Habitudes 1

 Habitudes for CommunicatorsHABITUDES FOR COMMUNICATORS: Images that form Leadership Habits and Attitudes, by Tim Elmore

I came upon this book serendipitously. You know how things seem to connect? You are having an experience that matches exactly with something you read about the day before? Jean will be giving a talk in a few weeks, and he was wondering how to prepare~ then this book just fell into our laps. I’m inspired because we have also just started a small group and I’m looking for things to inspire our discussion and help us to create genuine relationships with each other. Here is an excerpt from the first IMAGE given by Tim Elmore. The book is wonderfully designed to be not only inspiring, but easily applicable~ guidelines are given to assess yourself and your personal authentic speaker/communicator skills.

Communicators must use window and mirrors when they speak. When a communicator provides a window for people to see into his/her life, listeners receive a mirrow to see their own. Speakers must indentify with the people. Steve Jobs told 3 stories about his life, taking less than 15 minutes to deliver the commencement speech at Stanford University in 2005.

When speakers hold a window up to their soul (their humanity) listeners identify with them and become engaged with their story. Because the communicator is secure enough to pull back the curtain on their own life, everyone feels safe to lean in and examine their own.

Effective speakers identify with the people who are listening. They may tell a story about themselves; they might reveal a fear, a hope or a weakness they possess. Through the raw act of being transparent, they attract listeners to identify with them. (HONY)

Window and mirrors is all about becoming transparent. Being real and revealing. It asks us to go beyond the sterile transmittal of information. It reminds us that what people really long for ~ what is magnetic to most audiences~ is a genuine spirit.

People are looking for a communicator more than a public speaker.

Talk it over:

  1. Is it difficult for you to open up and become vulnerable in front of an audience? Why?
  2. How much should a communicator open up and share weaknesses? How transparent should a speaker be with an audience?
  3. John Maxwell suggests that speakers should be real to the point that the audience doesn’t begin to feel sorry for them and distract from the point being made. What is your take on this idea? Is there a better gauge?
  4. Can you name a time you saw a communicator become authentic and win over a crowd?

 Assess Yourself

Dr. Martin Seligman says that the critical determinant of success in life is resilience in the face of adversity. Awareness, contemplation and a sense of humor are your best friends in attempting to learn from difficult experiences and make sense of them for listeners. Evaluate yourself on how personal your communication is using the following criteria on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being weak and 10 being strong.

 1. I am keenly aware of my own flaws and weaknesses. _____

 2. I reflect on lessons I can learn from difficult experiences. _____

3. I maintain a sense of humor and can laugh at myself. _____

4. I am emotionally secure enough to share my flaws/weaknesses. _____

5. I’m generally good at sharing stories from my life, even failures. _____

6. I can sense if my listeners need more transparency as I speak. _____


There is a rule that works in most social settings: people will only become as vulnerable as their leader. We must be willing to reveal the kind of information that we’d ask of another person. Telling people your background, your likes and dislikes, and your fears and hopes is part of the give and take of genuine conversation. It’s how we get to know people. This week, practice this habitude in conversations and in any speeches, talks or sermons you deliver. Develop two strong personal anecdotes and insert them into your comments to others. Take a risk and open up about your humanity. Then, meet in a community and discuss how it influenced others to be transparent as well.



Collaborating for a Change: Applying Himmelman’s Approach                           

Source: Arthur T. Himmelman, Collaborating for a Change

 -Networking- Information exchange, Minimal time, low levels of trust, no turf sharing; No mutual sharing of resources

 -Coordinating-Information exchange and activities to achieve a common purpose, Moderate time and trust, no turf sharing, make services user friendly; None or minimal resource sharing

 -Cooperating-All of coordinating plus resource, Substantial time, high trust, high access to each other’s turf; Moderate to extensive resource sharing. Some sharing of risks, responsibilities and rewards.

 -Collaborating-All of cooperating plus enhancing the capacity of another to achieve a common purpose; Extensive time, very high trust, reciprocal capacity enhancements; Full sharing of resources, risks, responsibilities and rewards 

Additional Resources

-David Chrislip and Carl E. Larson: Collaborative Leadership

-WilliamIsaacs: DialogicLeadership

-James Kouzes and Barry Posner: The Leadership Challenge

-ArthurT.Himmelman: CollaborationforaChange

-JohnKesler: CivilDiscourse

-PeterSenge: TheFifthDiscipline

-JohnGardner: OnLeadership

-Ronald Heifetz: Leadership Without Easy Answers

 Margaret O. Schmelzer, MS, RN State Health Plan Director Director of Public Health Nursing and Health Policy Division of Public Health Wisconsin Department of Health Services Madison, Wisconsin

Margareto.schmelzer@dhs.wisconsin.gov  May 2013


Thank You!



Five Levels of Discourse in Building Healthy Communities

(Adapted) Primary source: John T. Kesler, Healthy Communities and Civil Discourse


1. Influence and even control decisions by individuals, institutions, and interest groups. Used to getting what they want due to power, money and influence (e.g., government, powerful industries, Wall Street).

 2. Here we take responsibility for respecting other’s rights if we are to enjoy our own. Gets us no further than balancing and accommodating interests. Doesn’t lead us to maximizing personal or community health. This can result in confrontations and win-lose outcomes (e.g., dispute resolution, such as mediation, arbitration).

 3. Calls for a higher cognitive and moral awareness and a deep sense of empathy. Works well with homogeneous ethnic and socioeconomic groups (town meetings). Focus is on responsibility and ownership / accountability. Here priorities, policies, plans are developed consistent with values conducive to personal and community flourishing. By participating, people begin to own it and work together (e.g., healthy communities initiatives, HW2020).

 4. Includes voices not usually heard. Level 3 is good but insufficient as it’s too easy to be satisfied with priorities and may not consider the entire community. Address fairness, social justice, universal respect and public policy. Look beyond the issues and solutions that arise out of discourse / dialogue. Finding commonalities can bridge deep cultural differences, and can yield policy implications that are broader than the scope of the initiating community (e.g., housing, homelessness, education).

 5. Extends concern for justice and fairness for each individual without giving up principles of fairness and social justice. Reflects The Golden Rule. Provides the opportunity to promote the highest traditions of a caring and nurturing society (e.g., voting, civil rights, human rights).













From Healthiest Wisconsin 2020: Everyone Living Better, Longer



Slide Show: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/hw2020/pdf/collaborativeleadership.pdf

Additional: http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/publications/P0/P00187c.pdf


“People want to be engaged in civic life. They want their views heard, understood and considered. They want to know that their involvement will make a difference, and that the public, not governments or special interest groups, defines the public interest.” Chrislip and Larson, Collaborative Leadership, http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/hw2020/

Collaborative Leadership, What is it? Taking a leadership role in a coalition, organization, or enterprise where:

• Everyone is on an equal footing.

• Participants work together to solve a problem, create something new, or run an organization / initiative.

• The leader relies on the group to work with both content and substance.

• The leader promotes and safeguards the process 


-Inspire commitment and action

-Use collaborative problem-solving and decision-making

-It’s an open process with no set end-point when it begins

-The end-point is worked out by the group – that’s collaboration.

-Lead as a peer problem solver

-Build broad-based involvement

-Sustain hope and participation



-More involvement in implementation

-Trust building

-Eliminate turf issues

-Access to more and better information / ideas

-Increased opportunity for results

-Generates new leaders

-Empowers collective action at the community and  organizational levels

-Offers a fundamental “change for the better” in the ways communities and organizations operate


This is consistent with John Kesler’s vision of inclusive, consensus-oriented civil discourse. This strongly aligns with the concepts of the “healthy communities” movement. John Kesler, Healthy Communities and Civil Discourse, 2000


-Time consuming

-Demands an ability to face conflict directly

-Need to overcome resistance to the whole idea of collaborative leadership

-Some may accuse the leader of not doing his/her job

-Some prefer authority figures making decisions or telling them “what to do”

-Some people may be used to authoritarian approaches

• Discomfort with uncertainty

• Old notions of the leader as “hero”


WHEN NOT TO USE ITCollaborative leadership may not work well in:

– Command-and-control environments (military combat, epidemic control)

– Rigorous approaches to ascertaining scientific evidence / scientific approaches

 WHEN TO USE IT:  Collaborative leadership works well:

– When the timing is right

– When problems are serious / complex

– Where there are a number of stakeholders with varied interests / perspectives

– When other attempts at solutions have not worked

– When an issue affects a whole organization or large portion of a community

– When inclusiveness and empowerment are goals from the beginning


Thought to Consider“The strategies and approaches we take may not be the ultimate solutions to today’s problems but they must be an improved evolving expression of an ideal.” Adapted from How Your Child Is Smart, Donna Marcova, page 31

 Creative Tension– Tension here does not mean anxiety or stress or emotional tension.

– It’s a force when we acknowledge our vision is at odds with current reality.

– When we feel the vision is too high, we naturally ask to lower the vision.

– We lower the vision when we fear failure (including personal failure). We are tempted to quit.

– We should do the opposite – elevate current reality instead of lowering the vision – keep our visions high. Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline


Balancing Advocacy / Inquiry

-Advocacy can cut off inquiry; most importantly, it can cut off learning.

-Without inquiry, advocacy begets more advocacy and positions become hardened. There’s no forward movement. Creates escalation of problems.

-Inquiry (asking questions) such as: – “What leads you to that position?” – “Can you illustrate your point for me?”

-What questions might you ask to foster inquiry? Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline


-When we balance inquiry and advocacy, we create opportunities for dialogue.

-Remember: dialogue is generative. It creates new knowledge; Knowledge stimulates learning by people and by stakeholders.

Suggested reading: Dialogic Leadership – William Isaacs, Vol.10, No. 1, Systems Thinker

Peter Senge and William Isaacs, combined sources


Characteristics / Traits of Collaborative Leaders

-Trusted and respected

-Relate to people easily

-Good facilitators


-Nurture new and emerging leaders

-Safeguard the process

-Motivated to find solutions to real problems

-Focus on what’s best for the group, the organization or the community as a whole

-Focus on broad rather than narrow-interest issues


Effective Collaborative Leaders – Five practices:

1. Lead the process

2. Understand the context in the given situation

3. Motivate

4. Be flexible and persistent

5. Set aside one’s ego


Collaborative Leadership Practice #1: Establish, maintain and safeguard the collaborative process. Help the group to:

       -Set norms

       -Assure everyone gets heard, Encourage and model inclusiveness

       -Foster real connections between people

  -Mediate conflicts / disputes

– Create mechanisms to solicit ideas

– Maintain collaborative problem solving / decisions

– Push the group toward effectiveness

– Choose doable projects first, to build confidence and demonstrate group success


Collaborative Leadership Practice #2: Know the leadership context:

–The community or organization

–The nature of the problem


Collaborative Leadership Practice #3: Motivate, motivate, motivate

–Be upbeat even when things look bleak

-Keep the group focused on the future –

-Keep focused on the bigger picture

-Identify and celebrate small successes

-Guard against discouragement and burn-out


Collaborative Leadership Practice #4: Be flexible, yet be unyielding

–         Be flexible:

•         Try new ideas including ideas from unusual or unlikely sources

•         Change course as the situation demands

•         Let go of something that isn’t working

•         Create opportunities for more participation


–         Be unyielding:

•         Protect the integrity of an open, collaborative process

•         Practice inclusiveness

•         Keep the group on track

•         Advocate for the best interests of the group as a whole


Collaborative Leadership Practice #5: Check your ego at the door

-Let go of your own ego

-Forget about being a “hero” or taking credit

-Contribute to problem-solving as a member

-Accept the decisions of the group

 Aligning Problem Type and Leadership Approaches:

1. Directive leader – role as expert- Solves the problem; gives instructions

2. Dual leader – role as directive and coach- Solicits group involvement; asks for input; encourages; meet people’s needs; may bring in an expert. Leader may ultimately make the decision.

3. Collaborative leader- Listens; praise; asks for input; gives feedback; facilitates and encourages confidence and motivation; creates learning through dialogue by balancing inquiry and advocacy.

 Closing Remarks: “Leaders know some of the most critically important tasks require lateral leadership, boundary crossing leadership involving groups over whom one has little control. They must exercise leader-like influence beyond the system over which they preside. They must do what they can to lead without authority.” John Gardner, On Leadership



from “The Leadership Challenge, How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations”

by Kouzes and Posner

  1. Model the way
  2. Inspire a shared vision~ find a common purpose,envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities.
  3. Challenge the Process ~search for opportunities, take initiative, experiment and take risks.
  4. Enable Others to Act ~foster collaboration, create a climate of trust, facilitate relationships, strengthen others, 
  5. Encourage the Heart ~ recognize contributions, celebrate values and victories, create a spirit of community, get personally involved.

 Case study: Barby—- at Zeno: Fearless


-“Every single personal best leadership case involved changing the status quo.”

-You need to know what your values and guiding principles are.”

-“Innovation comes more from listening than from telling.You have to be constantly looking outside yourself and your organization for new and innovative products, processes and services.”

Key words: Innovation, change, experimentation, taking risks, support for good ideas, willingness to challenge the system. “When you take risks, mistakes and failures are inevitable. Proceed anyway.”

 Characteristics most looked-for in a leader: 


-Forward looking



For more about Kouzes and Posner, http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/about-section-our-authors.aspx

DARE TO DISAGREE, by Margaret Heffernan


from TED Talk “Dare to Disagree,” by Margaret Heffernan        



In her talk, Heffernan shared a stunning statistic — that 85% of executives had concerns with their company that they were afraid to raise, out of fear of the conflict that would ensue. Heffernan warns that this not only means that businesses aren’t getting the best work out of their employees, but that issues which could be nipped in the bud internally perpetuate themselves.

How do you foster conflict that leads to nimbler thinking rather than hurt egos? Heffernan shares her guidelines for productive disagreement.

1. Appoint a devil’s advocate. Someone whose excellence is demonstrated by the quality of questions they ask. Great questions include: “What are the best reasons not to do this?” “What don’t we know that, if we did know, would change our decision?” “If we had more money or time, what would we do?” “If this were a documentary, what would be the narrative arc?” It’s important that different people play the role of devil’s advocate: if always the same person, they’ll get tuned out and burned out.

2. Find allies. If you have concerns, try asking others privately, “Are you okay with this? Does anything about this bother you? Is there another way to frame this question?” Having allies allows you to work together to be creative and solve the problem.

3. Listen for what is NOT being said. If the conversation is being framed about money, consider what is not being talked about. If everyone’s talking technology, what have they left out of their equation? Sometimes it’s helpful to bring in an outsider to help with this. They should do nothing but listen. Then, ask for their impressions — not recommendations. They may notice trends that people embroiled in the conversation simply can’t.

4. Imagine you cannot do what you all want to do. In other words, think about what you would do if you could fire someone, if you could change the timetable, or if you were allowed to cancel the deal. If you could do any of those things — would you still proceed with your plan? What are the hidden orthodoxies nobody is challenging?

5. After a decision is made, declare a cooling off period. Ask everyone to go home and think about the decision on their own as well as discuss it with their family. Come back after a prescribed amount of time and ask the group: does the decision still look great?

Explains Heffernan, “All of these guidelines are neutral and designed to aid exploration rather than judgment. There’s never any reason not to try these — who doesn’t want to make better decisions?”