by Peter A. Arthur-Smith, Leadership Solutions, Inc.®

“The significant problems (or opportunities) that we have cannot be solved (or taken advantage of) by the same level of thinking which created them. We have to see the world anew.” Albert Einstein (with some additional license by this writer).

    One of this writers most disappointing experiences was working with an international client a few years back. That client attempted to expose around 35-40 mid-level leaders – not its executive leaders – to the ‘Hall of Possibilities.’ Its CEO assigned a bright, emerging leader to organize a two day conference north of New York City, comprised of its most promising  leader talent. Once assembled, they had a kick-off session discerning “what’s going right within their company and how those virtues could be built upon.”

Breakout groups were utilized to identify and discuss common possibilities and challenges to be explored that would pinpoint breakthroughs and put their company on a faster growth trajectory. Their ideas, passion and proposed initiatives were amazing. An opportunity awaited them to present all these outcomes to their executive-leader team at the end of their second day.

When that moment came, this writer encouraged those executive-leaders to be as open minded as possible toward the proposals of their younger lions and lionesses. There was no doubt by the reaction of those executive-leaders that they were impressed with what they heard and saw. Everyone was carried away by the quality and insight of proposals presented. Talk about being swept along with the “hall of possibilities” and opportunities.

Regrettably within a month, the more “reticent to change” members of the executive-leader team convinced their colleagues to pull back. They wanted to “be-in-charge” and drive their people forward rather than commit to ride the wave of refreshing proposals. Momentum died and the young executive who orchestrated it all eventually left; his crowning moment denied. Sadly this writer has observed other executive teams which act like dampers on their organizations. All because they wish to be “in the driving seat” and expect their enterprises to evolve at their behest and pace, rather than pursue what’s really possible. How does it look in your organization?

Learning from that regrettable experience, this writer is now challenging clients to determine whether their executive-leaders are open to walk through the “hall of possibilities.” Starting with the CEO (Visionist), he/she builds their own compelling vision through the multi-view prism of a Strategic Framework, not a strategic plan.

A strategic plan is usually two-dimensional – all about revenues and profits – whereas a strategic framework is four-dimensional – encompassing a compelling vision and purpose; associated challenging objectives and outcomes; integral vital knowhow; and key necessary resources. By visualizing and orchestrating all four dimensions, their frameworks will tune-into all the opportunities and profits their marketplace will bear. It’s like building a chicken that will lay golden-eggs.

               “It’s like building a chicken that will lay golden-eggs.”

Strategic frameworks enable you to stand outside your organization and realize what’s going in your team or enterprise’s favor and what’s holding it back. You can see how traditional management is like tethers holding a thoroughbred horse back. Once those tethers are cut, your team or organization can surge forward once more. Too many executive teams act like tethers. Why? Because they’ve been trained to look backwards rather than forward.

Once your draft framework is complete, you can either work it through with your key team or take them through it one-by-one. Which approach to utilize will really depend upon their egos, open-mindedness, and/or are they used to working as a constructive and cohesive team. Many executive teams haven’t matured to that point.

Going through such an exercise can be tremendously revealing, in terms of whether your executives are up to the task of strategic leadership or not. Additionally, it will disclose whether they’re ready to migrate onto the same team-page, or whether their minds are fixated in a different direction. If it’s the latter, you owe it to them to have a make-or-break, one-on-one session to turn them around. Where that’s not possible, then either move them into a less influential position or arrange for an amicable divorce.

In the event all your executive members are pretty much on the same page, and are interested in pursuing their “hall of possibilities,” you can then, as a team, collectively consider your best options for bringing them to reality. Such options can include:

» A “two-way” exchange with as many as possible across your venture, so your people buy-into and participate in a whole-hearted manner. So many show-and-tells build partial buy-in by their very nature. Two-way exchanges will unearth those most enthusiastic about moving your organization forward. (NOTE: Use of inclusive-communication – the art of translating executive desires into compelling frontline terms – will go a long way toward facilitating this.)

» Co-opting your most enthusiastic and able executive to lead the way. Assuming this person is talented at “two-way” communication and a natural leader, (s)he will serve as a terrific example for your other executives to follow.

» Take a leaf out of another CEO’s book – as witnessed by this writer on a pleasant island in the Caribbean – where that CEO had an ad hoc assemblage of key executives around a fairly large floating dingy, just a few strokes off-shore. It was totally captured, quality time in an unusual setting.

» Create new possibilities through your mid-tier group – Although this writer’s opening story was a disappointing episode, it could most likely work in another setting where you – as Visionist – are committed to firmly nudging your executive-leaders to collaborate on any mid-tier radical proposals, rather than see  them squashed. Of course, those mid-tier proposals will be based upon earlier framework possibilities flushed-out by your executive-leaders.

» Another option would be to invite key frontline groupings – to come up with their own action, bottom-up initiatives; once they are given outline exposure to your lead-executives’ vision. Such bottom-up initiatives can then be reconciled with your more detailed executive-leadership team strategic thinking. One of the obvious advantages of doing this is to give frontline people a sense of empowerment by allowing them input on the “shape of things to come” – a great way to increase commitment.

Other options may exist, too, where executive-leaders decide which option best suits their enterprise. That option will be shaped by the mental-maturity of those same executives, as well as the sense of trust and good-will that exists.

It is recommended that, over the next two or three months, you take your executive team through its “hall of possibilities.” And then either use one of the above mentioned options or a preferred, empowering alternative to engage the rest of your organization. Any of these will convey leadership much more than management – where leadership is  a much more engaging force. It will also facilitate “solving issues with a much higher order of thinking than the ones which created them.”

To learn more about your leadership options, talk with: