Sports and Intentional Change Theory

This week the discussion revolves around the success of US Women's Soccer and the Dream Team failures of US Basketball in the Olympics. Naturally these two sports are the sports that I have the least amount of interest in researching. Baseball wasn't an option? All grousing aside there are some lessons to be learned from the success and failures of these two teams.


Starting with failures: The 2004 US Men's Basketball Olympic team was, on paper, supposed to dominate the field...and they didn't. This article applies a bit of statistics to the team but the overall point is that the quality of the players changed. I tend to disagree, the players sent to the Olympics in 2004 were comparable to any other player in the world. However they were relatively new to international play and they were new "stars" in the US. I would argue that, according to Intentional Change Theory, their ideal self and real self were not the same "self." As the linked article above notes, scoring in basketball is dependent on having the ball in the first place. A given "star" on an NBA team can count on his teammates feeding the ball to him in order to score. This can lead to a self that appears to the player as "I am the man with the ball." However, when these "stars" get together the cohesive goal of giving the ball to the "star" begins to change. There are five "stars" on the court and the image of "being the man with the ball" crashes into the reality of "all these players want the ball and can use it." The court, during the game, is not the time to apply a learning program, evaluate mistakes or success, and find a support system as those steps take time, so they failed. Learning from those success the US Men's Team went on win gold in 2008 with the Redeem Team.


Comparing that the US Women's Soccer team has been dominate for nearly 30 years on the world stage. This fivethirtyeight article also breaks down some statistical data for women's soccer but I find this passage very telling, "So how did we get here? Basically, it boils down to two things: 1) Women’s soccer has been on a great run for the past 30-plus years in the U.S., to the point where it’s poised to become our most popular women’s sport, and 2) the rest of the world has been relatively apathetic and/or hostile to the women’s game." Additionally, US players make up over half the world's registered players. In the US women's soccer is very popular for young women and thus from an early age they begin to merge their ideal selves and real selves as soccer players. The same could be said for basketball players but I argue that the lesser spotlight cast on women's sports, while shameful, also allows for the players to develop themselves free from trying to be what others see them as. Whereas Carmelo Anthony has an image to protect many folks may have to look up the name Brandi Chastain. It may be that Brandi's ideal self and real self are very close to the same person.


The same could be said for Ronda Rousey's loss to Holly Holms. If one looks at her loss and reasons for taking the fight a case could be made that Rousey was trying to reconcile her ideal self with her real self. While it was physically painful for her to learn that merging the two is no easy task the lesson can apply to all of us. The ideal self may not be a bad "self" and neither may be the real self. However, when they aren't the same a state of dissonance can occur. Applying the ICT steps can take a person closer to making the two the same though I argue that a complete merger is impossible. Anyone thinking that they no longer have a need to grow is missing the point of growth.

Tipping Points and Attractors

Tipping points in relation to emotional intelligence or knowing one's self can also be looked at as a type of epiphany. They can also be seen, when viewed quantitatively,  as a point where behavior either increases or decreases in a sharp manner. I've been studying leadership for several years, I've been a leader and a follower and I've begun to lean more towards qualitative rather than quantitative studies. That being said, data gathered is often critical to crystallizing behavior and providing data upon which to build theories. Qualitative and quantitative studies of leadership are, in my opinion, symbiotic.

Where this relates to tipping points can be seen in these two examples: In the first example Dr. Boyatzis outlines the data behind tipping points and performance and in the second, while he uses quantitative data his overall statement is on the qualitative aspects of tipping points. In both the result of the discussion is the same, the tipping point serves to either reset the emotional states or drive a different behavior.

I've had my own tipping point though due to my stubborn nature it took some hardship to get there. At one point in my early 20's I lost a job as a company I worked for downsized dramatically. At the time I thought I still had everything under control despite not being able to pay rent or adequately feed myself. Job searching was difficult as it wasn't easy finding a job that would have paid as much as the one I just left and therefore be able to cover rent. I worked two jobs, temp jobs, or wherever I could find work in order to stay afloat yet in the end I was evicted. From there it wasn't long before I lost my car as well. Being pretty much on my own and homeless I decided that I needed to make a change in my life.

My stubborn nature led me to believe that I could have made things work by sheer force of will. Life, however, had different plans. What this tipping point changed was my attitude. I very quickly learned that people can do all the right things and still come up short. Success or failure isn't always directly related to the effort put into things. Life is much more complicated than binary attitudes like "work had and you will succeed" or "if you aren't succeeding it's because you aren't trying." Such simplistic views went by the wayside and over the next decade and change I've developed a much broader sense of compassion and, at times, empathy. I joined the Air Force to get out my rut, and even then needed substantial financial assistance from my family. I was fortunate that my family had the resources to assist me in paying some old debts as well as assisting me while I was awaiting my basic training start date.

Looking back now I wish I had given up my stubborn belief system that failed to see the nuance in situations. However, had it not been so harshly confronted it is likely that I would still cling to it. In the end, we can learn as much from our failures as we do our success; if not more so. Failure forces change and when properly analyzed and reflected upon is a great teacher. Success, though to be sought after and appreciated, carries a danger of complacency. Of course, I much prefer success to failure! Still, they both have their roles in life and like most things, as I learned, that relationship can be complex.

Emotional Intelligence in Four Dimensions

Psychologist Dr. Daniel Goleman lists four dimensions of emotional intelligence they can best be summed up in the following:

I find this a good illustration of these four attributes as they are interconnected and also specific unto the themselves. A person can have a great self management attribute but lack a certain amount of social awareness. That being said, having a strong affinity in each category makes for a higher level of emotional intelligence and, it is hoped, a better leader. Two of Goleman's talks can be found here and here and they are well worth the watch.

For me, I find that my strengths lean more towards social skills and social awareness. Both of the fields are important to my work and thus I "practice" them more than I do self awareness. Often by the end of the day I am too tired for much introspection as it can be exhaustive to attempt to stay connected to others eight or more hours a day. Staying practiced in social skills and social awareness does keep them sharp but at a price; they tend to burn out. More on that later.

The two areas where I am less successful are self awareness and self management.  Self-awareness feeds a great deal in my work as I have to know what triggers certain emotional responses in myself. My clients can be sex-offenders, murderers, or the parts of society that exist on the fringes that, in my opinion, most of society is trying to ignore. But knowing a trigger is different than examining the "why" of a trigger and I reflect enough to get through the day but it helps that I am professionally obligated to keep my personal emotions out of treatment planning. I can't decide to avoid helping someone because they were convicted of child molestation. That being said, much like schoolwork, being forced to do something can make someone better at it by benefit of repetition. I do think that I could use more self-directed practice in self-awareness but it isn't far behind the social side of the paradigm.

However, self management is where I suffer. I am impulsive by nature and run more in instinct than I do introspection. That isn't to say I act without reason because I value reason so much more than I do most anything else. Where I struggle is that I forge ahead with projects or ideas and forget some of the details that would make those ideas or projects work. I then have to go back and tidy up those details before I get things back on track. I'm getting better at it but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't a blind spot at times.

Emotional Intelligence is more complex than a simple blog post can really encapsulate and this post is limited to strengths and weaknesses and mostly regarding my work. One final point is that emotional intelligence can be tiring. I am forced to apply a certain amount of emotional intelligence on a daily basis as I am sure many are. The constant introspection and internal checks and balances that emotional intelligence can demand is tiring if a person does not practice some form of self-renewal. The resonant leader concept stresses self-renewal right up front as it is demanding and effective leaders will take time for themselves as well. In some ways it is acceptable to "turn off" the emotional intelligence in the quiet moments and "just be" even though, with practice, emotional intelligence becomes less of a skill and more of a state of being and thus less tiring.

Resonant? Maybe

This week's blog post is an excercise taken from McKee et al's Becoming a Resonant Leader (McKee, Boyatzis, & Johnston, 2008). The idea of resonant leadership seems to be the next step after acquiring a mastery of emotional intelligence. After all, how can one hope to inspire others and create a positive tone for others if one does not know themselves? Additionally, a given leader must understand how they are reacting to stress and take steps to renew themselves so that positive environments can be maintained.

Thus far, in my readings into resonant leadership haven't reached a firm conclusion on the following but it seems that resonant leadership places the onus of creating a positive environment on the leader and less on the follower. However, these relationships are symbiotic and often draw from each other so it is important that a leader understand that followers will also need the same steps for self-renewal as well as possible sharing leadership roles. There is a danger in a leader thinking of themselves as some sort of guru and becoming unaware of how resonance means that all parts work together.

Below are the questions asked of me in the excercise along with my insights.

1. Am I inspirational? Do I inspire people?

I don't know that I am or am not inspirational. I don't exactly pass out surveys and most people in my life are unaware of the struggles I've overcome to get to where I am. Nor do I feel inclined to share the more distasteful episodes of my past and while there is nothing overtly scandalous in my past it is mine and I don't enjoy being vulnerable. Additionally, I move far too often for deep relationships to form. Perhaps one can be inspirational without sharing a great deal of themselves but if so I am not seeing the path.

All of that being said, I do try to lead by example. I've never asked someone I've supervised to do something that I was unwilling to do. In my current work-group I make myself available for roles that others might not want simply because it's good practice and the patients need the help. Others may draw inspiration from seeing someone going about their job with ethics, standards, and an eye for providing the best service to patients that is possible. They did nominate me for a small award for such. So perhaps it is a form of inspiration.

However, I don't draw inspiration from flowery speeches and I don't expect anyone to draw inspiration from anything I say. I am much more impressed by action and so I try to lead by example. That isn't to say motivational speaking isn't a great tool and I do use motivational interviewing and positive encouragement in my line of work. So in essence, for me I try to inspire but what inspires me and that is more doing and less talking when working with peers and switch to different type of motivation when working with patients. Part of that may very well be that behavioral health specialists have seen and heard so many horror stories and so many excuses that words are often not enough.

2. Do I create an overall positive emotional tone that is characterized by hope? How?

Seeing as how this my job I certainly hope so! Many of the patients with which my office works are struggling in more than one area of their lives. Some of them are happy that way. While others are wanting to work on improving themselves but they've been so beat down by life and poor choices that they can't see the light at the end of tunnel. It's our job to provide that light and the route to take to get there. That can't be done without hope and a positive tone. Also, this type of work is emotionally draining and so we often maintain positive tones among ourselves and provide mutual support.

3. Am I in touch with others? Do I really know what is in others' hearts and on their minds? How do I show this?

I try to be. One can never really know what goes on in the hearts of others but we can evaluate their actions. This is an extension of my approach to inspiration in that I am much more impressed by seeing actions rather than hearing words and I live my life this way. I have never been one to use ten words when five will do. But I will seek to understand others and to demonstrate that I will work as hard towards their goals as they are if not more so if they are in place where they need the support. I ask questions, I actively listen, and I try very, very hard to remain non-judgmental. Understanding that we don't always know the struggles of others, we don't know their pasts, we don't know their barriers, their health, their multitude of stories that make up a life means that we meet others with open minds. I believe that by meeting people on the level that feel comfortable helps place them at ease and begins to lay the foundation for healthy relationship.

4. Do I regularly experience and demonstrate compassion? How?

Working with people who have addictions, mental health disorders, and usually physical health impairments means that the term compassion fatigue applies to myself and most of my co-workers. Treating compassion fatigue requires mindfulness and some sort of self-renewal process; much as with resonant leadership. If I am honest I am sometimes faking compassion until I can find a way to feel it. Opening one's self to an endless litany of horror stories drains the compassion from a person. I'd like to have a better answer for this question but the truth is that while I am compassionate if I don 't take time for myself whatever compassion I have will ebb away. Resonant leadership stresses self-renewal and speaking from personal experience, self renewal is vital.

5. Am I authentic and in tune with myself, others, and the environment? How can people see this in me? 

If I am not authentic with myself how can I be authentic with anyone or anything? I try to not allow the darker parts of my psyche (which we all have) go unaddressed. We all suffer from our pasts and we all have learned and grown from our pasts in some way or another. Being authentic isn't just about being honest with one's self but it is taking the step to accepting one's self and using the whole of you to reach the whole of others. I endeavor to be as authentic as I am able in my dealings with others. My co-workers and I are very authentic with each other and that is probably why our team works as well as it does. It's refreshing to know that others see you for who you are and accept you and I give the same in return.


McKee, A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Johnston, F. (2008). Becoming a resonant leader: develop your emotional intelligence, renew your relationships, sustain your effectiveness. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Pub.

Contrasting Leaders

It isn't a great academic leap to state that not all leaders are created equally. Many of us can point to leaders that either inspired us or made us dread going into work. For the most part most of the managers with whom I've worked fell between these two extremes. I've been fortunate in that I've not experience too many toxic leaders. Even completing this exercise I struggled to think of a leader that was the polar opposite of what I considered to be a great leader.

In the end I settled on a former Chief Controller from my time in the Air Force. In all fairness this leader was stuck with a senior leadership structure that appeared to be dysfunctional in its pettiness but that doesn't excuse this leaders responsibility to filter that for his followers. Filtering some of that pettiness is one way  a leader gains trust. This Chief failed in that regard and his interpersonal relationships were based on favoritism. It didn't help that this particular posting was frustrating for me in a great many ways and he didn't seem interested in forming the type of relationship where I could speak with him regarding these things.

What is particularly toxic regarding the above situation is that this leader wasn't overtly a bad person. He wasn't prone to fits of anger, he didn't demean people, nor did he micromanage or abuse authority. In some ways the almost gentle negativity and behind the scenes favoritism was worse. At least with an in-your-face horrible manager you know where you stand and you can plan accordingly. That doesn't make them good leaders but it does make them easy to read. Instead the constant sense of unease and uncertainty meant that it was a slow death of morale. I left work drained nearly every day and dreaded the thought of another moment in that place.

Contrasting that manager was my first manager in post-military life. She was the manager for the South Dakota Department of Labor and while to this day I am not sure what I said in the interview that impressed her I am glad I did. Postings in government jobs are political even when they aren't supposed to be. There is a constant worry over appearances and what the tax payers will think and this can lead to directives that can be frustrating at times. Additionally, funding is always a constant worry. Yet despite this this manager took time to get to know the people that worked for her. She was a good judge of character and seemed to know when you were "off" or struggling.

While she could be directive (which is sometimes needed) if there was an opportunity to modify a process or figure how best to implement whatever brilliant scheme the Governor's office had cooked up she would ask the people it would affect how best to get it done. She also did an excellent job of keeping the staff informed of what changes were coming or what current issue was on the radar of someone at the capitol.

That being said, what really set her apart was the genuine concern for the people in her office. I always got the impression that she would fight tooth and nail for us and was far more interested in developing people rather than keeping them in line. It made a huge difference in the way I felt getting up and going to work in the morning.

In some ways comparing military leadership and civilian leadership isn't totally accurate. Military leaders have a captive audience and more absolute authority. Civilian leaders may like to think they have those things and for some jobs (entry-level or areas where employment is scarce) that may be true but at certain level people have options. Civilian leaders therefore have a vested interest in developing loyal workers. However none of that excuses military leaders from their negative traits. I left after my enlistment was up largely because of the leadership failings I saw. I only left the job at the State as I needed more career development and advancement potential. Additionally the State of South Dakota isn't big on wages. While wages are not the primary reason people leave jobs they can play a part. Those variables were out of the State Manager's control though if they were I may have stuck around.

I am not sure that she would have considered herself "resonant" even if she did or did now know the term as it applies to leadership. Part of me thinks that applying labels to one's self as a leader defeats the point of resonant leadership. If one is only being relationship minded in order to make one's self feel like they are resonant than they are doing it for the wrong reasons. What made her unique was that it was a natural part of her personality. She didn't be a good leader to earn the title of "good leader" she just was. That doesn't take away from the importance of learning about leadership skills and taking a good look within but I posit that if a leader is trying to be resonant simply to earn the title they will fail. A leader must first seek to improve themselves simply because they want to be a better person. The rest tends to fall in line.

                                                                              

Positive Leader	Not so Positive Leader
Delegated	Favoritism
Trusted her people	Petty
Solicited opinions	Interested in appearance
Interested in personal struggles	Didn’t want to learn about people

Emotional Decision Making

It seems rather intuitive that emotions can affect decision making but confidence has a specific affect on how others see your decisions. In a prior career, air traffic control, we were taught to project confidence in our voices. A great deal of air traffic control is making decisions, often quickly, in rather congested air space. At busy times, such as when the base's fighters were recovering, a controller makes choices on determining how aircraft will be sequenced, what parts of the airspace to use, and even deciding between different types of approaches a pilot can be cleared for in order to expedite traffic. Not every request a pilot makes is granted. Confidence in these choices is gained through a rigorous training  process.


I recall working a wing recovery in poor weather when a KC-135 took a lightening strike. Lightening strikes on aircraft aren't typically fatal but they can damage aircraft. The pilot declared an emergency and requested clearance to land. Aircraft declare emergencies for many reasons and they are common enough in military aviation that controllers see enough of them not to panic. That being said, they can cause a great deal of disruption to an otherwise orderly pattern. Also the pilots are looking for the best vectors they can get in order to get to an airfield without delay. Not every emergency is the same but the procedure for handling them in air traffic control is the same and that is to expedite the aircraft's safe return and to make every effort to not delay the aircraft. There are other things we need to do but they aren't germane to the choice I had to make. In this case I had to vector the aircraft away from the airfield for a few miles as a second aircraft had failed to make radio contact with the tower. The second aircraft could not have picked a worse time to fiddle with his radio and he was taking his time getting down final. In order to ensure the KC-135 was safe I had to build a few extra miles of separation between the second aircraft and the emergency aircraft. Vectoring away from final during an emergency is something that is not ordinarily a good idea but when I issued the vector I explained, in my best controller voice, why and the pilot accepted this information and took the turn. It was the best way to ensure every aircraft was safe, the slow-poke on final who forgot radio was a thing, and the emergency aircraft. The delay was only a few miles but that can make a great deal of difference to an aircraft  in distress. I was confident it was the safest move and the pilot accepted the vector without question.


I could have let my anxiety creep into my voice and that could have raised concerns in the pilot's mind that I wasn't keeping things safe, especially with a rather unorthodox procedure. To be sure I had a great deal of anxiety over the situation but in the end I trusted that what I was doing was correct. The pilot on final suddenly remembered he had a radio by the final approach fix  (in fairness he likely keyed up an incorrect frequency by accident but at the time I wasn't feeling charitable) and I had built the extra few miles of separation I needed. Both aircraft landed safely. Anger at the aircraft that wasn't in radio contact also enters your mind but there isn't much you can do about it except try to contact the aircraft on emergency channels. While that may have been an option it takes time and there is no guarantee the pilot will answer their either, although they are supposed to. All the while the KC-135 would have been getting closer. I am still not 100 sure that I couldn't have used "guard" as we called the distress frequencies but I had to trust myself. Had the pilot had a more severe emergency such as cabin decompression or an onboard fire I may have used the emergency frequencies. So, a certain amount of subjective reasoning on my part was undertaken, and while that isn't an emotion it plays a part in assigning value to a decision.


Lately I have been working with  a few cases that are increasingly difficult. These are particularly trying emotionally as one can get very frustrated and begin to let negative emotions affect decision making. I will never say that I am perfect but I do try very hard to remind myself that I cannot let those emotions change how I approach things. But it has happened.


Without dabbling into politics it should come as no surprise to anyone that reads my work that I tend to lean left. I say that so that I can say I also freely admit that people do game the system. It doesn't happen as often as portrayed on some media sources but it does occur. Thankfully sooner or later it catches up with people.


I had a patient that I was working with who was like this and I became so frustrated that I started finding myself giving this patient incomplete advice. This patient was one that Dr. Shiv was referring to in this video; he took up all my time.  I wouldn't not see the patient or attempt to do my job but it is fair to say that this person wasn't getting my best work. Knowing that I did that, affected my confidence with other patients. A bit of shame creeps in and my own personal demons of extra self-doubt started their chorus. In times like this it is good to take a small break and come back refreshed and this is what I did. But during that time where I was experiencing what is called "compassion fatigue" the other patients noticed that I wasn't at my best. Or in the words of one patient, "what's wrong with you?" This wasn't a moment of personal epiphany but I did take stock of how my emotions were affecting how I was doing my job and consequently the decisions I was making; patients were getting less than they needed to make their own decisions. Guilt, shame, and some self-directed anger were all going through my head. Thankfully a day off and some rest allowed me to get out of the funk. Many of my co-workers have similar experiences and it's nice knowing that others "get it."

In many ways I find what I do now more intellectually draining than air traffic control. ATC could leave you exhausted and stressed out but it was also something that is dynamic and quite simply...fun. Working with people takes something out of you every day. This is important for leaders to understand. People will push your emotional buttons and knowing how to manage and work with those emotions is a critical skill.

Transformers...No Not That Kind

Being prior military listening to Stanley McChrystal's give a Ted Talk was an interesting experience. When you are in the military your perspective is limited; typically just the job in front of you. As you gain a bit of rank that perspective changes and broadens a bit. However, very few ever make it to the rank of General. Though looking back on my time in the service part of why I left was a loss of faith in leadership and a focus on image rather than substance. It's anecdotal but certain career fields such as McChrystal's have a much more focused mission and as such less time is spent devising ways to politic among themselves.

McChrystal's understanding that he is leading a group of people with vastly different life experiences was refreshing to hear and it's part of what makes transformational leadership so effective. Transformational leadership understands that an individual brings more to the group than just their skills and talents. They also bring synrgey and what happens to that person also affects the group as a whole. A focus on developing the subordinate's overall ability to be a better person is much more important than just developing skills.

Jim "Mattress Mack" McIngvale also makes some valid points regarding leadership and changing how he employees viewed their roles. Jim invested a great deal of time and money into improving his workers skillset. What I found most interesting was teaching employees how to use iPads and electronic devices. This is a skill that goes beyond work into making a worker a more flexible citizen, able to adapt to a changing economy, and is certainly a function of transformational leadership.

When a company moves to a transformational leadership model a culture change typically takes place. Mattress Mack's team building was a great example of how company understood the need for change and then began to manage the change itself. It appears from his answers that the workforce was resistant to changes at first and I wonder how it was finally sold to them though if I had to guess once the state of company was made clear there buy-in began to increase. This would place the company near the line of quadrants three and four on a Strategy-Culture Matrix. They knew they needed to make a change quickly but still had the time to properly implement a transformational process throughout the company. 

McChrystal's leadership was more a change within himself and Mattress Mack changed external processes, though likely by learning new things. Both are important for transformational leadership. This form of leadership isn't particularly new and it's taught in many leadership courses but the component that I feel is left out is the transformation is a two-way activity. Leaders need to also be aware of how they themselves may need to change and grow in order to proper grow those they lead.