Why Integrity, Honesty and Character are foundation values of Positive Leadership

The scene was the 1925 U.S. Open at Worcester Country Club in Worcester, Massachusetts, and Bobby Jones was in the hunt for his second major championship.

As Jones prepared to hit a shot out of the rough late in the tournament, he noticed that his ball had moved ever so slightly during address. His playing competitor, Walter Hagen, never saw the incident. The same went for his caddy and the spectators watching his round. The pressure was placed squarely on Jones to make the right call.

Unlike other sports where a referee makes the final decision on a penalty or foul, golf lives by a different set of rules. These rules include putting the onus of calling a penalty on yourself. The ability to live or die with that decision is one that makes golf such an honourable sport.

Instead of living hiding the penalty and going on with his round, Jones decided to do the right thing and call a 1-stroke penalty on himself. That one shot ended up costing him the tournament in regulation, as well as the championship, as he went on to lose a 36-hole playoff to Willie Macfarlane.

Famed sportswriter, O.B. Keeler, lauded Jones for his decision, one that ultimately cost him one of the most prestigious trophies in golf. Instead of taking the honour and recognition for his decision, Jones pleaded with Keeler to not write about the incident.

“You might as well praise me for not robbing banks,” Jones said.

Brian Davis probably felt the same way after last Sunday's final round of the Verizon Heritage at Harbour Town Golf Links.

Davis and Bobby Jones might not have a lot on the common on the surface (one is a golf legend; the other is a journeyman tour pro) but it became very clear on Sunday that both are cut from the same cloth that preaches honour before accolades.

After making a miraculous birdie on the 72nd hole of the championship to force a playoff with Jim Furyk, Davis found himself in a very interesting predicament on the first playoff hole.

After watching his approach shot draw left of the green on 18 and into a water hazard, Davis was left with the difficult shot of getting his ball up and down from beside a bunch of reeds and twigs. During his takeaway on the shot, Davis noticed a reed had moved during his backswing.

Davis immediately called over rules official Slugger White to tell him the news. The violation of rule 13.4 (which prohibits moving a loose impediment in a hazard during a takeaway) went unseen by everyone but Davis. After watching the incident on television replay it was confirmed that Davis did in fact brush the reed with his club. Davis called a two-stroke penalty on himself and went on to lose the playoff to Furyk. As much fun as it was to see Furyk finally put on the plaid jacket at Harbour Town, there was definitely a bitter-sweet taste to the victory.

Davis’ decision, one that cost him $400,000 and a trip to the SBS Championship next year in Hawaii, was probably the toughest decision of his life. 

But if ever there was a decision that made you proud to be a fan of the sport, this was certainly one of them.

In a sports world where steroids and cutting corners is an accepted practice, Davis’ decision to call a penalty on himself speaks volumes about not only Brian Davis as a person, but the integrity of the sport of golf.

“That [decision to call a penalty] will come back to him spades, tenfold,” White said afterwards.

After calling a penalty on himself during the 1925 U.S. Open, Jones went on to win the U.S. Open the following year. We can only hope Davis gets the same kind of karma in the near future for his honourable decision. 

Why Integrity, Honesty and Character are foundation values of Positive Leadership

Why Leaders need to talk about Honesty and Integrity in the Work Environment

Employees will go to great lengths to support a leader they believe in; one they see as having high standards of honesty and integrity. Conversely, they lack commitment for managers whose approach is "Do as I say, not as I do". 

It is a mistake to assume that everyone on your team would define honesty and integrity in the same way. That's why you need to talk about it with your team: an open discussion where team members can contribute ideas for, and share their opinions on, a collective set of values for your team. By doing this you can develop standards of honesty and integrity that everyone can abide by. 

This means, of course, that you need to set the example and operate by these standards at all times. Encourage all team members to hold each other mutually accountable for operating by these shared values. If they see anyone, including you, failing to meet the agreed standards of honesty and integrity it is up to them to reinforce the standards and remind the individual of her or his responsibility to the rest of the team and to the organisation.

To recap, here are the steps you can take to develop a set of shared values of honesty and integrity in your team:

1. Take time out to reflect on what you believe is right and wrong; what are your own personal standards of honesty and integrity?
2. Ask the team what they believe is right and wrong behaviour:
      a. What is an honest day's work?
      b. What is honest communication?
      c. What is an honest product or service?
3. If the team does not come up with something that is important to you, share your beliefs with the team and ask for feedback.
4. Agree on a set of behavioural guidelines for operating with honesty and integrity that you can all abide by.

Why Leaders need to talk about Honesty and Integrity in the Work Environment

Self-Discipline

Self-discipline is a value of Positive Leadership.

‘Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power.’ Lao Tzu

Here are some reference materials which speak to this value:

Self-Discipline

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership

If you've not studied Emotional Intelligence you should, especially if you want to be a top leader. Here are two powerful reasons back up that statement. First, research shows that the overwhelming difference between top performers and average performers is higher levels of Emotional Intelligence. The second reason? Emotional Intelligence is totally learnable.

Emotional Intelligence (what many call "EQ") is a type of skill or intelligence that enables you to perceive and assess the emotions, desires, and tendencies of yourself as well as of those around you, and make the best decision for all concerned that moves everyone in the direction of a common goal.

Four-fifths of the difference between top and average performers is higher EQ. Contrary to popular belief, it's a relatively simple undertaking. Also, since more than two thirds of the difference between top performers and average performers is EQ, it's practically a no-brainer to study it if you want to be a top performer.

By the way, if you're in a top leadership position, the reason to study is even stronger: in senior positions, four-fifths of the difference between top and average performers is higher EQ.

 What follows are ten essential understandings about relationship management that some say ought to be common sense. If your work involves dealing with people (most jobs do), and you want a foundation upon which you can build your emotional intelligence skills, here are a few things to know:

1. In the realm of personality styles, we should drop the ideas of "good" and "bad." People are just different.

2. People often equate "different" with "difficult." In reality, different is difficult only because people haven't learned to work effectively with the differences.

3. In the same way that a stick has two ends, people have strengths and weaknesses. All strengths have an associated weakness, and all weaknesses have an associated strength. You choose which end of the stick will receive your attention.

4. All personality styles add to team strength; it's just a matter of focusing on strengths rather than weaknesses. By focusing on strengths you'll get stronger. By focusing on weaknesses, you'll get weaker.

5. Seeking the strengths in differing styles does not come naturally — it takes constant effort.

6. We cannot be effective if we expect everyone else to meet us on "our turf."

7. We cannot assume we know another person's definition of "win." We may have a general idea, but to truly be effective we must ask.

8. If we place personal goals over those of others, the team, and/or the organisation's vision and mission, we create divisions. This severely weakens our ability to maximise results.

9. Effectiveness has to with doing the right thing, efficiency has to do with getting things done fast. When working with people, effectiveness is rarely efficient. The best results usually come when we take the necessary time in our relationships to do things right.

10. It's one thing to understand these things, it's another thing to do them. The longest road can be the 18 inches between your head and your heart.

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership

Openness and Communication

Openness and Communication are two values of Positive Leadership.

‘It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.’ Aristotle

‘The day soldiers stop bring you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them.’ General Colin Powell

‘Having the confidence to adapt quickly to any situation, use honesty, humility and humour in the conversation, and interact as a positive force in the community.’ Steve Shenbaum

Here are some reference materials which speak to these values:

Openness and Communication

UK General Election 2010: Nice Nick Clegg can't believe his luck

From Simon Heffer’s column in today’s Daily Telegraph:

‘As Dave, in particular, has learned in the past 36 hours or so, the big problem with the "historic" leaders' television debate was that it was preceded by expectations. Gordon Brown, who I thought was mad to agree to take part, had everything to lose, and jolly nearly lost it after a wooden, aggressive, boring performance; Dave was expected to wipe the floor with him; and as for Nick Clegg, who was he, other than Vince Cable's valet de chambre?

We now know exactly who Nick Clegg is: he is Mr Integrity, the nation's sweetheart, the only honest man in politics. I had thought the public were a bit brighter than that, and would see through his pious, sanctimonious, oleaginous, not-me-guv display of cynical self-righteousness: but they didn't. And for that we can only blame the two inadequates with whom he had the good fortune to go in front of the cameras: for they were shocking.......

Mr Brown's impersonation of a robot, and his projection of all the charm of a caravan site in February, were pretty predictable: but the place where hair was really being torn out yesterday was around poor old Dave. The attempt by this trust-funded Old Etonian (and Old Bullingdonian) to come over as Mr Ordinary was rather tragic: if we have to hear much more about his children's state school and his family's experience of the NHS, some of us will need medical attention of our own......

It is a long haul from winning a beauty contest to winning a general election, and one imagines Nice Nick won't do that. But Dave now goes into next week's bout as the underdog. Mr Brown can't really get any worse, and has few expectations riding upon him: but if Dave underperforms again, he will be in very serious trouble. To land five years in No 10, he does not just need to squash an already imploding Labour Party: he needs to win a pile of seats from the Lib Dems. On last night's show, that is going to be a tall order: and if he fouls up again, the Lib Dems might even start winning seats from him. Still, it could have been worse: just imagine if he had had to debate with Ukip, too, about the real meaning of conservatism.’ 

For more, see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/7598998/General-Election-2010-Nice-Nick-Clegg-cant-believe-his-luck.html

UK General Election 2010: Nice Nick Clegg can't believe his luck

Sharing Your Positive Leadership Vision With Your Team

Many of us like to contemplate and reflect on the future of our business. Some of us even articulate a vision for our organisation or team: how we would like the future to be in, say, three or five years from now. By opening your mind to the possible and, yes, dreaming a little, you will be amazed at how much creativity you will bring out of yourself and your team.

One of the best ways of getting your team members on board and passionate about working with you is to get them to share their thoughts and dreams with you. If you want them to be passionate about their work, show them that they can be a part of creating the future.

Here are some ideas you can use to develop a sense of excitement and buzz within your organisation about its future:

• Put aside some regular contemplation time for yourself to think about the future of your business and what it could be like in the coming years.
• Sit down with your team members and stimulate a discussion about what they believe is possible for your team to achieve.
• With your team, identify the goals that need to be reached in order to realise this vision.
• Encourage your team members to talk with each other about the future and how they can continually improve performance.

The benefit of this exercise is twofold. Not only will it help you to create a more passionate workforce, you are also very likely to uncover some latent talent within your team - adding more substance and new perspectives to your vision.

By opening up a discussion in this way, suddenly you will have transformed "my" vision into "our" vision. 

Sharing Your Positive Leadership Vision With Your Team

Coaching Teams for Success

It is interesting to study the leadership strengths and strategies of coaches who inspire teams to succeed. Those strengths and strategies are applicable in any work situation and provide the same results — continuous success.

But first, here is a look at what manipulative coaches/leaders do as opposed to what inspirational coaches/leaders do. Manipulative leaders want people to know who the boss is, and they use their positional power to make people do things. They boast of their education and achievements. They intimidate people and point out what is wrong with other people. People are on the team or work for manipulative coaches/leaders because they have to. Work/playing is a task the team players/employees don’t look forward to because it’s not fun.

However, inspirational coaches/leaders have seven proven attributes that inspire teams/employees to perform to the best of their potential. 


Here are the key attributes:

• They influence people with their 'personality power' but not with their position or knowledge power.

• Their talk and actions reflect their deep conviction that they are not above the team. Instead of saying, “You go do this and that,” they say, “Let’s all go and ...”

• They create a positive team or work environment with their positive influence.

• When things are wrong, they point at what’s wrong, not at individuals.

• They inspire people for maximum productivity (play/work) because they help others want to succeed.

• They encourage people with timely feedback, whether encouragement or otherwise.

• They develop people for success in life, beyond a given task. They are interested in an individual’s overall success.

Bonus: They make people feel valued, important and positive contributors to the organisation’s bottom line. 

Coaching Teams for Success

Resilience and Courage

Resilience and Courage are two values of Positive Leadership.

‘Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall.’ Confucius

‘Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others.’ Winston Churchill

Here are some reference materials which speak to these values:

Resilience and Courage

Does Your Passion as a Leader Match Your Ambition?

Leaders who create extraordinary new possibilities are passionate about their mission and tenacious in pursuit of it. Many people have good ideas, but many fewer are willing to put themselves on the line for them. Passion separates good intentions and opportunism from real accomplishments.

To determine whether your passion matches your aspirations, try these 12 questions:

1. Do I feel strongly about the need for this?

2. Does the idea fit my long-held beliefs, values, and convictions?

3. Have I dreamed about something like this for a long time?

4. Do I think that this is vital for the future of people I care about?

5. Do I get excited when I think about it, and convey excitement when I talk about it?

6. Am I convinced that this can be accomplished?

7. Am I willing to put my credibility on the line to promise action on it?

8. Am I willing to spend time to sell it to others who might not understand or support it?

9. Can I make this the major focus of my activities?

10. Am I willing to devote personal time, above and beyond organisational time, to see that this happens?

11. Do I feel strongly enough to ignore negativity and fight for this?

12. Am I committed to seeing this through, over the long haul?

Passing the passion test is doesn't guarantee success, but without it, the journey can't even begin.

For more, see - http://blogs.hbr.org/kanter/2010/03/does-your-passion-match-your-a.html

Does Your Passion as a Leader Match Your Ambition?

Values Based Leadership from P&G

Bob McDonald, the ceo of Proctor & Gamble speaks about his personal values and how they guide his leadership style (from an event at MIT in February 2009):

Values Based Leadership from P&G

Influence and Respect

Influence and Respect are values of Positive Leadership.

‘Leadership is influence.’ John Maxwell

‘Respect a man, and he will do all the more.’ John Wooden

Here are some reference materials which speaks to this value:

Influence and Respect

The Pygmalion Effect - How High Expectation Creates High Performance

In 1911, researchers begin taking special interest in a horse owned by a German mathematician named Von Osten. The horse, aptly named Clever Hans, was reported to able to count - add, subtract, multiply and divide. It was even suggested that Clever Hans could spell and solve problems involving musical harmony. As mystifying and even magical as this seemed to be, it was concluded following a rigorous study, that in fact Clever Hans possessed no highly intelligent factors nor extraordinary abilities. It was simply a case of Clever Hans performing what had become expected of him.

Two researchers, Stumpt and Pfungst, realised that when the handlers of Clever Hans posed questions to him, they were providing subtle physical and verbal cues to the horse as it pertained to the answer. This reality was summarised in the book, 'Teachers and the Learning Process' written by Robert Strom (Prentice-Hall, 1971): 

"Among the first discoveries made was that if the horse could not see the questioner, Hans was not clever at all. Similarly, if the questioner did not himself know the answer to the question, Hans could not answer it either - A forward inclination of the head of the questioner would start Hans tapping, Pfungst observed - as the experimenter straightened up, Hans would stop tapping - he found that even the raising of his eyebrows was sufficient. Even the dilation of the questioner's nostrils was a cue for Hans to stop tapping."

In short, inadvertently, people were offering the correct answers to Clever Hans by communicating their expectations via physical signs - and Hans learned to pick up the signals, no matter how subtle.

This ascension to what is expected of you is known contemporarily as self-fulfilling prophecy and was outlined originally in 1957 by a sociology professor Robert Merton, at Columbia University. In his essay, 'Social Theory and Social Structure', Merton suggested that "a false definition of the situation evokes a new behaviour which makes the original false conception come true". Simply stated, once an expectation is set, even one of false conception, you will act in certain ways that are consistent with that expectation, causing the results of the expectation to become true.

The birth of this theory may actually be found in ancient mythical legend. It is written in the tenth book of Metamorphoses, which the sculptor, Pygmalion, who was a prince of Cyprus, sought to create an ivory statue of his ideal mate. The result of his work was an extraordinarily beautiful sculpted woman, which Pygmalion named Galatea. Because of her beauty, Pygmalion fell desperately in love with the sculpted woman and began praying to Venus to bring Galatea to life. Venus granted his prayer and thus became what is now known as 'the Pygmalion Effect'.

The expectations you direct towards a person, event or even yourself, will eventually come true. This theory has transcended to become a key instrument of learning for managers and supervisors in the business world. It was described by J. Sterling Livingston in the September/October 1988 Harvard Business Review in an article entitled 'Pygmalion in Management'; "The way managers treat their subordinates is subtly influenced by what they expect of them".

The Pygmalion Effect can either elevate an employee's productivity or entirely undermine it. For instance, workers who receive continuous verbal praise for their efforts, while being supported by non-verbal means, will aspire and ascend to even more productivity. In contrast, if an employee receives less praise or even communication from management than their peers or co-workers, although nothing is being conveyed verbally, the worker feels as though they are underappreciated and will see a lapse or decrease in productivity.

The Pygmalion Effect - How High Expectation Creates High Performance

Accountability

Accountability is a value of Positive Leadership.

‘The right to do something does not mean that doing it is right.’ William Safire


'A personal choice to rise above one's circumstances and demonstrate the ownership necessary for achieving desired results.' Roger Connors

Here are some reference materials which speak to this value:

Accountability

America's Inspirational President

President Obama's recent achievement on healthcare has not just rebutted critics, it has slain doubts. His election campaign promised the triumph of imagination and optimism over weary resignation. His slogan "Yes we can!" was meant to answer an implicit question over the ability of politics ever to be a vehicle for meaningful change.

President Obama revisited that theme in a brilliant speech on the eve of the healthcare vote. He asked veteran parliamentarians to recall what inspired them to get involved in politics in the first place. He invited them to fan the embers of their idealism back into flames of conviction. He used the power of pure oratory to change the boundaries of what his audience considered possible in politics. It is hard to imagine any of the current generation of British politicians mobilising anyone that way.

We may have watched much of the US debate on healthcare with bafflement. But we can also witness with envy the manner in which the argument was won by the president and feel inspired.

America's Inspirational President

Confidence in Leadership

The Korn/Ferry Institute's Confidence in Leadership Index shows that support for CEOs worldwide has inched up over the past year, and that optimism about the direction of leadership is again on the rise. 

The survey of executives from 13 nations also found that those working in the developing economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China are the most positive about the direction of corporate leadership. Those in United States and the United Kingdom remain the least optimistic.

The study focuses on opinions of global executives about the leadership within their organisations. The analysis revealed interesting trends over the past year. Of six "layers" of corporate leadership (from self-assessed rankings of one's own leadership ability to credibility of the C-suite and board of directors), only CEOs showed quarter-over-quarter improvement. The mean score for CEOs has gained four points, from 67 in Q2 2009, to 71 in Q1 2010.

In addition, data shows wide differences in how executives around the globe feel about the direction of corporate leadership. On a scale from -100 (getting worse) to +100 (getting better), China, India, Brazil and Russia expressed the strongest view that their corporate leadership is improving, posting marks of 53, 52, 44 and 26 respectively against a global mean of 22. The mean scores of Canada, the U.S. and the U.K. were slightly negative: -1, -4 and -5 respectively, representing the bottom three positions.

Globally, the Direction of Leadership index climbed by 3.7 points to 26.3 in Q1 — the high for the last 12 months.

Significant findings from the full-year analysis include:

• India's executives rank the credibility of its CEOs (81) and the credibility of corporate leadership in general (78) highest among 13 countries in the global sample. The global mean for CEO credibility was 69 and for corporate leadership in general it was 70.
• Canada (83), Australia (81) and the U.S. (78) are the most trusting of their corporate leaders to adhere to ethical business practices. Japan (59) and Italy (57) fell well below the global average of 70.
• The ability to deal with business strategy was the factor the surveyed executives found most important.

Significant findings from Q1 2010 include:

• North American executives continue to rank that region's overall corporate leadership highest for credibility, with a score of 75 on a 100-point scale. Europeans' ranking of their leadership declined by two points, back to its Q1 2009 low of 63. The global average is 70.
• Every category in the Leadership Trust Index slipped in Q1 2010, and the overall Leadership Trust Index declined by three points to 69.
• The optimism gap narrowed. North America jumped 10.2 points last quarter on a scale from -100 to +100, but remained the least optimistic region.  Central/South America dropped 5.6 points but remained the most optimistic region.

The Confidence in Leadership Index asks executives in 13 countries questions that produce metrics for: 1) credibility of leadership; 2) trust of leadership; 3) leadership characteristics ("factors"); and 4) direction of leadership. The study has been fielded quarterly since Q2 2009. The Q1 survey was fielded by Braun Research, Inc. Feb. 19-26, 2010.

For more, see - http://www.kornferryinstitute.com/

Confidence in Leadership

Visualising Leadership

For the past decade, Chris Maxwell, associate director of the Wharton School’s Undergraduate Leadership Programme, and Anne M. Greenhalgh, the Programme’s director, have begun their foundation course for Wharton undergraduates with a simple question – “How would you describe the essence of leadership?”   

They ask each student to find or create an image that captures the essence of leadership and to explain why in a short essay.  Over time, Maxwell and Greenhalgh have used these essays to search the most frequently used words in order to construct the overarching story the students tell, and they have used the student’s images and essays to create in-class exercises and to foster classroom discussion.  

Here are the most often used words:

The Wordle image makes clear that the primary subject of the students’ leadership story is an individual leader in the context of people, team, group, and other.   The primary qualities that describe leadership are moral; in students’ eyes, the leader is good, great, able, and true.  In addition, the Wordle highlights that the students most frequently refer to the subject of leadership as his. Finally, taken as a whole, overtly transformational actions such as make, show, inspire, help, and believe are twice as prevalent as the transactional actions take and order.    

Visualising Leadership

Team Spirit

Team Spirit is a value of Positive Leadership.

‘An eagerness to sacrifice personal interests or glory for the welfare of all. The team comes first.’ John Wooden

' Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.' Michael Jordan

Here are some reference materials which speak to this value:

Team Spirit

Leaders Have To Take a Risk

On paper, William Johnson had the perfect background to run H.J. Heinz, the $10 billion food company. He had worked as a marketer in the company's flagship ketchup business, then orchestrated turnarounds at its pet-food and StarKist divisions. But there's really no preparation for what Johnson, CEO since 1998, has had to manage through recently: a high-profile proxy fight with activist shareholder Nelson Peltz, followed by a punishing global recession.

In a recent interview with Newsweek chairman Richard M. Smith, Johnson talks about how his view of leadership has evolved during a long stint in the corner office. Edited excerpts -

'After more than 10 years as a CEO, are you a better leader? There's no comparison. I started out under the assumption that what got me to the position of CEO would work when I became CEO, and that is running the business and execution. That's not my job as CEO. My job is to lead the people and manage the process. It took me a couple of years to learn that, and [when I did] I stepped back from the operations of the company and really began to focus on leadership, on having the right people in the right place, and on making sure people were properly motivated, incentivised, and directed.

Your dad was a longtime NFL coach. What did you learn from being a coach's son?
It's a very black-and-white upbringing: you win, everybody's happy; you lose, no one's happy. I learned to avoid the peaks and valleys—you're going to have days you win, days you lose, and you have to manage them the same.

In 2006 Heinz came under pressure from activist investor Nelson Peltz. How did you respond to that?
It created a sense of urgency that we need to change faster ... It also helped me understand leadership, because it was a situation where we had to [deal with both] the shareholder battle going on and keeping the company operating. It was a process that opened my eyes, and Nelson and I are very good friends now. I talk to Nelson frequently, more at my instigation than his.'

For more, see - http://www.newsweek.com/id/236140 and http://video.newsweek.com/#?t=69800499001&l=64930095001 

Leaders Have To Take a Risk

Friendship and Compassion

Friendship and Compassion are values of Positive Leadership.

‘Friendship comes from mutual esteem, respect and devotion. A sincere liking for all.’John Wooden

‘Make no judgements where you have no compassion.’ Anne McCaffrey

Here are some reference materials which speak to these values:

Friendship and Compassion

Winners Take Calculated Risks - Mickelson's guts, talent came together for shot that defined the 2010 Masters

'AUGUSTA, Ga. — The beautiful thing about golf is that, in the end, it is all about what you have to give. You can’t wait for a pitcher to hang a curveball. You don’t look for your opponent to drop his left. You don’t hope for a defender to fall for a fake left. You can’t take advantage of second serves. No, it's just you and the golf course and the possibilities.

Phil Mickelson's ball rested on top of the pine straw behind a tree at the 13th hole in Sunday’s final round of the Masters. He was facing his second shot, and he saw an opening. That's a gift of Mickelson's, of course: His ability to see clearings where others see traffic jams. That's also a weakness. Sometimes there really are traffic jams.

Mickelson loved his lie. His ball was resting right on top of the straw, looking pretty, like it was pleading: "Come on Phil. Go for it." Good lies can be an illusion, of course. It was a good lie that inspired Jean van de Velde to try a crazy second shot on the final hole of the 1999 British Open. He hit that ball into the stands and it bounced back into a valley of death and he lost a tournament that he had won. Golfers do believe that, with good lies, anything is possible.

Mickelson looked at his opening again. It was maybe four feet wide, plenty wide enough, if he hit it good. But could he count on hitting the ball good? This was the back nine at Augusta. He was leading the Masters by two shots. The air was getting thin. And, no matter how good the lie looked, his ball was on pine straw. And there was a giant tree in front of him and another tree not too far to the left. And there was water in front of the green. And it was 187 yards to carry over the water. And ...

Mickelson could have laid up, of course. That was the percentage play, or at least the television announcer percentage play. Television announcers love lay-ups when things are looking tricky. If Mickelson had laid up, well, the television announcers would have sung his praises, talked about how smart a decision it was, how mature a decision it was, how the right way to win the Masters is to smother those gambling instincts and make the percentage play, and it's definitely the percentage play to lay up from 209 yards out when your ball is on pine needles and there's a gigantic tree in front you.

Then again, like Fast Eddie Felson said in The Hustler: “Percentage players die broke too.”

Phil Mickelson decided to go for it. He is 39 years old, fast approaching 40. He has won major championships, and he has lost major championships, and over the years he has learned to pick the moment. This was his moment. This was his time to win the Masters. This was the time to hit the shot. He had to go, right? He's Phil Mickelson. It's in his nature.

People have always talked about how many more tournaments Mickelson might have won had he just pulled back a little, played things a little safer. People point to Winged Foot in 2006. On the last hole of the U.S. Open, Mickelson needed a par to win. He hit his driver because he can't help himself, and he hit his second shot into a tree because he saw an opening, and he double bogeyed the hole and lost the U.S. Open. He confirmed the general consensus afterward when he said, “I am such an idiot.”

But would he really have won more if he played it safe? Is it ever really that simple? All his life, Phil Mickelson has had this talent for making golf balls do remarkable things, for making them pop over trees and skid under branches and turn around bushes and roll up to the cup like a car pulling into a driveway. And it's not quite fair to call it “talent” like it was something he was born doing—certainly he was born with touch, but he honed his brilliance. He hit those crazy trick shots again and again until they felt a part of him. After all that work, all that practice, could Phil Mickelson really win by ignoring the openings he saw? Could he really win by smothering his talents? Could he really win more by playing it safe? Could he really win by being less like himself?

This is Mickelson. Sure, he always could play smarter. Of course, he always could pull back just a little. But the beautiful thing about golf is that, in the end, it's all about what you have to give. This is what Phil Mickelson has to give. He saw the opening, he saw the flagstick, and he had to hit the shot. He set up with 6-iron and steadied himself, then hit the shot just to the left of the tree and watched it fly right at the flag, watched it clear the creek, watched it settle three feet from the hole. And then, he listened happily to the roar that sounded like it would never quiet.

“It's really one of the few shots that only Phil could pull off,” his playing partner and main foil on Sunday Lee Westwood would say.

Mickelson missed the eagle putt, which does take a little away from the success of the shot. But in the end, it wasn't the success of the shot that mattered. It was the power. Westwood was steady on Sunday (“Percentage players die broke too”), Anthony Kim blazed up the back nine, and Tiger Woods had a crazy day of brilliance and hideousness. But nobody was going to beat Phil Mickelson, not on this day, not after he hit that shot.

He dropped the birdie on 13. He made two more birdies in the last six holes. He won the Masters by three shots. And as he walked off the 18th green, he saw his wife Amy. Phil was not sure that Amy would make it to the tournament. She has been battling breast cancer, and the medicines make her feel tired and weak. She was there. They hugged for a long time. When it ended, everyone wanted Mickelson to talk about the shot at 13, a shot that will hang in the gallery of great moments at the Masters. But the truth is, he didn't really have a lot to say about it. He saw the opening. He trusted his talent. He made the shot. That's golf.

“I kept saying that if I trust my swing, I'll pull it off,” is how he explained it.

Then someone asked Mickelson a great question: to explain the difference between a great shot and a smart shot. It was a great question because in many ways, Phil Mickelson's whole golfing career has rested somewhere between great and smart. “I don't know,” Mickelson said. “I mean a great shot is when you pull it off. A smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it.”

Yes, that answer pretty much sums up Phil Mickelson. Is it the right answer? Well, some days it is and some days it isn't. It's the right answer when the guy saying it is wearing a green jacket.'

By Joe Posnanski, Senior Writer, Sports Illustrated

Winners Take Calculated Risks - Mickelson's guts, talent came together for shot that defined the 2010 Masters

Leadership and Uncertainty

We remember wartime prime ministers and presidents better than peacetime leaders, and the same is true for company executives.

Organisational leadership matters most during a period of stress and uncertainty. 

This conclusion emerges from a 1996 study of 48 firms among the Fortune 500 largest U.S. manufacturers. 

Wharton Professor Robert J. House and colleagues asked two direct subordinates of each of the firm's chief executives to assess the extent to which the CEO...

• is a visionary
• shows strong confidence in self and others
• communicates high performance expectations and standards
• personally exemplifies the firm's vision, values, and standards
• demonstrates personal sacrifice, determination, persistence, and courage.

The researchers also assessed the extent to which the firms face environments that are dynamic, risky, and uncertain. 

Taking into account a company's size, sector, and other factors, they find that these CEO leadership qualities make a significant difference in the firm's net profit margins when the company is facing a highly uncertain environment. When the firm is not so challenged, however, such leadership qualities make far less of a difference.

Several practical implications follow:

• Your leadership matters most when it is least clear what course you should follow. The decisions and actions of those above, beside, and below you also matter most when the organisation is facing intensified competition or requires strategic redirection. Yet these are the very moments when developing leadership is least practical. 
• Periods of normalcy -- when strategies are working and performance is strong -- are therefore those when the need for leadership development is least evident but best achieved.

Source: David A. Waldman, Gabriel G. Ramirez, and Robert J. House, "CEO Charisma and Profitability: Under Conditions of Perceived Environmental Certainty and Uncertainty," 1996. 

Leadership and Uncertainty

Happiness Helps Performance

New York magazine had a recent feature 50 Steps to Simple Happiness.

There's lots of interesting advice – quite a mixed bag – and some of the nuggets include:

• Collect visual memories of moments when you were incredibly happy.
• Start an old-fashioned (hand-written) correspondence with a friend.
• Surround yourself with things that smell like green apple or cucumber.
• Carry yourself more erect. You can improve your outlook and confidence simply by improving your posture.
• Forget the brown rice sushi. The Japanese are some of the most long-lived people on the planet, and they only eat white rice.

We each develop our own strategies for preventing and relieving stress and promoting joy and contentment in our lives. The key is the idea of work / life integration. This is different to work / life balance that is so often talked about – the notion that happiness depends on making a series of trade-offs: home versus office, work versus family. This approach of sacrifice and subtraction is all wrong. An alternative philosophy is to bring each aspect of your daily life together into a satisfying whole. If you are happy in your personal life, work sits lighter on your shoulders; if work is stimulating and enjoyable, that will happily infect your life outside the office.

One way to achieve work / life integration is to be diligent about your happiness. Think about what brings happiness to your life, and make time for it. Plan for it and prioritise. Treat time to breathe and to enjoy life as vital and urgent priorities. Don't relegate or postpone. Your life – and work – will suffer if you do. 

See - http://nymag.com/health/features/63043

Happiness Helps Performance

Judgement

Judgement is a value of Positive Leadership.

‘Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement.’ Oscar Wilde

‘With good judgment, little else matters. Without it, nothing else matters.’ Warren Bennis

Here are reference materials which speak to this value:

Judgement