Some say that my teaching is nonsense.

Others call it lofty but impractical.

But to those who have looked inside themselves,

this nonsense makes perfect sense.

And to those who put it into practice,

this loftiness has roots that go deep.

—Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu, translation by S. Mitchell (2008)¹

We often confer the title of Master onto people who are highly effective at what they do. Mastery in anything—from sports, to the arts, to leadership—requires well-practiced capability mediated by a highly mature interiority: a well-honed “Outer Game” arising on a highly-evolved “Inner Game.” Both are essential. Masterful leadership is Conscious Competence.

The inner game runs the outer game. The maturity of the inner game is mediating and managing the outer game. Since this truth is largely ignored, most efforts to develop mastery in leadership focus on the outer game of competence with little focus on the inner game of consciousness. Until we take a more balanced approach, one that evolves both the inner and outer game (consciousness and competence) simultaneously, we will falter in our efforts to develop leaders for the future at the pace required.

TRIUMPH AND FAILURE OF THE INNER GAME

In the 1988 Winter Olympics, three female figure skaters entered the final night of competition. In first place, and the favorite to win, was Debi Thomas, the 1986 World Champion and two-time USA National Champion. She had a commanding lead, and was the most technically accomplished skater. In second place was Katarina Witt, a prior gold medalist and four-time World Champion from East Germany. She was skating the final event of her amateur career. In third place was a woman from Canada named Elizabeth Manley, a dark-horse contender. No one (except her) expected her to be in contention.

We are always learning about the impact of the inner game on performance, so we paid close attention as each skater was interviewed before taking the ice. Debi Thomas said, “I just want to get through this performance without making a mistake.” Katarina Witt spoke eloquently about closing her amateur career with a magical performance. Elizabeth Manley said, “I was not expected to be here. I have nothing to lose. I am going to go out there and have a blast. I am going to skate the performance of my life.”

What you hold in your consciousness tends to manifest—the inner game runs the outer game. Debi Thomas, trying hard not to make a mistake, fell and skated beneath her potential. Katarina Witt skated a beautiful swansong performance. But Elizabeth Manley stole the evening, skating an inspired performance. She had the highest score of the evening and rose from third place to capture the silver medal, a fraction of a point from getting the Gold. Katarina won the gold, and Debi Thomas fell to third place.

How mature was Debi's outer game to compete for Olympic Gold? She was more than capable of winning gold. How mature was her inner game for that moment, for that stage? By her own account, not mature enough. How mature is your inner game for the stage you are on, or to which you aspire? Is it mature enough to handle the pace and complexity of leading your organization through the volatile whitewaters that most organizations are now navigating?

Debi Thomas was stuck in what Larry Wilson calls a Play-Not-To-Lose game (Wilson, 1998). In this game, we strive to win by trying hard not to fail. This is essentially a defensive game—the game we play when our inner game is functioning from, as we will call it, a Reactive Structure of Mind. Elizabeth Manley and Katarina Witt were competing in what Larry Wilson calls a Play-To-Win game. In this game we play full-out, as if we have nothing to gain or lose. We play this game when our inner game matures to what we call a Creative Structure of Mind.

Debi Thomas now coaches aspiring skaters on the inner game. As a successful surgeon, she cannot afford to have a single day when either her outer game or her inner game lets her down.

Which game are you playing?

COMPETENCY IS ONLY HALF THE GAME

Competency alone does not make for effective leadership. Yet, the current focus for developing leadership effectiveness is primarily on improving competency, which is necessary, but insufficient.

Years ago we facilitated a team-building session with the Extended Leadership Team of a large company. We asked the group to brainstorm the salient qualities of a great leader. As we completed the list, the CEO said in amazement: “Our top selection criteria for senior leadership positions is competence, and competence did not make the list. There are no competencies on that list!”

Competence is necessary to attain and be effective in senior roles; however, competence alone is insufficient. When we describe great leadership, we describe something beyond skill, capability, and competence. We use words like integrity, honesty, passion, vision, risk-taking, fearlessness, compassion, courage, authenticity, collaboration, self-awareness, selflessness, purposefulness, humility, intuition, and wisdom. These are qualities of the inner game. Great leadership is connected with the deepest parts of ourselves. It has more to do with character, courage, and conviction than it does with specific skills or competencies. Leadership requires wisdom, self-knowledge, and character development at psychological and spiritual levels. Mastery of leadership requires that we work at these depths and develop mature, conscious awareness.

TWO GAMES OF LEADERSHIP

We are playing two games at all times: an outer and inner game. The outer game of leadership consists of using all of our knowledge and experience, as well as our technical, managerial, and leadership competence, to accomplish results. The all-consuming outer game is obviously where most leaders spend most of their time, since the day-to-day requirements of the outer game are fierce and the learning curve is steep. Developing well-honed capability to think and act effectively, skillfully, and competently in different situations is a baseline requirement for effectiveness in managing and leading. We ignore honing this outer game at our peril. If we lack capability in technical competence, management, and execution, we will not be effective.

Today leaders need to be effective in three areas (see Figure 3.1):

Leadership Process. This is the science of leadership and the domain of management. Leaders are responsible for the allocation and effective utilization of resources: people, time, and money. How effectively they allocate and use these resources impacts organizational effectiveness. To effectively utilize resources, leaders deploy management systems that include business cadence, strategy, direction, execution, process, metrics, and decision making. Without an effective management process in place, the business is not organized for success.

Leadership Competencies. These are the competencies required for a leader to be successful. We describe this as the outside game of leadership. We will review the competencies that are most strongly correlated with effective leadership later in this book.

Leadership Consciousness. This is the inside game of leadership. It is the leader's inner operating system—what drives the leader, how they define themselves, what is important to them, what they believe. We will address this in detail throughout the book.

In high-pressure leadership roles, we might assume that the outer game is the only game; however, it is just the tip of the iceberg. What is happening beneath the surface is mediating and organizing the effectiveness of the outer game. The inner game consists of:

• Our meaning-making system—what we use to make sense of the world.
• Our decision-making system—how we analyze, decide, and act.
• Our values and spiritual beliefs.
• Our level of self-awareness and emotional intelligence.
• The mental models that we use to understand reality, think, act, and create.
• The internal beliefs and assumptions making up our personal identity—the system that we use to know who we are, and to define and deploy ourselves into circumstances.

Together, these aspects make up the complex internal system by which we relate to the world. The more well-honed the outer game, the more effective we are. The more mature the inner game, the more effective we are. Both are required for mastery. Mastery is a well-honed outer game arising from a very mature inner game.

INNER GAME RUNS THE OUTER GAME

Again, most efforts at developing leaders target the outer game. The dominant approach to leadership development is competency-based. We measure competencies, provide feedback, and then create action plans. While this approach is helpful, it seldom produces breakthroughs because it ignores the inner game. Furthermore, while leaders may need help with learning a new competency, more often than not they need help with their inner game. They are stuck at the level of their inner game. The inner game is letting them down, and because most of the inner game goes on beneath the surface, they may not know they are stuck.

A breakthrough in the inner game can result in sudden shifts in the effectiveness of the outer game, which, in turn, can result in big performance gains.

A year ago, we sat down with Rob, a senior supply chain manager, to debrief his Profile results. His feedback showed him to be an aggressive, autocratic, arrogant, and critical manager. His scores for Relationships, Teambuilding, and Leadership Effectiveness were low, and his Leadership Quotient score was well below 1.0, indicating that his leadership was costly and toxic.

This was a shock to Rob. As we reviewed his results, Rob gained insight into himself, how he was leading, the energetic cost he was incurring, and the impact of his leadership on others. It was a hard conversation for Rob, but he faced it with unusual openness and courage.

Recently, we called Rob for an update. He reported that he had been through our year-long leadership development process and then said:

“I will never forget our conversation. I cannot thank you enough for what it gave me. When I returned to the office, I did a lot of soul searching and self-observation. I saw more clearly all that we had talked about. I realized that I am hyper goal-oriented, hard-wired for results. I care about people, but when problems erupt, I take over. I am constantly worried about what others will think if we fall short of expectations. Failure is not an option for me. Through our conversation, I realized how the fear of failure runs me and how I measure myself by always succeeding. So, when problems arise, I become the ogre! I laugh now thinking back on what an ogre I was.”

Rob went on to say:

“About six months ago, I received a promotion. I am now in charge of all supply-side management for the start-up of our new plant in another country. I could not have succeeded here had I not changed. This is a very relational culture. People hug each other when they come into work. They look each other in the eye when they say hello. If I were to lead here the way I used to lead, I would fail. Now, when problems come up, I can deal with them. Instead of blowing up, blaming people, and taking over, I work with and through the team. I am direct and firm, but in a way that builds accountability, trust, relationships, and teamwork. I still feel the urge to blow up, but now I manage it. It does not manage me. I am not as defined by my results now, and ironically that enables me to be more effective at achieving them.”

Rob then told us that before he worked for his current company, he worked for a manufacturer in Detroit. He mentioned how painful it was to live through the downturn in the industry, the closing of plants, and the impact on people and their families. Rob began to cry as he said, “Now I can have a positive impact in another community. I am finally becoming the leader I have always dreamed I could be. I am a much happier person now.”

Rob was no longer stuck in his outer game. The maturity in his inner game boosted the effectiveness of his outer game. When Rob did the uncommon work of deeply engaging himself, courageously facing what he saw, and restructuring his inner game, he naturally emerged as a far more effective leader. His company is better off for it, and so is Rob.

We incur huge opportunity costs when we ignore the inner game or treat it as irrelevant. Individual and collective effectiveness cannot emerge unless we explore how our inner game is being played. Yet there is little support for this exploration in our attitudes and approaches to developing leaders, despite all that is being written on the importance of the inner game.

LITANY OF THE LITERATURE

Library shelves are replete with great books that describe the intimate, interdependent relationship of the inner to the outer game and exhort us to go within for the source of our effectiveness, mastery, or greatness. Here is a short sample of this literature:

• In his book, As a Man Thinketh, James Allen posits the core tenet of personal mastery:

  “Thought and character are one, and as character can only manifest and discover itself through environment and circumstance, the outer conditions of a person's life will always be found to be harmoniously related to his inner state. This does not mean that a man's circumstances at any given time are an indication of his entire character, but that those circumstances are so intimately connected with some vital thought element within himself that, for the time being, they are indispensable to his development.

  Man is buffeted by circumstances so long as he believes himself to be the creature of outside conditions. But when he realizes that he may command the hidden soil and seeds of his being out of which circumstances grow, he then becomes the rightful master of himself.”

  “The soul attracts that which it secretly harbors; that which it loves, and also that which it fears. Circumstances are the means by which the soul receives its own.”

  “The outer world of circumstance shapes itself to the inner world of thought. As the reaper of his own harvest, man learns both by suffering and bliss.”

  “Circumstance does not make the man; it reveals him to himself. Men do not attract that which they want, but that which they are. Men are anxious to improve their circumstances, but are unwilling to improve themselves.”

  (Allen, 1905)

• In Think and Grow Rich, a classic in success literature, Napoleon Hill shows how great leaders in many fields think in ways that make them so successful (Hill, 1937).
• In his book On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis, the great teacher of leadership, said that the process of becoming a great leader is the same as that of becoming a great person (Bennis, 1989). His book's title parallels that of a book by his friend Carl Rogers, On Becoming a Person.
• In Man's Search for Meaning, Viktor Frankl wrote: “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances. When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.” Frankl learned this lesson in a Nazi concentration camp (Frankl, 1959).
• The field of Psychology is premised on the relationship between the inner and outer game. The interior reality of conscious and unconscious beliefs, assumptions, and thoughts runs our lives; it determines our emotional states, actions, and the results we create. Changing the deep habits of mind changes the results we attain in our lives.
• Tim Gallwey wrote a series of “Inner Game” books on the relationship between the inner game and the outer game (Gallway, 2000).

• In his seminal book, The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge holds that one of the five disciplines of creating great learning organizations is Personal Mastery (Senge, 1990). Peter was a business partner with Robert Fritz who, in his book, The Path of Least Resistance, described personal mastery as the shift from a Reactive to a Creative Orientation (Fritz, 1989).

• Larry Wilson, founder of Wilson Learning, describes two internal mindsets that are very similar to Fritz's Creative and Reactive Orientations. He called these mindsets Playing-to-Win versus Playing-Not-to-Lose (Wilson, 1998). Each orientation gets very different results.
• The Human Potential Movement is founded on the principle that our inner world shapes our outer world. Change the inner world and all things follow suit.
• The Tao Te Ching describes the highest states of leadership consciousness and effectiveness (Mitchell, 2008), as does the Bhagavad Gita, a spiritual classic of the Hindu tradition (Mitchell, 2000).

• The spiritual, mythic, and poetic literature exhorts us to go inside to discover the roots and keys to freedom, joy, peace, harmony, and our well-being and welfare.

Again, what we hold in our consciousness tends to manifest (individually and collectively). The outer world shapes itself to the inner world. Consciousness creates reality. Everything emerging in human affairs has its source first in thought.

FOUR FOUNDATIONAL PREMISES

We base all of our work with leaders as we help them to develop higher individual and collective effectiveness on four premises that underpin the Unified Model of Leadership.

CONSCIOUSNESS AND COMPLEXITY

The level of maturity of your individual and collective IOS must be more than a match for the complexity of the challenges you face. Consciousness must evolve to a high level of complexity to meet the complexity of today's business challenges.

Several years ago, we were working with the CEO of a midsized insurance company that was going through major changes in two lines of their business. As we were getting acquainted, we asked this CEO how he was doing. He said, “Well, I am like a duck.” Surprised, we asked him what he meant. He said, “If you look at me at the surface, you think that I am gliding along smoothly. But, if you look beneath the surface, you see that my feet are paddling as fast as possible, and I am not sure it is fast enough.”

He then told us about the arduous task that he and his Senior Team faced in guiding the organization through major change amid volatile financial and economic conditions. He spoke openly of his doubts about his ability to provide the leadership required. He spent many nights in the 4a.m. club, the club where we leaders worry and wonder how to navigate through the complexity we face.

This CEO is not alone. In 2010, IBM interviewed over 1,500 CEOs worldwide to learn what their challenges are and their strategies for addressing them (Capitalising on Complexity: Insights from the Global Chief Executive Officer Study). Two challenges emerged at the top of the list: 1) escalating complexity, and 2) building the creative capacity in leadership to deal with it. These two themes have shown up in IBM's 2012 and 2014 CEO studies as well. In this study, many CEOs openly wondered if they were “in over their head,” if they had the capability to lead their organizations through so much change.

The 4a.m. Club has many members. Most leaders, including the authors, sometimes lie awake at night wondering how to navigate complexity, if we have what it takes to lead, whether we are “in over our heads,” and if we are the right person for the job. We have learned, from many conversations, that this quiet, internal struggle is common among entrepreneurs and senior leaders.

Complexity will continue to escalate. In his book, Leaders Make the Future, futurist Bob Johansen makes this disconcerting statement: “In my 40 years of forecasting futures, the direst forecasts yet are in this book.” He then describes a VUCA world—a global business environment of escalating Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity (Johansen, 2009). We add market disruption (see Figure 3.2).

VUCA will continue to accelerate for all of us. We will all be hit by ever-increasing waves (in frequency and amplitude) of Adaptive Challenge. Ron Heifetz describes adaptive challenges as a set of interdependent challenges that are seemingly unsolvable, but must be solved (Heifetz, 1998). What makes them adaptive is that they cannot be solved from within our current operating system. We must evolve our individual and collective operating system. This gets to the second theme in the IBM CEO study: we must evolve our creative capacity, individually and collectively, to meet complexity.

UNDERSTANDING COMPLEXITY: REDUNDANT POLARITIES AND PROBLEMS

Barry Johnson distinguishes between Problems and Polarities. Problems are solvable. There are usually a few optimal solutions that, once arrived at, admit to a stable solution. Polarities are dilemmas. They are not solvable because a polarity is comprised of a tension between equally legitimate, but opposite, end points. For example, should the management of vital business functions be centralized or decentralized? The answer is, yes. Too much centralization is problematic, as is too much decentralization. This polarity, like all polarities, is not solvable, but it is manageable. Furthermore, the optimization point of any polarity is a moving target as companies grow through stages of development, change strategy, and as market conditions change. Polarities are continually being managed and optimized.

Most polarities and problems come in sets. They are interdependent and redundant. Redundancy is a term borrowed from engineering. In designing a stable structure, like building an aircraft, engineers are designing for tension resolution, such that the resulting structure is strong and stable. Redundancy results when one tension resolution in the structure depends on a second tension resolution in the structure and vice versa. Part one of the structure cannot be stably resolved until part two is resolved, and part two depends on the resolution of part one.

In mathematics this is the equivalent of simultaneous equations—two equations with two unknowns. One equation cannot be solved in isolation. Redundancies are so interdependent that they can only be solved simultaneously. These same conditions are experienced when we think systemically.

Amazingly, many of our complex structures could only be designed by resolving a long string of redundancies. For example, when the Boeing 747 was tested in 1969, the aircraft had some 700 redundancies! Imagine designing something with 700 interdependent elements such that the final stable structure cannot be resolved unless all 700 parts of the structure are simultaneously resolved.

Redundant polarities are polarities that depend on each other for optimal resolution. Two or three polarities are hard enough to optimize separately, but when they each need to be resolved simultaneously, complexity increases dramatically. Now multiply the number of redundant polarities by a factor of 10, throw a few challenging and redundant problems into the mix, add a rapidly escalating VUCA world, and you have the makings of Complexity Stew—adaptive challenges within adaptive challenges. This is the complexity that leaders face. If we do not lead with the whole system in mind, simultaneously designing for and resolving multiple interdependent variables, then the unintended consequences go up in multiples.

NON-OBVIOUS POINTS OF LEVERAGE

Those of us who lead and consult in system transformation often describe organizational systems as “un-figure-out-able.” Solutions that could have long-term positive, intended consequences exist, but are seldom easily seen and rationally deduced. When we approach systemic complexity with problem-fix logic, we usually install solutions that make the system more complex or have consequences in other areas that were unseen or unintended. Non-systemic solutions usually result in better before worse performance. Things get better for a while and then either revert to the way they were or get worse. The US war in Iraq is a good example of a reactive and hasty solution appearing to make things better for a while and then making things much worse.

Finding systemic solutions that evolve the system in ways that result in lasting improvement is possible, but not easy. Often these solutions are not obvious, and no one person is smart enough to consistently discover and implement them. Collective effectiveness is required. Finding long-term high leverage solutions takes a whole systems approach. This means bringing a representative body of stakeholders into one room and following a deliberate process so that the solutions to systemic, complex issues can be created. This practice relies on the notion that the wisdom resides within the system for many of the issues that we face. Leaders rarely know how to tap the collective wisdom and intelligence of the system to find leverage amid escalating complexity. Most leadership teams lack the collective effectiveness to pull this off. It takes a highly evolved operating system, individually and collectively, to thrive in a VUCA world.

THE LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVE

The mix of mounting adaptive challenges, multiple redundant polarities and problems, and complex systems with non-obvious points of leverage mandates that leaders evolve more elegant operating systems. Einstein said: “The solutions to our current problems cannot be solved from the level of consciousness that created them.” They can only be solved from a higher order of consciousness, one that is more complex than the complexity we face.

To meet the adaptive challenges we face today, we need to evolve more elegant ways of thinking and being. Failure to adapt and evolve is to go extinct. The Leadership Imperative is simply this: The development of leadership effectiveness must, at a minimum, keep pace with the rate of change and the rate of escalating complexity.

Not to keep pace with the rate of escalating complexity is to become less relevant and effective. The complexity of mind of a leader, and of the collective leadership system, must evolve at a rate that matches or exceeds the rate of escalating complexity. If the challenges we face are more complex than we are, our leadership is inadequate and a competitive disadvantage. But, if we can evolve the complexity of mind of the leader, and the leadership system, to be at least as complex as the challenges we face, we can thrive in a VUCA world.

Rapidly increasing complexity puts the effectiveness of leadership at a premium. When the maturity of the leadership IOS, individually and collectively, evolves to a higher-order platform of consciousness, higher-order complexity of mind, leadership becomes more collectively masterful, effective, and intelligent. This requires a Leadership Quotient greater than 1.0, and when the LQ reaches 2.0, leadership becomes a serious competitive advantage.

Leadership's primary job is to enhance creative capacity by developing collectively effective leadership. As complexity increases, effective leadership becomes a major competitive advantage. Jack Welch believed this and backed it up as CEO of General Electric. He deployed systemic development and then parlayed leadership development, systems thinking, and action into one of GE's primary competitive advantages.

Developing effective leadership, individually and collectively, is a business imperative. This Leadership Agenda must be a strategic priority. Senior teams need to make their own development a strategic priority as they lead development efforts within the leadership system. The organization will not perform at a higher level than the consciousness of its leadership.

THE CORE ARGUMENT

Escalating complexity requires that the creative, adaptive capacity of the leadership of the organization evolve at or beyond the rate at which complexity is increasing. The maturity of the outer game and the inner game of leadership, individually and collectively, must mature at a pace to stay relevant and competitive. The mastery or effectiveness of leadership depends on evolving the complexity of mind or consciousness (IOS) of leadership to be more than a match for the complexity of market and business challenges. Since consciousness is a structure, and structure determines performance, to attain higher effectiveness and better business performance amid complexity, you must be restructured. This is a metamorphosis process—a radical change in the structure of mind. This mind-shift initially happens within individual leaders. More conscious individual leadership catalyzes collective leadership effectiveness, which transforms business performance.

Those leaders who see the extreme upside potential of this Leadership Agenda and act on it create a competitive advantage that sets them and their companies apart. Such proactive development requires an investment in time, money, and people, with time being the most precious resource. In leading companies, this investment continues even when budgets tighten.

Katherine is the CEO of a high-profile media company and one of our clients. In 2008, she faced an economic downturn that turned out to be the worst in its 50 years as a company. In response, Katherine proactively led the organization through a cost reduction process that resulted in the first major layoffs in company history. However, that was only the beginning. During the downturn, she decided to double down on her own development and the development of her leaders. Fortunately, over the years she had purchased her freedom with a record of results, and despite the resistance she received, she continued an aggressive development agenda, believing it would make a difference.

Over the next three years, the Extended Leadership Team worked closely together on the business of the business and on their own effectiveness as leaders. They were quick and decisive, set strong direction, and followed through on that direction while working on their inner and outer game of leadership. During that same time, they retook the Leadership Circle Profile (LCP), and their collective leadership effectiveness improved from the 45th percentile to the 75th collectively, even as they reduced staff and decreased resources.

As they emerged from the difficult times 18 months later, they found themselves in the position of increased leadership capacity and capability that enabled them to win multiple new national clients from their competition, and they posted the best year in company history.

Katherine recently reported: “We could not have made it through these times as well as we have and moved way ahead of the pack if not for our focus on becoming more effective as leaders. We were 12 months ahead of our nearest competition when the market started to improve, and we have not looked back. Even as we reduced costs by 30%, we strategically developed ourselves as leaders, and we have the metrics of the difference this has made. Now we will blow everyone away with what comes next.”

This amazing CEO had to make a courageous stand with her organization, her board, and some of her own people. She anticipated the results before they happened, and now the organization is benefiting from the leadership she continues to display.

UNCOMMON SENSE

Several years ago, we were interviewed for a video documentary. The interviewer opened with this curveball question: “Isn't leadership just a matter of common sense?”

We were not sure how to respond. Based on the volumes written on the subject, leadership seems to be both extremely common and extremely rare. Bookstore shelves are full of the latest secrets to leadership success. We are critical of much of this literature for reducing the development of leaders to a set of superficial skills and steps. From this perspective, leadership appears to be easily developed and common. On the other hand, we are facing a worldwide leadership crisis. What sense can we make of all this? While some managers and leaders are taking their leadership development seriously, others are seduced by the promise of a shortcut to greatness.

After a moment of hesitation, we responded to the interviewer: “If great leadership were just a matter of common sense, it would be common. The fact that it is not common, despite all the activity to develop it, suggests that, if shortcuts were possible, we would have all bought the package long ago and would now be enjoying the fruits of success.”

When the development of leadership effectiveness into mastery is understood to be more than skill and competency development, when it is seen as a profound process of Metanoia, when we acknowledge that it requires metamorphosis, a restructuring of the self into higher-order form, then we will begin to understand why earlier generations called it a Hero's Journey or a Heroine's Journey. It is not for the faint of heart. It is an acquired taste. Mastering leadership is neither common nor common sense. It is uncommon sense. There are no shortcuts to greatness. As T.S. Eliot said, it will “cost not less than everything.” It is worth the cost.

COLLECTIVE WISDOM

Collective effectiveness is the foundation of collective intelligence. As collective intelligence emerges, collective wisdom becomes possible. Since the leadership challenges are formidable, it will take unprecedented collective effectiveness, intelligence, and wisdom to avert global calamity and create a thriving future for Earth's inhabitants. Only when leaders do their heroic inner work will the kind of collective leadership emerge that can positively change the trajectory of events now unfolding. Nothing short of a profound shift of mind is required. Higher-order consciousness and wisdom are related. We must evolve the practice of conscious leadership and the collective wisdom necessary to steward the planet.

Sadly, developing our leadership effectiveness often gets side-lined because we resist the vulnerability of learning and changing. It takes courage to face the truth about ourselves. The truth shall set us free, but first it may make us miserable. As we seek to improve collective effectiveness, we will likely be learning publicly. Senior leaders guard their credibility carefully, not wanting to lose face. Our IOS is who we take ourselves to be and how we have attained our current success. Change is scary. Who will I be if I am not this? This has made me effective; do I really want to mess with what got me here? Will I remain effective if I make fundamental changes within myself? How will it all work out? We intuitively know that there are no guarantees. However, we also intuitively know that transformation promises capability beyond what is now possible, that the only way out is through, and that there are no shortcuts to greatness.

A GLOBAL LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVE

The commitment to develop effective leadership as a strategic priority should be made because of its dramatic impact on business performance. The choice for mastering leadership can also be made in service to the larger needs of humanity. The world is hungry for more effective, conscious leadership. As we develop more effectiveness in the leadership system of our organizations, we also develop more effective leadership on the planet. As leaders emerge, conscious of our inherent unity and our collective welfare, we will collectively steward the planet toward a thriving future.

In the next two chapters, we will define various levels of the IOS that, as they progressively evolve, become complex enough for the level of global complexity facing leaders.