• Book Summary

    Leadership today is in a crisis of credibility. Across the globe, there seems to be a state of lament about the inability of leaders to create and deliver upon a meaningful, uniting purpose. The rise of populism on the national stage and narcissism at the organizational level is telling. Whether it is explicit or not, there is a near universal yearning for individuals who can foster the necessary conditions under which citizens and organizational actors alike can leverage their true passions and strengths. In some ways, the way that leadership has come to be understood is itself problematic. For too many, it is a positional and hierarchical construct, thereby relegating it to an elite status in which most people find themselves as mere bystanders or worse yet, collateral damage.

    For those of us who are invested in reclaiming the promise that leadership has held over the ages, we recognize that tangible and meaningful reform is in order. This reform begins with a reframe of the relationship between follower and leader. While leaders are often clear on the ask of their followers, they rarely ask the question, what is being offered in return. I would argue that the most that leaders can ever offer their followers is the promise of impact through a collective endeavour. Such impact can only be had through real work… people work…

    At its very core, leadership work is people work… If we can’t love them, we can’t lead them. It’s not that we have to love everyone that we lead, but there must be something in those we lead that we love to see grow and develop.

    Impactful leadership is, in the words of Gianpiero Petriglieri, “about the courage, capacity, curiosity, and commitment to work with, learn from and give voice to the ‘other.’” So, how do we get to this place, internally? Meaningful leadership requires intentional exploration. Intentional about what? Leaders have to be intentional about development: our own, and that of those through whom we want to have impact. We also have to be intentional about exploration, specifically that of our own journey. We must be humble and courageous enough to look at what we carry with us. What experiences, challenges, obstacles, successes, and failures shape our worldview, biases and actions? Why is this intentional self-exploration necessary?

    Leaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what’s important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future).

    We need to prototype a new design of ourselves as leaders. Only then can leaders extend the invitation: if we can do this together, we can have meaningful impact.

  • #Diamond:

    #Diamond: How do you inspire minds of those who don’t want to give up power in the old definition, and how do you convince those who don’t want to lead, to step up? Shfit their mental models? Could you say that this leadership proposition is not only appealing in the business case, or moral or ethical or professional, but that it will create the conditions for personal satisfaction and fulfilment?

    #Diamond: How do we make this case that this redefinition is an imperative, esp. for those with immense privilidge?

    #Diamond:Is this book, in some or many ways really about de-colonizing leadership? Perhaps this is something to discuss in: every story matters - opening up the dominant narrative.

    #Diamond: Do you think that culture defines leadership? And if so, what is the dominant cultural paradigm we are trying to move away from and towards, in this new leadership model?

    #Diamond: Do you want to talk about or explore other cultural models of leadership and maybe intersections of what has worked, in other places at other times? (clearly I am a histry nerd too!)

    #Diamond: How will we convince our readers of their potential leadership, especially those for whom particular leadership roles have been closed to them due to class, gender, race etc..

    #Diamond: how do we speak to those who feel limited/boxed in to specific leadership roles (women, community leaders but not political leaders).

    #Diamond: Many ppl might be desirous of, but scared of leadership roles - and feel like even if they go into it with this emancipatory approach, existing power structures will block them/crush them.

    #Diamond:How can we define or discuss leadership that makes it feel appealing for those scared of owning their power, or who have had traumatic experiences? Do you have stories that will inspire and activate!?

    #Diamond: I think an easy critique I could see beign taken here that actaully came to mind is from a feminist stance: that this is frustrating because these traditionally undervalued feminine qualities (empathy, communmication, service) are now being valued and perhaps coopted by men while women are still in this double bind of being too soft or too bitchy as leaders.

    “culture defines leadership, so it makes sense that leadership in the west has been dominated by men, and how the imbalance between masculine and feminine values has impacted our world…Simons says the problem was never masculinity in leadership, it was the absence of and bias against femininity.

    #Diamond: Do you think that women make better leaders? Or, do the best leaders embrace the best qualities of leadership and let go of traditional notions of gender.”

    #Diamond: How do leaders take the time to do all of the necessary personal and interpersonal work, when organizational culture and complex social problems seems to be speeding up, happening more rapidly. There seems to be a pacing discrepancy. Is this part of the way that leaders are changing the ‘system’?

    #A lot of leadership concepts get stuck on business case, how do we posit this book in the moral, ethical, professional case?

  • Introduction:

    1) The Credibility Crisis. Leadership is in a crisis of credibility which needs to be (healed, not solved? healing brutal colonial legacy?) in order to reclaim the promise of meaningful, uniting purpose.

    2) Reclaiming the promise of leadership:
    Where did our ideas of and definitions of leadership come from and why it is critical that they be reclaimed and redefined? #diamond: what’s at stake here?!

    Effective leadership is of necessity equity-based leadership.

    3) Leadership for Impact

    From inspiration to impact - asking more of our leaders and ourselves.

    Petrilglieri Quote: Courage, curiosity, Capacity and Committment to give voice to the other.

    Where we could go with a new model for leadership? (A hope for the future?)

    Redefining Leadership for impact means the following:

    A) We must embrace the fact that leadership is people work.
    B) Must be able to lead across differences.(cultural fluency)
    C) You must love to nurture growth in people. (not just tolerate differences)
    D) Must be intentional about exploration and development of self and others.
    E) Must know your purpose.
    F) Must see yourself as an instrument that you can understand and design to be used best towards your purpse.

    4) My story: SNA’s call-to-action moment, or series of revelations that honed his purpose.
    #Diamond, you mention one a-ha moment of a workplace where you noticed people adopting the normative work culture to fit in - can you give me other examples that led you to your path?

  • Chapter 1: What Are You Working On?

    (Purpose Before Process)

    Thesis: The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process - to know your role as a leader by the impact you want to make. Purpose is the oxygen we need to enable contribution by anyone for anyone.


    1.1) Purpose Before Process
    What is Purpose? Purpose vs. accomplishment, (purpose never ends). What happens when leaders don’t have purpose? Why does Purpose come before process? The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process - to know your role as a leader by the impact you want to make. (purpose is not purpose without impact!)

    Designing backwards: what is missing in the world - what can I do? Reflective practice and prototyping mindset. Exploration of failure.
    Greta Thurnburg ex.
    1:15: Where do I begin?
    CASE STUDY STORY
    Where to play and how to win:


    1.1) Chapter intro, setting up the argument with a story) The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process. Purpose is the oxygen we need to enable contribution by anyone for anyone.

    1.2) The rutterless leader (what happens when we don’t have #purpose?)
    -When and how did you find your purpose?

    1.3) From Equity to Duty of Care: Not just for doctors and lawyers but everyone who is a leader, who has influence and whose actions affects the lives of others. The duty of care obligation goes beyond giving a damn, or caring about something, but thinking through the implications of a decision

    Questions for self-inquiry:
    What is unique about my profession?
    What is unique about me? Why have I chosen this path? Or Why has this path chosen me? How do I want to be experienced? What is my brand as an independent professional?


    #diamond: It can be easy to confuse achievement and purpose - would you say that a defining factor of purpose is that it is never done, while achievement has an end point? #diamond, Often when we check a box of accomplishments, we feel lost, and depressed, what next - do you think that purpose is actaully the most deeply gratifying ‘supreme’ engine fuel for this reason, because is it never done?

  • Chapter 2: Why Does Every Story Matter?

    Thesis:
    Our stories are how we construct three things: self, other, and task. If leadership is people work and we are seeking to nurture something in all our followers we must know their stories, to know them, and how to support them.

    **

    (Nelson Mandela story - “I refused to be imprisioned physically and mentally”)

    Our stories represent people and their names. If you were to ask me to tell you how I would describe an inclusive learning organization (impactful leader), I would say that it’s one in which everyone’s story matters – and I do mean everyone’s story. I use the term story deliberately. It’s not everyone’s issue. It’s not everyone’s problem. It’s not everyone’s agenda.
    Instead, it’s a story. In sum, it’s how we construct those three things: self, other, and task. Those three
    things are our stories.


    Section Topics:
    2.1) Leadership work is listening
    giving voice to, that includes being honest about your own story with yourself.

    2.2)Our stories are how we construct three things: self, other, and task. Those three things are our stories.

    2.3) Want to create impact we must know who and how we want to impact, we must ask.

    Questions for self-inquiry

  • Chapter 3: What’s the Invitation?

    Thesis:
    what is the invitation we are making, daily, as leaders?
    Pluralism: conditions in which people can make active contribution from the source and center of their being.
    What invitation for impact are you making?

    Moving from inspirational leadership to impactful leadership.

  • Chapter 4: How Do You Set the Table? (Inclusion by Design vs. Diversity by Default)

    the conditions for dialogue are just as important as the dialogue itself. How do we create psychological safety? How do we maintain a level of mindfulness about the distance and the difference between us? But how do we lower the possibility of this dialogue being less than constructive? Who needs to be in the room and who needs to leave?

    Know who your guests are going to be and how to welcome them.

    Section topics/ideas:

    4.1) Comfort Zones vs. Safe Spaces
    4.2) Amy Edmondson: Teaming vs. Teamwork. Getting to the learning zone via high safety and high accountability.

    (Story: Talking to the president of U of T David Naylor)

    Questions and Excersises:

  • Chapter 5: What’s Your M.O.?

    We need to understand that our intentions are not enough, we need to be patient, open, and engaging to earn trust and respect.

    Topics

    5.1) Understanding your stance. Stance is your behavioural footprint, the impression and feelings you leave someone with after an interaction. Intention does not always translate into stance.

    5.2) Developing our stance through self-observation and reflection.

    5.4) Empathy:from congnitive to behavioural

    5.4) Honing and refining our stance through feedback.Inviting everyone to co-author the story.

    Questions and exercises for Self-inquiry:

  • Chapter 6: How do we Get People to Commit to Courage?

    Thesis:
    Self as Instrument: Enabling courage in others

    Topics:

    Courage
    Cultural Fluency
    Excellence


    The ultimate leadership question! Terry Fox, “we inspire people by living out the courage we seek to inspire in them.”

    Inspiring confidence by displaying the courage we want to inspire in others.

    “I think that leaders need to see the “self as instrument;” that is, themselves as being the key instrument of practice in cultural fluency.

    Excellence enables impact. How do we show up with excellence?

  • Chapter 7 Designing for Tomorrow

    Leading for a more meaningful, engaged society means leaders must: 1) Embrace discomfort 2) Move beyond tolerance, raising the bar 3) Design from a place of love, not from guilt.

  • 1) The Credibility Crisis

    Leadership today is in a crisis of credibility. Across the globe, there seems to be a state of lament about the inability of leaders to create and deliver upon a meaningful, uniting purpose.
    (#Diamond: Why do you think that is? How and why are leaders failing to deliver?

    Is this promise deliverable - if we are all different, what is the meaningful uniting purpose - maybe this expectation is flawed?)

    Has there always been a credibility crisis and we are just demanding accountablity now? Are the new leadership models that have been coming out since the 80s and 90s reflective of the political shifts over this time?

    CONTEXT: The rise of populism on the national stage and narcissism at the organizational level is telling.(#Diamond: telling of what?)

    Whether it is explicit or not, there is a near universal yearning for individuals who can foster the necessary conditions under which citizens and organizational actors alike can leverage their true passions and strengths. (#Diamond - proof? Strikes and protests?)

  • 2) Reclaiming the Promise of Leadership

    In some ways, the way that leadership has come to be understood is itself problematic. For too many, it is a positional and hierarchical construct, thereby relegating it to an elite status in which most people find themselves as mere bystanders or worse yet, collateral damage. (#Diamond: do we want some historical context here of the western definitions of leadership and modern uses, when did leadership become a thing we studied and learned rather than bloodline, religious power or finanical power? #Diamond: Is this book in some ways de-colonizing leadership, by re-defining it as something everyone can do and be?)
    (from Power to People) or, it’s more important to heal than to solve.

  • 3) Leadership for Impact

    For those of us who are invested in reclaiming the promise that leadership has held over the ages, we recognize that tangible and meaningful reform is in order. This reform begins with a reframe of the relationship between follower and leader. While leaders are often clear on the ask of their followers, they rarely ask the question, what is being offered in return. I would argue that the most that leaders can ever offer their followers is the promise of impact through a collective endeavour. Such impact can only be had through real work… people work…
    At its very core, leadership work is people work… If we can’t love them, we can’t lead them. It’s not that we have to love everyone that we lead, but there must be something in those we lead that we love to see grow and develop.
    Impactful leadership is, in the words of Gianpiero Petriglieri, “about the courage, capacity, curiosity, and commitment to work with, learn from and give voice to the ‘other.’” So, how do we get to this place, internally? Meaningful leadership requires intentional exploration. Intentional about what? Leaders have to be intentional about development: our own, and that of those through whom we want to have impact. We also have to be intentional about exploration, specifically that of our own journey. We must be humble and courageous enough to look at what we carry with us. What experiences, challenges, obstacles, successes, and failures shape our worldview, biases and actions? Why is this intentional self-exploration necessary?
    Leaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what’s important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future).

  • 4) My Story

    What led you to your focus
    on equity, well-being, and
    achievement?
    One starting point was when I was working in
    organizational consulting. Early on in this context
    when I noticed many people, even leaders, felt that
    a part of themselves had to be hidden for them to
    be fully accepted in the organization. It was obvious

    to me but not to them. And when I would probe
    a little, I would uncover remarkable stories of
    resilience, incredible anecdotes of creative thinking,
    and unbelievable track records of accomplishment
    that they wouldn’t share. And so, for me the “aha”
    was that the environment or context within which
    people thrive is just as important as understanding
    what they do.

    That essentially led me to the beginnings of what
    I think of today as emancipatory leadership. It’s the
    idea that leaders do great things for themselves,
    their organizations, and their stakeholders. They do
    this not because they don’t have strong preferences
    or biases but in spite of these biases. This includes
    biases that they hold about themselves.
    Imagine how much more effective, impactful, and
    engaging leaders might be if three conditions were
    in effect. First, they have some self-awareness about
    their own strong preferences and biases. Second,
    they have tools or coaching to mitigate the impact
    of these strong preferences and biases. Third, they
    can help to create and sustain an organizational
    culture in which everyone feels free to bring their
    fuller selves to the endeavour.
    I feel deeply that society loses out on a lot when
    we self-censor, when we feel the need to extricate
    part of our experience, part of our learning, part
    of our values. Of course the intent is often noble.
    The intent is to fit in, to enable organizational
    alignment or whatever the case may be. Ultimately,
    the potential of the organization is not fully realized
    because a lot remains on the editing room floor.

  • 1.3) Duty of Care (from existing book document)

    Fundamentally, for me, leadership is being fully aware in every sensory form of this phenomenon that I call our “duty of care obligation.” So, when you hear the term “duty of care,” most of us think about regulated professions. Like medicine, like nursing, like police forces, like the law, like education, like boards of directors, engineering, and so on and so forth.
    I want to stretch that definition a little bit today, and I want to say to you that every leader has a duty of care obligation that is implicit in being a leader. Why do I say that? Fundamentally, leaders actually have to give a darn. They actually have to care. And the reason I say that is that leadership work is people work. If you can’t love ‘em, you can’t lead ‘em.
    And heck, it’s even more fundamental in this [client-oriented] profession. If you don’t fundamentally love people, you can’t be in meaningful service to people. And I just want to pause for a second and say to you that you don’t have to accept that everything, that you have to love every dimension and every aspect of what you see, and you experience, and you intuit in every human interaction.
    I am saying, though, that we actually have to love this notion of creating experiences where we meet people where they are, and that by the time we’re done with them as [leaders] we don’t leave them as we found them.
    And this idea of making small tweaks in their experience that lead to improvement in their health conditions, in their health outcomes, in their lives, in their happiness, in their joy, their fulfillment, in their aspirations coming one inch closer to reality – is what leadership is all about.
    Many a time, you have, I have, and we have seen instances where people do the bare minimum and just scrape by. And I mean that professionally. And I’d say to you, it’s exactly how we feel, which is like “Yeah that was OK.”
    But the question I have for you is, as we compete for hearts and minds, as we compete for people’s attention, I think of it as mind-share, heart-share, and wallet-share (let’s be real, because you are competing with others!). How do we actually craft an experience that speaks not only to our own duty of care obligation, but to our own strength?
    Let’s pause my lecture for a few minutes because I want you to think about this idea and say what is unique about being [a leader] in which my understanding of this notion of duty of care is bringing excellence to life on a daily basis, one interaction at a time, comes to be? So what’s unique about my profession?

    Two: What’s unique about me? Why have I chosen this path? Or some might say, why has this path chosen me? What is the linkage between the skill sets that I have and the experience, the slivers of excellence that I leave behind like exponential crumbs on the journey of professional development?
    What’s unique about my profession? What’s unique about me?
    And thirdly, ask this question: How do I want to be experienced? I’m not asking you how you want to be perceived; how are we wanting to be experienced? So much of the literature – both the popular literature and academic literature – is focused on this idea of the centrality of brand.
    What’s our brand as an organisation? What’s our brand as a collective? What’s our brand as a practice? What’s my brand as an independent professional?
    Ask those questions. “How do I create that brand?” I’ll give you about three minutes, a minute for each question, and then I will share with you some examples of how I have thought of this from working with and coaching executive and professionals such as yourselves. So take the time now. Thank you.
    [SLIDE 1]

    [5 Minutes]
    Welcome back. Hopefully that was only about three to five minutes and not longer.
    So tell me, how did it feel, to actually think about these questions of significance?
    You know, in my experience most of the time when we ask these questions of ourselves, they are kind of intuitive, but rather deep. And that’s the whole idea behind the exercise. So here’s my brain-buster of the day for you, and I hope I won’t lose you after what I say next:
    While we do not have to think about our thinking to think differently, we do have to think about our thinking to think differently in a specific way [raspberry sound].
    One more time.
    While we do not have to think about our thinking to think differently, we do indeed have to think about our thinking to think differently in a specific way. What do I mean by that?
    So, I can say to you “Be outstanding,” or “Be better than you’ve been,” and you could say “Fine, I can do that.”
    But if I say to you “You have to actually take your duty of care obligation and turn it into a superpower that you unleash on every client, in every situation that you professionally operate in,” that would require you to ask the question: “So what is my normative pattern of interactions: Am I mindful or mindless? Am I careful or careless? Am I meaningful, or, am I meaningless?”
    This is where I want to share with you a couple of examples of this. I remember, you know, being a student in a Midwestern school in the U.S. and I had to take a course in the summer so I could actually have the prerequisite for a course in the fall. So I went to the registrar’s office – back in the day actually walked into the registrar’s office and they would check the status of a course and they would let you know if you could get in or not – and the registrar said “Oh, you know I got some bad news for you, the course is full.”
    ”So I said, “OK, so who’s the professor?” They gave me the professor’s name and I looked up where his office was. And there I was, knocking at his door. Knock, knock [gesture]. He opens the door and I say “Sir, my name is Nouman Ashraf and I would like to take your course this summer and I need to take the course badly because I need it as a prerequisite for a fall course, and if I don’t take the fall course on time my graduation will be delayed.”
    And, this instructor looked at me – he wasn’t particularly emotional in his expressions – and said “You know what, the course is full; I’d like to help you, but I can’t.” And, he went back in and sat in his chair. So I pleaded with him and said “But sir, you got to understand, I need this course as a prerequisite for the course that I need to graduate in the fall.” He just looked at me and said “As I said, the course is full.”
    I was despondent, I turned around and was probably muttering some not-so-nice stuff under my breath. As I made my way down the hallway I noticed someone’s hand on my shoulder and it was the same professor who had come out of his office from around the back of his desk, walked down the hallway and caught up to me. I stood still. I turned around.
    He looked me dead in the eyes and said “Son, I’ve had seven other students before you come in and make the exact same request. If I said yes to you how would I feel about having said no to them?”
    And, I have to say to you folks, that in that interaction — where he was actually able to leave his office, physically walk down the hall, put his hand on my shoulder, and create that line of sight between our eyes, and explain himself – it made all the difference.
    To me, that was a meaningful interaction. Look, the outcome of that interaction was the same as him sitting behind his desk on his chair, leaning back and saying “Sorry, the course is full.”
    This time though, not only did I feel heard, but I also felt engaged. I felt that he had paid attention to my need. I felt that he paid attention to what it was that mattered to me. And the reason he wasn’t able to accommodate my request wasn’t personal, it wasn’t because of who I was or how I presented myself, it wasn’t because of whether I was his favourite or not, or whether I’d taken a previous course with him or not. It had everything to do with the fact that he had a constraint.
    And the idea, the phenomenon, the principle, that in fact bound his actions together, is an important one even for this professional realm [of leadership], which is procedural justice.
    How do we make sure, in all the interactions we have, that we are procedurally just?
    How do we make sure, that the ways in which we interact with one another, we don’t cut corners? But not just that, we don’t actually give unfair advantages to individuals, to hierarchies, to institutions, that in fact speak to our own strong preferences and bias?
    So I say this to you because it is really important that as you reflect on what is really important about your profession is that people are looking for you to add value in a specific way. And that is to interact with them with excellence.
    What’s unique about you, I hope, is that you have chosen this path of mindfulness. That it is an avenue for you to have impact. I have got to say that of all the words in the English language, the one that resonates with me [regarding] leadership, is impact. Impact is a definition of outcome. It’s a definition of how our efforts, our capacities, are channeled to create the kind of conditions under which we can say “Huh, I made a difference.”
    And, if you were to ask me what gratifies most of the people that I have had the privilege of coaching and teaching, it’s this sense of gratification: “Have I made a difference, through my efforts, through my capacity, through my leadership abilities in the lives of others?”

    • From Existing Book Document:

      So, how many of us have ever been in a situation where we’ve got a high-stress presentation to make? And I want to share with you an example of one that I had to make. So I was, back then, the Director of the Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office, and really in that role I had to do three things. I did policy, I did programs, and I did what I call “getting help,” or dealing with complaints.
      And we have a forum at the University of Toronto which is the most important forum in which we discuss ideas and initiatives. It’s called PDAD&C. Of course, its and acronym which stands for “Principals, Deans, Academic Directors and Chairs.”
      And the agenda on this thing is super-stacked. So you have the president of the university, you have the deans, you have the academic directors of the programs and the chairs of departments who come together usually about once a month in the academic calendar and what they do is talk about things that are happening and everyone else should be aware of.
      So, in my role as the Director of the Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office, we were just rolling out a policy. And this policy was about how we deal with situations around requests for time off, or for holidays, linked to faith or cultural holidays. Myself and a colleague of mine in Student Affairs, we developed policy, and as you know policy is all just kind of words on paper – or increasingly pixels on screens – which require the application of sound judgement for them to come to life.
      But they are also creatures of the centre, and as we have many faculties and divisions within the university, they get applied at the division level. So what’s important is that people understand – these principals, deans, academic directors and chairs – how to apply the policy. So what we had done is we had actually created a mini case study.
      So we were originally promised 15 minutes and we obviously got five, and it was the very end of the agenda. So instead of going through the role play, what I did was I asked three provocative questions to the audience. And I can tell you that because no one was expecting questions – they were expecting people to throw stuff at them, and I paused and I said “These are real question and I want to hear from you. How many of you have heard a situation where you’ve heard a complaint way past its best before date?” And I’d say to you that about two thirds of the hands went up.
      And I said, “Now how many of you wish they had someone to delegate this to, to make it go away?” And even more hands went up.
      And I said, “Now how many of you knew to call my office?” Maybe ten to 15 percent of the hands went up.
      So I said “Look, I have a real simple promise for you. I’m not going to spend your time or my time talking about this policy, but I’m going to say to you that policy requires the practicing of sound judgement or discernment for you as leaders and academic directors and chairs. And my role is to be a consigliere to you. My role is to be strategic counsel to you. Simply because you call me doesn’t mean that I actually have carriage of the situation. So here’s the situation. All I can do is give you one more perspective of how to deal with this. And the last thing I want to say to you is that I have a sorting feature in my email which is the following: Any email that has the word ‘lunch’ attached to it, I look at first, first thing in the morning.”
      And they all laughed and I said “You know how to get hold of me. Thank you very much.”
      And that was it.
      I thought I was able to use my time wisely to really get across to them that I’m not going to take this over for them. But there’s a resource that’s available to them and I closed off with a little bit of a humorous – but serious – invitation to get in touch with me.
      I thought it was pretty good. My VP at the time thought it was neat. And so what I did was, I actually lowered the temperature in the room by opening up by making my policy document relatable to them, and at the same time making the ante lower.
      The story doesn’t end here though. As I’m walking out of Governing Council Chambers I have a colleague — at that time she was Chief of Staff of the Office of the President – who runs after me and says “The president would like to speak to you about your presentation.”
      I said “Great… whenever.”
      She says, “How about at 2 o’clock this afternoon?”
      So president David Naylor, who was the new president of U of T at the time – I had not met him before. So I said “Sure.”
      So I showed up to his office and he said, “You know Nouman, I was impressed by your presentation. Tell me some of questions, or what are some of the issues you deal with?” And I want to give kudos to president Naylor because what he did was, he created a safe space for me to really open up to him about the kinds of challenges I see, that I was dealing with because many of the divisional leaders were afraid to raise questions about how we were dealing with concerns that they were not particularly skilled at dealing with.
      And it really took a level of vulnerability for them to reach out to officers and experts like me.
      So we went back and forth. One of the things that we did was we spoke about what some of the barriers were, that lead to that. And why is it important for them to understand that the university becomes the respondent in complaints.
      It was a very generative conversation. And I have to say to you that the way in which he led the conversation was another example of psychological safety. It was just he and I – he took his tie off, we were sitting across from each other, we were not sitting at his giant conference table, and we were sitting at the head of a table together, and were just having a collaborative discussion.
      And that model, that experience, has been etched in my mind as a great example of someone who had way more positional authority than myself, and how we was actually able to set his cap aside and just have a conversation with a colleague about a situation that effects both of us.
      So the key that I want to make here is that if you want to be an emancipatory leader you’ve got to understand that the conditions for dialogue are just as important as the dialogue itself.
      So how do we actually think about that practically? How do we enable the conditions? How do we maintain a level of mindfulness about the distance and the difference between us that may in fact be correlated to our position, could be in fact our gender, could be in fact the way we dress, could be in fact the way in which we present ourselves?
      And there’s never going to be a hundred percent success story. But how do we lower the possibility of this dialogue being less than constructive? And for me, the most important work in this area is done by a colleague and someone I admire a lot – her name is Amy Edmondson, at the Harvard Business School – and she has this wonderful idea that she calls “teaming.”
      Teaming, she says, is where you need to be in the zone which she calls the “learning zone.” Which actually, in addition to high psychological safety introduces another dimension, and that is high accountability.
      And now, when I think back to my conversation with president Naylor I can say to you not only do I feel psychologically safe but I also feel accountable. His questions were really about: “If the buck stops at the University of Toronto responding to a complaint by a member of our community, it also means that the presidents on the line. I’m on the line. The provost is on the line. The dean is on the line. The departmental chair is on the line.”
      So I didn’t feel the stakes were high in terms of what I could say but both his questions and his follow up questions and his follow up questions were indicative of the fact that this was not just a conversation for the sake of a conversation, it was something more important. Which actually means that in addition to creating a safe space into which people can bring their fullest perspective to bear on the question that we are having a discussion about, how do we make a connection to our roles.
      Now, I’d to harken onto an earlier chapter of the book that speaks about this duty of care obligation.
      The duty of care obligation goes beyond giving a damn, or caring about something, but thinking through the implications of a decision. And this is where I just want to say something that I think is important: Our comfort zone is a space where we do things recursively, repetitively – it’s a kind of place where we net out without thinking too much because we’ve had so much mastery in doing this.
      So creating psychological safety is to say “Let’s abandon the comfort zone and step into a safe space and, at the same time, not judge the other person’s idea.” And this is where I’m going to get a little technical: It’s not judgement that applied, but discernment.
      And you filter that and ask “How does this pertain to the purpose that we have for our organization?”
      Let me use an example from the university for instance. The purpose of the university is to create a confluence of conditions under which we are able to have an exchange of ideas that we can actually turn into innovative solutions to the big problems of the world. Well, that requires for us to have a common language to understand what’s OK and what’s not OK. And I think that that requires discernment. How do we locate that in the context of what we’re doing?
      The other thing that I want to say is a quote that I love from Roger Martin, former dean at the Rotman School. He said that “the status quo gets away with bloody murder.” And I think he’s dead on. The moment we think about any kind of change people say “How do we know that’s going to work?” Well, the question is, do we ask that question of the status quo itself? How do we know if the status quo is in fact working?
      And so we actually enable the status quo – and I would say “ennoble,” because we make it seem so noble – because we sometimes feel it has kind of been well thought-out and that it really is something that is working. And I think that that’s a challenge. One of the mentors that I have in my mind, around psychological safety, is that people should feel reasonably safe to say “You know, I don’t think our current way of thinking, doing, reflecting, being, is working.”
      And the only way we can find out if that is true or not is to speak to people outside of our normative sets. Our echo chambers. Our comfort zones. Look, fish don’t know they’re wet but that’s because they’re so subsumed in that environment.
      Lastly, I’d say to you, as I think about the idea of psychological safety and high accountability is to ask the question “Whose voice are we not hearing in this conversation? Whose perspectives are not heard in this discussion? Whose critique is not made available?”
      And I think, most of the time, this happens not because we’re not interested in that critique, or we are turning away that critique. There’s an old saying, “Why attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.” It’s literally our incompetence in figuring out who needs to be in the room.
      Peter Block, who is a community organizer and a scholar who asked this question: “Who needs to be in this room for something different to happen out there in the world?”
      We hear a lot about this around innovation, around thinking through emerging [paradigms… not audible], we think about this in education and healthcare. Which patients? Which students? Which communities need more representation? And I think instead of simply saying “Aha, we heed to have more diversity! Let’s just throw more people into a room, let’s create a committee, let’s create these processes,” I call this diversity by default.
      Or in a place where you have lots of diversity and you just try to “bring them all in.” I think we have to move beyond that.
      Diversity by default says that simply putting people of diverse experiences, backgrounds, and approaches together in a room will make a different outcome happen. So this about where we have to think of diversity as a necessary but insufficient condition for change to happen. For constructive change, positive change, meaningful change, that is in keeping with our sense of purpose, [we need a] different frame that I want to put out there.
      And that frame to me is inclusion by design.
      Inclusion by design is an idea which says – thinking back to the question of whose voice do we actually need to be in the room for something different to happen in the world – who are we and whom are we not listening to in this conversation?
      And I actually want to begin with the conversation of the people who are already in the room. Back to my earlier point. Are conditions adequate for people to feel that their voice matters? So what are some things that you could do to ensure that?
      So, if you’re the one who has the authority, or who has called the meeting, speak last. Going around, and asking everyone for their perspective, paraphrasing, and checking for accuracy, repeating certain things, and amplifying their impact, in particular if they are unpopular ideas or if they are coming from individuals who do not have currency within the organization.
      So start there to make sure what we have in the room is being optimized.
      Next, ask the question “How do we think about the composition of who is in the room?”
      And it’s quite simple by the way – we can game the system a little bit – by getting people who look different than us, sound different than us, speak different than us, but have the same way of thinking, and bring those people into the room.
      But that’s not what inclusion by design is. Inclusion by design pre-requires a genuine curiosity about what different perspectives and experiences can bring around enrichment, around not only our ideation and how to think about a phenomenon, but also our understanding of the experience.
      And this is key. Because fundamentally, the promise that we make as leaders is the experience that we want to deliver. People don’t care, actually, about what we proclaim. What they care about is their experience of us as leaders. And why I think it’s important for us to focus on the experience we leave people with is because, fundamentally, followership is a result of loyalty that we instantiate amongst our followers.
      What that means is that we actually have to demonstrate to them that we understand what their points of pain are, that we recognize our role in it, and that we demonstrate our ability and willingness to do something about that. And that’s all about experience.
      So what does that mean? That means that we have to fundamentally answer this question. Where do we spend the majority of our time? In the conference room of certainty? Or, in the clover fields of curiosity?
      And fundamentally, to me that’s asking this question: Look through our weekly calendars, our daily routines – if it’s just going from one mindless meeting to another, what’s the likelihood that we’re going to have different insights?
      How about we walk over, physically, or transit over, or drive over, or UBER over – you pick your metaphor – to where others live.
      Gary Hamel, who’s done a lot of work in innovation, always says this: “You want to be innovative? Go to where innovation lives.” And I think even there – if we go to where innovation lives – it’s not innovation actually. It’s more fundamental than that.
      Go to where different experiences happen. Different experiences.
      And there’s a couple of reasons for that. Neuroscientifically, is this idea that when our brain is in a new place, it’s wondering, it’s sense making, saying where am I, what am I doing here, what is my role here? A different part of our brain is being used. And when we ask simple questions different neural pathways are being triggered to answer the same questions. That’s the first advantage.
      (A scholar at Emory University, Gregory Burns, has a lovely book which speaks about this called The Iconoclast.)
      But fundamentally also, if we have a curiosity mindset, and we go into different places and different experiences we are likely closer to empathizing with the ones whom we are looking to substantiate loyalty with, and, to create followership from.
      And I think this is different from just cognitive acceptance of empathy as a phenomenon. But instead, this is what I think of as the behavioural footprint that leads to a deeper recognition of a role of empathy towards emancipatory leadership.
      But to me, it’s not simply about an agreement in principle, but thinking about who is in the meeting, who do we hear from within the meeting, how do we make that happen, how do we go outside of the confines of who’s there, ignoring this idea of diversity by default, and living out the values of inclusion by design, because at the end of the day what really matters is: Are we, hopefully, changing for the better the experiences of those who are looking to us as leaders to create the conditions under which “better” is not just probable, but is possible?

    • 1.3) Empathy story: Amina (From existing book document)

      There I am, I get off the plane in Houston and I’m parched. I am so thirsty. But I’m like, you what I’ll just get to my sister’s place, I’ll be fine, we’ll have a meal and something to drink. I didn’t want to keep them waiting. So I grab my carryon and meet them at the meetup point and I’m waiting and waiting and waiting – it’s about a half hour before they show up.
      And, my sister and my brother-in-law are just profusely apologetic. “I’m so sorry we made you wait. I have this assignment I’m working on,” and so on and so forth. No big deal.
      So we get in the car and we’re driving and talking. And, I have to say to you I was a little worried because it was raining and my brother-in-law who was clearly under a lot of pressure to get us home and is driving pretty fast. And, I’m sensing some discomfort but I’m just too polite to say anything. And then on top of that, I’m absolutely thirsty and I’ve got all of this salty stuff in my and I’m like “Oh my gosh” and then the worst possible thing that I can imagine happens.
      We’re on the freeway and a car spins out of control. It spins out of control and does like a complete 360 and then another 180 and then comes slamming to rest under the side of a bridge. And I’m just completely knocked over. I’m sitting in the back – so my brother-in-law’s driving, my sister is in the front passenger seat and I’m in the back of a two door family sedan. And while the hit was quite a jolt I have the feeling that it’s not over yet.
      So I look around and I look through the back rear view and I see this 18 wheeler truck completely and utterly out of control. It is jackknifed. It is slipping out of control. It is coming right at us. And this is like one of the worst possible scenarios, straight out of a Bruce Willis movie, let me tell you. Except that I am no Bruce Willis… In any case, there is an instinct that kicks in where I reach in and release the side of my sister’s seat and push her as far forward as possible. And within three seconds I feel the hit. And I literally mean a hit.
      The truck comes careening into us. It makes impact and the driver’s side rear, it absolutely crunches me and pins me between that side and what is a concrete barrier and I realize very quickly that the gas tank, which is in most imported cars on the driver’s side, is ruptured. And, I could smell gas, and I could actually feel dampness in the compartment.
      My brother-in-law, my sister, they’re both besides themselves. As am I. I’m in shock as well. And what happens is this:
      My brother-in-law is able to lower his window. He comes out from the side and he’s asking for help. And, these good Samaritans – I don’t know where they came from – they were able to find this huge rock from the shoulder of the freeway, and they were able to come to our assistance, to smash the windshield. I push my sister out and then I push myself out. And I have to say this to you: I had bought a brand new pair of shoes, Italian shoes, and one of those got left in the car, and I am still crestfallen about those shoes.
      In any case, I leave the car and there is a helicopter that lands and we are taken to Hermann Hospital in Houston Texas. And I have to say that I had this unbelievable desire. I’m so thirsty and I’m in so much pain. I just wanted a cup of water.
      But I can’t because the paramedics tell me “We can’t move you. We can’t give you anything to drink right now because it would just be against protocol.”
      I’m going to pause here for a second. At this point of the story all I can fixate on besides the safety of my relatives is my need to have some water. You know, many of our clients, many of the people who are under our care, who are the recipients of our duty of care obligation, who expect excellence from us, expect for us to intuit this need that they have.
      And I would say to you that as a healer, that‘s where you have to start. What is it that confounds them? What is it that in fact needs to be offered to them in ways that are meaningful to them that can make them whole again? That they can begin the process of recovery.
      And why is that important? Because if you are not dealing with a person in their fullest sense you are not actually dealing with the whole person.
      A few hours later I am in Hermann Hospital. There’s lots and lots of testing and that sort of stuff. And, I am visited by the surgeon the next morning. And he says to me, “Son, I thought we’d have to do surgery but we don’t. All of your fractures,” (I had multiple fractures in my pelvic region), “have stabilized, and you’re going to need lots and lots of help in rehab.”
      And then he tells me (I’m going to get a little graphic here; I apologize) that “But you’ve had severe trauma to that region so we’re going to have to put a catheter on you, and that’s the only way that you can actually do your business, if you know what I mean.”
      And, I’m just blown away by this: “What’s a catheter?”
      “Well it’s something we put inside of you to take the stuff inside of you to outside, and it’s not very comfortable. And we have to do it.”
      And I’m like “You know what, at this point of time just do what you’ve got to do because I am really feeling the pain and feeling all sort of blocked up and all that sort of stuff.”
      Why am I sharing this with you? Because the person who cath’ed me – I still remember her name – her name was Amina. Amina was a nurse, African American, proud, incredibly intelligent, beautify and gracious, but just the consummate person and she came to me and said “Look, the procedure we’re about to do is uncomfortable for me, but more important, it is very uncomfortable for you. Tell me what would make it easier for you to go through with this. I can explain to you the mechanics of what happens but I want you to tell me how you are feeling about the whole thing as we are doing this.
      “Would it be helpful for you to have a distraction or the TV on? Do you want me to play a song for you? Do you want to talk to somebody on the phone while we are doing this? All I want you to do is communicate openly with me while we are doing this.”
      And I have to say, her openness, her invitation to me — saying “Look, this is all about you. And if we’re going to do this right we’re going to do this in a way that feels right to you” – opened up a window in my mind around what excellence looks like in that setting.
      I say this to you because many a time, the knowledge that we have is so intuitive, so inbred, through experience and recursive practice, through our observation skills, through our inferences – all that sort of stuff – that we forget to take the step to explain to people that this is really about care to them, and service to them.
      Healing has to begin by us walking a mile in the other person’s shoes. And the key there, the gift there, the magic there, is empathy. That’s right, empathy.
      And most of us think about those situations and say “Huh, empathy, I haven’t thought of that. What is empathy, and how is that different from sympathy?”
      Well, sympathy – in my mind – is a passive process. When we feel bad for somebody we kind of have sympathy on them.
      Empathy is quite different. Empathy is an active process. Just as I mentioned earlier on, the metaphor is walking a mile in somebody else’s shoes.
      I’m going to pause for five minutes now, and I want you to recollect a moment, an experience, an episode, in which you have been a recipient of empathy, where someone has really empathised with you and that’s made a difference. And then ask yourself the question, “When have you, as a human-centred professional, engaged empathy as a superpower to bring healing?” Take five minutes. Welcome back. So, as we think about that experience in which we were empathised with, or, hopefully, and episode in which we were the enabler of empathy and the utilizer of empathy as a means of getting people to a better place. To a more giving place. What comes to mind?
      In my experience, we have to think about that metaphor almost quite literally: Walking a mile in someone else’s shoes. Maya Angelou referred to it as: “It’s your pain that I feel inside my body.”
      And I mean that quite literally. So, we don’t actually have to have the exact same experience as somebody else.
      But this relational intelligence, this ability to relate to somebody and their experience and to harken back in our mind’s memory – but also into our psychic memory – to a place of fear, to a place where we’ve felt neglected, or left out, or in severe trauma, can give us a sense of: “I know what that’s like. I know what that feels like. I know how that made me feel and how it created a sense of anxiety in me or perhaps a rationale for a choice offered to me and I needed comfort and healing.”
      If we use the metaphor literally, which is to walk a mile in somebody else’s shoes, it’s a reminder to all of us as healing professionals to take our shoes off first. Our boots off first. Our sandals off first. Our Crocs off first – whatever we wear. Why that’s important is that if we are situated in our own models and we attempt to actually empathise, I’d suggest to you that there are limits to how effective we can be. And the way to get beyond our normative limit is to take on a different mindset.
      So what mindset am I talking about? The mindset that I’m talking about is the beginner’s mindset. If you’ve ever seen a child taste something for the very first time, and they are in wonderment – they are like, “Hmm, do I like wasabi? Or do I find it too intense? Do I like the texture of it, the tartness of it, the flavour of it, the feeling of it?” – it allows us to really come into it, as they say in Latin, tabula rasa, “a clean slate.”
      I think every interaction we have with our clients mandates, if we are on a quest for excellence, that beginner mindset. As a great sensei once said, “In a beginner’s mindset, possibilities are almost infinite. And, in an expert mindset, possibilities are few.”
      Problem solving is often the expert mind set. Healing is a beginner mindset.
      Let me pause here for a second and say to you that I am not suggesting that taking on the role of a healer as a leader means that you can, in some way, park all of your knowledge or prior experience.
      On the contrary, what I am saying to you is that you must bring that discernment to bear on critical questions. The key thing is that you have to look at each interaction with a fresh set of eyes. With a sense of novelty.
      Georgia O’Keeffe, the artist, once said, “To look at something as if you are seeing it for the very first time takes an immense amount of courage.” And it does. And I’m saying this to you very sincerely, for us to be able to look at things and say “This may be, this week, my fifth client, or my fourth birth, or my fifth post-partem visit… but this is their very first time interacting with me after they’ve had a child. What does that mean? Not only to them but also for me?”
      Building on that question of how we actually take our boots off – our shoes off, our Crocs off, our sandals off – is this idea of reflexivity. Asking ourselves a question that when we actually are having a reaction to something, in an interaction, what’s triggering that? What am I reminded of? What doesn’t feel right or does feel right? And most of the time we’ve been trained to think that we have to park these feelings. But park them where?
      I’d say to you that this is where your duty of care obligation, my duty of care obligation, requires for us to engage our discernment and to think about ways in which not only we can bring our fullest selves to work but to work in our fullest selves.
      Not only so we can do the work better, but that we can do better quality work.

    • 5.3)

      It begins with adopting the beginner mindset.We must move away from expert to a mindset of a beginner, which is to say that every day I come in
      to a classroom, or a school or a district office eager to learn something new. This is what I refer to as the education leader’s stance. I believe that stance is about three things: how do I think about myself, how do I think about the other, and how do I think about the task at hand. I would advocate that the stance of an authentic emancipatory leader is one in which they see themselves as being the enablers of the progress of others within their realm of influence.

    • 5.4 Feedback

      Well, I would imagine that fish don’t know they’re wet. What I mean by that is, sometimes, incredibly well-meaning individuals, people who are in roles of responsibility, can’t see the shortcomings of their methodologies partly because they are so focused
      on their intent. The only way that we can break through this impasse is by actively seeking feedback on how we
      are making an impact on others. Now people may believe that actively seeking feedback is difficult and
      emotionally laborious. I beg to differ. I’ve developed a low-cost method of collecting feedback on a regular basis. At the end of each of my classes at Rotman, I ask my students to answer three questions on a sticky note: “What was the highlight for you?”, “What would you want more of?”, and “What would you change?”

    • Leaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what’s important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future).
      We need to prototype a new design of ourselves as leaders. Only then can leaders extend the invitation: if we can do this together, we can have meaningful impact.

    • The most important instrument that we have for engaging with, leveraging, and empowering diversity is our self #Diamond can you give me an example from your own life?

      Leaders need to move away from the
      notion of having a reference sheet or checklist where they can just check off boxes to feel that they are competent. Instead, I like the idea of cultural fluency, which builds on the metaphor of language. As we think about language, we think about the fact that we all speak the languages of people with whom we have attachment – our parents, our communities, our caregivers, whoever. So cultural fluency has to begin with an attachment to culture and understanding the power of culture.
      When we understand how culture influences us and others, and gain cultural skills through deeper
      dialogue and exploration, we move into the realm
      of cultural understanding. Then, through deliberate
      practice we develop cultural skill. The sweet spot or
      the intersection of this is cultural fluency. I think
      that leaders need to see the “self as instrument;”
      that is, themselves as being the key instrument of
      practice in cultural fluency.

      #Diamond: give me an example, elaborate: And, by the way, everyone has culture – everyone, everyone, everyone. It’s not just about the exotic. It’s about everyone.

    • Cultural fluency is a three-part process:

      1. It begins with cultural awareness. Culture is deeply impactful and it affects the way in which we see ourselves in the world. Most of the
        time the impact of culture is unconscious.#Diamond: Tell me a story!

      2. The next part is cultural understanding. Different people will have the exact same experiences but will process them differently. What I mean by this is “one size fits no one.” #Diamond: Tell me a story!

      3. Lastly, it’s about cultural skill which is the ability, the flexibility, the effortlessness that we need to navigate across various forms of being, seeing, and leading. The overlap between awareness, understanding, and skill is cultural fluency. #Diamond: Tell me a story!

      Intro

    • From existing book document

      There is one more thing I’d like to talk to you about. And that is this idea that in a lot of the leadership literature the focus is on the leader being a problem solver. And I think look – look, look, look – that there is enormous value, and tremendous impact, that can come through problem solving as leaders.
      But I want to suggest to you that there is another frame, in addition to problem solving, that is equally important, if not more important in certain times, and that is that of a leader as a healer.
      I had the privilege of consulting with a large consumer package goods company and there was a person who actually runs their innovation practice. And, she takes their high potential leaders and runs them through simulations and organizational games and case studies and lectures and interactive experiences, and the idea is that these people may become incredibly adept at making innovation come to life.
      So I was with her and I said to her, “Karen, what have you learned after a decade and a half of doing this work?”
      And she pause for a second, and only a second, and said that “It is more important to heal than simply to solve.”
      If you think about your role as a leader, your collective’s role, your organization’s role, it isn’t simply about problem solving (although that is important). It’s about: How do we heal as we do our work, and how does that healing reverberate in the experiences of our clients? How does that reverberate in to their families? How does that ripple out into their communities?
      And I say this to you because, fundamentally, the work of healing is the work of leadership.
      I want to pause for about five minutes and I want you to ask yourself these questions, please and thank you. Think of an instance where you were the recipient of healing, and think about a time or situation where you were an enabler of healing. I want you to break your thoughts down into three, concrete compartments. When you were the recipient of healing, how did that other person or persons make you feel, think, and behave? And when you think about yourself as a healer, how do you aspire to make people feel, think, and behave?

      QUESTIONS:
      Think of an instance where you were the recipient of healing or an enabler of healing. How did other people make you feel, think, and behave?
      When you think about yourself as a healer, how do you aspire to make people feel, think, and behave?

    • From existing book document:

      You know, we live in a time where there is a huge trust gap: between consumers and producers; between politicians and voters; between individuals who seek acts of leadership at the largest scales – at society, within corporations, you name it.
      But I want to change the focus of our conversation a little bit at the start and just say to you that in fact, to me, leadership isn’t just about the big stuff. It isn’t simply about the person in the front. It isn’t simply about the person pounding the podium trying to get your attention.
      Leadership is really about understanding: “How do we locate excellence in everything that we do, every single day?”
      And to me, by the way, there is an assumption built into that very idea. The idea is this. That we actually have to have the capacity to make decisions and choices.
      About who we are [as leaders]. And, how we think about [our organization]. And, how it connects to our own aspiration for leadership.
      Fundamentally, to me, leadership is about the capacity to bring excellence a lived-value.
      I’m going to pause for a second and ask you to think about this.
      When you’ve been in the presence of someone who has been truly excellent, what is unique about them? What’s been unique about that interaction that you had with that person? It may have been a health professional; it may have been a barista at a coffee bar; it may have been the person who drove you an Uber and asked you about your day, and asked if you wanted to do something about that tickle in your throat.
      It may have been a teacher that you had. A partner in life. Maybe your child. Maybe your grandparent. Maybe even the postal worker, who takes time to scale up the stairs, to come up to your apartment, and say “good morning” to you as they slip the mail into your mail box.
      And if you were to ask me what is common in all of them, it is this idea that they are focused on the experience that they leave you with. The famed novelist, in my mind a sense-maker of our time, the late, great Maya Angelou said the following. She said: “Oftentimes we don’t remember what people say to us, but we almost never forget who they made us feel.”
      And I think this fundamental attribute of thinking about feelings as we contribute to people’s days is central to your excellence and to your leadership.
      Why do I say this?
      Dan Goldman, who teaches emotional intelligence at Harvard University, in the psychology department, says the following: “It is not only that feelings matter; feelings are what mattering is all about.”
      Think about this for a minute. Be reflective.
      What are those moments that you show up – either postpartum, prenatal, or during labor – when you have the most impact? When you walk away after a long four, or six, or eight hour shift, and you say “My goodness, I feel like I could do that again.”
      Something transpired that is almost magical between you, the client, their family, the others in the situation, and, most importantly, your sense of self. That’s right, I mean your sense of self.

    • From Existing Book Document:

      Confucius once said “By three means you acquire wisdom: First, by reflection, which is the noblest; second, by imitation, which is the easiest; and third, by experience, which is the bitterest.”
      Now while he wasn’t the graduate of any executive leadership program that we know of, I think he knew a thing or two about wisdom.
      When we think about this statement, let’s go in reverse order. When you think about this idea of experience being the bitterest form of getting to wisdom, I think he’s right. While we have successes in our experience, we quickly gravitate towards examples and instances of failure in our lives – personally and professionally. And that’s his point and neuroscience backs that up (#missingreference). The brain’s ability to access memories of failure is far quicker than its ability to access memories of pleasure and success.
      Imitation being the easiest form of getting to wisdom. And this is one where I really have an issue with many of the books on leadership that we find out there on the market. You read about great actors, and military leaders, and presidential actors, and CEOs, and athletes, and so on and so forth; In the moment, all of these stories seem quite inspirational.
      But when it comes to the real work of leadership, which is to manifest our vision within an organizational context, when we have to give feedback to that underperforming employee, none of these great examples are necessarily meaningful to us. (#Diamond Really? Can failure not give us insight and empathy about others, in this case the underperformer - that can help us communicate?)
      So in the moment they’re kind of helpful, but not particularly malleable.
      On the question of reflection being the noblest means of getting to wisdom, this is consistently an experience that I have seen in the work that I have done as an executive coach, as a thinking partner for CEOs and members of boards, executive directors across sectors. Some of the most effective ones that I’ve worked with understand that not only do they need time, but they also need to make space for reflection. And this book, this idea, of emancipatory leadership, is really to focus in on a much needed creative and generative space that enables us to not only to lead, but to lead with impact in mind.
      Impact on the ones we are asking followership from. But also impact from ones we don’t even know, who we are not even aware are looking to us for leadership across society.
      The premise of this book is simple and yet profound. That leaders do great things for themselves and their organizations, and their stakeholders by extension, not because they do not have strong preferences and biases, but despite them. Imagine how much more actualized, impactful, and effective they might be if they knew what some of these biases and unconscious strong preferences were that were holding them back… and, in fact, were leading to people not taking them seriously, or were just enabling their ability to get access to real insight.
      This is a journey about more than just self-exploration but about self-actualization: Welcome to it.

    {"cards":[{"_id":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960269,"position":1,"parentId":null,"content":"##Book Summary\n\nLeadership today is in a crisis of credibility. Across the globe, there seems to be a state of lament about the inability of leaders to create and deliver upon a meaningful, uniting purpose. The rise of populism on the national stage and narcissism at the organizational level is telling. Whether it is explicit or not, there is a near universal yearning for individuals who can foster the necessary conditions under which citizens and organizational actors alike can leverage their true passions and strengths. In some ways, the way that leadership has come to be understood is itself problematic. For too many, it is a positional and hierarchical construct, thereby relegating it to an elite status in which most people find themselves as mere bystanders or worse yet, collateral damage. \n \nFor those of us who are invested in reclaiming the promise that leadership has held over the ages, we recognize that tangible and meaningful reform is in order. This reform begins with a reframe of the relationship between follower and leader. While leaders are often clear on the ask of their followers, they rarely ask the question, what is being offered in return. I would argue that the most that leaders can ever offer their followers is the promise of impact through a collective endeavour. Such impact can only be had through real work… people work…\n\nAt its very core, leadership work is people work… If we can’t love them, we can’t lead them. It's not that we have to love everyone that we lead, but there must be something in those we lead that we love to see grow and develop. \n \nImpactful leadership is, in the words of Gianpiero Petriglieri, \"about the courage, capacity, curiosity, and commitment to work with, learn from and give voice to the 'other.'” So, how do we get to this place, internally? Meaningful leadership requires intentional exploration. Intentional about what? Leaders have to be intentional about development: our own, and that of those through whom we want to have impact. We also have to be intentional about exploration, specifically that of our own journey. We must be humble and courageous enough to look at what we carry with us. What experiences, challenges, obstacles, successes, and failures shape our worldview, biases and actions? Why is this intentional self-exploration necessary? \n \nLeaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what's important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future).\n \nWe need to prototype a new design of ourselves as leaders. Only then can leaders extend the invitation: if we can do this together, we can have meaningful impact. \n \n"},{"_id":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960239,"position":1.5,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Introduction: \n\n1) The Credibility Crisis. Leadership is in a crisis of credibility which needs to be (healed, not solved? healing brutal colonial legacy?) in order to reclaim the promise of meaningful, uniting purpose. \n\n2) Reclaiming the promise of leadership: \nWhere did our ideas of and definitions of leadership come from and why it is critical that they be reclaimed and redefined? #diamond: what's at stake here?! \n\nEffective leadership is of necessity equity-based leadership.\n\n\n3) Leadership for Impact \n\nFrom inspiration to impact - asking more of our leaders and ourselves.\n\nPetrilglieri Quote: Courage, curiosity, Capacity and Committment to give voice to the other. \n\nWhere we could go with a new model for leadership? (A hope for the future?)\n\nRedefining Leadership for impact means the following:\n\nA) We must embrace the fact that leadership is people work. \nB) Must be able to lead across differences.(cultural fluency)\nC) You must love to nurture growth in people. (not just tolerate differences)\nD) Must be intentional about exploration and development of self and others.\nE) Must know your purpose.\nF) Must see yourself as an instrument that you can understand and design to be used best towards your purpse. \n\n4) My story: SNA's call-to-action moment, or series of revelations that honed his purpose. \n#Diamond, you mention one a-ha moment of a workplace where you noticed people adopting the normative work culture to fit in - can you give me other examples that led you to your path? \n\n \n\n"},{"_id":"5104b83eb07d9fb16000001e","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19962064,"position":1,"parentId":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","content":"##1) The Credibility Crisis\n\nLeadership today is in a crisis of credibility. Across the globe, there seems to be a state of lament about the inability of leaders to create and deliver upon a meaningful, uniting purpose. \n(#Diamond: Why do you think that is? How and why are leaders failing to deliver? \n\nIs this promise deliverable - if we are all different, what is the meaningful uniting purpose - maybe this expectation is flawed?) \n\nHas there always been a credibility crisis and we are just demanding accountablity now? Are the new leadership models that have been coming out since the 80s and 90s reflective of the political shifts over this time? \n\n\n CONTEXT: The rise of populism on the national stage and narcissism at the organizational level is telling.(#Diamond: telling of what?) \n\nWhether it is explicit or not, there is a near universal yearning for individuals who can foster the necessary conditions under which citizens and organizational actors alike can leverage their true passions and strengths. (#Diamond - proof? Strikes and protests?) \n\n "},{"_id":"50eb4423484858210d000033","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19947384,"position":1,"parentId":"5104b83eb07d9fb16000001e","content":"##Resources:\n\nhttps://www.forbes.com/sites/chrispearse/2018/11/07/5-reasons-why-leadership-is-in-crisis/#3647b4363aca\n\n5 reasons for credibility crisis:\nThey focus on outcomes instead of causes \nThey believe organisations to be machines \nThey fail to see beyond their egos \nThey lack self-awareness\nThey venerate activity\n\nhttps://ideas.bkconnection.com/new-leadership-paradigm-the-real-difference-between-traditional-and-progressive-models-of-leadership\nHistoric context: directive or command-and-control leadership—which has roots in the industrial revolution.used control, coercion, dominance and consistency. \n \n\n \n"},{"_id":"51043341b07d9fb160000020","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955041,"position":2,"parentId":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","content":"##2) Reclaiming the Promise of Leadership \n\nIn some ways, the way that leadership has come to be understood is itself problematic. For too many, it is a positional and hierarchical construct, thereby relegating it to an elite status in which most people find themselves as mere bystanders or worse yet, collateral damage. (#Diamond: do we want some historical context here of the western definitions of leadership and modern uses, when did leadership become a thing we studied and learned rather than bloodline, religious power or finanical power? #Diamond: Is this book in some ways de-colonizing leadership, by re-defining it as something everyone can do and be?) \n(from Power to People) or, it's more important to heal than to solve.\n"},{"_id":"50f79081484858210d00002f","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19939067,"position":1,"parentId":"51043341b07d9fb160000020","content":"##From existing book document\n\nThere is one more thing I’d like to talk to you about. And that is this idea that in a lot of the leadership literature the focus is on the leader being a problem solver. And I think look – look, look, look – that there is enormous value, and tremendous impact, that can come through problem solving as leaders. \nBut I want to suggest to you that there is another frame, in addition to problem solving, that is equally important, if not more important in certain times, and that is that of a leader as a healer.\nI had the privilege of consulting with a large consumer package goods company and there was a person who actually runs their innovation practice. And, she takes their high potential leaders and runs them through simulations and organizational games and case studies and lectures and interactive experiences, and the idea is that these people may become incredibly adept at making innovation come to life.\nSo I was with her and I said to her, “Karen, what have you learned after a decade and a half of doing this work?” \nAnd she pause for a second, and only a second, and said that “It is more important to heal than simply to solve.”\nIf you think about your role as a leader, your collective’s role, your organization’s role, it isn’t simply about problem solving (although that is important). It’s about: How do we heal as we do our work, and how does that healing reverberate in the experiences of our clients? How does that reverberate in to their families? How does that ripple out into their communities?\nAnd I say this to you because, fundamentally, the work of healing is the work of leadership.\nI want to pause for about five minutes and I want you to ask yourself these questions, please and thank you. Think of an instance where you were the recipient of healing, and think about a time or situation where you were an enabler of healing. I want you to break your thoughts down into three, concrete compartments. When you were the recipient of healing, how did that other person or persons make you feel, think, and behave? And when you think about yourself as a healer, how do you aspire to make people feel, think, and behave? \n\nQUESTIONS:\nThink of an instance where you were the recipient of healing or an enabler of healing. How did other people make you feel, think, and behave?\nWhen you think about yourself as a healer, how do you aspire to make people feel, think, and behave?\n"},{"_id":"51042203b07d9fb160000021","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19932456,"position":3,"parentId":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","content":"##3) Leadership for Impact\n\nFor those of us who are invested in reclaiming the promise that leadership has held over the ages, we recognize that tangible and meaningful reform is in order. This reform begins with a reframe of the relationship between follower and leader. While leaders are often clear on the ask of their followers, they rarely ask the question, what is being offered in return. I would argue that the most that leaders can ever offer their followers is the promise of impact through a collective endeavour. Such impact can only be had through real work… people work…\nAt its very core, leadership work is people work… If we can’t love them, we can’t lead them. It’s not that we have to love everyone that we lead, but there must be something in those we lead that we love to see grow and develop.\nImpactful leadership is, in the words of Gianpiero Petriglieri, “about the courage, capacity, curiosity, and commitment to work with, learn from and give voice to the ‘other.’” So, how do we get to this place, internally? Meaningful leadership requires intentional exploration. Intentional about what? Leaders have to be intentional about development: our own, and that of those through whom we want to have impact. We also have to be intentional about exploration, specifically that of our own journey. We must be humble and courageous enough to look at what we carry with us. What experiences, challenges, obstacles, successes, and failures shape our worldview, biases and actions? Why is this intentional self-exploration necessary?\nLeaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what’s important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future). "},{"_id":"50f7f1af484858210d00002d","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19938990,"position":0.5,"parentId":"51042203b07d9fb160000021","content":"##From existing book document: \n\nYou know, we live in a time where there is a huge trust gap: between consumers and producers; between politicians and voters; between individuals who seek acts of leadership at the largest scales – at society, within corporations, you name it. \nBut I want to change the focus of our conversation a little bit at the start and just say to you that in fact, to me, leadership isn’t just about the big stuff. It isn’t simply about the person in the front. It isn’t simply about the person pounding the podium trying to get your attention.\nLeadership is really about understanding: “How do we locate excellence in everything that we do, every single day?”\nAnd to me, by the way, there is an assumption built into that very idea. The idea is this. That we actually have to have the capacity to make decisions and choices. \nAbout who we are [as leaders]. And, how we think about [our organization]. And, how it connects to our own aspiration for leadership.\nFundamentally, to me, leadership is about the capacity to bring excellence a lived-value. \nI’m going to pause for a second and ask you to think about this.\nWhen you’ve been in the presence of someone who has been truly excellent, what is unique about them? What’s been unique about that interaction that you had with that person? It may have been a health professional; it may have been a barista at a coffee bar; it may have been the person who drove you an Uber and asked you about your day, and asked if you wanted to do something about that tickle in your throat.\nIt may have been a teacher that you had. A partner in life. Maybe your child. Maybe your grandparent. Maybe even the postal worker, who takes time to scale up the stairs, to come up to your apartment, and say “good morning” to you as they slip the mail into your mail box.\nAnd if you were to ask me what is common in all of them, it is this idea that they are focused on the experience that they leave you with. The famed novelist, in my mind a sense-maker of our time, the late, great Maya Angelou said the following. She said: “Oftentimes we don’t remember what people say to us, but we almost never forget who they made us feel.”\nAnd I think this fundamental attribute of thinking about feelings as we contribute to people’s days is central to your excellence and to your leadership. \nWhy do I say this? \nDan Goldman, who teaches emotional intelligence at Harvard University, in the psychology department, says the following: “It is not only that feelings matter; feelings are what mattering is all about.”\n Think about this for a minute. Be reflective.\nWhat are those moments that you show up – either postpartum, prenatal, or during labor – when you have the most impact? When you walk away after a long four, or six, or eight hour shift, and you say “My goodness, I feel like I could do that again.”\nSomething transpired that is almost magical between you, the client, their family, the others in the situation, and, most importantly, your sense of self. That’s right, I mean your sense of self.\n"},{"_id":"50fa0476484858210d00002b","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19938163,"position":1,"parentId":"51042203b07d9fb160000021","content":"##From Existing Book Document:\n\nConfucius once said “By three means you acquire wisdom: First, by reflection, which is the noblest; second, by imitation, which is the easiest; and third, by experience, which is the bitterest.”\nNow while he wasn’t the graduate of any executive leadership program that we know of, I think he knew a thing or two about wisdom.\nWhen we think about this statement, let’s go in reverse order. When you think about this idea of experience being the bitterest form of getting to wisdom, I think he’s right. While we have successes in our experience, we quickly gravitate towards examples and instances of failure in our lives – personally and professionally. And that’s his point and neuroscience backs that up (#missingreference). The brain’s ability to access memories of failure is far quicker than its ability to access memories of pleasure and success. \nImitation being the easiest form of getting to wisdom. And this is one where I really have an issue with many of the books on leadership that we find out there on the market. You read about great actors, and military leaders, and presidential actors, and CEOs, and athletes, and so on and so forth; In the moment, all of these stories seem quite inspirational. \nBut when it comes to the real work of leadership, which is to manifest our vision within an organizational context, when we have to give feedback to that underperforming employee, none of these great examples are necessarily meaningful to us. (#Diamond Really? Can failure not give us insight and empathy about others, in this case the underperformer - that can help us communicate?) \nSo in the moment they’re kind of helpful, but not particularly malleable. \nOn the question of reflection being the noblest means of getting to wisdom, this is consistently an experience that I have seen in the work that I have done as an executive coach, as a thinking partner for CEOs and members of boards, executive directors across sectors. Some of the most effective ones that I’ve worked with understand that not only do they need time, but they also need to make space for reflection. And this book, this idea, of emancipatory leadership, is really to focus in on a much needed creative and generative space that enables us to not only to lead, but to lead with impact in mind. \nImpact on the ones we are asking followership from. But also impact from ones we don’t even know, who we are not even aware are looking to us for leadership across society. \nThe premise of this book is simple and yet profound. That leaders do great things for themselves and their organizations, and their stakeholders by extension, not because they do not have strong preferences and biases, but despite them. Imagine how much more actualized, impactful, and effective they might be if they knew what some of these biases and unconscious strong preferences were that were holding them back… and, in fact, were leading to people not taking them seriously, or were just enabling their ability to get access to real insight.\nThis is a journey about more than just self-exploration but about self-actualization: Welcome to it."},{"_id":"51041c34b07d9fb160000022","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19976363,"position":4,"parentId":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","content":"##4) My Story\n\nWhat led you to your focus\non equity, well-being, and\nachievement?\nOne starting point was when I was working in\norganizational consulting. Early on in this context\nwhen I noticed many people, even leaders, felt that\na part of themselves had to be hidden for them to\nbe fully accepted in the organization. It was obvious\n\nto me but not to them. And when I would probe\na little, I would uncover remarkable stories of\nresilience, incredible anecdotes of creative thinking,\nand unbelievable track records of accomplishment\nthat they wouldn’t share. And so, for me the “aha”\nwas that the environment or context within which\npeople thrive is just as important as understanding\nwhat they do.\n\nThat essentially led me to the beginnings of what\nI think of today as emancipatory leadership. It’s the\nidea that leaders do great things for themselves,\ntheir organizations, and their stakeholders. They do\nthis not because they don’t have strong preferences\nor biases but in spite of these biases. This includes\nbiases that they hold about themselves.\nImagine how much more effective, impactful, and\nengaging leaders might be if three conditions were\nin effect. First, they have some self-awareness about\ntheir own strong preferences and biases. Second,\nthey have tools or coaching to mitigate the impact\nof these strong preferences and biases. Third, they\ncan help to create and sustain an organizational\nculture in which everyone feels free to bring their\nfuller selves to the endeavour.\nI feel deeply that society loses out on a lot when\nwe self-censor, when we feel the need to extricate\npart of our experience, part of our learning, part\nof our values. Of course the intent is often noble.\nThe intent is to fit in, to enable organizational\nalignment or whatever the case may be. Ultimately,\nthe potential of the organization is not fully realized\nbecause a lot remains on the editing room floor.\n\n"},{"_id":"50dcc7c0484858210d000039","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955029,"position":5,"parentId":"5104ba46b07d9fb16000001d","content":""},{"_id":"510419b3b07d9fb160000023","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19975978,"position":9,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 1: What Are You Working On? \n\n(Purpose Before Process)\n\nThesis: The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process - to know your role as a leader by the impact you want to make. Purpose is the oxygen we need to enable contribution by anyone for anyone.\n___________________________\n \n1.1) Purpose Before Process\nWhat is Purpose? Purpose vs. accomplishment, (purpose never ends). What happens when leaders don’t have purpose? Why does Purpose come before process? The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process - to know your role as a leader by the impact you want to make. (purpose is not purpose without impact!) \n\nDesigning backwards: what is missing in the world - what can I do? Reflective practice and prototyping mindset. Exploration of failure. \nGreta Thurnburg ex. \n1:15: Where do I begin? \n**CASE STUDY STORY **\nWhere to play and how to win: \n______________________________\n\n1.1) Chapter intro, setting up the argument with a story) The key to enabling impact is to put purpose before process. Purpose is the oxygen we need to enable contribution by anyone for anyone.\n\n1.2) The rutterless leader (what happens when we don't have #purpose?) \n-When and how did you find your purpose? \n\n1.3) From Equity to Duty of Care: Not just for doctors and lawyers but everyone who is a leader, who has influence and whose actions affects the lives of others. The duty of care obligation goes beyond giving a damn, or caring about something, but thinking through the implications of a decision\n\nQuestions for self-inquiry:\nWhat is unique about my profession?\nWhat is unique about me? Why have I chosen this path? Or Why has this path chosen me? How do I want to be experienced? What is my brand as an independent professional? \n\n____________________________\n\n#diamond: It can be easy to confuse achievement and purpose - would you say that a defining factor of purpose is that it is never done, while achievement has an end point? #diamond, Often when we check a box of accomplishments, we feel lost, and depressed, what next - do you think that purpose is actaully the most deeply gratifying 'supreme' engine fuel for this reason, because is it never done? "},{"_id":"50f79d36484858210d00002e","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19939097,"position":1,"parentId":"510419b3b07d9fb160000023","content":"##1.3) Duty of Care (from existing book document) \n\nFundamentally, for me, leadership is being fully aware in every sensory form of this phenomenon that I call our “duty of care obligation.” So, when you hear the term “duty of care,” most of us think about regulated professions. Like medicine, like nursing, like police forces, like the law, like education, like boards of directors, engineering, and so on and so forth. \nI want to stretch that definition a little bit today, and I want to say to you that every leader has a duty of care obligation that is implicit in being a leader. Why do I say that? Fundamentally, leaders actually have to give a darn. They actually have to care. And the reason I say that is that leadership work is people work. If you can’t love ‘em, you can’t lead ‘em. \nAnd heck, it’s even more fundamental in this [client-oriented] profession. If you don’t fundamentally love people, you can’t be in meaningful service to people. And I just want to pause for a second and say to you that you don’t have to accept that everything, that you have to love every dimension and every aspect of what you see, and you experience, and you intuit in every human interaction.\nI am saying, though, that we actually have to love this notion of creating experiences where we meet people where they are, and that by the time we’re done with them as [leaders] we don’t leave them as we found them. \nAnd this idea of making small tweaks in their experience that lead to improvement in their health conditions, in their health outcomes, in their lives, in their happiness, in their joy, their fulfillment, in their aspirations coming one inch closer to reality – is what leadership is all about.\nMany a time, you have, I have, and we have seen instances where people do the bare minimum and just scrape by. And I mean that professionally. And I’d say to you, it’s exactly how we feel, which is like “Yeah that was OK.” \nBut the question I have for you is, as we compete for hearts and minds, as we compete for people’s attention, I think of it as mind-share, heart-share, and wallet-share (let’s be real, because you are competing with others!). How do we actually craft an experience that speaks not only to our own duty of care obligation, but to our own strength? \nLet’s pause my lecture for a few minutes because I want you to think about this idea and say what is unique about being [a leader] in which my understanding of this notion of duty of care is bringing excellence to life on a daily basis, one interaction at a time, comes to be? So what’s unique about my profession?\n\nTwo: What’s unique about me? Why have I chosen this path? Or some might say, why has this path chosen me? What is the linkage between the skill sets that I have and the experience, the slivers of excellence that I leave behind like exponential crumbs on the journey of professional development?\nWhat’s unique about my profession? What’s unique about me? \nAnd thirdly, ask this question: How do I want to be experienced? I’m not asking you how you want to be perceived; how are we wanting to be experienced? So much of the literature – both the popular literature and academic literature – is focused on this idea of the centrality of brand. \nWhat’s our brand as an organisation? What’s our brand as a collective? What’s our brand as a practice? What’s my brand as an independent professional?\nAsk those questions. “How do I create that brand?” I’ll give you about three minutes, a minute for each question, and then I will share with you some examples of how I have thought of this from working with and coaching executive and professionals such as yourselves. So take the time now. Thank you.\n[SLIDE 1]\n\n\n [5 Minutes]\nWelcome back. Hopefully that was only about three to five minutes and not longer.\nSo tell me, how did it feel, to actually think about these questions of significance?\nYou know, in my experience most of the time when we ask these questions of ourselves, they are kind of intuitive, but rather deep. And that’s the whole idea behind the exercise. So here’s my brain-buster of the day for you, and I hope I won’t lose you after what I say next:\nWhile we do not have to think about our thinking to think differently, we do have to think about our thinking to think differently in a specific way [raspberry sound]. \nOne more time.\nWhile we do not have to think about our thinking to think differently, we do indeed have to think about our thinking to think differently in a specific way. What do I mean by that?\nSo, I can say to you “Be outstanding,” or “Be better than you’ve been,” and you could say “Fine, I can do that.”\nBut if I say to you “You have to actually take your duty of care obligation and turn it into a superpower that you unleash on every client, in every situation that you professionally operate in,” that would require you to ask the question: “So what is my normative pattern of interactions: Am I mindful or mindless? Am I careful or careless? Am I meaningful, or, am I meaningless?”\nThis is where I want to share with you a couple of examples of this. I remember, you know, being a student in a Midwestern school in the U.S. and I had to take a course in the summer so I could actually have the prerequisite for a course in the fall. So I went to the registrar’s office – back in the day actually walked into the registrar’s office and they would check the status of a course and they would let you know if you could get in or not – and the registrar said “Oh, you know I got some bad news for you, the course is full.”\n”So I said, “OK, so who’s the professor?” They gave me the professor’s name and I looked up where his office was. And there I was, knocking at his door. Knock, knock [gesture]. He opens the door and I say “Sir, my name is Nouman Ashraf and I would like to take your course this summer and I need to take the course badly because I need it as a prerequisite for a fall course, and if I don’t take the fall course on time my graduation will be delayed.”\nAnd, this instructor looked at me – he wasn’t particularly emotional in his expressions – and said “You know what, the course is full; I’d like to help you, but I can’t.” And, he went back in and sat in his chair. So I pleaded with him and said “But sir, you got to understand, I need this course as a prerequisite for the course that I need to graduate in the fall.” He just looked at me and said “As I said, the course is full.”\nI was despondent, I turned around and was probably muttering some not-so-nice stuff under my breath. As I made my way down the hallway I noticed someone’s hand on my shoulder and it was the same professor who had come out of his office from around the back of his desk, walked down the hallway and caught up to me. I stood still. I turned around.\nHe looked me dead in the eyes and said “Son, I’ve had seven other students before you come in and make the exact same request. If I said yes to you how would I feel about having said no to them?”\nAnd, I have to say to you folks, that in that interaction -- where he was actually able to leave his office, physically walk down the hall, put his hand on my shoulder, and create that line of sight between our eyes, and explain himself – it made all the difference. \nTo me, that was a meaningful interaction. Look, the outcome of that interaction was the same as him sitting behind his desk on his chair, leaning back and saying “Sorry, the course is full.”\nThis time though, not only did I feel heard, but I also felt engaged. I felt that he had paid attention to my need. I felt that he paid attention to what it was that mattered to me. And the reason he wasn’t able to accommodate my request wasn’t personal, it wasn’t because of who I was or how I presented myself, it wasn’t because of whether I was his favourite or not, or whether I’d taken a previous course with him or not. It had everything to do with the fact that he had a constraint. \nAnd the idea, the phenomenon, the principle, that in fact bound his actions together, is an important one even for this professional realm [of leadership], which is procedural justice.\nHow do we make sure, in all the interactions we have, that we are procedurally just?\nHow do we make sure, that the ways in which we interact with one another, we don’t cut corners? But not just that, we don’t actually give unfair advantages to individuals, to hierarchies, to institutions, that in fact speak to our own strong preferences and bias?\nSo I say this to you because it is really important that as you reflect on what is really important about your profession is that people are looking for you to add value in a specific way. And that is to interact with them with excellence.\nWhat’s unique about you, I hope, is that you have chosen this path of mindfulness. That it is an avenue for you to have impact. I have got to say that of all the words in the English language, the one that resonates with me [regarding] leadership, is impact. Impact is a definition of outcome. It’s a definition of how our efforts, our capacities, are channeled to create the kind of conditions under which we can say “Huh, I made a difference.”\n And, if you were to ask me what gratifies most of the people that I have had the privilege of coaching and teaching, it’s this sense of gratification: “Have I made a difference, through my efforts, through my capacity, through my leadership abilities in the lives of others?”\n"},{"_id":"51041187b07d9fb160000025","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19975977,"position":10,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 2: Why Does Every Story Matter? \n\nThesis: \nOur stories are how we construct three things: self, other, and task. If leadership is people work and we are seeking to nurture something in all our followers we must know their stories, to know them, and how to support them. \n \n**\n\n(Nelson Mandela story - \"I refused to be imprisioned physically and mentally\")\n\nOur stories represent people and their names. If you were to ask me to tell you how I would describe an inclusive learning organization (impactful leader), I would say that it’s one in which everyone’s story matters – and I do mean everyone’s story. I use the term story deliberately. It’s not everyone’s issue. It’s not everyone’s problem. It’s not everyone’s agenda.\nInstead, it’s a story. In sum, it’s how we construct those three things: self, other, and task. Those three\nthings are our stories.\n \n___________________________________\n\nSection Topics: \n2.1) Leadership work is listening \ngiving voice to, that includes being honest about your own story with yourself.\n\n2.2)Our stories are how we construct three things: self, other, and task. Those three things are our stories.\n\n2.3) Want to create impact we must know who and how we want to impact, we must ask. \n\nQuestions for self-inquiry"},{"_id":"51041074b07d9fb160000026","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960298,"position":11,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 3: What's the Invitation? \n\nThesis:\nwhat is the invitation we are making, daily, as leaders? \nPluralism: conditions in which people can make active contribution from the source and center of their being.\nWhat invitation for impact are you making?\n\nMoving from inspirational leadership to impactful leadership."},{"_id":"51040f9cb07d9fb160000027","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955096,"position":12,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 4: How Do You Set the Table? (Inclusion by Design vs. Diversity by Default) \n\nthe conditions for dialogue are just as important as the dialogue itself. How do we create psychological safety? How do we maintain a level of mindfulness about the distance and the difference between us? But how do we lower the possibility of this dialogue being less than constructive? Who needs to be in the room and who needs to leave? \n\nKnow who your guests are going to be and how to welcome them.\n\nSection topics/ideas:\n\n4.1) Comfort Zones vs. Safe Spaces\n4.2) Amy Edmondson: Teaming vs. Teamwork. Getting to the learning zone via high safety and high accountability. \n\n(Story: Talking to the president of U of T David Naylor)\n \nQuestions and Excersises: \n\n"},{"_id":"50f90249484858210d00002c","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960329,"position":1,"parentId":"51040f9cb07d9fb160000027","content":"##From Existing Book Document:\nSo, how many of us have ever been in a situation where we’ve got a high-stress presentation to make? And I want to share with you an example of one that I had to make. So I was, back then, the Director of the Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office, and really in that role I had to do three things. I did policy, I did programs, and I did what I call “getting help,” or dealing with complaints.\nAnd we have a forum at the University of Toronto which is the most important forum in which we discuss ideas and initiatives. It’s called PDAD&C. Of course, its and acronym which stands for “Principals, Deans, Academic Directors and Chairs.” \nAnd the agenda on this thing is super-stacked. So you have the president of the university, you have the deans, you have the academic directors of the programs and the chairs of departments who come together usually about once a month in the academic calendar and what they do is talk about things that are happening and everyone else should be aware of.\nSo, in my role as the Director of the Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office, we were just rolling out a policy. And this policy was about how we deal with situations around requests for time off, or for holidays, linked to faith or cultural holidays. Myself and a colleague of mine in Student Affairs, we developed policy, and as you know policy is all just kind of words on paper – or increasingly pixels on screens – which require the application of sound judgement for them to come to life.\nBut they are also creatures of the centre, and as we have many faculties and divisions within the university, they get applied at the division level. So what’s important is that people understand – these principals, deans, academic directors and chairs – how to apply the policy. So what we had done is we had actually created a mini case study. \nSo we were originally promised 15 minutes and we obviously got five, and it was the very end of the agenda. So instead of going through the role play, what I did was I asked three provocative questions to the audience. And I can tell you that because no one was expecting questions – they were expecting people to throw stuff at them, and I paused and I said “These are real question and I want to hear from you. How many of you have heard a situation where you’ve heard a complaint way past its best before date?” And I’d say to you that about two thirds of the hands went up. \nAnd I said, “Now how many of you wish they had someone to delegate this to, to make it go away?” And even more hands went up.\nAnd I said, “Now how many of you knew to call my office?” Maybe ten to 15 percent of the hands went up. \nSo I said “Look, I have a real simple promise for you. I’m not going to spend your time or my time talking about this policy, but I’m going to say to you that policy requires the practicing of sound judgement or discernment for you as leaders and academic directors and chairs. And my role is to be a consigliere to you. My role is to be strategic counsel to you. Simply because you call me doesn’t mean that I actually have carriage of the situation. So here’s the situation. All I can do is give you one more perspective of how to deal with this. And the last thing I want to say to you is that I have a sorting feature in my email which is the following: Any email that has the word ‘lunch’ attached to it, I look at first, first thing in the morning.” \nAnd they all laughed and I said “You know how to get hold of me. Thank you very much.”\nAnd that was it. \nI thought I was able to use my time wisely to really get across to them that I’m not going to take this over for them. But there’s a resource that’s available to them and I closed off with a little bit of a humorous – but serious – invitation to get in touch with me.\nI thought it was pretty good. My VP at the time thought it was neat. And so what I did was, I actually lowered the temperature in the room by opening up by making my policy document relatable to them, and at the same time making the ante lower.\nThe story doesn’t end here though. As I’m walking out of Governing Council Chambers I have a colleague -- at that time she was Chief of Staff of the Office of the President – who runs after me and says “The president would like to speak to you about your presentation.”\nI said “Great… whenever.”\nShe says, “How about at 2 o’clock this afternoon?”\nSo president David Naylor, who was the new president of U of T at the time – I had not met him before. So I said “Sure.”\nSo I showed up to his office and he said, “You know Nouman, I was impressed by your presentation. Tell me some of questions, or what are some of the issues you deal with?” And I want to give kudos to president Naylor because what he did was, he created a safe space for me to really open up to him about the kinds of challenges I see, that I was dealing with because many of the divisional leaders were afraid to raise questions about how we were dealing with concerns that they were not particularly skilled at dealing with.\nAnd it really took a level of vulnerability for them to reach out to officers and experts like me. \nSo we went back and forth. One of the things that we did was we spoke about what some of the barriers were, that lead to that. And why is it important for them to understand that the university becomes the respondent in complaints. \nIt was a very generative conversation. And I have to say to you that the way in which he led the conversation was another example of psychological safety. It was just he and I – he took his tie off, we were sitting across from each other, we were not sitting at his giant conference table, and we were sitting at the head of a table together, and were just having a collaborative discussion.\nAnd that model, that experience, has been etched in my mind as a great example of someone who had way more positional authority than myself, and how we was actually able to set his cap aside and just have a conversation with a colleague about a situation that effects both of us. \nSo the key that I want to make here is that if you want to be an emancipatory leader you’ve got to understand that the conditions for dialogue are just as important as the dialogue itself. \nSo how do we actually think about that practically? How do we enable the conditions? How do we maintain a level of mindfulness about the distance and the difference between us that may in fact be correlated to our position, could be in fact our gender, could be in fact the way we dress, could be in fact the way in which we present ourselves? \nAnd there’s never going to be a hundred percent success story. But how do we lower the possibility of this dialogue being less than constructive? And for me, the most important work in this area is done by a colleague and someone I admire a lot – her name is Amy Edmondson, at the Harvard Business School – and she has this wonderful idea that she calls “teaming.”\nTeaming, she says, is where you need to be in the zone which she calls the “learning zone.” Which actually, in addition to high psychological safety introduces another dimension, and that is high accountability.\nAnd now, when I think back to my conversation with president Naylor I can say to you not only do I feel psychologically safe but I also feel accountable. His questions were really about: “If the buck stops at the University of Toronto responding to a complaint by a member of our community, it also means that the presidents on the line. I’m on the line. The provost is on the line. The dean is on the line. The departmental chair is on the line.”\nSo I didn’t feel the stakes were high in terms of what I could say but both his questions and his follow up questions and his follow up questions were indicative of the fact that this was not just a conversation for the sake of a conversation, it was something more important. Which actually means that in addition to creating a safe space into which people can bring their fullest perspective to bear on the question that we are having a discussion about, how do we make a connection to our roles.\nNow, I’d to harken onto an earlier chapter of the book that speaks about this duty of care obligation.\nThe duty of care obligation goes beyond giving a damn, or caring about something, but thinking through the implications of a decision. And this is where I just want to say something that I think is important: Our comfort zone is a space where we do things recursively, repetitively – it’s a kind of place where we net out without thinking too much because we’ve had so much mastery in doing this. \nSo creating psychological safety is to say “Let’s abandon the comfort zone and step into a safe space and, at the same time, not judge the other person’s idea.” And this is where I’m going to get a little technical: It’s not judgement that applied, but discernment.\nAnd you filter that and ask “How does this pertain to the purpose that we have for our organization?”\nLet me use an example from the university for instance. The purpose of the university is to create a confluence of conditions under which we are able to have an exchange of ideas that we can actually turn into innovative solutions to the big problems of the world. Well, that requires for us to have a common language to understand what’s OK and what’s not OK. And I think that that requires discernment. How do we locate that in the context of what we’re doing?\nThe other thing that I want to say is a quote that I love from Roger Martin, former dean at the Rotman School. He said that “the status quo gets away with bloody murder.” And I think he’s dead on. The moment we think about any kind of change people say “How do we know that’s going to work?” Well, the question is, do we ask that question of the status quo itself? How do we know if the status quo is in fact working?\nAnd so we actually enable the status quo – and I would say “ennoble,” because we make it seem so noble – because we sometimes feel it has kind of been well thought-out and that it really is something that is working. And I think that that’s a challenge. One of the mentors that I have in my mind, around psychological safety, is that people should feel reasonably safe to say “You know, I don’t think our current way of thinking, doing, reflecting, being, is working.”\nAnd the only way we can find out if that is true or not is to speak to people outside of our normative sets. Our echo chambers. Our comfort zones. Look, fish don’t know they’re wet but that’s because they’re so subsumed in that environment. \nLastly, I’d say to you, as I think about the idea of psychological safety and high accountability is to ask the question “Whose voice are we not hearing in this conversation? Whose perspectives are not heard in this discussion? Whose critique is not made available?”\nAnd I think, most of the time, this happens not because we’re not interested in that critique, or we are turning away that critique. There’s an old saying, “Why attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.” It’s literally our incompetence in figuring out who needs to be in the room. \nPeter Block, who is a community organizer and a scholar who asked this question: “Who needs to be in this room for something different to happen out there in the world?”\nWe hear a lot about this around innovation, around thinking through emerging [paradigms… not audible], we think about this in education and healthcare. Which patients? Which students? Which communities need more representation? And I think instead of simply saying “Aha, we heed to have more diversity! Let’s just throw more people into a room, let’s create a committee, let’s create these processes,” I call this diversity by default. \nOr in a place where you have lots of diversity and you just try to “bring them all in.” I think we have to move beyond that. \nDiversity by default says that simply putting people of diverse experiences, backgrounds, and approaches together in a room will make a different outcome happen. So this about where we have to think of diversity as a necessary but insufficient condition for change to happen. For constructive change, positive change, meaningful change, that is in keeping with our sense of purpose, [we need a] different frame that I want to put out there.\nAnd that frame to me is inclusion by design.\nInclusion by design is an idea which says – thinking back to the question of whose voice do we actually need to be in the room for something different to happen in the world – who are we and whom are we not listening to in this conversation?\nAnd I actually want to begin with the conversation of the people who are already in the room. Back to my earlier point. Are conditions adequate for people to feel that their voice matters? So what are some things that you could do to ensure that? \nSo, if you’re the one who has the authority, or who has called the meeting, speak last. Going around, and asking everyone for their perspective, paraphrasing, and checking for accuracy, repeating certain things, and amplifying their impact, in particular if they are unpopular ideas or if they are coming from individuals who do not have currency within the organization. \nSo start there to make sure what we have in the room is being optimized.\nNext, ask the question “How do we think about the composition of who is in the room?”\nAnd it’s quite simple by the way – we can game the system a little bit – by getting people who look different than us, sound different than us, speak different than us, but have the same way of thinking, and bring those people into the room. \nBut that’s not what inclusion by design is. Inclusion by design pre-requires a genuine curiosity about what different perspectives and experiences can bring around enrichment, around not only our ideation and how to think about a phenomenon, but also our understanding of the experience. \nAnd this is key. Because fundamentally, the promise that we make as leaders is the experience that we want to deliver. People don’t care, actually, about what we proclaim. What they care about is their experience of us as leaders. And why I think it’s important for us to focus on the experience we leave people with is because, fundamentally, followership is a result of loyalty that we instantiate amongst our followers. \nWhat that means is that we actually have to demonstrate to them that we understand what their points of pain are, that we recognize our role in it, and that we demonstrate our ability and willingness to do something about that. And that’s all about experience.\nSo what does that mean? That means that we have to fundamentally answer this question. Where do we spend the majority of our time? In the conference room of certainty? Or, in the clover fields of curiosity?\nAnd fundamentally, to me that’s asking this question: Look through our weekly calendars, our daily routines – if it’s just going from one mindless meeting to another, what’s the likelihood that we’re going to have different insights?\nHow about we walk over, physically, or transit over, or drive over, or UBER over – you pick your metaphor – to where others live. \nGary Hamel, who’s done a lot of work in innovation, always says this: “You want to be innovative? Go to where innovation lives.” And I think even there – if we go to where innovation lives – it’s not innovation actually. It’s more fundamental than that. \nGo to where different experiences happen. Different experiences.\nAnd there’s a couple of reasons for that. Neuroscientifically, is this idea that when our brain is in a new place, it’s wondering, it’s sense making, saying where am I, what am I doing here, what is my role here? A different part of our brain is being used. And when we ask simple questions different neural pathways are being triggered to answer the same questions. That’s the first advantage. \n(A scholar at Emory University, Gregory Burns, has a lovely book which speaks about this called The Iconoclast.)\nBut fundamentally also, if we have a curiosity mindset, and we go into different places and different experiences we are likely closer to empathizing with the ones whom we are looking to substantiate loyalty with, and, to create followership from.\nAnd I think this is different from just cognitive acceptance of empathy as a phenomenon. But instead, this is what I think of as the behavioural footprint that leads to a deeper recognition of a role of empathy towards emancipatory leadership.\nBut to me, it’s not simply about an agreement in principle, but thinking about who is in the meeting, who do we hear from within the meeting, how do we make that happen, how do we go outside of the confines of who’s there, ignoring this idea of diversity by default, and living out the values of inclusion by design, because at the end of the day what really matters is: Are we, hopefully, changing for the better the experiences of those who are looking to us as leaders to create the conditions under which “better” is not just probable, but is possible?\n"},{"_id":"50f7819b484858210d000030","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19939095,"position":2,"parentId":"51040f9cb07d9fb160000027","content":"##1.3) Empathy story: Amina (From existing book document)\n\nThere I am, I get off the plane in Houston and I’m parched. I am so thirsty. But I’m like, you what I’ll just get to my sister’s place, I’ll be fine, we’ll have a meal and something to drink. I didn’t want to keep them waiting. So I grab my carryon and meet them at the meetup point and I’m waiting and waiting and waiting – it’s about a half hour before they show up. \nAnd, my sister and my brother-in-law are just profusely apologetic. “I’m so sorry we made you wait. I have this assignment I’m working on,” and so on and so forth. No big deal. \nSo we get in the car and we’re driving and talking. And, I have to say to you I was a little worried because it was raining and my brother-in-law who was clearly under a lot of pressure to get us home and is driving pretty fast. And, I’m sensing some discomfort but I’m just too polite to say anything. And then on top of that, I’m absolutely thirsty and I’ve got all of this salty stuff in my and I’m like “Oh my gosh” and then the worst possible thing that I can imagine happens. \nWe’re on the freeway and a car spins out of control. It spins out of control and does like a complete 360 and then another 180 and then comes slamming to rest under the side of a bridge. And I’m just completely knocked over. I’m sitting in the back – so my brother-in-law’s driving, my sister is in the front passenger seat and I’m in the back of a two door family sedan. And while the hit was quite a jolt I have the feeling that it’s not over yet.\nSo I look around and I look through the back rear view and I see this 18 wheeler truck completely and utterly out of control. It is jackknifed. It is slipping out of control. It is coming right at us. And this is like one of the worst possible scenarios, straight out of a Bruce Willis movie, let me tell you. Except that I am no Bruce Willis… In any case, there is an instinct that kicks in where I reach in and release the side of my sister’s seat and push her as far forward as possible. And within three seconds I feel the hit. And I literally mean a hit. \nThe truck comes careening into us. It makes impact and the driver’s side rear, it absolutely crunches me and pins me between that side and what is a concrete barrier and I realize very quickly that the gas tank, which is in most imported cars on the driver’s side, is ruptured. And, I could smell gas, and I could actually feel dampness in the compartment.\nMy brother-in-law, my sister, they’re both besides themselves. As am I. I’m in shock as well. And what happens is this: \nMy brother-in-law is able to lower his window. He comes out from the side and he’s asking for help. And, these good Samaritans – I don’t know where they came from – they were able to find this huge rock from the shoulder of the freeway, and they were able to come to our assistance, to smash the windshield. I push my sister out and then I push myself out. And I have to say this to you: I had bought a brand new pair of shoes, Italian shoes, and one of those got left in the car, and I am still crestfallen about those shoes.\nIn any case, I leave the car and there is a helicopter that lands and we are taken to Hermann Hospital in Houston Texas. And I have to say that I had this unbelievable desire. I’m so thirsty and I’m in so much pain. I just wanted a cup of water. \nBut I can’t because the paramedics tell me “We can’t move you. We can’t give you anything to drink right now because it would just be against protocol.”\nI’m going to pause here for a second. At this point of the story all I can fixate on besides the safety of my relatives is my need to have some water. You know, many of our clients, many of the people who are under our care, who are the recipients of our duty of care obligation, who expect excellence from us, expect for us to intuit this need that they have.\nAnd I would say to you that as a healer, that‘s where you have to start. What is it that confounds them? What is it that in fact needs to be offered to them in ways that are meaningful to them that can make them whole again? That they can begin the process of recovery. \nAnd why is that important? Because if you are not dealing with a person in their fullest sense you are not actually dealing with the whole person.\nA few hours later I am in Hermann Hospital. There’s lots and lots of testing and that sort of stuff. And, I am visited by the surgeon the next morning. And he says to me, “Son, I thought we’d have to do surgery but we don’t. All of your fractures,” (I had multiple fractures in my pelvic region), “have stabilized, and you’re going to need lots and lots of help in rehab.”\nAnd then he tells me (I’m going to get a little graphic here; I apologize) that “But you’ve had severe trauma to that region so we’re going to have to put a catheter on you, and that’s the only way that you can actually do your business, if you know what I mean.”\nAnd, I’m just blown away by this: “What’s a catheter?”\n“Well it’s something we put inside of you to take the stuff inside of you to outside, and it’s not very comfortable. And we have to do it.”\nAnd I’m like “You know what, at this point of time just do what you’ve got to do because I am really feeling the pain and feeling all sort of blocked up and all that sort of stuff.”\nWhy am I sharing this with you? Because the person who cath’ed me – I still remember her name – her name was Amina. Amina was a nurse, African American, proud, incredibly intelligent, beautify and gracious, but just the consummate person and she came to me and said “Look, the procedure we’re about to do is uncomfortable for me, but more important, it is very uncomfortable for you. Tell me what would make it easier for you to go through with this. I can explain to you the mechanics of what happens but I want you to tell me how you are feeling about the whole thing as we are doing this.\n“Would it be helpful for you to have a distraction or the TV on? Do you want me to play a song for you? Do you want to talk to somebody on the phone while we are doing this? All I want you to do is communicate openly with me while we are doing this.”\nAnd I have to say, her openness, her invitation to me -- saying “Look, this is all about you. And if we’re going to do this right we’re going to do this in a way that feels right to you” – opened up a window in my mind around what excellence looks like in that setting.\nI say this to you because many a time, the knowledge that we have is so intuitive, so inbred, through experience and recursive practice, through our observation skills, through our inferences – all that sort of stuff – that we forget to take the step to explain to people that this is really about care to them, and service to them.\nHealing has to begin by us walking a mile in the other person’s shoes. And the key there, the gift there, the magic there, is empathy. That’s right, empathy.\nAnd most of us think about those situations and say “Huh, empathy, I haven’t thought of that. What is empathy, and how is that different from sympathy?”\nWell, sympathy – in my mind – is a passive process. When we feel bad for somebody we kind of have sympathy on them.\nEmpathy is quite different. Empathy is an active process. Just as I mentioned earlier on, the metaphor is walking a mile in somebody else’s shoes. \nI’m going to pause for five minutes now, and I want you to recollect a moment, an experience, an episode, in which you have been a recipient of empathy, where someone has really empathised with you and that’s made a difference. And then ask yourself the question, “When have you, as a human-centred professional, engaged empathy as a superpower to bring healing?” Take five minutes. Welcome back. So, as we think about that experience in which we were empathised with, or, hopefully, and episode in which we were the enabler of empathy and the utilizer of empathy as a means of getting people to a better place. To a more giving place. What comes to mind?\nIn my experience, we have to think about that metaphor almost quite literally: Walking a mile in someone else’s shoes. Maya Angelou referred to it as: “It’s your pain that I feel inside my body.”\nAnd I mean that quite literally. So, we don’t actually have to have the exact same experience as somebody else. \nBut this relational intelligence, this ability to relate to somebody and their experience and to harken back in our mind’s memory – but also into our psychic memory – to a place of fear, to a place where we’ve felt neglected, or left out, or in severe trauma, can give us a sense of: “I know what that’s like. I know what that feels like. I know how that made me feel and how it created a sense of anxiety in me or perhaps a rationale for a choice offered to me and I needed comfort and healing.”\nIf we use the metaphor literally, which is to walk a mile in somebody else’s shoes, it’s a reminder to all of us as healing professionals to take our shoes off first. Our boots off first. Our sandals off first. Our Crocs off first – whatever we wear. Why that’s important is that if we are situated in our own models and we attempt to actually empathise, I’d suggest to you that there are limits to how effective we can be. And the way to get beyond our normative limit is to take on a different mindset. \nSo what mindset am I talking about? The mindset that I’m talking about is the beginner’s mindset. If you’ve ever seen a child taste something for the very first time, and they are in wonderment – they are like, “Hmm, do I like wasabi? Or do I find it too intense? Do I like the texture of it, the tartness of it, the flavour of it, the feeling of it?” – it allows us to really come into it, as they say in Latin, tabula rasa, “a clean slate.”\nI think every interaction we have with our clients mandates, if we are on a quest for excellence, that beginner mindset. As a great sensei once said, “In a beginner’s mindset, possibilities are almost infinite. And, in an expert mindset, possibilities are few.” \nProblem solving is often the expert mind set. Healing is a beginner mindset. \nLet me pause here for a second and say to you that I am not suggesting that taking on the role of a healer as a leader means that you can, in some way, park all of your knowledge or prior experience. \nOn the contrary, what I am saying to you is that you must bring that discernment to bear on critical questions. The key thing is that you have to look at each interaction with a fresh set of eyes. With a sense of novelty.\nGeorgia O’Keeffe, the artist, once said, “To look at something as if you are seeing it for the very first time takes an immense amount of courage.” And it does. And I’m saying this to you very sincerely, for us to be able to look at things and say “This may be, this week, my fifth client, or my fourth birth, or my fifth post-partem visit… but this is their very first time interacting with me after they’ve had a child. What does that mean? Not only to them but also for me?”\nBuilding on that question of how we actually take our boots off – our shoes off, our Crocs off, our sandals off – is this idea of reflexivity. Asking ourselves a question that when we actually are having a reaction to something, in an interaction, what’s triggering that? What am I reminded of? What doesn’t feel right or does feel right? And most of the time we’ve been trained to think that we have to park these feelings. But park them where? \nI’d say to you that this is where your duty of care obligation, my duty of care obligation, requires for us to engage our discernment and to think about ways in which not only we can bring our fullest selves to work but to work in our fullest selves. \nNot only so we can do the work better, but that we can do better quality work.\n "},{"_id":"51040ed9b07d9fb160000028","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960327,"position":13,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 5: What's Your M.O.? \n\nWe need to understand that our intentions are not enough, we need to be patient, open, and engaging to earn trust and respect.\n\nTopics\n\n5.1) Understanding your stance. Stance is your behavioural footprint, the impression and feelings you leave someone with after an interaction. Intention does not always translate into stance. \n\n5.2) Developing our stance through self-observation and reflection.\n\n\n\n 5.4) Empathy:from congnitive to behavioural \n\n5.4) Honing and refining our stance through feedback.Inviting everyone to co-author the story.\n \n\n Questions and exercises for Self-inquiry: \n\n "},{"_id":"50dca3c3484858210d00003b","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955082,"position":1,"parentId":"51040ed9b07d9fb160000028","content":"##5.3) \nIt begins with adopting the beginner mindset.We must move away from expert to a mindset of a beginner, which is to say that every day I come in\nto a classroom, or a school or a district office eager to learn something new. This is what I refer to as the education leader’s stance. I believe that stance is about three things: how do I think about myself, how do I think about the other, and how do I think about the task at hand. I would advocate that the stance of an authentic emancipatory leader is one in which they see themselves as being the enablers of the progress of others within their realm of influence."},{"_id":"50dc43f1484858210d00003c","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955208,"position":2,"parentId":"51040ed9b07d9fb160000028","content":"##5.4 Feedback\n\nWell, I would imagine that fish don’t know they’re wet. What I mean by that is, sometimes, incredibly well-meaning individuals, people who are in roles of responsibility, can’t see the shortcomings of their methodologies partly because they are so focused\non their intent. The only way that we can break through this impasse is by actively seeking feedback on how we\nare making an impact on others. Now people may believe that actively seeking feedback is difficult and\nemotionally laborious. I beg to differ. I’ve developed a low-cost method of collecting feedback on a regular basis. At the end of each of my classes at Rotman, I ask my students to answer three questions on a sticky note: “What was the highlight for you?”, “What would you want more of?”, and “What would you change?”\n"},{"_id":"51040e06b07d9fb160000029","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19960330,"position":14,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 6: How do we Get People to Commit to Courage?\n\nThesis: \nSelf as Instrument: Enabling courage in others\n\nTopics:\n\nCourage\nCultural Fluency\nExcellence\n_________________________________\n\nThe ultimate leadership question! Terry Fox, \"we inspire people by living out the courage we seek to inspire in them.\" \n\nInspiring confidence by displaying the courage we want to inspire in others. \n\n\"I think that leaders need to see the “self as instrument;” that is, themselves as being the key instrument of practice in cultural fluency.\n\n\n\nExcellence enables impact. How do we show up with excellence?\n"},{"_id":"50fa3b57484858210d00002a","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19954955,"position":1,"parentId":"51040e06b07d9fb160000029","content":"Leaders understand that the most important instrument that they have for having impact is themselves. If you think about an instrument, what’s important is the way that the person who is holding it, uses it, leverages it, and gets the best out of it. How do we get the best out of ourselves and others? Part of this is asking the question: how do we design our future selves? (not just plan for our future).\nWe need to prototype a new design of ourselves as leaders. Only then can leaders extend the invitation: if we can do this together, we can have meaningful impact."},{"_id":"50dd106d484858210d000036","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955057,"position":2,"parentId":"51040e06b07d9fb160000029","content":"The most important instrument that we have for engaging with, leveraging, and empowering diversity is our self #Diamond can you give me an example from your own life?\n\nLeaders need to move away from the\nnotion of having a reference sheet or checklist where they can just check off boxes to feel that they are competent. Instead, I like the idea of cultural fluency, which builds on the metaphor of language. As we think about language, we think about the fact that we all speak the languages of people with whom we have attachment – our parents, our communities, our caregivers, whoever. So cultural fluency has to begin with an attachment to culture and understanding the power of culture.\nWhen we understand how culture influences us and others, and gain cultural skills through deeper\ndialogue and exploration, we move into the realm\nof cultural understanding. Then, through deliberate\npractice we develop cultural skill. The sweet spot or\nthe intersection of this is cultural fluency. I think\nthat leaders need to see the “self as instrument;”\nthat is, themselves as being the key instrument of\npractice in cultural fluency.\n\n#Diamond: give me an example, elaborate: And, by the way, everyone has culture – everyone, everyone, everyone. It’s not just about the exotic. It’s about everyone.\n"},{"_id":"50dcb2bf484858210d00003a","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19955170,"position":3,"parentId":"51040e06b07d9fb160000029","content":"Cultural fluency is a three-part process:\n1. It begins with cultural awareness. Culture is deeply impactful and it affects the way in which we see ourselves in the world. Most of the\ntime the impact of culture is unconscious.#Diamond: Tell me a story!\n\n2. The next part is cultural understanding. Different people will have the exact same experiences but will process them differently. What I mean by this is “one size fits no one.” #Diamond: Tell me a story!\n\n3. Lastly, it’s about cultural skill which is the ability, the flexibility, the effortlessness that we need to navigate across various forms of being, seeing, and leading. The overlap between awareness, understanding, and skill is cultural fluency. #Diamond: Tell me a story!\n\nIntro \n\n"},{"_id":"51040cbdb07d9fb16000002a","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19941189,"position":15,"parentId":"5104e727b07d9fb160000013","content":"##Chapter 7 Designing for Tomorrow \n\nLeading for a more meaningful, engaged society means leaders must: 1) Embrace discomfort 2) Move beyond tolerance, raising the bar 3) Design from a place of love, not from guilt."},{"_id":"50eaa4f4484858210d000034","treeId":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","seq":19962833,"position":2,"parentId":null,"content":"#Diamond:\n\n#Diamond: How do you inspire minds of those who don't want to give up power in the old definition, and how do you convince those who don't want to lead, to step up? Shfit their mental models? Could you say that this leadership proposition is not only appealing in the business case, or moral or ethical or professional, but that it will create the conditions for personal satisfaction and fulfilment? \n\n#Diamond: How do we make this case that this redefinition is an imperative, esp. for those with immense privilidge? \n\n#Diamond:Is this book, in some or many ways really about de-colonizing leadership? Perhaps this is something to discuss in: every story matters - opening up the dominant narrative.\n\n#Diamond: Do you think that culture defines leadership? And if so, what is the dominant cultural paradigm we are trying to move away from and towards, in this new leadership model? \n\n#Diamond: Do you want to talk about or explore other cultural models of leadership and maybe intersections of what has worked, in other places at other times? (clearly I am a histry nerd too!) \n\n#Diamond: How will we convince our readers of their potential leadership, especially those for whom particular leadership roles have been closed to them due to class, gender, race etc.. \n\n#Diamond: how do we speak to those who feel limited/boxed in to specific leadership roles (women, community leaders but not political leaders).\n\n#Diamond: Many ppl might be desirous of, but scared of leadership roles - and feel like even if they go into it with this emancipatory approach, existing power structures will block them/crush them. \n\n#Diamond:How can we define or discuss leadership that makes it feel appealing for those scared of owning their power, or who have had traumatic experiences? Do you have stories that will inspire and activate!? \n\n#Diamond: I think an easy critique I could see beign taken here that actaully came to mind is from a feminist stance: that this is frustrating because these traditionally undervalued feminine qualities (empathy, communmication, service) are now being valued and perhaps coopted by men while women are still in this double bind of being too soft or too bitchy as leaders.\n\n \"culture defines leadership, so it makes sense that leadership in the west has been dominated by men, and how the imbalance between masculine and feminine values has impacted our world...Simons says the problem was never masculinity in leadership, it was the absence of and bias against femininity. \n\n#Diamond: Do you think that women make better leaders? Or, do the best leaders embrace the best qualities of leadership and let go of traditional notions of gender.\"\n\n#Diamond: How do leaders take the time to do all of the necessary personal and interpersonal work, when organizational culture and complex social problems seems to be speeding up, happening more rapidly. There seems to be a pacing discrepancy. Is this part of the way that leaders are changing the 'system'? \n\n#A lot of leadership concepts get stuck on business case, how do we posit this book in the moral, ethical, professional case? "}],"tree":{"_id":"510555bcb2db9ca553000066","name":"5 Questions That Matter","publicUrl":"5-questions-that-matter"}}