The Sky is Falling!

It seems that the world’s attention is on COVID-19. We receive a daily barrage of information, directives, and perspectives on how best to manage this new reality of shelter-in-place. Watching local, regional and national leadership try to manage the situation reminds me of the times I have faced challenges in the school environment.

The challenges have run the gamut. While I was in Boston, we negotiated a gutted endowment by making major cuts to programs and personnel. We purchased protective gear in order to care for children and staff who might contract H1N1. We implemented a boil-water order in response to a contaminated drinking water source. We confronted children’s deaths, extended staff and family supports. We faced the reality of the Boston Marathon bombings, and sheltered in place when one of the perpetrators escaped to a place mere blocks from campus.

Leadership in these situations requires many things, but first and foremost, it requires calm. It requires the leader to learn as much as she can about a situation before she reacts to it. It requires precise communication that not only shares facts and potential solutions, but is reassuring to staff, students, and families. And it requires an outward appearance that is poised, positive and focused.

One of my favorite children’s stories was about the chick that was hit in the head by something while taking a walk around the farm. Chicken Little immediately assumed that what had happened to him was monumental, when in fact it was an acorn that fell from a tree and hit his head. As the story goes, he ran around the farmyard shouting, “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!” creating hysteria in those who listened to him.

I’ve worked with a lot of Chicken Littles in my leadership career, ones who take a panicked or fatalist stance whenever things are unknown or seemingly insurmountable.  Whether the situation is real or perceived, my reaction is typically the same. Stay calm. Question. Plan. Communicate. Implement.

Why is “stay calm” at the top of this list? The answer is simple, if often overlooked. When a leader responds to a challenge in a hyper or panicked way, she shifts attention away from the problem and onto herself. And that shift neither supports nor inspires onlookers.

I was at a regularly scheduled meeting once where the leader had spent a good deal of the day responding to a critical shift in events. He presented his scattered self to the meeting attendees in full view, talking about how distracted he was by the issue and what he was going to do to address his own self-comfort in order to get through it. Needless to say, the meeting was unproductive. Even attempts by attendees to help the leader address the critical issue were met with mild hysteria. The leader was so wrapped up in his own feelings that he could not hear.

Presenting a calm self is the first and most important thing a leader should do when confronting a tough situation. You might ask, “but what if I am not feeling calm? What if I am scattered like the person in your story?”

I am not saying you won’t be flustered or anxious or scattered. I’m saying that regardless of what is going on in your head, you need to present a calm and focused outer self.

When my mother was dying, I looked over at my dad, who was moving calmly from one task to the next. I commented on his calm. He said, “I’m like a missile: focused and ignited on the outside, exploding on the inside.” (My father launched missiles as part of his career in the Air Force.) Another way I’ve heard this described is being like a duck: gliding across the water while its feet are moving frantically underneath.

Whether you’re a missile or a duck, the point is that an effective leader is one who focuses not on herself, but on the problem and the people she supports during a time of crisis. Call on a mentor or a friend to help you self manage, and thoughtfully gather the colleagues you need to help you work toward solving the problem at hand.

If the sky really is falling, you’ll be prepared. And you’ll impart that sense of preparedness to those you lead.

A Leadership Stone for the New Year: Consider

I had all but given up on my one-word mantra: “consider.” Considering new opportunities had transported me into situations that were exhilarating, tough, and full of learnings. It had moved me from Colorado to Arizona to Massachusetts to Kentucky. It was the word I held onto when my dream shattered or I fell short of my goal. It had expanded my life in ways I hadn’t imagined when I was first licensed as a teacher in 1982. I had even planned to have the word tattooed on my wrist, a reminder of its power in my life.

Over time, however, I began to grow weary of the transitions, the frustrations and even anguish of trying new things. I kept picking myself up, learning from my mistakes, reveling in what I had achieved because I had considered, but feeling more defeated than refueled. I made the decision to step down from leadership and find a new way

I was even glad I hadn’t gotten that tattoo—considering new opportunities and challenges had left me deflated and, it seemed, alone.

Then I saw something on Facebook from an acquaintance whose viewpoints often differ from my own. It was a cut-paste that made fun of political correctness and its extremes. It ended with a statement: “This is what this country has become.”

Instead of scrolling past and keeping my tongue, I responded with this:

“When someone points out an issue to you, consider it. Turn it over in your hand and see if it speaks truth to you. If it does, consider changes you might make. If it does not, set it aside and continue on your way.”

In the moment those words came to me, I realized I was not done with the mantra that had propelled me through life for so long. The wisdom it holds is as strong as ever--I have just applied it in a different way.

In 2020, I will continue to consider, and I hope you will too. Without the power of considering something that is initially foreign to us, women wouldn’t have the right to vote, slavery would not have been abolished, and my leadership journey would have been brief. I am grateful for all I have experienced simply by considering.

What are you worth?

Money. Not the first thing we think about in schools, state agencies, or nonprofits, is it? But for leaders, money drives many things. Leaders manage budgets, make staffing decisions based on available resources, write grants, appear before state and national legislatures asking for funding, all in the name of having what they need to get the job done.

There are so many branches on the money tree that it is hard to choose a leadership stone among them. But here goes. I am setting out here to support the theory that you must pay well to get the best people on your team, and that the concept applies to ALL members of the team.

One of my greatest frustrations in an organization where top-tier leaders were paid well was the fact that those doing front-line work were drastically underpaid. We limped through the recession, a time when I was forced to trim $1.5 million from my department’s budget. Staff salaries remained nearly flat during those years. When the recession eased, I assumed we would play substantial catch-up with teachers and instructional assistants… but it did not happen. Instead, we continued with minimal yearly pay increases and no provision for mimicking our public school counterparts that implemented steady salary increases and step raises. The most important teacher-leaders and staff in our school seemed to be valued the least, if pay was any indicator.

Now don’t get me wrong—I am not one of those who complain when the CEO of a large nonprofit agency is paid well. Nonprofits are incredibly complex, and some of the best CEOs I have known are working 60-70 hours a week managing multiple departments. Fundraising, developing legislative relationships, and keeping the ship pointed in the right direction require great expertise and incredible effort, which should be appropriately compensated. Every position is important, however, and compensation is part of the formula that indicates a person’s value in an organization.  

Since half of my career has been spent in leadership positions, I have been privy to a great deal of financial information from various organizations. And because I practice servant-leadership, I have tried to advocate for my own compensation in a way that keeps it in line with others providing similar services but also takes into consideration that any organization faces finite resources. The more I take as an administrator, the less there is for others on the front line.

The most disturbing phenomenon I noted both in schools and nonprofits is the pervasive attitude that educators and their counterpoints should be grateful for the pay they receive. A board member of a nonprofit stated that teachers in private settings should accept lower pay because they had a better working environment than their public school counterparts. A leader in that same organization stated that we needed to offer better pay in our development and communications departments so that we could attract the “best” people. See the irony? Me, too.

In addition, I have observed systems where top-tier employees were held to a lower accountability standard than others in the organization. Confidentiality keeps me from going into details, but I was surprised when percentage raises were regularly granted to top employees with no performance measures attached to those raises. And since percentage raises pay off, literally, more for top earners, shouldn’t they be based on performance?  

I know—I’m mostly complaining here. Where’s the leadership stone, you ask? The stone I cling to is more of an “ought to” than an ism. Leaders ought to focus on pursuing excellent compensation for ALL employees whose work they value. And for me, that’s everyone who is working toward the organization’s mission and meeting mutually agreed upon accountability standards.

The concept of “socio-economic value” was invented to account for the social value of educators (and other front-line workers) who may not be compensated in accordance with their true value to society, but we should not ignore the economic side. We have lost many great staff because of low pay in this field. Let’s not do that any more.

On Judging Others

We have all had experiences where someone at a meeting or on social media is VERY upset about something, and we dismiss their focus with a comment like, “that person needs to get a life, “ or “he has too much time on his hands.” This happened to me a few weeks ago at a homeowner’s association meeting, when one person went on and on about the (apparently unacceptable) way the landscapers trimmed the desert spoon plants in our common areas. It occurs to me that we all might have too much time on our hands, the way we comment about this or criticize that. It’s not just a daily habit, but a several-times-a-day habit we’ve gotten into.

My “aha!” moment about different perspectives came at a public event several years ago. I was representing the nonprofit where I worked, and many donors were in attendance. The leader of the organization had some of the most amazing skills I’d ever witnessed when it came to meet and greets. He was working the room like a pro, personalizing his comments to each guest, and making everyone feel at home.

“He’s wearing that suit again,” said a member of the fundraising department. “What?” I asked, reframing my thoughts to focus on how our leader was dressed. “The tan one. The tan suit. He’s wearing the tan suit again.”

My boss’s professional wardrobe flashed across my mind. He had some beautiful suits: charcoal gray, black, a brown that still worked with his graying hair. He had a great set of ties, some with themes that signified his work, others that were perfectly matched to a colored shirt and particular suit. And he did have one tan suit. I found it curious, unusual, but also a little brave. Why not wear something different from the same old same old black or minor variation? The “tan suit” color was more toward taupe, and I thought it looked fine. No big deal.

Back to my colleague. “Who wears tan suits?” I quickly noted our different perspectives: she disliked the suit and thought it was inappropriate for events like this. It was an irritation to her. I thought it was unique but pretty much a non-issue. While she had judged his effectiveness as a fundraiser in part by what he was wearing, I was looking only at his actions.

Now don’t get me wrong. Tan IS an anomaly in a Boston landscape of black attire. I once showed up at an upscale event wearing an ensemble of brown and realized right away that I’d gotten it wrong. But the idea, implied, that a tan suit might put off donors seemed like a stretch to me.

Here’s my learning: not only do opinions vary, they also vary in the weight they carry. Appearances, attributes, and behaviors run through our individual filters and are judged. Some are barely considered, while others drive individuals to distraction, to irritation, to the need to complain. Some are notable enough to be acted upon. Information inflow is constant, and it can be distracting if we focus on inconsequential matters. Choose what it is that is significant enough to comment on or to take action for or against.

As a leader, you will not only be called on to judge: you will be judged. Constantly. I have been judged for the tone and volume of my voice, the length of my skirts, the height of my heels, the organization of my presentations, my hairstyle, the size and shape of my body. I’ve also been judged on my technical expertise, the way I handle crises, and where I go on vacation. Part of leading is being visible and noted. It’s inevitable.

As you consider how you are judged, spend some time looking at how you judge others. There’s often a story behind what you perceive: the tan suit could have been a reminder of a loved one’s clothing preferences, or it could just be a tan suit. If it’s important to you, consider asking about the item of concern. Find out if there’s a story.

Place your energy where you can make the greatest difference. Becoming distracted by judgment that does not support your goals takes away from your effectiveness. When others point out things they perceive as wrong, take a moment to consider whether their perspective adds to or detracts from your goals.

Intention Part 1: When you know why you're doing it, you're doing it with intention.

“We’re making brownies tonight,” said the house parent in a residential program. I was making rounds in the cottages where students lived and learned daily living skills while attending school. Interesting, I thought. That’s what they were doing the last time I’d stopped by on a weekday evening. The activity was well-planned, with picture cards for the students with low vision to follow and braille for those who were blind. But when I asked why they had chosen this particular recipe this particular night, the answer was essentially, “we’re making brownies.”

This is a snapshot that brought me back to my early days as an Orientation and Mobility instructor and as a supervisor for O&M interns. The lesson I tried to drive home is simple: every time you teach something, you should know why you are teaching it. Think critically about how the lesson fits in with the student’s overall program, and decide which lesson fits best with the chosen goal. Repetition isn’t out of the question—in fact, it’s a key part of teaching. Students need repeated opportunities to master certain skills. There is purpose in repetition if it is done intentionally. But if you’re repeating a lesson simply because it’s Wednesday night, I urge you to think critically about what you are doing—and why you are doing it.

Now let’s think about this concept in leadership terms. Intentionality is critical for a leader. In fact, if you are random in your initiatives and do not clearly communicate their purpose, you may never gain the attention and trust of your followers. Here’s an example.

My beginnings as interim principal for a school for the blind were rocky. I came home from my first staff meeting, in fact, in tears. I’d done everything by the book: handed out an agenda in print and braille, varied the activities within the meeting itself, asked for input from attendees, etc. What should have been a fruitful meeting was instead filled with chaos. People talked amongst themselves, positioned themselves as far away from me as possible, and answered my queries either not at all or with rude, badgering replies. I was pretty sure my leadership days had started and ended at that meeting, and I was ready to give up.

Fortunately, I slept on the notion of quitting, and I decided to become more deliberate in my communication. At the next meeting, I did several things differently. First, I set up the room in a way where there were few opportunities for back-of-the-room behavior. Second, I clearly stated the purpose of the meeting and my expectations for the staff. I gently called them out on their past behavior-acknowledging it and then outlining what I hoped for instead. Then whenever we veered from our intended direction, I brought people back in.

Once people settled into the new routine, one that was driven by intention and purpose that I had clearly communicated to them, transformation occurred. Truly, the staff who had brought me to tears eventually became one of the most motivated and enthusiastic groups I have ever worked with.

In all the leadership positions I have held since, I have done very few things without reason. Whatever I initiate, I develop a plan around it—and communicate it as needed. And when I get stuck in a routine, I nudge myself to make an intentional change in order to achieve better results.