Are You Guiding Or Governing?

Posted on July 20, 2010 by Scott Gould

I was having a leadership discussion yesterday and the dilemma came up of wanting to have organic growth, but at the same time control the organic growth with checks and balances to ensure the brand wasn’t tarnished.

It’s a discussion I’m sure many of you have had: whilst you respect your community or audience and want them to run with ideas and bring value to the table, you don’t trust them enough to give them full ownership, either because they might get it wrong, or they might not keep it up.

The reason why this discussion is important for us is because all of us are asking: how much do I govern it?

Guidance and Governance

I see two mindsets, at either end of an upside down triangle (much like this). On the left, we have guidance, which is a hands-off approach that says ‘go for it’, and at the extreme, will let anything happen. On the right, we have governance, which is a sign-off approach that says ‘hold on it’, and at the extreme, will let nothing happen.

In my head I’ve got these two terms pretty together. I know what I think they mean – something that I explained sometime ago in this post on where I see PR going this year.

For me, guidance is the new way of thinking. It says that with good leadership, I can guide people without needing to govern them. However, I’m beginning to rethink this, just a little.

You don’t need me to tell you that either mindset, at the extremes we have listed above, becomes a real problem. But in balance, each has important strengths that we need that often create the same goals. For instance:

Guidance creates unconferences that destroy the speaker/attendee divide and get us learning together in a de-centralised way
Governance creates a smooth conference feel that has many controls in preparation to deliver a powerful learning experience, in a centralised way

Or lets take Open Source Software. By definition, it is about guidance – an openly available code base that you can modify and do whatever with for free. Yet, there are some rather strict guidelines and learning curves that govern Open Source – meaning that the average person probably won’t get round to using much of it in their life.

Governance is also not a negative thing. Governance provides a safety that a guidance mindset can’t. It often provides structure that guidance can’t too – especially on a larger scale. As much as we bash schools and the education system, there is a certain problem with scalability of new learning methods.

You see where I’m going here.

Guiding and Governing

Here’s what I’m beginning to realise: there are somethings that have to be governed, as much as I want to make everything open. For instance, in church I’m always going to govern the doctrine. But I don’t govern the way that people live – I can only guide it.

If we go back to our starting example – organice growth has to come from guidance. You set a vision, you set the end goal, and then you let people move there and even beyond there. But what underpins this and maintains the ground that you have won organically is a governane mindset – setting policies, procedures, structure.

This means that we need to be guiding, and then we need to be governing.

Your Leading Thoughts

I think you can also say the same about innovation vs duplication, or even social vs broadcast. So, tough question, but do we err too much on the side of guidance, innovation and social without acknowledging how much broadcast, duplication and governance is really at work?

Photo credit

It’s Easier To Obtain Than Maintain

Posted on July 19, 2010 by Scott Gould

Here’s a thought to kick off the week: is it easier to obtain than maintain?

For example: I find it easier to start and lead something, than managing it once it has been bult. Like Minds is always growing (check out our latest addition) – so I’m not so much maintaining it as I am obtaining new ground every month.

This is a hack I use. I know that I have energy and motivation to obtain, so I always focus on growing the things that I’m leading – or setting targets to obtain.

Faye, however, is far better at maintaining – so in many ways we compliment each other. Of course, we also can both step into obtain or maintain at any point if it is really required of us. This balance has been so useful for everything we do as a team.

Your Leading Thoughts

My question is – to you guys who participate and engage here – which are you? Can you obtain and maintain, or just one? What tricks do you use?

Photo: Like Minds Summit at Villa Kataya

Three Things We Need To Give

Posted on July 17, 2010 by Scott Gould

Thinking on from our discussion last week on The Fight Our Youth Face, I wanted to share the three things that I believe we need to give to the young people around us. Working with interns everyday, these have been the basis of what I’ve been doing for 7 years.

1. Exposure

It’s vital that people know there is a world far larger than the one that they live in. When I am working with teenagers who live in poorer neighbourhoods, it’s always interesting to see the mindset that ‘there isn’t life beyond their street.’ Unless we expose people to more – they’ll never know what options they really have.

The way I like to expose people is to show them people who have more and people who have less. I’ll take them to areas of depravity, I’ll take to see people who have lot less than they do who have then become successful, I’ll show them people who have little but are happy, and I’ll show them people who have little and are sad. This can be done, of course, abroad (which does wonders for getting them out of their usual environment) – but I find it powerful to also show them people living in their own city who fit this description.

Then I’ll take them to places and people who have more. I’ll take them to luxury places, business meetings, to meet very successful people in a range of industries, etc.

And then finally, I’ll always strive to show them something new everyday.

All of this serves to shift their thinking, and also should help with humbling them a bit and realising how privileged they are, and also how hard they need to work if they want to be successful. (I say this, because humility and hard work seem to be two traits that are becoming rarer and rarer.)

2. Insight

If I had to list the important traits that I want someone to have, top of my list would probably be self-insight. To know yourself – to really know yourself – with depth and clarity, understanding your weaknesses and strengths, understanding how you work, what makes you tick – and not just in general, but with great precision and very specifically is an asset that will take you far.

Giving insight is hard work, especially because it requires cutting into someone in order to reveal themselves to themselves. By cutting I don’t mean I shout at them or demean them – of course not – it means knowing how to use a surgeons knife to make an incision that makes them see more clearly.

Sometimes this is not met with joy. Sometimes people are up for it, and then sometimes the same people have too much too deal with, and so you need to know when to pick your moments.

3. Giving

We have to show our young people how to give. More specifically, how to give:

Their time (their attention and effort into something or someone)
Their talent (their resources and skills)
Their treasure (their finances and investments)
Their tongue (their words, language and encouragement)

I strive to help learn how to give and then when to give and when not to give. You all know that I learned from Chris Brogan about focussing in on the person in front of you – there are also times of course when you should not give, and the danger is that if you teach people to be giving, you need to help them with the maturity to develop a very strong no. This creates focus.

Your Leading Thoughts

Those are my three top things that I think we need to give. I’d like to know what yours are – but more specifically;

What is the top thing that you think we need to give?
In your experience, what we do think we need to give, that young people actually already have?

If You Had To Start Again

Posted on July 16, 2010 by Scott Gould

I was having lunch with someone the other day who was asking about becoming an Active Authority – someone who uses social media to actively engage people in a particular subject by demonstrating their expertise and authority in said subject.

Think Olivier Blanchard. When Olivier talks about brand management and social media management, people stop talking and listen. When he’s finished talking, people start repeating adapting what he’e said. Why? Because he’s the authority on it.

Now I wrote sometime ago on 5 ways to use Twitter as an Active Authority, but a comment on Wednesday made me see this in a new light, and I’d like to open up the discussion.

On the discussion about the myth of the personal brand, Codi Spodnik commented:

I am re-entering this space after a 5 – 6 year stint as a stay-at-home-mom in a small metro area. I do want to start my own consultancy, sharing the experience I gained before motherhood, helping clients find the right fit for executing their products, helping them articulate their needs and strategize solutions….. still working on the details.

But I have found this space to be cluttered with this talk of “personal branding.” To me, it has the appearance of a cult of Self. After perusing my local “experts” and similar consultants all over the web, I am finding the same talk and catch phrases, regardless of their level of actual experience or competence. I was really struggling with finding a way to create my own genuine identity without engaging in this practice or having that appearance.

I totally feel where Codi is coming from, and so I wanted to get your feedback for her so that she can glean insights from the wealth.

What I want to know is this: If you had to start again, what would you do?

I know what I’d do: I’d create content on a focussed subject that provides people with very clear and practical takeaways, and then engage with anyone who interacted with me or the content at any level, and do my best to help them make the content work for them.

Your Leading Thoughts

How about you? If you had to start again, what would you do?

Photo courtesy of Emiliantha

The Fight Our Youth Face

Posted on July 10, 2010 by Scott Gould

The more and more time I spend with young people (having just graduated from that class when I turned 26 last year), the more and more I realise how big a fight there is that they face – and they don’t even know it yet.

Since when I got into working with youth in 2003 when I started the Feedback youth charity, to today when I have youth interns working with me all the time (as per the photo to the left), I have noticed how directionless our young people have become. The irony is that the blessings of our knowledge economy have created an abundance of choice and open treasure chest full of opportunity, travel and exploration to these young people, which in turn has paralyzed them. Let me explain:

Because we are in a knowledge economy, fewer and fewer people are learning trades and instead studying soft subjects. We focus on gap years, sandwich years, extended studying at college (or high school if you are American) even up to the age of 21 – studying without obtaining any Higher Education accreditation – and then facing, whether they take an undergraduate course or not, the problem of a considerable lack of experience.

Cue my 18 year old brother, Todd. He has just finished two years of Further Education media studies, which he now regrets and is considering taking another two years of FE study. Whilst the opportunity and diversity of subjects available is a good thing, the amount of choice that he faces paralysis him. It’s good that our young people have so much more to engage with and formally learn, yet the plethora of choice has two major problems:

It delays decision making
It does not identify transferable skills

These are two of the fights our young people face – let’s look and them, as well as add another. Continue reading →

Building The Kingdom: Generalists and Specialists

Posted on June 15, 2010 by Scott Gould

We’ve been discussing the mini-series of “Building the Kingdom”, which has been a very insightful time for us to hear from one another on what it takes to build something that is strong, influential and significant. Notice I don’t say successful, which has personal and financial nuances, but rather I say significant, which instead speaks of legacy and making a difference to others.

Today I want to discuss something that came from our church leadership team, and is something that we have been thinking about and working out over the last 9 months.

A Leadership Dilemma

Despite having pioneered a number of successes over the last 7 years that I have been self employed, 6 months ago I found myself again in an all too familiar situation: I hadn’t built team, evidenced by these core symptoms:

I was doing a lot of the final production work that was being delivered in my areas of responsibility
I kept attracting people to myself who weren’t team builders themselves
I wasn’t regularly adding people into my teams
I wasn’t getting past the issues of scaling my areas, due to a lack of team
I was the bottleneck for at least 70% of the tasks being done in my areas of responsibility

The diagnosis? I was a perfectionist. Or rather, I was a specialist.

Specialists

If it’s focussing on one particular task or element that you often find yourself doing, tinkering over one cog in a machine almost obsessively, then you may well be a specialist.

Specialists are those who have a perfectionist, often creative, streak and tend to over focus on something in order to master it. They can multi-task, but they find it hard to have too many priorities in general in their life at a time, and often when a few interest or ‘fad’ is found, the old interests are cast aside.

As a result of their ability to focus deeply on one thing, they can produce at a high level of excellence in their interest. This is why I find most academics, creatives, athletes, geniuses and such are specialists.

Generalists

If it is organising multiple parts of a project, having an instinctive ability to put people to task, and bringing an idea to fruition, then you’re likely to be a generalist.

I think most people who are ‘born leaders’, and tend to be the typical number 1, are generalists because they see the bigger picture. If the specialist is obsessing over the function of a single cog, it is the generalist is overseeing the production of the machine – or rather it’s ability to produce.

Generalists tend to think with the end picture and with result, whereas specialists (myself) are more motivated by things being done right and in their perfect order.

Putting Them Together

For team building you need both generalist and specialists, and they need each other to achieve significance. As it’s said, one is too small a number to achieve significance:

A generalist, the natural team builder, needs the specialists to perform the expert and intricate tasks, in order to achieve an end result
A specialist needs the generalist to focus their work and link it together with other specialists, in order to achieve an end result

Nature and Nurture

The big question then, coming back to where I found myself 6 months ago, is can you be a specialist and become a genrealist, and vice versas?

Having discussed this concept with our church leadership team 6 months ago, I gained the self-insight that I am a specialist by nature. Every since I was a kid, I’ve had a fascination with order and doing things right, and focussed obsessively on my creative endeavors to make them the best that I could.

However the dilemma was facing me: I wasn’t building team. Through gaining the self-insight into myself, I was able to deduce two things:

I have influence with people because I have focus, expertise and a good track record
I can learn anything that I decide to specialise in by obsessing over it

Therefore, I decided that I could turn my obsession onto becoming a team builder, and expand my influence into building my team.

The result? I’d like to discuss that later, actually. What I’d like to discuss now though, is what I’d like your leading thoughts on.

Your Leading Thoughts

Are you a generalist or a specialist? Why? What’s the evidence for either?
Can you learn one or the other?
Are their General Specialists and Special Generalist? If so, what the two axis in this 2×2?

Developing A Strong ‘NO’

Posted on June 11, 2010 by Scott Gould

Last week, Rich Quick posted an excellent comment on this blog, talking saying “NO”. It came in the middle of the discussion of the 5 innovations of the iPad, and that Apple’s strength was by saying no to a lot of things, in order to have a stronger and more defined yes. In actual fact, MG Siegler from TechCrunch wrote the same thing yesterday.

Rich’s comment was so good, and so encapsulated the journey that I’ve been on over the last 2 years (and in particular, the last 2 months), that I’d like to share it with all of you. Consider it a lesson in “No.”

The question to ask yourself as you read is, like Apple, what should you say “no” to, so that you can “yes” to?

If you need more advice on a “strong no” when you’re done with this, then watch this video from Robin Dickinson on the subject.

How Rich Quick Learnt To Say No

By Rich Quick

It’s something I’ve discovered over the course of my business career anyway. The power of “no”.

I come from a sales background. Salespeople love the word “yes”, it makes them money.

I also trained to be a teacher – and both my parents were teachers. (Good) teachers also love to say “yes”. Yes, I can help you. Yes, you did do well on your homework.

So, “no” come unnaturally to me. Continue reading →

Building The Kingdom: Knowing Me, Knowing You

Posted on June 9, 2010 by Scott Gould

My friend Robin Dickinson had what I described as the greatest blog ever recently. His post “Share Words“, in which he gave hands on advice on assisting people with their own share words – short phrases to help him share what they are about – to every person who commented. The best bit was how the community began helping one another with their share words, and to date, there are 697 comments.

To be a king maker, you have to know your kings. The strongest teams are those who know each other inside out, and can maximise each other’s strengths and minimise each other’s weaknesses. This is why Robin’s share words are so important, because they help us know each other.

Knowing you, and you knowing me, means that we don’t compete with each other but we complete each other:

When anyone asks me who to speak to about digital publishing, I tell them it’s Andrew Davies and Ed Barrow at Idio.
If anyone needs measurement and integration consultancy with Social Media, I tell them they need to speak to Olivier Blanchard and attend Red Chair in London later this month.
Anyone who is overloaded I tell to read Robin Dickinson’s blog immediately and start developing diamond-focus.
Those who want Social Media advice and are in Bristol or Cheltenham I tell to speak to Chris Hall and attend Media140 in Bristol this month.
Any person who wants to really impact on a social scale I hook up with Stephanie Rudat and the exceptional work she is doing, or point to Jeff Hurt and Dave Lutz to learn how to improve learning.
For those wanting to take their organisations beyond marketing, I refer them to Ann Holman.

And likewise, these people are plugging people into me who need the strengths that I have.

The Multiplying Effect of People-to-People

When we talk people-to-people like this, we encounter a multiplying effect. A scripture in the bible that confounded me for years was “One can put a thousand to flight, two can put ten thousand to flight.” I never understood how 1+1 could equal 10, but then I began to realise that if I spend my day doing what I am best at, and let others do what they are best at, then I no longer have to waste my time and neither do they. My day becomes more productive, and our combined productivity equals a 10.

The big question of course is “do you know me?” – or rather – “do I know you?” The volume-based game that most are playing online booms with a resounding “No” because everyone is too busy building their own super personal ego brand, complete with logo and 30 day programme, that they don’t have the time nor the inclination to get to know you.

However people-to-people is not a volume but value play and we must know each other – and know each other well. Without this, we do not understand each other’s strengths and therefore don’t achieve this multiplication of strengths.

The answer then is plain: know me, and enable me get to know you.

Note: this is an active pursuit, and the one of a leader. Followers not necessary.

Your Leading Thoughts

How do you get to really know people, practically?
How are you managing those relationships successfully and ensuring that you build deep, value-based relationships rather than getting sucked into the volume game that most people play?

P.S. If you have no idea what that photo above is about, watch this.

Building the Kingdom: Number 1s and Number 2s

Posted on June 1, 2010 by Scott Gould

Over the last week, there’s been some great discussion from our community on the post “Are you a King or a King-Maker?” First of all – thank you. The depth of discussion has been exceptional and a very clear display of people who are all committed to being king-makers.

This post is in response to the comments and discussion, and presenting just a small truth that I learnt myself earlier this year.

To get you up to speed

The point we were making is that some people are kings and some people are king-makers. King makers are those who see the potential in people and work to make them the kings that they can be. In an age (particularly on Twitter) where everyone wants to be the king of their own personal brand, their own community and blog, complete with product and their own affiliate program, king-makers are increasingly rare.

Being a king and a king-maker are also not mutually exclusive – but the best kings are those who were king-makers first, and indeed continue to be so.

The liberation of it all

In the comments on the post, Randy Dunning said something that really humbled me and opened my eyes when he said:

Posts like this are very liberating in that they give people permission to do what is right.

Common thinking – even in relation to social media – is along the lines of “How can I leverage this to further my kingdom.”

I think he’s quite right. As I said above, there is this strong push for everyone to be a king of their own kingdom (no matter how small it is), and in turn, every social connection they have is seen as leverage to the advancement of said kingdom. This is what I’m probably going to call the Digital King Complex, because it’s what we are seeing everywhere. There is an immense pressure from every side, with bloggers telling other bloggers that they have to get a brand, get their product, get their affiliate program, get their feeds, and so on. Continue reading →

Are You A King, Or A King-Maker?

Posted on May 27, 2010 by Scott Gould

I wrote yesterday about my dear friend Trey Pennington who I described as a king-maker. People really liked the analogy of being a king or king-maker, which isn’t surprising - but I wonder how many people really are making kings?

It’s far more rewarding, effective and exciting to be the king-maker, than trying to put yourself on the throne all the time. Ego is hard work, and trying to make yourself king is tiring. I’ve tried it before, and not only did I find it exhausting, but I found I wasn’t helping anyone else but myself.

You know how it is when someone is trying to be king – the ego casts a shadow a mile long, right? Not always. It can be very subtle. In fact, I find pretty much the whole of the Twitter community are trying to be kings. There’s nothing wrong with that, but doesn’t all this ‘share’ talk annoy you when the ones who shout ‘share’ really mean ‘share me?’

Those who are trying to be kings are always:

Trying to get attention, rather than give it
Trying to get traffic, than send it
Trying to get comments, rather than give them
Trying to sell, rather than buying
Trying to build the house, rather than build the hostel

The difference between these people, and king-makers, is that king-makers get attention, by giving it, and so on.

Of course some people are kings. But the best kings were king-makers first - and will always be king-makers – because these are the ones that better the country they lead.

Your Leading Thoughts

Every regular at this blog that comments aren’t self proclaimed – I know you all. So my question is:

Are you a king-maker. If yes, or if no, why?
If you’re not, shouldn’t you be?

Image courtesy of Timothy K Hamilton.