Warren G. Harding looked like a leader. He was handsome and dignified, never hard to get along with. He moved with little effort through the ranks of Ohio politics, became a compromise candidate for president.
He was elected in
a landslide on his promise to return the country to normalcy after the
hardships of World War I. He died in office after three mediocre years and
often is classed among the worst presidents in history.
Numerous scandals
erupted because of Harding’s inability to evaluate his appointees.
Stephen Hawking is
an entirely different story. He looks like a very sick man, which he is –
severely limited physically by ALS, able to communicate only by computerized
means.
And Stephen
Hawking is deep into the most fundamental questions of our physical world. He
is a cosmologist, and yet has the celebrity of a rock star. He works
brilliantly in studying and writing about the universe – gravity, black holes, why
the theory of General Relativity must be unified with Quantum Theory.
And people hang
on his every word.
Harding was born on third base and died
disgraced. Hawking was born a genius and has never ceased his hard work, employing
his brilliance to advance knowledge.
We see gradations
of both workstyles all around us.
There are people
whose appearance, personality and/or indefinable attractiveness predispose us
to pay attention to them, whose opinions and preferences gain them an automatic
entry into our favorable judgment.
Some of them
behave in ways that validate that first impression; some don’t.
Often, the ones
who fall short continue to exercise influence despite the evidence, and those
who depend upon them suffer disappointment – and worse – proportionate to the duration
of their inattention.
Most of us don’t
seem to have obvious bonus points to support our efforts to earn attention and
influence with our fellows. People have no particular reason to wait expectantly
for us to speak. So how are we to get noticed and respected? How can we matter?
As with any other
learning process, let’s start with observation.
There are people among our associates
who always get listened to without any extra advantages. What do they do that
gives them such status?
They generally are good at both
inclusiveness and critical thinking.
They pay real
attention to other people, focusing on what is being said. They regularly use
comments and questions to validate and clarify what they are being told. They
withhold their own conclusions until others have fully contributed, then keep
it short and on point.
This outward
focus in conversation builds response from others. People pay attention to
those who pay attention to them. Relationship-building also blends naturally
into the first stages of critical thinking.
Critical thinking
is a personal discipline aimed at reducing the predominance of bias and habit
in our decision-making. It requires thought and practice, but it is worth the
effort because it produces improved results immediately and enhances the
building of mutually productive partnerships.
Actually, we love
to have critical thinkers as associates, and gain significantly from working
with them. These are the people who, besides listening actively and attentively
to us, ask good questions, do their research homework, are restrained in
agreeing – but are steadfast once they have agreed.
So, leadership results from focus and
discipline. Not only must we decide to practice it, we also must practice
it. We devote conscious attention to how we’re thinking and how we’re
interacting with others.
We invest time
and effort, continually, in awareness of ourselves in the moment. We learn how
to corral straying thoughts. We become better companions. We contribute and
collaborate more actively.
We think more and
more acutely.
We assert less
and ask more.
We get listened
to.
Think about it for a moment. Whom do you pay attention to? Who influences you, and how? Let's see your comment below.
SEE ALSO: You Radiate
Leadership . . . or Not
http://jimmillikenproject.blogspot.com/2013/11/you-radiate_23.html
No comments:
Post a Comment