations, Martin, but gets unnoticed as there is already a system and processes in place. Here, the system is not written in stone, and the processes are agile based on the Agile learning that's happening constantly.

Martin Hedley: 6:15

Yes. So formulating a shared vision in smaller groups, then remains very important, just as it is very different. I've seen it require the leader to keep people focused and not chase too many great, but unnecessary ideas. So anytime you come up with a dramatic change, or something really worthwhile. It's an engine of innovation for the individuals in the group, and they just come up with great ideas. One way I explained this to a small team, actually in the startup company that I was restructuring, following an early failure was to remind them that overnight success usually takes 15 years. And they said, well, that was an overnight success and I said Yes, okay. When we all first learn that the idea and the massive implications of what would happen if we did this right, it became obvious that we'd all be a household name in our industry. But in reality, if you can't get the first product or service out of the door, to solve a customer's problem, we can't get the first community service going. You don't need to worry about becoming an overnight success, nothing will ever happen. So a new organisation getting one innovative product out, or starting a new community service takes everything the team members have in them and every resource they've got. So neocharismatic leaders recognise this and focus the team on the value of the goal that is to be achieved. And this is where the altruistic aspect of Neocharismatic leadership plays a big part. They also make sure that there are sequential goals, each bigger than the last that lead to the ultimate goal. So stretching, but not unrealistic to start with. So do it right, when you have a team that can hardly be stopped. And then of course, they'll come up with product or service 2, 3, 4.

Ghadah Angawi: 8:25

Yeah, so you're really putting a lot of time and effort in building that team, more than trying to launch the project, or the product or roll it out into the market. This is where were the main differences, you're investing in people. Building formulating a shared vision requires all the prerequisites of the Neocharismatic leader to be in place. And the main difference is that the decision is no longer made at the top, because there is really isn't a top level, everyone is closer. And the decision is still provisional, and must be adjusted to suit the shared vision that is being built by the team. That much doesn't change the decision is going to establish the norms and the culture of the group as it becomes more clarified, more focused more realistic, more possible to apply and touches their values as their values become clearer to them. What I wanted to say here is that challenging the status quo is not something that will proceed here, it might be the other role, the fourth role, instead of the third role. And here comes the model again in play, the cyclic idea of travelling between all of that. So between these two stages, there is probably alternating roles between these roles, there is travelling between role number four and role number three until the leader feels that the team is ready to move forward.

Martin Hedley: 10:12

Ghadah, I think you're right, the time is shorter, no doubt, because you do lack these resources, and you've got to get something done. In fact, building on what you said, I think it is the leaders job in a small group to build the team. And it's the group's job to get the product out, or to get the new community service going, or whatever it is. And it's sometimes hard because it's so much fun that the leader actually wants to do some of the doing themselves. But that can also waste your leadership resource and that is something where you really can't afford to make that mistake. But this is where leaders of new emerging groups need to take care. None of the stages of Neocharismatic leadership can be left out. So as we can go, we can jump from here to there, but we cannot leave one out, we miss one at our peril. The temptation is to believe that all the involvement, the feedback, the learning and understanding of sensing the needs, and then creating a shared vision has happened. But it needs to be tested for, the leader needs to seek assurance, it has happened. And I've seen it falter, where these are the top causes. The first one is the leader believes everyone shares the vision. And they march off, not stopping to look back and see that everybody's behind them. The second one is where the group members believe they have adopted the shared vision. But disagreements arise over the direction, not how to get there, but the fundamental direction they're going in, which means you've missed the point again. And the third subgroup I find here is that some group members still think the goal is unattainable, right at the beginning, they don't put their weight for the group's benefit. So the leaders job is to weed those folks out. Because as excited as they are, and as committed as they are, they're still going to drag the rest of the team back. And again, resources are short, you can't afford that. So in a small group, we still have to spend the time to cement that vision in place. Everybody needs to know it as well as we the leaders do, in near endeavours, circumstances change faster than they do for established organisations. So it's not unusual that a slightly different direction is needed. Sometimes every week, you're learning about your market, you're learning about what your customers or what your community wants from you, you're making adjustments. But still, the shared vision needs to be adjusted as well. And the same as we coached for leaders of bigger organisations. Just because we created a shared vision before doesn't mean we can skip it each time it changes. So the pressure on the leader of a new group is that you're going to be going through this re establishment of the shared vision continually. One might say until until the group has actually got the first product or service out the door, that's going to happen. So the act of visioning, as I call it, is really constant, in vibrant groups.

Ghadah Angawi: 13:20

I love the word you use the cementing the vision. And it means for me, the leader is really putting the effort and rechecking constantly with people that this is what they signed up for. Because there is a difference between sensing people's needs and formulating shared vision. formulating shared vision is is not a rare event that happens only when there is a strategic transformation decision to be made. As many people think in smaller groups, the change is constant, as you mentioned, and the group tries out new activities, just like what you said, and learns from those activities, what works and what doesn't work, which is the Agile learning part. So visioning as you call it has to be a cyclical activity following evaluation and execution. But you know, it has to be done. In order to let the new or smaller groups survive. It has to be done constantly, as you said, so I totally agree with with what you've mentioned, if you haven't the process, and jump from sensing people need to articulating the vision, skipping the whole process of formulating the shared vision that we've just explained. And it's very easy to do that, because when you're listening to people's needs, and they express what their aspirations are, from being part of this group, it sends a message to you that they are both into what you want them to do. So that's that's the dangerous part here and I really want to emphasise the thin line between the two. You really need to check and be Because what from our experiences as coaches, when we coach people, they begin the session with something. And by the end of the session, the whole direction of the session is changing. Because as they explore further their own thoughts and emotions around what they started with, they discover this is really not what I want to do. And you discover, actually, in the second and third and 12th session, that people are constantly changing. So this is why I'm saying it's very important for the neocharismatic leader to practice the prerequisites of neocharismatic leadership with people, which is navigating their emotions, through empathetic listening, navigating their personal visions, navigating their values, and also being able to raise and build their self awareness. And that in itself, will generate the shared vision gradually, so that by the end of the process, they have a compelling purpose that they are ready to work for together.

Martin Hedley: 16:00

Yes, when we were talking about neocharismatic leaders in large organisations in the last podcast, we tried to contrast them to non neocharismatic leaders. But the question that I get asked quite a lot is, is it only a neocharismatic leader, that can start a new group and make it flourish? Because a small group would not survive its members did not adhere to an altruistic purpose. So yeah, I had to think about that one, quite hard. I was trying to think of some examples. But looking through the evidence, almost all people who start groups are in fact neocharismatic in that they enrol people for a good cause, whatever that might be, and they market it as a good cause. However, looking under that intent for some, maybe the potential for that leader to take the group in a direction that most people would not consider ethical. And when that change is slow and methodical, some of the folks in the group may not realise that the group is no longer what they first thought it was. Usually, the first time they do notice is that new people who are joining the group don't seem to share the same vision or other way of doing things. Obviously, we're not here to help leaders who want to subvert visions of groups, we're here to support the ones that want to grow. But the point is, if you're constantly rebuilding the shared vision, then only people that will agree with that shared vision will come in and join you. So you're still working towards an altruistic purpose that everybody in the group feels ethical. And that becomes, it's like building the strength around a body cell against the virus, isn't it? You know, the virus is bad. The cell is good, generally, and you want to protect that cell against the viruses so that it can grow and prosper. Yeah. An example I think, to illustrate this, I once worked with a group that was formed for great environmental purposes. It was formed to make people more aware of their own impact on the environment and their family's impact, and how simple things could be done to reduce that impact. Perfect, right? Ethical and altruistic, worth signing up for and exciting. While the leader was building the group, or was well, the group grew to about 100 people, many of whom were now dedicated to the cause and really enjoyed their work. Big organisations, we're hiring this group to be advisors, or to speak at conferences, it was amazing. But over time, the leader became incensed at how long it took for large organisations to adopt the changes that they wanted. And they started to use information gained while supporting these large organisations to defend them in public and cause considerable harm. So first, the group members were unaware of this, and then they became concerned and in the end, many started dropping off because they became an ethical mismatch. So the tough question got it is, is it possible to start out as a neocharismatic leader and then lose your edge? What what stops leaders from doing this?

Ghadah Angawi: 19:21

Yeah, again, this is a very tough one Martin, leaders who have not had enough coaching or mentoring in place may move on the scale of altruism quickly, or sliding to the other end of altruism, which is egoism. Thus, it is very important for leaders to fulfil the prerequisites of their neocharismatic leadership thoroughly before attempting to lead. This is a danger for motivated and full of energy young leaders specifically because they can be driven to the good cause out of a moment of engagement but not address enough their prerequisites for leadership. Most of the neocharismatic leaders I have interviewed told me that their upbringing secured their old truism. And it became a constant in their lives from an early age as they were growing up. If a young leader out there listening today and they feel they have mixed emotions, and thoughts about where they are on the scale of moral or ethics, they should immediately see coaching. If you spend enough time nurturing your neocharismatic leadership prerequisites and atruism. With an experienced neocharismatic leadership coach or mentor, I can assure you, this will never be a problem in your leadership in the future. Neocharismatic leadership is not inherent in your DNA. It's a learned behaviour and process.

Martin Hedley: 20:52

Well done, you answer that tough question, which is impressive. So I hope our listeners are beginning to feel that there are some really deep questions they need to be asking themselves, both now and all the time they're leading. So don't forget to send in your questions to our podcasts, through a website. Next time, we're going to start to address the second role of creating a shared vision, which is articulating the vision. Ghadah and I will be taking a break over the summer and we'll look forward to seeing you again in the early fall 2021.

Ghadah Angawi: 21:31

Thank you. Goodbye.

Introducer: 21:33

Ghadah and Martin, hope you enjoyed this episode. There was more information available at Neocharismaticleadership.org and if you would like to discuss coaching or training for yourself or your team, you can contact Ghadah and Martin through the website. We look forward to your participation next week. Until then, goodbye