Advancing

“Do you hear me? Do you care?” Missing Persons

 

Stephen H Dawson, DSL

The band Missing Persons released a tune in 1982 called Words. The tune considered the value of talking when no one is listening. The music video craze was starting then, and the audio aspect of the music video was almost unheard by many viewers. The point made by Missing Persons is valid. Society sometimes reaches a place where doing nearly anything without listening occurs by the majority of people. It is this condition where the world now finds itself.

Today, the biggest party in decades is in full swing. It has been in motion for a few months and looks like it will go on for at least another year. The party is about feeling human again. Those alive now endured 2020 by dealing with COVID-19, loss of income, and perhaps the loss of loved ones. The party is epic in scale. Those attending this party do not want to hear any more bad news for a long time. They are happy to have whatever they have now, but they want more consumerism. They want their version of the truth and not much else going into their hearts and minds. The Summer of Love is the closest example I can provide for what we are witnessing in 2021.

This non-listening-to-truth party is perhaps the most dangerous scenario a leader could experience. Life has a way of bringing reality to us all, as COVID-19 did in 2020. A leader who has closed their ears, eyes, and mind to truth will find they are deficient as a leader when truth shows up as it does from time to time. Today, let’s look at how you can avoid the pain of this dangerous experience by remembering the pain the world went through for several years after the carefree summer of 1967. Ever notice how these big parties seem to occur after a war concludes?

Let’s look at some research. Then, let’s look at some of the societal and political pressures compressing folks today. Then, let’s look at what can help you to avoid the dangers associated with the impending decompressing. Finally, some considerations of how we can best advance forward together as we say goodbye to one another for now.

I know, there is a lot of material presented today. However, I am not sure when we will meet again. It is best to equip you now with the material we need to address to keep you going forward as a growing leader until we meet again. I will use several examples of imagery during our discussion today to help stitch together the bigger picture. Take your time reading this material so that it will soak into you as deep as possible.

 

PERSPECTIVE

Today, I see a metaphorical spring device compressed under tension below the people of the world. It has been compressed by various forms of societal and political pressures. Share on X The global population stands above the spring. The day will come when the societal and political pressures will shift, causing the spring to decompress. Those who are above or beside the spring will be injured by the spring decompressing. Those that are not above or beside the decompressed spring will also feel some form of pain. It is this exact danger a credible leader will assure the people in their organization do not experience or at least experience minimally.

Now, another way to consider this spring is a trampoline. Imagine the trampoline in this video which set a world record for size. The trampoline looks fun until something crucial to the equations shifts and injuries occur. So, take a moment and ask yourself how interested you are in leading your people for a ride on this trampoline.

 

 

RESEARCH

Molly Baker shared research on what entrepreneurs have learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, plan to stay out of danger. Jeremy Howell shared research from the CEO perspective on the same topic, finding the same results. The nonprofit association called Business Roundtable is working the approach to see what is coming in the world of business. They found planning is a valuable contributor to success, as declared in their statement of purpose.

Ron Carucci performed research comprising a 15-year longitudinal study of more than 3,200 leaders on organizational honesty. Carucci found the success factors for building a reputation as a trustworthy leader included making values clear, living up to those values, treating others and their work with dignity, determining when to be open and when to protect confidences, and cultivating a sense of unity across the organization. Remember our discussion about trust? The Carucci findings are supported as credible by this writer.

Harry Dempsey shared the present microprocessor shortage is expected to last until the middle of 2022. Reshma Kapadia stated that Taiwan Semiconductor is the world’s most important chip maker, even though its stock share price is down 15% since mid-February. Remember our discussion on the topic of microprocessors? The 47th G7 Summit is positioned to establish a global minimum tax rate on company profits for businesses that operate internationally. Paul Hannon, Richard Rubin, and Sam Schechner reported that member nations have agreed on global minimum corporate-tax rate rules. John Lyons and Frances Yoon considered the bigger picture of companies choosing to leave Hong Kong, finding the perceived need to be in Hong Kong is decreasing by the day for many individuals and companies. Angela Tan shared the G7’s global minimum tax deal may nullify any tax advantage Singapore offers. Singapore Financial Secretary Paul Chan shared, “The proposed changes to the global tax regime may affect some of the tax concessions the Hong Kong government offers to various industries.”

The action in play now by global governments is to grab big piles of money by way of taxes while the world is having its party. The trend I see playing out is to take money from Asia where the economies are doing great and bring it to the United States and European Union. Things have been down, up, and then down again since 2008 for the US and mostly down for the EU since 2008.

 

COMPRESSION

I said recently, “Trust is the connector of evidence and faith.” I maintain this position. The trust within society is falling apart by the pressure applied to it from the political position combined with a societal position shifting from national to global in many nations, but not all nations. Nationalism is still a pervasive consideration in the majority of nations.

The pattern occurring over history for a constructive society is society does whatever it does, then the politics align with the actions of society’s majority. This turn of events does not last forever. Germany rebuilt powerfully after World War I, then met its demise at the end of World War II after an incredible comeback from defeat just under three decades earlier. This societal-political flow is like a river. The water flows downstream from society to politics. Today, the politics are trying to drive society to do what political positions want to have happen without widespread support from society. The result is the river is trying to flow upstream. This reversed flow is another form of compression, as gravity is pushing against the backward flow.

We are talking much more than who won the 2020 elections in this country or that country, the origins of COVID-19, or when will be the next cyber attack on a company or country. We are also talking about jobs, kids, schools, and the ability to see loved ones both when and as preferred. These topics are timeless and cross all societal and economic levels. These topics are where things get personal for everyone, where the rubber meets the road, where trust in leaders had better be in place if leaders expect followers to be with them willingly.

The release of this compressed spring device has only one assured outcome: determining who collaborated with those that caused the pain during spring decompression. The spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. We have seen this scenario play out many times in history. The most recent vivid example of these events playing out occurred in 1944.

Germany was losing the war after the invasion at Normandy, arguably earlier. We discussed this topic when we considered evil. Essentially, some of the folks in oppressor-occupied nations collaborated with their enemy. Most notably, the horizontal collaboration events. The people of those occupied nations knew who was collaborating with their enemy. When their enemy ran in fear, those harmed by the collaboration paid retribution to those collaborators. They did so in part by shaving their heads, marking their skin with symbols, and casting them out of their society. The message was simple and clear: you made your irrevocable choice, now you are no larger a part of us. The images and video of this payback experience also occurred in the nations where the Japanese and Italians fell in defeat.

The civil aspect of this retaliation occurred by civilian hands. The military aspect is even more strict. The Uniform Code of Military Justice, UCMJ, is regulated by the United States Congress. UCMJ articles 77-134 define punitive punishment. UCMJ article 103b is the law covering aiding the enemy. The penalty for aiding the enemy is death, much worse than a bad haircut. Many developed nations have similar military laws in place.

Things get worse for society as a whole in terms of payback over the past two decades. The effort comprising institutionalized support of non-heterosexuality by the observance of LGBT Pride Month provides no assurance women will be protected from any form of retaliation repercussions from any topic in the future. The lack of assurance comes from the LGBT premise disregarding assigned sex without ambiguity in favor of gender identity by using the personal sense of one’s own gender. The disregard of gender eliminates almost all protection for women from an assault during retribution of collaboration or any other payback reason because there is no female to protect. However, there are still valid reasons for hope.

The LGBT topic is the most significant conflict point between traditional and postmodern culture-based societies. It is the most significant conflict point because of the force applied by each group for acceptance of each worldview through religion, legislation, and commerce to form clear rights. A more concise example of these LGBT events playing out is a storm surge on the boundary of the social groups who hold the propensity for the continuance of the human race versus those who desire to reshape the human race into a form that defies reason for both its survivability and thrive-ability.

The cancel culture phenomenon is not new, but it is unique to our time. It, combined with separation for those who refuse to receive the COVID-19 immunization, are examples of forming distinct groups. The spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. Those targeted by the cancel culture efforts and those who refuse to receive the COVID-19 immunization are further examples of targeted groups receiving retribution.

You see, the spring is more than a single reason. It is any reason that justifies retribution in the minds of the majority who has the power to want their form of justice delivered to them. It is at this point where the rulings of espoused morality occur, rendering whatever judgments they find valid. The members comprising the group named “they,” are those who suffered either perceived or actual harm.

Remember our discussion about love and diplomacy? I made the statement, “Diplomacy without reasoning is lunacy. If there is no room for reason, then there is no likelihood of success in any engagement with people regardless of either using or not using diplomacy.” I maintain this position. Remember our discussion about how ambivalence does not help anyone accomplish love? The reasoning I presented in these discussions about loving people being the only viable answer serves to help resolve the conflict between those who disagree with and those who support LGBT rights. Neither hatred nor ambivalence ever did anything productive in life. So, the only thing we can do is love one another as we work together to try and find the means that will somehow help the disagreeing groups live in peace and not attempt to destroy one another.

 

If the conflict of cultures present today arises to the form of war, then the struggle between person versus person will structure to a clear espoused worldview found in group versus group. There will be little doubt which side, camp, group, or team a person stands with during this conflict. Neutrality by either person, company, or country will not be an option as those who take a side will be the majority of the population, and they will refuse to allow bystanders not to make a choice. We are witnessing this premise play out today in the growing number of calls for resolving supposed injustice to an aggrieved group of either gender, skin color, religion, ethnicity, or some combination of these demographic and psychographic elements. The attributes of conflict, persecution, and payback are again headed to harmful consequences. Just ask those who lived between World War I and II about life during those years. They will tell anyone who will listen to the signs of the times then and how they match up to what we are witnessing today.

My heart breaks considering the events of collaboration with an enemy, as the payback occurs based on long-held anger. Those who collaborate with an enemy make irrevocable choices. Those who provide retribution also make irrevocable choices. The spring pops, and people are harmed.

I am an optimist, but I am also a realist. If love does not take hold of our hearts on a global basis, then I cannot help but believe the conflict we will force on one another will be quite harmful. Again, there is hope. Another spring pops, people are hurt, the masses are upset about the harm, and they want justice for their suffering. However, their justice will be peace and not continued conflict. We have also seen this scenario play out many times in history.

The societal and political pressures compressing this spring device each cry out for qualified leadership. Together, they demonstrate the clear need for qualified leadership. The qualified attribute is the key to this calling. Not everyone will lead, wants to lead, or is even capable of leading. We are in a watershed moment of history now. The future of the next century is being shaped before our eyes, as the traditional and postmodern culture-based societies decide what they will and will not concede for their beliefs. Whatever the answers are from each of these societies will determine how much overlap there is between them. Then, things will be more definite for how they will either coexist or live apart.

Anyone willing to serve in a leadership role at this point has their work cut out for them. How about you? Are you up for serving in a leadership role? Do you need further leadership development? Leadership is not easy, but I never said it was easy.

 

TRUTH

I shared last week the most controversial topic I handle in my work is the concept of truth. I also said last week, “Truth is realized by reason. Reason is manifested in process.” The majority of my work involves helping people see and embrace truth. This understanding of truth is the basis of our work going forward.

I have learned, painfully, there are three states of reality for awareness of truth. I use the term reality as the part of truth that a person realizes, not whatever is or is not true but has no bearing in their life. Remember our discussion on the topic of assessing? Truth is a singular term.

The first reality state is the worst for everyone involved. The second reality state of truth is the scariest for everyone involved. The last reality state of truth is the most difficult for anyone to do, but it is also the most beneficial.

The first reality state of truth awareness is avoiding truth. This condition is practiced by both the ignorant and the sophisticated. The ignorant are unaware of what they do not know. They grab the hot clothes iron with the hope they can learn why the iron makes the fabric flat. The sophisticated is a thespian who practices their avoidance of truth with polished eloquence. This reality state brings those who attempt to lead by way of reason nothing but pain. It is best to not be with anyone in the first reality state, as they are dangerous to all they encounter both directly and indirectly.

The second reality state of truth awareness is indifference to truth. This person is not sure what they feel, think, or believe about a topic. So, they are unable to arrive at understanding the truth of the topic. They are like the animal standing in the road that is killed by the oncoming vehicle. They do not move. They do not do anything. They are scared at the moment before their death. Their fear causes you to be in danger. It is best to put this person to the side of you in a safe spot, if they will go there and stay there, while they hopefully figure out whatever it is they feel, think, and believe about truth.

The final reality state of truth awareness is wanting to know truth. This person has been harmed by both the first and second reality state. They have no desire to live in any condition that will prevent them from holding reason to know truth. This reality state is difficult for them as they work tirelessly to know truth.

Now, it does not matter what the topic is or is not, the aspect of the topic, or the truth about the topic. It does not matter if the topic is understood completely or even at all. What matters is the harm and benefit combination you experience from the topic. Remember our discussions about looking and reading? Those points were made early in our time together to help you mature those skills so you can use them as soon as possible.

AVOIDANCE

I do not broker in sensationalism. I refuse to listen to fearmongering. I spoke against fear several weeks back. My intention now is to help develop you as a leader to avoid the spring device underneath the global society now decompressing as an outcome of musical chairs, considering no one knows either when the spring will decompress or who will be harmed by their not having a chair.

We would be wise to cover many more topics to develop you as a leader further, regardless of your mastery of each topic now. The need for this additional work on our part is formed by your need for more power as a leader. Remember our discussion on power sourced by servitude? Remember our discussion on power sourced by humility? I will now share a list containing some of the items we need to cover to further develop you as a leader and address each item briefly. There are many more items on the list, but here is a glimpse of what we have for the work ahead of us.

The quest for any status is an example of evil. Remember our discussion about the excusability of evil? Remember the story of Michael Hingson from last week? The way to overcome the need for a particular status is to serve humbly. Your actions will assign you the status you need for the moment.

There is endless preparation work involved in any aspect of leadership. A plan may hold a good idea, but it is not a plan without a schedule. A plan is matched with a schedule. All talk without supporting evidence is cheap, and so is a plan without an executable schedule.

There is endless work involved in data management. Remember our discussion several weeks back about leaders not having sufficient data analysis skills? The ability to understand the lifecycle of data in your organization is paramount for any leader, particularly those at the executive level. Understanding and accomplishing calculations by hand, spreadsheet, or any other mathematical tool is non-negotiable for a successful leader.

Truth is absolute, not relative. Remember our discussion a few weeks back on The Stuff? I can spend several hundred pages addressing the topic of truth alone. The topic of truth was a part of my doctoral dissertation work. There is no process, no strategy, no plan, or anything else defined as accurate apart from truth.

We have only scratched the surface of succession planning during our time together. Anyone who holds thoughts of impunity as they believe they are a sheep of your shepherding is not a person you need in your organization. Remember our discussion about organization antibodies? Our effort to find new people for your organization applies directly to the work of succession planning. It involves moving people up in your organization, not out. The need to evaluate people during the succession process must be based on reason to avoid the appearance of impropriety through favoritism bias to maintain your credibility as a leader.

CLOSURE

We started off our time together discussing a destination that was unknown. We knew that people at the time were mad enough to fight about how things were going for them. I shared several weeks later how “I both have fought and will fight tooth-and-nail to defend those who I love.” We then went on to discuss love in a deep study. We have accomplished much together. We are off to a great start. You are in much better shape now than before we started our work.

I am going to take some time and rest before I begin work for some new customers. I urge you to contact me by email when you are ready to pick up our effort to develop you as a leader. I have enjoyed our time together. My sales pitch includes the line, “Applying my consulting and educational knowledge to an organization is a unique experience for both myself and the organization.” Our time together has been unique for me. I hope it has also been unique for you.

I trust we will talk again, soon. I look forward to hearing from you. Take care of yourself until then. I will do the same.

 

The sky above us, the unknown.

 

Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL
Executive Strategy Consultant

Dr. Stephen H Dawson

Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia.

Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.

Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.

Thank you for visiting our Blog!

Jim Weber – Managing Partner,  ITB Partners

Jim Weber – Managing Partner, ITB Partners

I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox.  Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.

Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read.  Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.

 

Matching

“But pattern-matching doesn’t equal comprehension.” Peter Watts

Stephen H Dawson, DSL

The thought of finding a perfect job applicant to fill any role in any organization seems impossible. It seems impossible because it is impossible. It is impossible because people are imperfect. They are imperfect as they tend to change over time.

We are working on developing your leadership skills by working on the need you have to swap out some people in your organization. The need is formed by your strategic planning work being behind schedule where you identify it is neither a workspace nor worker skills problem. We discussed last week how to approach the assessment work of job applicant credential packages. We discussed a few weeks ago the linear relationship between worldview, ethics, morality, and virtue. Today, let's talk a bit about determining if a suitable match exists between a job applicant you have and each role you need to be filled in your organization. Share on X

The matching work at hand involves much more than only considering a suitable match between the job applicant and each role you have to fill. It also involves considering the match between the job applicant and the organization. Remember, your organization includes any matrix-supplied folks involved in doing work with your people, your customers, your strategic partners, and your supply chain network. The job analysis we discussed last week may not have included these attributes. However, they need to be in there. If they are not, then the job analysis must be revised to include them as applicable.

OK, let’s proceed from the point of having a satisfactory job analysis as we consider job applicants to see if you have a viable candidate for each role you need to fill. We need to first look at some terms before looking at applicants. These facts may seem harsh, but they are a crucial part of your assessment work.

ORGANIZATION ANTIBODIES

An antibody does the work to neutralize either a pathogenic bacteria or virus. The intent of the pathogenic is to help, but it instead causes harm. An organization antibody is a person who does not want to follow your leadership. They resist your leadership either passively or actively.

Nicholas Evans described how an antibody could suffer the pursuit of innovation. Evans cited an article by Mitra Best, who described antibodies in a corporate setting. Both Evans and Best provided recommendations about how to remediate each antibody form. What they did not do address in their writings is why an organization antibody has so much power over their boss.

Think about the folks in your organization who have been there a long time. They have not been promoted to a senior role because they have either a character deficiency, a skills deficiency, or both. They hold the belief they know it all and tell anyone who will listen to them they know it all. This person is an example of an organization antibody. Deep down, they believe they are running the organization. They believe they are doing what is best for the organization. They refuse to listen to reason. Therefore, they have no ability to have cognitive awareness to know they are causing harm. They are as cancer is to the body.

Antibodies

CANCER

Cancer is a disease defined by abnormal cell growth. It is possible cancer could be misinterpreted as a nodule, a small bump. A small bump could occur due to one of several conditions. The indication of a cancer being present does not appear until cancer grows to be a problem. Untreated cancer spreads in a condition known as metastasis. Early testing for cancer helps to overcome cancer unawareness. The value of proper testing here is beyond measure.

I shared several weeks back, “I cannot say a person is evil, as I do not believe it is possible. I can say their actions are or are not evil.” I maintain this position. I shared a few weeks later about evil. The attributes of organization antibodies and cancer have considerable overlap with one another. They both have no ability to have cognitive awareness to know they are causing harm. They both consume a massive amount of resources as they spread. They both spread through the host, either the body or the organization, in a progressive manner. The rate of spreading is inconsistent, so not relative to objective analysis. They both have a high mortality rate, both literally and figuratively.

An organization member allowed to mature into an organization antibody is an event that does not occur overnight. It is without question the presence of an organization antibody is the result of a failure by leadership, human resources, and learning & development. Note I do not identify either a manager or a team leader as responsible here. I hold this position because their roles are not able to have an overarching view of the organization. The reasons for such failures are endless, but the leadership, human resources, and learning & development staff hold collective responsibility for the damages caused by an organization antibody.

I hold the position the only way to treat an organization’s antibody is to remove them from the organization and place their leader on a rapid performance improvement plan. If I do not see substantial adherence to the performance improvement plan by their no-longer leader in my eyes, then their no-longer leader is no longer a part of my organization. The corrective action to address the human resources poor performance is to replace the human resources business partner serving my organization immediately. The corrective action to address the learning & development staff performance is to replace their leader serving my organization and place all learning & development staff on a rapid performance improvement plan. All activities and I mean all activities, performed by the learning & development staff for my organization cease until there is credible evidence they are each qualified to perform learning & development work. The support necessary for the human resources and learning & development staff corrective actions may require support from your boss. You should be able to get it without difficulty since you have credible proof of the harm caused to the organization by their respective failures to deliver quality work.

SKILLS

The term credential is the combination of work experience, education, degrees, certifications, and licenses earned and held by an individual that each has relevance to each role you need to fill in your organization. These individual credentials then feed into forming organization credentials. All aspects of any credential must be validated during the job application process by your organization. You must hold, without a doubt, a clear understanding of the abilities each job applicant holds today. What credentials they held in the past may be nice to know, but that was then. You are evaluating now.

Gaining credentials from a source that is not accredited is possible, but the validation process becomes much more costly to accomplish. It may not be possible to validate a credential that is not from an accredited source. A non-validated credential is termed as hope but not a credential.

No alt text provided for this image

PERSONALITY

We discussed last week the value of third-party testing. The cost of testing each applicant may not be worth the expense. The need is still present to know the personality of each applicant. If you do not have the ability to fund personality testing a job applicant you advance to candidate status to know if they are a viable candidate, then your ability to advance applicants through your evaluation process is reduced. How much of a risk can you afford to take at this point in the assessing-to-matching process?

You have rooted out those job applicants who do not hold the skills necessary to fill each role you need to be filled in your organization. You know you cannot afford to interject harm to your organization by bringing in an organization antibody. You are wondering if you can afford to measure a personality without an objective third-party test. The answer is you cannot. You will have to bear the risk of going forward without measuring personality should you chose not to use third-party personality testing. This risk will have to be managed as any other risk.

WORLDVIEW

We discussed worldview a few weeks back. You are wondering how the applicant’s worldview matches both your worldview and the worldview held by those in your organization. You can get this information from the screening call. I addressed last week how to go about this action during the interview you conduct with them. Specifically, you are looking for their position on social and political matters. You must follow fair employment laws to be a credible leader. So, how do you get this information?

You get this information by asking three questions. One question focused on a social aspect. One question focused on a political aspect. Then, one question overlapping both a social and political aspect. Use three different aspects in these three questions. Write the questions to be as figurative as possible. Look for timeless topics common across all cultures, present in all points of history, having reasonable belief they will be present in the future. These answers will provide you enough information to know if you have an applicant that can advance to a candidate.

RECOMMENDATIONS

If you are matching applicants without a third-party personality evaluation, then you must accomplish this evaluation in the next step of your interviewing process. You cannot experience success in finding a suitable candidate without performing a clear personality evaluation. Prepare for the costs of third-party personality evaluations.

Record all screening calls. Have the calls transcribed. Read the entire transcript. Listen to the parts of the audio recording you find interesting by way of the transcript.

Match the notes of the person conducting the screening call to the call transcript. Identify any mismatch in what the caller observed in comparison to the response of the applicant. This mismatch will help you understand if there is a personality or worldview mismatch with your organization. It will also help you qualify the work of the person conducting the screening call. This collective understanding will arrive because you have a satisfactory job analysis, you wrote the questions for the screening call, and you placed boundaries on the screening call. This reasoning is found in the plan we discussed last week.

I recommend you take time this week to consider the impact of an organization antibody in your organization. Prepare your screening call questions based on the material we covered this week. Finally, look for providers of counseled results interpretation to assist you in selecting applicants to become candidates based on the plan we discussed last week.

So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.

I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.

COMMENTARY CATALOG

http://www.shdawson.com/commentary/

Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL

Executive Strategy Consultant

Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.

Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.

Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.

Thank you for visiting our Blog!

Jim Weber – Managing Partner,  ITB Partners

Jim Weber – Managing Partner, ITB Partners

I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox.  Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.

Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read.  Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.

 

Looking

Men differ LITTLE on what things they will call EVIL. They differ GREATLY on what evil they will call EXCUSABLE.” G. K. Chesterton

Stephen Dawson, DSL

We only see if we look. We only look by choice. We may glance at or skim through what we read, but neither of these actions results in seeing.

G. K. Chesterton made a point about humanity in his observation of men and how they differ. I understand that Chesterton uses the term man in his statement as mankind, the human species. I interpret one of his unstated points as this: a little evil brings great inexcusability. I wonder what a lot of evil would bring. I choose not to look for more evil. Chesterton did not make it clear what evil is and is not. I wonder how many people today care to look into what he meant.

I got new eyeglasses last year, the kind that reminds me I am not a kid who did not need eyeglasses. They look good on me. I see better with them. I do not like to wear them. I only wear them when necessary. Additionally, I am unable to discern evil with them.

I shared last week about being scared. I used this condition in the context of you being unsure of the strategy you propose to plan. We were going to talk next time about making people changes to your strategy work. Let’s have this talk now.

Making changes to the work assigned to your followers, your people means one of two things. Either they do not have the time to do the work, or they do not have the skills to do the work. If they are not interested in the work of their role, then that is another matter. It is part of my work to help my customers discern between these conditions. We look at the facts, then we call it for what it is. Many of my customers are afraid they will be calling their people evil when their people do not get their assigned work completed. A common term used today is optics. It is a subjective term. It is a horrible term, from what I see. Facts are facts. They are absolute. Nothing absolute needs perspective to understand the fact. We need to understand the repercussions of facts to know their value, and those repercussions require various perspectives to comprehend the complexities of their collective impact. Facts are not subjective. Hence, the difficulty in assessing the people productivity part of strategy work.

LOOKING

Looking at anything displeasing can be difficult. Looking at evil, for me, is displeasing. I cannot say a person is evil, as I do not believe it is possible. I can say their actions are or are not evil. I make this determination based on the espoused morality of my worldview found in my ethics. Meaning, my definition of evil is not necessarily the same as anyone else’s. I do not consider evil when I look at the research. I look for facts. Helping my customers do the same involves many prior discussions to learn their abilities, perspectives, and positions to comprehend their research abilities. It is not a quick look, a glance, or a skim of the research we accomplish to evaluate either the facts of their strategy or the work of their people to plan their strategy. It is a series of discussions.

No alt text provided for this image

SEEING

Seeing an opinion unsupported by facts, to me, is a form of evil. I am allowing the person to share their opinions with me to convince me without relevant supporting evidence. Sure, there are times when this scenario is necessary for my best interests. HEY STEPHEN, GET DOWN! I confess that hearing these words, regardless of vocal tone, would at least put my head down. I would, once I am sure it is safe to raise up again, either thank them or ask them why they told me to get down. This simple example is to help you see how much time you could be wasting looking at work accomplished by your people but not seeing enough value from it. The intentional circular effort I shared about last week is what I am describing here. If you do not see value in your people’s work, then you either have a communication problem or a worker skills problem. I set aside the possibility of a worker not having time to do their assigned work because you already took care of that problem earlier…didn’t you? I cannot imagine you would have miscommunicated with your workers, as you have a written plan to accomplish work assignments…don’t you? Did you talk with them, or did you send them an emoji hoping they understood what you intended to say to them?

What is your intended message?

INTERPRETING

If your people have the time and skills to do their assigned work, then the work will be accomplished as planned. If your strategy work is not progressing as communicated in your plan, then you have a people problem. It is not a technology problem. If it were, then you are executing the wrong plan. It is not a workplace problem. If it were, then you are executing the wrong plan. I could go on presenting examples here, but Pilita Clark explains it pretty well.

So, we have a people problem. Is it their fault they do not have the technology they need? Is it their fault they do not have the workplace they need? No, these are your problems as their leader. Perhaps they do not have the skills to use the technology. Perhaps they cannot get to the workplace. These are their problems. They will have to solve them to remain employed with you. It is not a matter of evil versus good, fair versus unfair, or happy versus sad. They are the facts you face while attempting to complete your strategy work. If the work must be accomplished, and your workers cannot complete the work as planned, then you must get other workers assigned to the strategy you need to have planned.

I tell you, from the position of both a professor and as a management consultant, the problem I just described to you is widespread today. We have not prepared today’s students with enough skills to do the work in many roles involving strategy development. We have provided them pieces of education in the form of shorter degree program course durations with the expectation they will assemble these skills effectively into pertinent credentials. An outcome of these conditions over the past three decades is a student’s inability to absorb the lesson material deep enough to achieve the transformational experience of education. This change occurred about the time microcomputers showed up in commonality. There is a direct connection between increased access to learning and learning deficiency caused by information overload. It is a realization of analysis paralysis. Meaning, many degree programs in the past few decades do not have enough analysis instruction contained within them. Those who experienced high achievement did so outside of a single degree path. See if the article by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic and Becky Frankiewicz rings a bell with you for how you look at your workers’ circumstances. I recommend you get to the point of interpreting it.

Next week, we will begin to talk about how diversity, inclusion, and what Chesterton talked about with the human species will help you get out of the circumstances hindering your strategic planning work. Specifically, how to go about staffing your organization to do the work you need to be accomplished. We will approach the balance of emotion and logic by considerations of needs and wants.

So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.

I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.

Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL

Executive Strategy Consultant

Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.

Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.

Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.

Thank you for visiting our blog.

 

Jim Weber, Managing Partner – ITB Partners

Jim Weber – Managing Partner,  ITB Partners

I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox.  Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.

Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read.  Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.

 

Breathing

“We’ve got to try. Do you know what happens if we don’t try?” “What?” “Nothing.” Braveheart

Dr. Stephen H Dawson

I only have time now to watch movies on Saturday nights. Not every week, but when I can. I turn off the world by throwing my phone out the window, getting away from my laptop, and remember when life was simple enough to enjoy two uninterrupted hours of rest. I breathe easier when movie time arrives, as it is a pivotal stopping point in my week. I like movies that have a historical significance. They help me understand more of the historical topic, though I remember theatrics could skew the facts. The act of muddying facts with opinions is an activity found in theology, philosophy, and even unstructured discussion. Sometimes, we realize we are only opinionating. Other times, we are able to stay grounded in facts. The rest of the time, it seems like we do not care enough to do either.

I shared last week the perspective I hold of 2020 from the strategic planning position. Everyone, for the first time in world history, had to throw the majority of their plans out the proverbial window, as I do my phone on Saturday nights. We were all trying to come up with a new plan to face the events of 2020. We wondered last year if trying to have a plan was worth it anymore. I faced that question myself. I learned this past week several readers of last week’s column also faced this question. Some of them shared with me a few of their recent experiences. We all stand in 2021 with the same multi-pronged question: do we need to plan, or can we even plan anymore? I am sure the reasoned response to this matter is a resounding yes.

UNASSURED SUCCESS

Yes, there are plenty of smart folks who fail at their strategic planning, who then try to abandon planning. The Wall Street Journal reported Vale settled for $7 billion this past week for their part in a collapsed dam. The same periodical also reported McKinsey settled for $573 million this past week for their part in the opioid epidemic. Singapore reported this past week they will need twice as much fresh water in 30 years than they have now. These stories represent significant failures by professionals in their practice areas. I hope they work things out for the best. Their failures do not limit my life. I hope they will not limit yours, either.

OPINIONS VERSUS FACTS

I read a recent opinion on when to change a strategy during a crisis. The opinion operates by first achieving four measurements, then responding to each measurement accordingly. I practice strategy. I sell what I practice. I spend several hours each week reading. I read weekly many facts, statistics, reports, and opinions. Sometimes, these items are even assembled into a form of foresight. I read an article this past week in the Harvard Business Review about why it is challenging to have workers operate using quality data now that computing has been around for decades. I also face this challenge in my work to serve my customers. The reason for the workers not using quality data difficulty is the lack of belief held by both the workers and their leaders to change their culture to only have and use quality data. It is a failure of leadership.

I read an article this past week in the MIT Sloan Management Review about growing a human-centered business. The term data does not show itself prominently in that article. Can we ever establish a productive organization without first having quality data? Can we ever have a productive organization without it also using quality data? It is doubtful. Again, more evidence of the need for facts in hand versus operating only by an opinion.

I do not remember reading the professional report on what to do when we all have to stay home for weeks. Neither do I remember hearing an opinion from those older than me about what to do when a global health crisis occurs. I provide guidance to folks. It is my advice based on the best research and recommendations I can deliver to them. I would commit a critical error if I stated facts and opinions could be separate in the practice of any field of work. What I can tell you with certainty is planning is easy when the necessary facts are in hand. What is difficult is assuring any fact is not in actuality an opinion.

A lifetime can be spent to accomplish what seems to be only a bit of fact-finding. Think back to the time when it was unclear if the world was flat or round. Think back to life before antibiotics. The rush to get something productive accomplished is neither bad nor good. It is a reasonable tendency to want to demonstrate productivity. “We’ve got to try. Do you know what happens if we don’t try?” “What?” “Nothing.” I agree life does not always let us wait for research to occur before action must occur. Thankfully, planning to get facts often helps us stay out of a mess by working continuously to know we hold facts. Note, I did not say work endlessly and never rest.

WHAT NOW?

I hope I have sold you by now on the need to plan the strategy you want to accomplish. I realize you may be feeling overwhelmed now. I offer the best advice I can to those in this condition. The advice is to follow a two-step process.

Step one, breathe. Step two, repeat step one. No smug intended here. Realizing the unquestionable need to undertake strategic planning can lead to the thought of quitting the work before beginning the work. My first trip to Chicago happened in early grade school. I first saw a train rail yard there. The operation’s size taught me a bit about the thinking, planning, and work required to build a railway that would help build a nation. Today, most trains are operated by electric engines. A steam locomotive needs oxygen to operate. It needs to breathe. The industrial revolution is filled with images of steam locomotives. Sometimes the train tracks are elevated. I cannot imagine how much fill dirt and gravel hold up an elevated railway system.

I am reminded of rail stressing when I look at older railway systems. It was not until hydraulics were invented before the rails could be treated to handle a railway system’s stress. I can only imagine the number of train wrecks on railway systems that were not treated with rail stressing. Take some time, breathe, think about living without a plan to accomplish your strategy, and see if you want to advance beyond a steam locomotive to execute your strategy.

STRESSING BREATHING

Doing the work to accomplish strategic planning involves research. The plan you write helps to inform others what they must do as a group, a team, a department, a company, a family, or even a country to achieve the strategy. A human-centered plan may include technologies. The research work could be boring at times, but it is not boring for those who need a viable plan to carry out their proposed strategy.

The endurance metaphors abound at this point in your decision to not quit on your strategic planning work. Pressing onward. Get up a head of steam. Get on track. Then, the big one: fight the good fight. Again, as I shared last week, I am not sure what fight is being fought in our contemporary society, but it is appropriate to include it in this list of go-get-’em slogans. I hope to focus you now on breathing leading to trying.

Gloria Gaynor asserted, “I will survive.” It seems as though she did, based on how many times I have heard her say those words over the years. A good way to get out of desperation is to form a plan, work the plan, and rejoice you are no longer desperate. I shared last week if you, at your lot in life, can understand strategic planning as a series of plans involving simple communications, then you have the necessary understanding to undertake your strategic planning efforts. I stand by these words. I urge you to spend time this week alone, breathing, and focus your thoughts on trying to begin to accomplish your research work to support you in carrying out your strategy by working on your plan. Yes, we should be breathing all of the time. Yes, I am saying to de-stress instead of distress. Yes, we are talking about your strategy as a metaphoric train to carry out your strategy. I am hopeful I can help you train yourself to breathe relaxingly, to consider the work you need to accomplish deeply, for you to undertake your work diligently, and for you accomplish your work with excellence.

So, I ask you: where do you want to go? I hope your answer is to develop the plans necessary to accomplish the strategy you know you need to achieve to arrive at your desired destination. If this is the case, then let’s get to work. If not, then I wish you the best of everything.

I hope we will see each other here next week. Email me if you need to talk before then.

 

Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL

Executive Strategy Consultant

Dr. Stephen H Dawson

Stephen Dawson is an executive consultant of technology and business strategy, serving significant international organizations by providing leadership consulting, strategic planning, and executive communications. He has more than thirty years of service and consulting experience in delivering successful international business development and program management outcomes in the US and SE Asia. His weekly column, “Where Do You Want To Go?,” appears on Thursdays.

Dr. Dawson has served in the technology, banking, and hospitality industries. He is a noted strategic planning visionary. His pursuit of music has been matched with his efforts to lead by service to followers. He holds the clear understanding a leader without followers is a person taking a long walk alone.

Stephen has lived his life in the eastern United States, visiting most of the United States and several countries. He is a graduate of the Regent University School of Business & Leadership. Contact him at service@shdawson.com.

Stephen Dawson, DSL

Vice President Strategic Planning or Business Development
by Dr. Stephen H. Dawson, DSL
February 4, 2021

Thank you for visiting our blog.

 

Jim Weber, Managing Partner – ITB Partners

Jim Weber – Managing Partner,  ITB Partners

I hope you enjoyed our point of view and would like to receive regular posts directly to your email inbox.  Toward this end, put your contact information on my mailing list.

Your feedback helps me continue to publish articles that you want to read.  Your input is very important to me so; please leave a comment.

 

A Fresh and Effective approach to Strategy

How many hours are spent every year in meetings conducting strategic planning sessions only to find the plan ignored? Or, in today’s Agile approach to business, the confusion reigning with a lack of effective and timely communications of shifting priorities. The human element cost can be tremendous with employees left confused with engagement levels constantly fluctuating, impacting output.

Two very successful entrepreneurs have combined forces providing your organization with access to a fresh and effective approach to strategic planning and execution:

Dr. Stephen Dawson is a strategic internal or external consultant who provides exceptional-business building outcomes in the United States and Southeast Asia by utilizing his visionary abilities to design and deliver the next generation business productivity tools to assist regulators in accomplishing economic development. He has maximized his postdoctoral work in ways to blend his exceptional education with his outgoing personality and strong communication skills. He is also an Adjunct Professor with Regent University, serving with the Department of Business, Leadership, & Management.

Dave Daniels (BA/MA) is an accomplished senior business, human resource, and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) executive. Having held leadership positions throughout the country, Dave’s business approach is intended to exceed financial objectives by inspiring exceptional capabilities on the part of all team members. He is an accomplished facilitator and leader of results-oriented cross-functional teams. Additionally, Dave is a Certified Coach of the IDI (Intercultural Development Inventory) process, the most respected Diversity and Inclusion (D & I) assessment in the world. While he brings a wide range of experience, Dave’s expertise in the D & I space provides for full integration of this critical piece in our approach.

What we do:

    • Troubleshoot (assess) current plans and levels of communications and results
    • Create “real” alignment and commitment to the best actions
    • Become a trusted advisor to the CEO and the Executive Leadership Team (ELT)
    • Define/refine desired outputs and impact

How are we different:

    • Identify and solve key pain points, immediately
    • Provide a strong and relevant D & I lens to every aspect of your organization
    • Access to the IDI process, as a value, add
    • Flexible and Agile customization

Contact Information: Stephen and Dave may be reached via phone or email:

Dr. Stephen H Dawson

David Daniels, Daniels Consulting
Dr. Stephen Dawson David (Dave) Daniels (BA/MA)
Executive Strategy Consultant Diversity & Inclusion Consultant
Phone: 1.865.804.3454 Phone: 1.972.269.3400
service@shdawson.com dave@davedanielsconsulting.com
www.shdawson.com www.davedanielsconsulting.com