Get Everyone in Your Boat Rowing in the Same Direction: 5 Leadership Principles to Follow So Others Will Follow You is another great book. I don’t have a copy of this, having borrowed it from the library, but it is going on my “to get for the library” list.
Author Bob Boylan gives a very clear cut and very practical explanation of the process of generating shared vision. Leadership, in the words of Marcus Buckingham, is all about “emphasizing the universal”. Boylan’s book is broken down into simple concepts, accompanied by very practical exercises that can be carried out to explore and implement those concepts.
The subtitle of the book is “5 Leadership Principles to Follow So Others Will Follow You “. One of the chapters is about knowing what to talk about. A leader should constantly emphasize shared values and the common vision. This will generate organizational cohesion. If a leader emphasizes a message that involves values or vision that are not shared by some in the organization, those people will be alienated.
Shared vision is generated in two ways, it is either created, or discovered. One way of thinking of values and vision is to think of the destination sign on a bus. The vision part is the final destination (where we are going), the values part represent the route (how we are going to get there).
You can think of the function of the leader as being that of the driver. He or she gets onto the bus and there are then a number of options, depending on whether there are already people on the bus or not. If the bus is empty, the driver can put up a sign with a destination and route on it, and then wait to see who gets on. The driver could wait for people to get on and then ask them where they want to go, then put the sign up. If the bus already has people on it, the driver can ask them where they want to go, then put the sign up, or the driver could simply announce to the people where the bus is going.
Shared vision is created when a leader announces the vision and then looks for people who share that vision. Shared vision is discovered when a group undertakes a process of discovering their values and vision and looking for the common ground.
Let me give some examples from my personal experience.
I have already previously spoken about the difference in my level of influence from my time in Wellington to my time in Peru. In Wellington I was there from day one, and had long standing relationships with the team members. I had invested time and energy in many of them, and in reciprocation for that there was a high level of trust and the concession of influence. People agreed to allow me to have influence on them (exercise leadership) due to these relationships.
When I was made a leader in Peru, however, my leadership was positional, in name only. I did not have established relationships with people as I had had in Wellington. My sphere of influence was considerably reduced. Of course, this is not something that was clearly explained to me at the time. That’s a function of two things, my particular style of learning, and a lack of availability (awareness) of appropriate resources. I had to learn all these things through hard experience, and it is only doing a review with the help of literature such as this that I am able now to understand what happened. As Maxwell says, experience is not the best teacher - evaluated experience is.
In Wellington basically those who were attracted to the vision and values that we established from the beginning joined the organization, so there was a high degree of alignment. Maneuvering the organization was easy. In Peru it was like steering the Titanic - trying to make a slight adjustment was nearly impossible.
I was able to achieve a lot with the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust there because I worked with my team that I travelled with from New Zealand and a family who were happy to work on the same platform of vision and values. I announced the vision and values, and it was harmonious with them.
In another sphere I was put in charge of an inner city temple. I called a community meeting to do some exploration of the vision and values of the people. Understand that I wasn’t following any kind of procedure or really deeply understanding what I was doing, because I had had no formal training. I was winging it. I have a degree of natural ability and intuition with leadership, but that only takes you so far….
The meeting was really a combination of two things, looking back on it. Basically I wanted to discover the vision and values of the existing members of the organization, and to look for the common ground with my own. Based on the commonalities, I would construct a platform to move forward.
What I discovered was a high degree of disparity between the vision and values of the existing members. Some people thought we should do one thing, others thought another. Some thought it should be done this way, others another. At the same time, people were not really clear about the differences, or really in touch with themselves and their values. People did not understand the positions of others. There wasn’t any clear direction to align with, what to speak of alignment!
What I should have done is spent a lot of time from this point forward working on discovering people’s values and their vision, helping them to really connect with their values and refine their vision for themselves, then discover what the common platform was.
What I did instead is basically construct a platform based on my own vision and values, incorporating some of the elements that I could detect as common from everyone else, and then start implementing it.
The result of this, predictably, returning to our bus analogy, is that a number of people realized that the bus wasn’t going their way or to their destination, and got off. Others, in true South American style, and again predictably, tried to seize control of the wheel.
I ended up fighting a massive rearguard action, with little support (those with something concrete to lose will fight hard, those with only potential gains won’t). Progress was frustratingly slow. Alienation and attrition were high. Motivation was low, obstructionism was rife.
OK, so chalk that one up to experience. Round two. I was put in charge of another inner city temple / preaching center. At the same time. I was also put in charge of another restaurant. Let me deal with the restaurant experience in my review of Good to Great, because that lead me to purchase that book.
In terms of the other preaching center (this one had no people living in it), I moved a little more slowly, having gained some expensive experience at the first place. I spent a lot more time trying to build trust and a common platform. Again however, I ran into the same problem. You see, if you get on the bus with people already on it, you have basically two options. Find out where they want to go and go there, or go where you want to go, and deal with the fact that at least some of those people on that bus are not going to want to go there.
My realization at the end was that I was not getting any love this way. Remember that previously I revealed that in my personal value structure progress ranks over harmony? I’m not the harmonizing team-building leader of Maxwell’s Leadership Aptitudes explanation. I’m a Directive / Strategic Leader. If this bus ain’t going somewhere, and at a decent speed, then I’m on the wrong bus, not matter how much fun everyone is having. It’s not right or wrong, it’s just the way it is.
I got off the bus.
I had attracted a number of people who were of a similar mind - similar value structure - and who had faith in my leadership. I had faith in them. With similar values a common vision is more easily constructed - a picture of the future and the path to get there. These were all foreigners. Harmony is valued over progress in the standard Peruvian value structure.
We find that as people mature they go from being progress over harmony to harmony over progress. From pioneers to community builders. It’s a natural progression. Putting the right person in the right job allows that person to utilize their talents and propensities effectively, and happily. I suffered intensely for three years there in Peru, and I caused a lot of suffering for others. It was all for a good cause though, and now afterwards we’re all the better for it. After I left others who opposed me tried their hand at it and ran into the same problems, learnt the same lessons, and now we correspond with each other, fellow graduates of the school of hard knocks. 
When I came to Australia from Peru I stopped off in Auckland, New Zealand, for the opening of the new temple. Before I left New Zealand for South America I had gone to Sri Sri Radha-Giridhari and prayed to Them: “Please, never let me go”.
Somehow they mystically arranged everything so that my time in Peru ended right on schedule for me to be present at the opening of Their new temple. I continue to serve Them in separation.
Anyway, at the opening of the temple I ran into Tirtharaj das, who had “head-hunted” us from Peru. My Guru Maharaja gave me some indications of his desires, and based on that I made the choice to come to Brisbane. Really it was easy. We were flat broke after three years in South America and had no way of getting back. Tirtharaj offered to front the money for our tickets so it was pretty clear where the path forward lay.
At the opening of the temple Tirtharaj came up to me and said: “Our temple president just resigned.” I started to get a little nervous. I was hoping to be able to work in with some kind of stable, compatible situation. I knew that Tirtharaj had faith in, if not me, at least in the recommendation of my spiritual master, who would encourage him to give me some scope to act. “Who is going to take over?” I asked. Tirtharaj’s hand descended onto my shoulder, accompanied by a big smile: “That’s where you come in!”
Anyway, I dropped that like a hot potato.
Here in Brisbane I have started with an empty bus. My vision is not completely formed, but I have a direction, and my values are clear to me, and becoming clearer. I am attached to working in a particular way and I’m out of the closet about it. I am not about to go through years more of suffering, and put others through suffering at the same time. Let those who wish to work with me and work in this way do so, and let others have space to do as they wish.
I am trying to balance my life using the 80/20 principle, something that I picked up from Simply Strategic Volunteers. 80% in your strength zone, 20% outside. It’s not just about self-actualization and to hell with everyone else, but it’s not about twisting yourself out of shape and burning out either.
As we go forward and our particular organizational unit becomes successful and develops, I will have the ability to compromise on other points and contribute to platforms where, while I can appreciate the values and vision, it just doesn’t do it for me. As long as my own need to work in a particular way is taken care of I won’t become frustrated.
People are getting on, and because it is clear from the outset what the values of this particular platform are, it’s either what they want to do, or they don’t get onboard. As a result alignment is high and very easily we generate a shared vision. Spiritual life is not about impersonalism or homogenity. Within a wider community there are many groups, and when people’s needs are being met in a way that doesn’t threaten others they are able to respect others who have different needs.
We don’t all have to think the same way, be the same way, or do things the same way.
Being attached to working in a particular way is a product of the modes of material nature. Being aware of that, and familiar with the particular nature of that way, and recognizing it, not as an absolute truth that all others must abide by to be “right”, but merely as an expression of your own particular nature, is a product of the sattva-guna, or mode of goodness. Knowing what your adhikara is and acting according to that will call your progress, and it will enable wider organizational harmony.
When people confuse their own nature with absolute reality and demand that others work in that way or get out of the organization it creates a difficult situation. It’s not “all or nothing”, or “my way or the high way”. In the house that Srila Prabhupada has built there are many rooms.
Conclusion: Be yourself and make a contribution. If you want to do it with others, read this book to get some clarity on how to help yourself and others to discover and connect with their values, and be able to recognize what will, and will not work in terms of organization of people into functional teams that can deliver results and fulfil the needs of the members.
