UpwardOnward

Strategic Small Business Ramblings 
Tags


Filed under

Paradigms

 
December 14, 2009

2 Paradigms of a Leader

Leadership is not so much an activity as it is a Paradigm. The reason is, behavior -or the act of leadership- will always follow one's paradigm of leadership. 

There are two basic paradigms of leadership:
  • leadership as service to self
  • leadership as service to others

Leadership as Service to Self

I'm sure many of us have seen leadership as "service to self". We have most likely all had the displeasure of working with, or witnessing, a president, a manager, or supervisor that had the "service to self" paradigm. Here are a few examples:
  • These people see their position as a means to personal gain first and foremost. 
  • Their actions speak louder than their words- no matter how eloquent those words are- that they are in this for "me". 
  • They often are constantly seeking positions of power above all else, power for their own benefit. 
  • They will often disregard the needs and concerns of those under their leadership, because their focus is on themselves. 
  • The "services" performed in their job duties are often just enough to meet the requirements of their position. 
  • They would rather not learn new things, just the minimum to get by. Personal growth is a chore. 
  • If their is any sort of difficulty or failure on the part of those under them, they look to pass blame and responsibility downward immediately, as it moves it farther from themselves. 
  • When faced with a difficult situation, they often look to pass blame to those that came before them, or those around them, anything to offload responsibility. 
  • Because of their focus on self, little effort is given to building up the people under them, or the organization they serve. 
  • They may act politically, looking to their own benefit, by making the politically popular decisions, not necessarily the decisions that actually benefit those under them.
  • They often fear those around them attaining power or ability that may rival their own, they look to surround themselves with those less threatening. 
  • A poor leader spends time trying to make himself look good, often at the expense of his team. 

Leadership as Service to Others

These leaders are more of a rarity. Some of us have had the great pleasure of working under these people, and watched how well they were able to serve us, and our organizations with aplomb. Here are a few examples of their behaviors: 
  • These leaders see their positions of power as an opportunity for more influence, and to serve in the best interests of others. 
  • Their actions speak louder than their words- no matter how dull and boring those words are- that they are in this for the benefit of "others".
  • They are often seeking to expand their influence, for the benefit of teams, organizations and companies they work for. 
  • They hold the needs of those under them in the highest importance. 
  • Their services often go above and beyond what is required of them. 
  • They are constantly learning- they are "students of the game".
  • If there is any difficulty or failure involving people under them, they assess the situation, look to themselves, and scrutinize their leadership first- they remember the saying: "There are no bad teams, only bad leaders." Only when they have exhausted all leadership avenues do they move on with extreme prejudice. 
  • When faced with a difficult situation they avoid placing blame where possible, and instead take full responsibility and ownership, realizing that in actuality, they alone bear it. 
  • They look to build up those under them, to improve individuals, the organization, and the world as a whole. But they give no free rides- they would rather teach a man to fish than give him a fish. With this in mind, they can seem harsh at times, and hold high expectations of those under them. But these high expectations are in place because they have assessed and estimated the true abilities of their people, and know its a leader's job to bring out peak performance. 
  • Good leaders also have faith in their fellow man, they visualize people's potential, and see no man as weak, disadvantaged or otherwise incapable. They see everyone as capable of achieving a high level of success, if they only learn to see that for themselves. 
  • They can often make politically unpopular decisions, but trust that those decisions are in the best interest of the individuals and the organization they serve. They are guided by principles, not politics or personal gain. 
  • They want to surround themselves with people smarter than they are, they know their power lies in their service, not in their abilities alone.
  • A good leader knows they cannot make themselves look good, they look good only when their team looks good. 

As leaders, it is important to self evaluate, and even be open to evaluation by others. Easier said than done, but the goal is to have all of our actions reflect a paradigm of service to those we are meant to lead. 

Filed under  //   Leadership   Paradigms  

Comments [0]

December 7, 2009

Paradigms of the Cash Flow Quadrant

In a previous post, Why Paradigms are so important, I outlined the importance of paradigms in regards to tackling problems and improving results. Robert Kiyosaki's book, "Cash Flow Quadrant", a follow up to "Rich Dad Poor Dad, talks about four paradigms, and their relation to creating wealth. 

In this post, I will only be covering the basic paradigms of the cash flow quadrant and highly recommend Kiyosaki's "Cash Flow Quadrant" for a more in depth look into how the four paradigms- E-employee, S- sole proprietor, B- business person and I-investors- work. Of these, there are no wrong paradigms, they each have their own advantages and disadvantages. 

The E- employee for example: as an employee you are at the mercy of your boss, and your company, you get few tax advantages (in fact the largest expense you have in your life is most likely taxes), and the only way to get a raise or "move up the ladder" is if someone above you says its OK. You sacrifice your life (in hours of the day) to make money- in essence you are sacrificing freedom and control for "job security", and less risk (or today, at least the illusion job security). Money is not as important to you as security. This all seems negative, until you experience the paradigm shift of trying to start and run your own business, then the E doesn't seem so bad after all to many people, and in fact, most people at least start out here. 

In between the E and B paradigms lies the S- sole proprietor. The small business owners, professionals and contractors. These are often people who have moved from the E quadrant in search of freedom and independence- something you get little of in the flight to comfort that is the E. You get to pick your own hours (or so it seems at first) and you can charge whatever you want for your time (as long as you can get work at that rate). This seems like a holy grail for many people, and in fact for many it is. You do get more freedom and independence, and if you are in a field where you like to be doing the work (a technician) and garner the respect for it, like a doctor, a lawyer, artist, consultant, or an academic, this is most likely the way to go. You are in full control, and your success and failure is up to you and you alone. It is however a lot harder to start your own small business and run it, than it is to get a job working for someone else. Often times, being that the only way you can make money is, again, with your time, the only way to make more money is with more time, (or higher rates which are not always feasible). You do get some tax advantages, but then in some ways, you can also end up paying more taxes as well, so your mileage may vary. You also get no benefits except what you create for yourself. The main attraction here is freedom and independence along with the ability to do your own work (which you love), with an easy transition out of the E quadrant. 

Kiyosaki is understandably very adamant about people going the route of the B and the I. For business owners, freedom and independence is also a top priority. The difference is- of low priority, is the need to take credit for their work. In fact, they perform best when they surround themselves with people who are smarter than they are, that can do better work than they can. Something the E and S paradigms usually find a little intimidating. B's want to create systems, not do work. This doesn't mean they are lazy, in fact, usually they are workaholics because they love what they do. Its just that creating systems is their thing. A system does have several advantages once its setup. For one, if your system is working, it requires very little of your time and effort to run. 
McDonald's for example, is a system. Kiyosaki talks about this a lot in his books. They are not interested in making the best hamburger, they are interested in creating a system that sells hamburgers. And that system works very well. I think we all can make a better hamburger than McDonald's, but none of us can sell billions of them. So if your system doesn't need you to run, you don't have to be there very much, you can be doing other things while your system (business) is making money for you. 
Businesses also enjoy some of the best tax advantages, because it is the businesses that take the risks, and creates the jobs for the E's. The paradigm here is of not doing the work, but finding people that can do it well, building them up constantly, and leading them to greatness. To do this, you need to always be learning, improving yourself, and thinking outside the box. The downsides to the B paradigm, are the extreme difficulty of successfully starting a business, but for some people, this is where they are happiest. 

Those with the "I" paradigm are people who want money to work for them, they don't want to work for money. Those in the E,S, and B quadrants could also share the I paradigm, wanting to be investors and put their money to work in stocks, real estate or other investments. Those purely in the I quadrant are usually wealthy, or have a certain level of liquidity to be able to invest full time. This is the "fast lane", where you can snowball your wealth using the money you already have, investing in large deals- be they businesses or real estate investments. They also want to avoid the expense of taxes as much as possible and just pay their fair share. The main difficulty of entering the I quadrant, even if you have the right paradigm for it, is building the capital to invest. Often, because of this major obstacle, you usually have to start elsewhere in the E,S or B quadrants.

Everyone has a different view on the best methods for creating personal wealth (making money) for themselves. As mentioned above, there is no wrong paradigm, with one exception- if you really want to be in a different quadrant. If you are in the E quadrant for example, and want to get into the B quadrant, this will first take a shift in paradigms, or you will have a very hard time. Being in a quadrant of your choice has less to do with what you know or what skills you have and more to do with how you "see" work, money, and the world around you. The paradigm is the root. 

 

Filed under  //   Business   Investing   Paradigms  

Comments [0]

November 30, 2009

Why Paradigms are so important

Paradigms are basically "the way we view the world", often also called a world view. Paradigms are the lens through which we see and interpret information and data around us. Understanding paradigms is helpful in solving problems, and in achieving better results in individuals and organizations. A lack of understanding of how paradigms work is at the root of most of the problems we face today, in government, business organizations, and amongst people in general. In dealing with problems, be they in an organization, or even problems one faces with self, paradigms are often overlooked completely. More often than not, Attitudes, Behaviors and Values are what is the focus for most people. But if you realize that paradigms are at the root of Attitudes and Behaviors, your plan of attack is much different.  

 

For other applications, such as any sort of self improvement, business activity, or endeavors such as investing, results become extremely important. Although there are many variables in any endeavor we undertake, paradigms are at the root of our results. Results can help us to see if a paradigm is beneficial or not in more black and white terms- if your results are not to your satisfaction, a change is needed, and often a change at the root will yield the best results. This change is known as a "Paradigm Shift". It is the "ah-ha" moment you experience, which opens you up to a new way of thinking, which yields different, often more beneficial results in your life or organization. 

 

As individuals, it is wise to compare our goals to our actual results, and if our goals are not being attained we look to be open to new paradigms- new ways of thinking about an existing problem- that could possibly yield better results for us. As business leaders, we look to empower people with the paradigm shift by giving people new experiences, and challenging existing modes of thought in ways that cause deeper introspection. When related to personal and corporate goals, this can allow them to achieve better results for themselves, and the organization. 

 

Until I understood paradigms, I used to struggle with trying to change my behavior, or my attitude to get the results I wanted. As a leader I would strive to change the behavior of those I work with in order to get the results I expected of them. This ended up being like a bandaid in almost every case, because I left the existing root intact. My results in either case were always less than what I thought they should be after all my hard work. Once I began to focus on paradigms, my results improved substantially. 

Filed under  //   Paradigms  

Comments [0]