There’s a little known fact of Mount Rushmore that, once you know it, changes how you look at the colossal carvings of the four U.S. presidents on the side of the granite mountain in South Dakota.

 

From left to right, the images of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln appear. But that wasn’t the intended order. After finishing Washington’s face, the sculptor, Gutzon Borglum, began work on Jefferson’s image to the left of Washington. For 18 months they hammered away at the stone, and repeatedly they ran into difficulties: the granite had too many cracks to hold the carving. They had to make a change.

As you approach the half way point of 2009, what adaptations are you making to ensure your goals, your vision is achieved? Too many leaders make these crucial mistakes and create elephants for their teams: 1) They stubbornly insist plans be executed as originally designed. And 2) they think they can advance results by focusing on what’s not working and who or what is to blame.

Can you imagine if these two approaches had been used at Mount Rushmore? If “stubborn insistence” would have been used, it’s likely Jefferson’s face would have fallen down the mountain by now. And, if they had focused on what’s not working and blame, they could have convinced themselves that the project – the vision – was not achievable. And we would be left with only Washington to take a picture of.

Instead, Borglum demonstrated the same sort of leadership as the presidents he was memorializing: He allowed his vision to evolve. He refused to be confined by an original idea; his vision advanced because he didn’t use a “why we can’t” focus, and instead used a “how do we” mindset.

Consider the possibility that the second half of 2009 will reveal your greatest leadership – and that it will look far different, far greater, than you have originally imagined.

 

Vannoy and Ross
May 10, 2009

This is what’s taking place on the average team: Sally is a strong contributor, but she doesn’t give her ‘A’ game because Ted drives her crazy. Ted is average, and he refuses to give his ‘great’ effort until John quits taking all the credit. John’s pretty good at what he does, but he refuses to “raise the bar” until…you guessed, Sally brings her ‘A’ game.

This affair of “conditional effort” is a HUGE “elephant in the office” (and frankly marriages, as well).

Are you ‘all in’ – or not? It’s safe to say that most people live and lead with “conditional effort.” These are people who withhold their best ideas and the discretionary effort. They focus on what they are not getting from their colleagues and the company for which they work. And they often have a “people never change” mentality.

“Conditional effort” people have, well, conditioned themselves to a ho-hum life. And isn’t it ironic: They commit to giving the conditional effort to protect themselves from being hurt, but in the end, it’s their commitment to mediocrity that limits them.

Unconditional leaders know that it’s their decision to experience the exhilarating feeling of living and leading full-on. “The reward for giving the unconditional effort is as rewarding as my paycheck, if not more so,” shares a friend, Tim. “It’s also the only way I can ensure that every day is a great day – because I determine my effort.”

It’s trite, but true. One person can make a tremendous change. On the team above, the moment Sally or Ted or John change their conditioned approach – is the moment the team delivers a breakthrough.

Who do you work with that has affected your effort? Change that now.

“Conditional effort” thinkers believe life is like a game of chess. But it’s not: Because in leadership, it’s always our move.

Where will you lead – where will you stomp elephants – today?

 

I saw a man walking down the street with a bulb of garlic hanging around his neck. He smelled terrible, and looked worried. “Dude. Why are you doing this to us – and yourself?”

 

                                                    

 

“There’s no way I’m going to fall victim to the flu pandemic,” he replied. “This garlic will save me.”

 

As crazy as that seems, do you know people who still lead the way they did prior to the economy becoming afflicted with its version of the flu? As outdated as wearing garlic to save yourself from the pandemic, some leaders are still ‘thinking’ and ‘leading’ like they did before – even though we all know much more effective ways to drive change within organizations.

 

As an example, consider accountability. “You have to hold people accountable,” is uttered in leadership meetings around the globe. Yet, how do you and your peers respond when you know you’re being forced, told or demanded to do things? It smells as much as garlic – and is as ineffective at driving change, too.

 

It’s time to end the misconception, the illusion, that you can force others to be accountable. Lack of accountability in an organization is a consequence, a failure of leadership; blaming others for not being accountable is often a confession that a person isn’t able to foster and create the natural accountability that resides in most employees.

 

Accountability is a mindset – not a task.

 

What strategy is your organization about to launch? Before pressing the “go” button, ask:

• To what extent are WE driving this change – rather than the people who will be doing most of the work?
• What questions can we ask to co-create ownership of this idea?
• How can we better incorporate participants’ ideas and tap into their motivations?

 

Are you changing with the times? Of course, you don’t have to take steps to develop accountability. You can always demand it – and wear garlic around your neck.

 

Where will you lead – where will you stomp elephants – today?