August 6, 2024 • 64 mins
Kim, Erin and Jonathan Clark - Leading Through: The New Paradigm of Leadership: Soul, Heart, and Mind
In this episode, we delve into a profound moment of opportunity in human history, examining how organisations can harness leadership to help people and communities thrive. The discussion centres on the new book, 'Leading Through: Activating the Soul, Heart, and Mind of Leadership,' authored by Kim, Jonathan, and Erin Clark. The Clarks share their experiences from diverse fields to propose a shift from the outdated power-over paradigm to a more human-centric, flexible, and adaptive way of leading. Topics covered include the challenges and potential of the new paradigm, real-life examples from the authors' professional journeys, and the enduring need for empathetic leadership even in the face of daunting organisational inertia.
00:00 Introduction to a New Leadership Paradigm
00:54 Meet the Authors: Kim, Jonathan, and Erin Clark
02:12 Erin's Journey: From Accidental Consultant to Leadership Expert
04:52 John's Insights: Organisational Performance and Leadership
08:01 Kim's Experience: The Power Over Paradigm in Action
15:23 The Pathway Program: Transforming Higher Education
18:34 John's Challenge: Changing Department Dynamics
22:55 The Power Over Paradigm: Real-World Examples
29:32 Erin's Client Experience: Unity and Freedom in Leadership
32:09 The Power of Collaboration and Humanity
33:43 Breaking Free from Organisational Dynamics
35:06 The Courage to Embrace a New Paradigm
38:16 Generative AI and the Value of Humanity
46:21 The Amazon Case Study: A Cautionary Tale
50:31 Modularity: Balancing Freedom and Unity
56:14 Empathetic Leadership and Difficult Decisions
01:01:22 The Vision of Leading Through
01:03:36 Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Book Website and how to get a preview:
Book links:
https://linktr.ee/leadingthrough
Find Aidan here for Keynotes, Event MC and Custom L&D Programmes.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/aidanmccullen/
Leadership, Organizational Transformation, Kim Clark, Jonathan Clark, Erin Clark, Leading Through, Power Over Paradigm, Business Strategy, New Paradigm, Employee Empowerment, Workplace Culture, Organizational Change, Management Consulting, Innovation, Bureaucracy, Harvard Business School, Modularity, Employee Engagement, Human Potential, Professional Development
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Aidan McCullen (00:00):
We find ourselves in a profound moment of opportunity
(00:03):
unlike any other in human history
and yet it is clear that our organizationsoften fall short of harnessing that power
to help people and communities thrive.
The culprit is the old ways of working,thinking, leading, and a paradigm.
That focuses on using powerover people to control them.
(00:24):
Restricting personal agency andenforcing compliance in a coercive
bureaucratic hierarchy the leadershipwe need requires a new way of thinking.
behaving and organizing.
A living paradigm thatis flexible and adaptive
.Today's book is a proposal for that new paradigm one wherein we are all
(00:47):
leaders or at least can be, this isthe soul heart and mind of leadership.
The new paradigm is designed to activatethem throughout the organization this
is what our guests call, leading throughit is a very important book written
by former dean of harvard businessschool his business school professor
(01:11):
son, management consultant daughter , itis a pleasure to welcome all three
of those authors of leading throughactivating the soul heart and mind of
leadership, kim jonathan and erin clark.
Welcome to the show
Kim Clark (01:27):
Thank you.
Erin Clark (01:28):
Thank you.
Jonathan Clark (01:28):
Thank
Aidan McCullen (01:29):
it's great to have you with us guys i am so impressed by
firstly okay i'm from an irish familyoutside that most people are happy to
get through thanksgiving dinner togetherlet alone writing a book and a book with
this much research so, bravo to you guysfirst of all i thought we'd share how
(01:50):
each of you bring your own experiencethe book, maybe we'll start ladies first
erin then we'll go to john and then.
end with kim . i love the greatadage of innovation that innovation
happens at the intersections, it's theintersections of both your different
disciplines and what you've seen boththe challenges and the opportunities
Erin maybe we'll start with you.
Erin Clark (02:12):
Sure.
Thanks, Aiden.
What I brought to the book, I think myexperience as a, I like to refer to myself
as an accidental management consultant,actually, was never in my career kind of
track how you set off in your career andyou think this is where we're headed.
This was never it.
(02:32):
But here we are 20 plus years in, And, oneof the things, and I'm incredibly grateful
for that career and the opportunitiesfor, to work with the organizations
I've had the opportunity to work with.
It's given me a living laboratory,if you will to look at this
(02:53):
challenge of leadership.
And I think that that experience iswhat I brought to this book is the
opportunity to, to see that playout in so many different contexts.
And to recognize that there's To see itwork so well in some situations and then
(03:15):
fall apart to see it not get tractionand not be able to see leaders and
executives and organizations struggle,to find my own sense of frustration
as a leader, as I've grown and takenon increased responsibility in the
organizations that I've been part of.
And then just in life to bring theexperiences of my own life and wrestling
(03:41):
with that dynamic between living lifeand the challenges that life brings and,
and, and, and work and the trade offsthat you make, and how do you address
all of those challenges, as a leaderand, and try to create value for yourself
(04:03):
and for the communities you're part of,for the organizations you're part of.
And I think I always tell the storyabout how did we come to write this book
in terms of we talk shop as a family.
And it went from family dinnerconversations or party conversations.
(04:23):
And then we started to see thatthere were these things that we
would share that we and we'd seekeach other out, to share them and,
and wrestle with these challenges.
And then we started to see patterns.
And, and so it became interestingto think about each of our different
(04:45):
perspectives on a common issue thatwe were each seeing and that there
might be something powerful there.
Aidan McCullen (04:52):
John what about you what was your experience to add to Erins,
Jonathan Clark (04:56):
Well, I, I've spent my career, studying
organizational performance.
Actually, the impetus for thatinterest came when I was a kid.
I was an athlete.
I played a bunch of sports and was alwaysjust interested in how can I be better?
How can I help my teammates be better?
(05:19):
What makes a team perform its best?
And that carried throughinto my professional life.
that interest.
And I spent the first part ofmy professional life studying
healthcare organizations.
I just became so confused as to whyso many healthcare organizations can
do these unbelievable things, performmiracles even, while others just
(05:41):
flounder and, and are just terrible.
And so I spent a lot of timestudying that issue , and
doing empirical work, right?
Using data to try touncover what's going on here.
And I just kept coming back.
To the concept of leadership andand that pushed me in a direction
of really trying to understand howmuch do leaders really matter, right?
(06:03):
That's actually a question.
I think for most people,it's intuitive, right?
Leaders matter.
But in the academic world,there's actually this whole.
component of organization theory,people who make the argument
that leaders don't matter.
Actually, everything else is determinedby other things and that leaders
play a largely ceremonial role.
(06:24):
And so I became interested inthat and explored that, that issue
and not surprisingly discoveredfor myself that in fact, leaders
do matter and they matter a lot.
But maybe not in the way that you might,you might think, naturally we're not
talking about where we're not onlytalking about executive leadership.
(06:46):
We're not just talking aboutthe CEO or other C suite folks.
What we've found is, , the kindof leadership that matters is
the kind of leadership thatpermeates an entire organization.
Organizations of all kinds, right?
Families teams, companies, communities,governments, , the organizations that
(07:11):
really thrive, that perform their verybest produce wonderful outcomes are
those in which leadership permeatesevery unit, every corner of every unit.
And, where that leadership helpsthe people in that organization to
thrive, because at the end of the day,we've found that it's thriving people
(07:34):
that create thriving organizations.
And, and that's what Ibrought to this book.
And, and I hope it's part ofthe message that comes across
and what we've, put together.
aidan_1_08-02-2024_150023 (07:43):
will your your deep research send me down many
many rabbit hole so i took a lot longerto read the book that i should have
because i kept going to the footnoteso that's you that's you that's on you.
But thank you.
You had this huge researchand massive footnotes for
each of the chapters as well.
So I, I thank you for that kind of Kimfor you, you have been a leader for, of
(08:10):
many organizations, but I thought we'dstart actually for you in a different
way, because the Genesis for youactually began many decades ago 1979 on a
beautiful spring day in Detroit, Michigan.
Kim Clark (08:24):
Yeah, that was a, that was a seminal experience, as they say.
I was in a, in a automobile plant,assembly plant, which by the way, is
a, is a marvel, it's just incredibleto be in one of these large, huge
plants that create cars, so wesaw people working and we're just
(08:49):
Studying productivity and quality.
And it was part of a nationalacademy of engineering study group.
And I was the junior guy.
And it was just really interesting to seethis technology in action and so forth.
But what was really striking was thatpeople who worked on the line, on the
assembly line, everything they did wasbasically choreographed by people in the
(09:13):
industrial engineering group who were noton the floor, they're upstairs somewhere.
They had about a minute toaccomplish their basic tasks.
And everything was choreographed.
We then had the opportunity to seethem, meet people and talk to people and
learned what they did outside of work.
(09:34):
It was astonishing.
These were people running the localparent teacher organization, their
schools, they're running they'remanaging the soccer team or the baseball
team, or they were restoring boats.
They were, fixing up new cars.
They're very talented and theyhad a lot of leadership skill,
but when they Came to work.
(09:57):
It was like those leadership skills becamecompletely unused by the organization.
They worked just nothing.
They didn't do anything.
And then the astonishing thing wasWe found exactly the same thing
everywhere we went in that corporation.
If you go into a marketinggroup or finance or engineering
(10:18):
or product development or Rand D, you saw the same thing.
You saw this focus on control,on compliance, and even the
people, the striking thing waseven the people in engineering.
And product Dylan who are creating newthings, they had this very heavy structure
on top of them and a very bureaucraticprocess that they had to deal with.
(10:43):
And it was really quite remarkable sothat was the genesis of, of looking
at the, what we call the power overparadigm in action, this legacy paradigm
that goes way, way back in history.
And one of the things thathas had a big impact on me.
And I've been in steel companiesseeing the same things I've been in
(11:08):
semiconductor companies, IBM, big,huge organizations that are in the
technology world, big software companies,and you see exactly the same thing.
So that's why we came to see,there's a there's a legacy paradigm.
It's like a legacy computer system.
It's like deeply embedded,very expensive, hard to change.
(11:31):
And people take it for granted.
This is just how you work organizations.
And I, I think that's one of thethings I brought to the book is
a, is a recognition that we wereall immersed in this paradigm.
We go to school, like yourelementary school is run like that.
And universities are run like that.
And so we're all, all immersedin it and we need to change it.
(11:56):
And fortunately, we'vehad some experiences.
I had a lot of experiencesbeing a leader myself.
So has John.
And so was Erin.
And we took those experiencesand we realized that we.
Had run counter to that legacy paradigm.
Our feeling about what was rightto do in an organization was
(12:17):
to do something very different.
And we began to understand and explore.
And what's happened in the book is we'vegone back and look at our experience,
at our research, at our practice,at all the companies we've observed.
We've been inside.
I think if you make a big list ofall of the, all of the different
kinds of industries there are,we've been in most of them.
(12:40):
either writing cases, doingresearch, doing consulting.
And so we've had this broadexperience, pulled that together
and then tried to articulate.
What's this new paradigm that wethink really makes a difference?
And that's what became the book.
And it started about six years ago,just in conversations with each other
about maybe we should write a book.
(13:03):
And I'll tell you, one of thegreat joys of my life has been
to write a book with my children.
Cause I knew these people whenthey were teenagers, and if
you'd said then, Oh, Kim about.
2025 years from now, you're goingto write a book with these people.
I thought you gotta be kidding me.
Jonathan Clark (13:24):
Actually, Aidan, we need to clarify something there.
The truth is, when we were kids, Erinabsolutely, absolutely was the kind of
you knew Erin was going to be great.
I on the other hand,
I was out in the wilderness somewhere.
, , Kim Clark: well, it's been a great joy.
Aidan McCullen (13:44):
And I remember, so for Erin and John, last time I spoke
to Kim on the show, he said this, hesaid, I'm having such a great time
writing this book with my family.
So he was saying that as youwere writing it , he said those
things, Kim, you teed us up.
You mentioned the power over paradigm.
We'll explain that.
You reminded me and John, I'd say you'vedefinitely read this book of a book there.
(14:07):
The one best way about Fred , Winslow,Taylor, and Taylorism, it's about
the scientific matters, whichis the, the, the bloody problem.
, why we've had this power overparadigm because it was seen as the
best way for efficiency, et cetera.
And I just wanted to point out onething, Kim, you mentioned there
about , the automotive, industry, and.
(14:28):
I still ask people today about thisparadigm and they will say that, Oh,
well, it's needed in manufacturing.
And you prove that's notthe case with a great case.
So you have CEMEX , in the book John,I'm sure this was your one Cleveland
clinic as well, where people think thereneeds to be a hierarchy in somewhere
like healthcare, which you've provedisn't the case , but because Kim,
(14:50):
you said this, each of you share.
Your personal story of the old paradigmerin you with a client john yourself
driving change and kim with byu idahopathway program, maybe we'll share
this because again i think this isgreat for context and as you know
you talk very much about context andinformation and get it right from the
(15:12):
start to help people understand whatthe vision is so let's get this in first
and then we'll get to the paradigm.
Kim Clark (15:18):
So let me go first.
I will reverse the order.
Maybe I had the great blessingof being president of BYU Idaho.
We started this program called Pathway.
which is a program designed to helppeople who don't have access to higher
education, for many reasons, , getaccess to it , and be able to succeed.
(15:40):
So we started this programand we discovered something
that was really discouraging.
People who would go throughthe program and were ready to
matriculate in the university.
would drop out.
They had spent a year preparing, going toschool, taking courses and got good grades
(16:01):
and they qualified to matriculate in adegree program or a certificate program
in the university, but they drop out.
And so we thought, what, what's going on?
So we began to investigate and discoveredthat whereas the pathway program for
them was very easy to access online,It was very simple, very friendly.
(16:24):
When they got to university, itwas like a whole new universe.
And it was incrediblydifficult to navigate.
For example, I'll giveyou one simple example.
Everything they encountered wasdesigned to support students on campus.
And these students were online.
Many of them lived in foreign countries.
So they'd get a prompt.
(16:46):
From the system would say, go to theregistrar's office and sign this document.
What?
Because the registrar's officewas in Rexburg, Idaho, and
they were living in Ghana.
It's just ridiculous stuff like that.
So we had to go to work and, wediscovered that there were just this, all
(17:07):
these bureaucracies, set of rules that hadbeen designed over the years and years.
to control what happened on the campus.
And we just were immersed in thisthing and we decided this can't happen.
So two things happened.
One, we changed it.
For the pathway students andeventually create their own
(17:29):
information system and then connectedit to the university seamlessly so
they don't have to deal with it.
And then we went to work on theuniversity to change that structure.
So it became much simpler, mucheasier to use many fewer rules and
ending up trusting the students.
That was the key element that changed.
(17:52):
So for me, that was an eye opener.
That even in a wonderful place, andthat's a wonderful university, that
paradigm , was there we needed to,we needed to work on to change it.
And we did.
Aidan McCullen (18:08):
The bureaucracy is very much part of the power over paradigm
and again it's a control mechanism thatthe bureaucracy some of it's needed
as you talk about there's a trade off,what's a absolutely something that is
a killer for listeners to the show.
They talk so much about how there'sbottlenecks because of the old way and
it shows that there's no trust of themand then they feel disempowered as
(18:31):
well john let's share your experience.
Jonathan Clark (18:35):
When I took over as chair of the department of management at
the University of Texas at San Antonio,I just, I just, I already knew this
because I'd been a faculty there for acouple of faculty member for a couple
of years, but I really discovered justhow miserable people were and not just
(18:55):
faculty staff to people were just unhappy.
And and so I, I just began toinvestigate why I talked to
everybody in the department to tryto figure out what was going on.
And it turned out the, the key issuewas power at the end of the day.
For years, in fact, decades,the department had been mired
(19:20):
in a set of power dynamics.
that caused different factions inthe department to just perpetually
be competing with each other forpower and control in the department.
And it just led people in the departmentto do all sorts of things that that
(19:41):
were unethical immoral, unkind.
Lots of backbiting people, I don'tknow, trying to get in each other's way.
People trying to controldecision making processes and
it was making people miserable.
And yet people didn't, they didn'tquite grasp that that was the problem.
(20:06):
This is the paradox of the power, powerover paradigm is that people think that
power over is the way to get things done.
And in fact it, it perpetuatesitself because you can use power in
that way to get some things done.
But in reality using power in thatway is self limiting because you're
(20:31):
going to make people miserable.
And what happens when peopleare miserable, they disengage.
And that was the story at UTSAwhen I took over as chair.
People were just disengaged.
People, in fact avoidedcoming into the office.
And so we set ourselves on a path andI, I got a number of my colleagues
to work with me to, to try to changethose dynamics and bring the faculty
(20:54):
together to create a set of values andexpectations for people and to create a
vision of what we were trying to become.
And it was a lot of work and,and it took a few years to, I
think, really bear fruit, but.
But it worked.
And I think now that department, ourdepartment is, is a wonderful department.
In fact, we, we became anexemplary department when the
(21:16):
university decided to stand forour one status from the Carnegie.
Institute.
And and so anyways, it I think it's a,it's a, it helped me solidify in my mind.
Cause this was all actually happeningwhile we were working on the book
that helped to, to solidify in my mindthat the paradox of, of power over
(21:39):
and, and really the, the detrimentalnegative effect that it can have
aidan_1_08-02-2024_150023 (21:42):
That's elements and now i know who peppered
the book with sports analogies aswell there's a lot of them in there
there's a i don't know if you saw thisthere was a speed skater i think she
was chinese speed skater and she useda totally unorthodox approach to win.
In the olympics you want to go justthe other day in the olympics and she
just went early to win the race likeand she end up laughing everybody
(22:06):
and she was she looked like she waslast but she had locked them all and
they just couldn't catch her cause sheran so early and it reminded me of.
The bravery to break the mold andthat's what you really did there
because you can get results by followingwhat everybody else does in sports.
I've had coaches that come innew coach comes in and there's a
(22:28):
huge fear for them to break themold of what everybody has done.
They also need the support of a higherlevel like a board or our colleagues
to go look this is gonna take timethere's a huge step back before we
take a few steps forward that's a hugechallenge for people as well because
you can you said, get results byhammering down milk the cash cow don't
(22:52):
invest in the future etc that paradox.
Is is a huge challenge maybe beforewe go to erin and erin's experience
of the power over paradigm you mightshare that because that would have
been difficult for you i'm sure,
Jonathan Clark (23:04):
Very difficult.
At the end of the day, or youhave to change people's mindsets.
It's a mindset shiftthat has to take place.
And they have to haveto see and understand,
not just the detrimental impactof power over, but also the
(23:26):
beneficial effects of, of.
a different way.
And at the end of the day it, itactually didn't, it turned out to
not be that part of it turned out tonot be as difficult as I anticipated
because people, people want to be happy.
And when people are not happy andyou, and you help them to see why
(23:47):
they're not happy and you show them,a better possibility, they, they get
excited about it and they love it.
And they, they want.
They want it and they are willing to dohard things in some cases, to get it.
And and that, so that's what, that'swhat, that's what we were doing it
(24:09):
at UTSA and people were very happy.
I had, I had a a really importantexperience, a very simple
experience last year when.
One of my most skeptical colleagues, oneof my most skeptical colleagues came up
to me after a meeting and actually, thiswas a department meeting in which we, we
(24:30):
had the best attendance we'd ever had.
Department meetings for yearswere attended by 10 or 12 people.
This, this meeting had 35 people at it.
She came up to me and she said.
You were right.
Aidan McCullen (24:46):
they're beautiful words to hear.
Kim Clark (24:50):
I had the same
experience at, Harvard business school.
I used to give talks to the faculty.
When I served as Dean there, that rancounter to the basic fundamental aspects
of what it meant to be a faculty memberbecause faculty members are inherently
independent, autonomous entrepreneurs.
(25:12):
That's essentially who they are.
And I, I gave talks about how, look,if we invest in each other and take
time to work together and actuallyhelp each other and work together,
Even at the expense of our own work inthe short run, eventually we'll create
(25:33):
an environment that's so powerful.
All of us will be more productive than wewould have been had we behaved selfishly.
That was really, really hardfor a lot of people to grasp.
And but the parts of the school thatreally got it actually it works.
(25:53):
It works.
It's a much better environment.
You're more productive, actually.
So I had, when I left the school, I gota letter from the most skeptical guy
and he wrote me a littlenote and a little letter.
And he said, I just have to tell you,when I first heard you talk about that,
I thought, am I at Harvard university?
(26:14):
Is this guy crazy?
Like, what is he talking about?
And they said, but then later Idecided I'm going to try this.
Not just at school, but I'mgoing to try this in my personal
life, my family, so forth.
He said, I just have totell you, you were right.
It works.
And I've never been happier.
And I'm so grateful that youtaught me that principle.
(26:37):
So the principles are true, actually.
And when you practicethem, good things happen.
It happens.
And that's part of the messageof the book, that leading
through is what you want to do.
As you adopt these ideas, it's have thecourage and the strength to just move
it and move it until you hit that pointand all of a sudden it just develops its
(27:01):
own momentum and it's awesome becausewhat happens, this is, this is one of
Erin's phrases, but what happens is athriving human being is a powerful force
And when you get a bunch of thrivinghuman beings working together, it's
absolutely incredible what happens.
It really is.
So what we say is the legacy paradigmand the power over paradigm doesn't mean
(27:26):
those organizations never do anything.
Because they do things and they,they improve and they deploy
stuff and things happen, but thepotential in them is so much more.
That's what this paradox is about.
Aidan McCullen (27:42):
Beautiful i'm gonna put a signpost there for just a reminder
audience cuz there's a very key pointand something you alluded to there and.
Is the book is that you have a bunchof entrepreneurs essentially that
are stifled and you're stiflingtheir energy their potential.
And I think that's such an important,we'll use that as a metaphor for, well,
(28:06):
that's the same in any organization,like you saw in Detroit , they have
potential, but it's stifled, butthere's also a paradox in there.
And this, I just sent a, and shesays, hi, by the way, Wendy Smith.
I sent her an excerpt from your bookbecause she just wrote a book called
both on thinking the power of, yeah.
And I was talking about the, I sent herthis and I said, this, this will speak to
(28:30):
exactly your point that there's a tradeoff between a certain amount of control.
And then unity.
So how do you actually, how do you,how do you create unity and freedom
? And it's really, really difficult.
That unity, freedom paradox isactually throughout the book and
it's something that can be achieved.
And we'll come back to thatin a moment, but I just wanted
(28:52):
to just remind our audience.
We'll come back to that.
That is such an important element,the way I think of you all now
is you've created this lensand now you see it everywhere.
Scott Anthony, was tellingme that one of the things,
Christine Clay Christiansen's, hiswife used to laugh about what she said.
I think Clay has an S curve carvedinto the inside of his glasses
(29:14):
and he sees them everywhere.
And I was thinking, that'swhat's happened to you.
You've created this power overparadigm framework I should say,
leading through paradigm framework.
And now you see it everywhere.
And Erin, you see it.
not only in your own life andin your own organization, but
we are clients all the time.
Erin Clark (29:34):
Yeah, I think, I think in the example that I, that I share,
it actually speaks to, I think what mydad was just talking about and, and,
and this, this, This false sense oftrade off that you mentioned, right?
That, that, that you, that youcan't have aligned unity and
(29:55):
freedom of action at the same time.
And the, the example that I sharein the book is an experience
I had working with a client.
And a lot of times in consulting,, especially in strategy, the project
can can sometimes be short and,this was a situation where we
were in it for a little while.
So we had that benefit, whichwas, an advantage, , being able to
(30:15):
actually see some of these dynamicsstart to play out and recognize
that while we weren't actually thereto solve this particular issue.
That I highlight in the book, , that wehad an opportunity by, being there to,
to support that, because it was, it wasimportant to the overall outcome that
we're trying to create for that plan.
But what we saw was a new leader,new to the organization, also new
(30:37):
to this particular area, coming in,inheriting a team from somebody who'd
been there for a very long time.
An organization that was verysiloed in its operations.
but entering a new, , area and I'llshare because I think it's important.
I don't say this in the bookbecause trying to protect, , client
(30:58):
confidentiality, but this is apharmaceutical company entering a new
product area, a new therapeutic area.
And I think that helped in somerespects, because one of the levers
that this leader was able to pullwas, I think part of the, what allows
you to create unity is tapping into.
, The soul, heart and mind of thehumanity of people and, , inheriting
(31:20):
this very siloed, , very competitive,which I think Jonathan talked about
as well, my dad referenced, right?
We're very competitive, , high, achievement oriented organization
with a, with a pretty clear setof, this is the way to success.
And it's a little bit cutthroat.
I guess this is what you could say.
(31:42):
, And recognizing that actually for usto, to move into this, this area of
opportunity for the organization , wasgoing to require us to do some new things.
differently and those thingsare really things we do well.
So how do I, as a leader, how do Iget folks to choose , to do that?
(32:04):
, when there's nothing structuralgiving them that incentive to do that.
The other thing I'll mention, I don'tknow that I mentioned this part in
the book too, is that their teamwas very small, , but they needed
the support and collaboration fromacross a whole other set of areas.
This is increasingly true inmany organizations, right?
Where my span of control ordirect authority is very limited.
(32:28):
And so in order to actually get thingsdone and collaborate in the ways that we
need , to be effective, I have to partnerwith and collaborate with a broad set
of folks and there was this recognitionthat there's really, , some structural
, and cultural challenges to overcome.
And I think the lever that was pulledhere among a number of other things, but
was really tapping into what some of whatJonathan and my dad mentioned too, is
(32:51):
tapping into the, the humanity of those.
People involved , and speakingto a higher sense of purpose.
, and recognizing an opportunity tobuild alignment, not through structure,
not through hierarchy or authority orany sort of, typical method that had
(33:12):
been in place in this organization,but through , our general desire
as human beings to do better.
And in this case, save people's lives.
And to tap into that and to findthe opportunity build momentum
around the chance to have a realimpact in the world in that way.
(33:33):
And then to tie that back to theindividual actions that I as a
team member or as a participantin this process have to play.
Over time, part of what played out waswhat we've discussed is a recognition
that, , people want to be happy, right?
And the dynamics of organizations oftenset us up to feel like we have to
(33:56):
play this game and participate in this.
This dynamic , that the way tosucceed is to play a certain way
to the example that you mentioned.
And I do think it takes incredibleamount of courage , to choose to
break out of that, , and to tap intosomething that, , on the surface may
or may not have anything to do withthe day to day of the work we do.
(34:18):
but if we can really if we can broadenthe aperture and, and take a step back
and really consider, , from a, senseof purpose and meaning, , then I think
there's, there's something there.
And I find that that's really , wherewe can tap into a shared sense of, of
alignment, , where , I don't need tohave formal authority over a group of
(34:39):
people in order , to build alignment.
and actually to have that alignment whilealso giving them the freedom of action
to innovate and create in the ways thatthey need , to create value, , in the ways
that they see and take that opportunity.
That's, I think what we're,what we're talking about with
this, with this new paradigm.
And, I love what you say about puttingon those, those glasses and we now now
(35:02):
that we framed it, we see it everywhere.
And it's true.
I see it everywhere.
And I think in the book, we,we try to make this point,
but it can feel overwhelming.
Like, how can I possibly take this on?
And at the same time, and I thinkthis example that I share in the book
is, , it's actually not that hard.
(35:25):
it's a lot of things if you lookat it at the more broad systemic
level, but if you look at it just atwhat's the first step or the first
thing that I can, that I can do,
, we're all human and we share common,, traits and, and tapping into some of that,
I think is where some of this starts.
(35:46):
i was thinking about when youwere saying that that one of the
biggest challenges is the bravery.
what also the persistence of the powerover paradigm and by that i mean that,
many and many of them are men are stillin board positions but they're also over
certain age and that age is often fromthe paradigm the previous paradigm and
(36:10):
then even the origin of many managersi'm sure you saw this came in in the
factories you visited in the seventiesand eighties, were ex-military and that
paradigm was very much power over cuzi probably needed to be even more maybe
i don't know maybe it needed to be morebut the paradigm is there and then,
(36:32):
you have somebody coming in i alwaysthink of the case study of paul o'neill
the former ceo of alcoa coming in.
First big meeting town hall meeting.
He announces that Alcoa is going tobe the safest company in America.
Some stock analysts sold their stock.
They're like, Oh, and there's a no jobcoming in as CEO of the company or sell
your stock, this place is going to tank.
(36:54):
And then it takes off.
And by focusing on this habit, thisorganizational habit, and I'm saying
that to set up , the challenge is yourbook talks about very human stuff.
heart mind love and they're languagesthat were not used to in the business
world we still have this dominantgordon gecko and wall street kind
(37:18):
of character and even if you're anexecutive having the bravery, like you
did jonathan bringing in a new paradigm.
You will have people who are thedetractors originally have lots of
those skeptics and that's where ittakes this immense bravery to step
above that and go you know what i'mtaking off the mask i'm gonna be human
(37:39):
i'm gonna expose my heart i'm gonnamake mistakes all this kind of stuff.
Business does not like that
I had a chance to speak on someof this this week , and literally
said to the audience, I said beforeI go on to this next section, I'm
just going to let you know, this istypically the moment where I start
to see the eyes roll in the audience.
When I start to use words like loveand, and humanity and tapping in really,
(38:04):
really the soul, heart and mind, right?
We sometimes write specialistsports analogies, we can get
over that and, use those still.
But when you add the soul piece to it,it adds another dimension that again,
starts to lead into that the wallsthat I think we've started that this
(38:27):
the legacy paradigm is Enabled us toput up it between who we are as human
beings and our work selves and our worklives And, , at the end of the day,
, we are humans, I'll, I'll sharejust really briefly this particular
conversation that I was part of thisweek was all about generative AI and the
(38:51):
journey that we're all embarking on innavigating change and transformation and
how we work and opportunities to createincredible value with these new tools.
And, , depending on how you approachit and how you look at it and I
said , to the group that our successin this journey collective as a
(39:12):
world society will depend less onour ability to tap into the value
of the technology than it will totap into the value of our humanity.
We have to make the most of our humanitiesfor this to really be successful.
You just look at the lastseveral sort of transformative.
Gifts that have happened inthe world over the last just
(39:33):
30 years that I've been alive.
, Are we better off?
We can say that the more value has beencreated in the world because of the
Internet and because of cyber, becauseof cloud and all of these things.
And certainly we will likelylook at this next AI and say
more value has been created.
(39:56):
Wouldn't we really want to also look andbe able to say humanity is better off?
I don't think we can say that rightnow about this sort of, the path
that we've, I think we can say prettyfirmly humanity is not better off.
More value maybe, but people?
Are miscible.
(40:19):
So it doesn't have to be that way.
I think that's part of the part ofwhat we're hoping to get across with
using that kind of language and reallybeing more human and how we talk
about leadership and organizations
Kim Clark (40:31):
when you framed the issue around the the difficulties
and the challenges, that'sexactly why we need leaders.
That's, that's the whole point.
Leaders mobilize people.
They learn how to help people mobilize,to bring about That's the whole point.
(40:55):
Action and learning and changethat improves the viability and
vitality of the organization.
That's what leadership is.
And if you have that idea that getsembedded in your heart, then there's
some, some great things that can happen.
So what you've articulated thereis exactly why we wrote this book.
(41:17):
It's to create a kind of paradigmof leadership that brings
about exactly that kind of veryproductive change for the people.
involved for the organizationsand ultimately for the
society in which they live.
Aidan McCullen (41:30):
Jon, i think you're gonna come in were you?
Jonathan Clark (41:33):
yeah, I was just going to building on what Erin said, comment , that
a lot of the misery that people experiencecomes because they essentially, it's like
they have to take off their humanity.
When they go to work, workhas become so depersonalized.
It's like, okay, I got to takemyself off and put, put it over
(41:53):
there, put on my battle gear.
And, and, and show up to work.
And that's just it's just miserable.
It's miserable for People.
, Erin has a great story that she tellsabout a colleague, I think it was a
colleague who realized one day thathe was coming to work and speaking
(42:14):
in a different way, literally likeusing different language and speaking
in a different tone and voice atwork , than he, he did at home.
Maybe Erin, you can, you canshare your thoughts about that?
Erin Clark (42:27):
Yeah, so this was actually experience during the, the height
of, of, mid 2020, we had the GeorgeFloyd incidents here in the U.
S.
And, the challenge of the pandemic,plus our black colleagues at work we were
really trying to wrap our arms around.
The emotional,
(42:48):
of that moment and in a conversation, with one of my colleagues, who's a
black man, who I've worked with fora number of years and, and I just
never occurred to me, but he saiddo you know how I speak differently?
not just I use different words,but my tone is different.
(43:10):
My whole way that I show upand present myself is different
at work than it is at home.
And that really struck me.
That for him black man and a blackprofessional, how challenging that,
that must have been and must be.
(43:31):
I think I'm sure it continuesfor many of our colleagues.
But it had me also recognizethat there are aspects of
that that are true for me too,
and, and that are true for all of usin some respects and, as we've written
this book one of the things that it'sreally shown me is the opportunity for
(43:53):
us to really strip away some of that.
It's sort of part of this deeply embeddedlegacy paradigm, but to feel like you
have to really be someone fundamentallydifferent in order to be successful.
Or in order to fit,, in aparticular dynamic is to me,
(44:15):
part of why we're so miserable.
Aidan McCullen (44:17):
i was a professional sports player for a while and when
i went to the workplace i remembersaying to my wife i remember going
you know this place i feel like.
I'm holding my breath and going intoa swamp and only to get out the other
side and can i go now i can go backto my real life but the problem is
(44:38):
we spend so much time and work and.
It's something i feel incrediblygrateful now that i work for myself
cuz i don't have to put on thatmask anymore but i still see most
of the planet having to do so.
And it really saddens me.
And you know, what's why I love supportingwork like this and the bravery to write a
book like this as well, because not enoughpeople talk about it, not enough people
(45:01):
share it, but we all know it, we all knowit deep inside as well, , but my wife said
to me, and this is my point in tellingyou the story, she goes, That's just
work and she meant it which was actuallyincredibly sad she's like that that's
the way it is you know you've been luckyyou've been you've worked for a sports
club or many over your time and, peoplewanted to go to work but most people don't
(45:27):
and then the other thing i discoveredin my research is that people who really
hate their jobs have incredible hobbies.
Because they live for the hobby afterwork and it's like you said about
automotive company these people hadlives outside and that's what was getting
them through the drudgery of the daywas knowing that this was at the end
(45:49):
of the day and unfortunately that'ssometimes that's alcohol for some people.
it's going to the bar whatever it isto drown the sorrows before having to
do it the next day as well but i wantedto tell you so because i was gonna
be sarcastic about this and go wellthank god that paradigms gone and, it
doesn't persist in relatively modernin of organizations doesn't happen
(46:12):
in place like amazon for example ifyou talk about this in the book that
amazon, had adopted it all these ways.
Absolute efficiency everything is measuredi even read recently that they have,
monitoring in the vans of the fulfillmentguys and girls that to see if they're on
(46:33):
their phone and they could be scratchingtheir neck and it will pick up actually
they were on their phone so everythingis measured, just like Taylorism
before jeff bezos as you tell us left.
Amazon he recognized this and he's tryingto instill the change of the power over
paradigm to a leading through paradigm i'dlove you to share this cause this shows
(46:53):
that there is Light amidst the darkness.
Kim Clark (46:56):
Yeah.
It's a, it's actuallya really great story.
It's a cautionary tale because there'ssort of two parts to the story.
The first part is one of themost highly regarded innovative
companies on the planet.
Was mired in this paradigm andthey use the paradigm to do
(47:20):
exactly what it was designed todo, to control, to get compliance.
And they exploited it in softwareand all sorts of monitoring
devices, sensors, very creatively.
And, they created a delivery system that.
It's pretty amazing actually, butthe human cost was considerable.
(47:44):
So that's one part of the story.
They also did the same thing inthe part of the organization.
That's very creative wherethey're innovating and so forth.
And there it was in any way, insome ways, even more cutthroat and.
and damaging to people than itwas in their distribution and,
and fulfillment center operations.
(48:06):
But then there's this other part ofthe story, which is a recognition
on the part of Jeff Bezos.
And I think in lots of, lots ofother people in the organization
that, whereas they had a great run.
In their business, thefuture was not going to be as
bright if they didn't change.
(48:27):
And he left this sense thatleadership is not the hard edge.
Pushing people and really crushing people.
It's just not the right thing.
And I think you can read between thelines and what he was, what he said
is that the words that we need tohear about leadership and Amazon are
(48:50):
not only high standards, pressure soforth, they need to be joy and fun
and fulfillment and energy at work.
And he also, you could readit to say, that's the future.
But I think he was alsosaying, we've done great.
(49:10):
We could have been even greaterhad we had this earlier.
And you can see in you don't seea lot of the failures in Amazon.
They don't talk about them that much.
They had some very, very good.
Productive innovations, , butthey had a huge number of things.
They tried, it didn't work and, we're pretty significant failures.
(49:34):
And I think part of the story is thatthey've tried to say, like, we're
going to, we're going to run thisplace differently in the future.
So it's a, it's an example of thelegacy paradigm being deeply embedded.
So embedded in the ethos oforganizations that a startup starts
at a startup becomes mired in it.
(49:55):
And yet, the counter storysaid, realization, we've got to
invest in our people, we've gotto lead differently because the
future is going to be different.
Aidan McCullen (50:04):
We haven't even got past my the introduction pretty much
i just want to tell our audience,there's loads in the book there's ten
chapters, our conversation has flowedabout the introduction we haven't even
got into the depths of the book i wantto share on the screen though for you
those people watching us on youtubeand now on spotify video as well.
that you can see a diagram onthe screen and one of the keys.
(50:31):
So Jonathan's a scholar of organizationaldynamics but Kim is also the person who
brought to light the concept of modularityand modularity is very much at the heart
of leading through paradigm, Jonathan,you're going to take us through this
diagram that are shown on the screen.
(50:51):
With the lens of modularity.
And because this is how you getstarted, this is, as you said
earlier on, you can get started.
You need to take the first step,and this is a great way to do so.
Jonathan Clark (51:03):
Well, modularity is a, as we've alluded to this idea of a tension
between freedom and unity and, and mostorganizations, Ranjay gulati, who's a
professor at Harvard Business School,has a great, a great article where he,
I think highlights the, the tensionbetween freedom, freedom and unity.
And he describes it as a tug of war.
(51:25):
In most organizations, this is a tugof war between freedom and unity.
And unfortunately, Unity wins thebattle most of the time because when
people start thinking about givingpeople freedom because they're so
mired in the power over paradigm, it'sjust so hard for them to imagine that
(51:45):
they can achieve the integration andthe innovation and the outcomes that
they seek by giving people freedom.
modularity breaks that trade off.
It it ends that, , it's possibleto end that tug of war using
the principle of modularity.
And , we highlight three, characteristicsof modularity, that really touch
(52:10):
every part of an organization.
Those three characteristicsare the framework for action.
The approach to integration and thepower dynamics and the approach to these
dimensions of the organization is verydifferent in a leading through context
than it is in a , power over context.
(52:30):
The frame framework for action is reallyabout how you design the organization,
the role of hierarchy, , how youget action, how you make decisions.
In a power over paradigm, thefocus, the mindset is control,
(52:53):
control through, through compliance.
And , this really involves the beliefsthat you harbor about people too, right?
There's this belief that peopleare, it's not just that people
are slothful or inherently lazy.
It's also that There's this mindsetthat people can't do their best work
(53:15):
and don't really know what to do withoutthe, without the intelligence and
decision making capacity of some smallgroup of people in the organization.
And Leading Through breaks through that.
Leading Through recognizes thatthere's power and potential in people.
People are not a variable to belimited and constrained and managed.
(53:39):
People are a source of inspirationand talent and ingenuity.
And Leading Through isaimed at unleashing that.
And the framework for action thatunderlies the Leading Through
paradigm is all aimed at unleashingthat potential in the people.
But when you give people freedom, rightthere is the risk that things will fray,
(54:07):
that you won't be able to retain thatunity that you seek as an organization.
In fact, unity is the veryreason that organizations exist
in the first place, right?
Organizations allow us through thatunity to accomplish , things that
we couldn't accomplish on our own.
And so you need mechanisms to integrate.
(54:29):
the work that people are doingthroughout the organization.
And and the key to that in theleading through paradigm is what
we call visible information.
, it's an approach to integration thatrelies less on executive authority
and hierarchical supervision and moreon shared commitment to values and
(54:50):
purpose, shared understanding of thestrategy of the organization and and
the other elements of the organization.
And it, it's a sharedness that results incommitment and people bringing their work
together and choosing using their agency.
And their talents to to dothe work of the organization.
(55:15):
And as, as our reference to power andthe power over paradigm suggests, power
is a central element of all of this.
If you can't get the power dynamics,even if you have a great framework
for action and , you're moving inthe direction of visible information
without those power dynamics,without the right power dynamics,
(55:35):
it's going to be a losing battle.
And the power dynamics and leadingthrough again are really all about
activating the potential, powerthat is already in people, right?
So it's not just about, I have power, Ineed to learn how to give it to people.
There is an element of that.
It's also about understanding thatpeople already have power within them.
(55:59):
what we need to do is unleash that power.
Aidan McCullen (56:01):
Nicely said, man.
I thought we'd share, Kim, I wasthinking about something that you
talked about in the book, while youtalk about heart and love and words like
that, you're not Pollyannish about it.
You say that, look, difficultdecisions need to be made also by,
by leaders, like being an empatheticleader does not mean you're soft and
(56:23):
you're going to make soft decisions.
If you, for example, have a badapple, one has snuck into your
organization, or you have a colleaguewho's not pulling their weight you
can deal with that again with empathy.
And this is a story thatyou share from the book.
Kim Clark (56:39):
Yeah, it's a, it's a really good point because leadership
is all about mobilizing people.
And so you really need to understandthe people and take advantage of the
opportunities and the power that'sin them to activate it within them.
That's what Jonathan just described.
But sometimes there are people who havereal problems and they, for whatever
(57:04):
reason, they either fail to performor they do things they shouldn't do.
And so you have to take action to do that.
And one of the, one of the principlesthat's so important in the leading
through paradigm is that every actionyou take, whether it's a decision you're
making or supporting people or dealingwith problems, you need to do it.
(57:29):
With soul, heart, and mind, which meansyou, you do it in a different way.
You don't take action.
For example, you might need toremove somebody from, from the
organization or help them in someway to get out of the situation there
because they're, they're, they're.
proving not to be productive, but youdon't do it in a, in a, in a way that
(57:55):
creates more darkness in the organization.
You just don't you do it in a waythat brings more light in and that way
you have to treat people differently.
The example that you refer to is, isreally a, A very powerful experience
that I had, which was somebody inmy department that I lived in before
(58:15):
I became Dean was just, Oh, theonly word I can think of is poison.
This person was angry all the time.
Cantankerous, contrary anddidn't do very good work.
And it was, it was like anightmare for the people who
(58:36):
had to work with this person.
And it went on and on.
And we tried to get help from our HR groupand try to figure out what can we do?
And, and there was a lot ofdocumentation and there were efforts
made to train, to help people andhelp this person understand this
is what we expect and so forth.
So it was a lot of work with this person.
(58:57):
It wasn't perimetry,but it never happened.
And so I became Dean.
And one of the first things I didis I, I talked to the head of HR.
I said, tell me about this situation.
Like what, what is going on?
Why is this?
He said, well, fundamentally.
We just can't take action becausewe're afraid of the union.
(59:19):
So this was a unionized workforce.
And I said, well, what, what do you mean?
He said, well, if we, if we get ridof this person, they could, they could
sue us, they could Extend this out.
I said, okay, so how longdo you think it will take?
And he said, Oh, it'sabout three or four years.
It could take three or four yearsgo to court and we could lose.
(59:41):
And it costs us a huge amount of money.
I said, okay, so you're telling methere's two states of the world.
One, we go on, the person leaves,we fire them, and then we get sued
and it might take three or fouryears and it costs a lot of money.
Meanwhile, the person's gone.
Or we have this person here for along time and everybody's dying.
(01:00:04):
I pick the first one.
So we've done everything wecould to help this person.
But this person is not well,something fundamentally wrong.
They, they can't be in this environment.
It's not good.
So they did, they took actionand you know what happened?
The union leader came back to usand said, what took you so long?
(01:00:29):
Cause they knew they weren't stupid.
They're smart.
They knew this was a bad situation.
And this person was justnot in a good place.
And so I learned a good lesson.
You gotta be careful.
You have to take care ofpeople and try to help them.
So we did everything we could to help.
But in the end, we had to take action.
(01:00:50):
We should have taken action ayear before that because it's been
going on for a couple of yearsand I just learned a good lesson.
You, you'd have to treat people well,be careful how you do things so that
you follow leading through principles,but you have to take action because
there are lots of people who sufferin the organization if you don't.
So they become discouraged.
(01:01:11):
When you don't deal with problems, theywonder like, what are you thinking?
You're telling us all these goodthings, but you're not doing things
that we need you to help us with.
So that was a, that was a good thing.
And it, it harks back to the fundamentalprinciples that, We were talking about
it, Jonathan took us through so well,which is fundamentally, you have a view
(01:01:31):
of people that people are human beings.
They're pulled to do wrong.
Sometimes they're, they're,they want to do good.
And you got to create acontext where they choose good.
And you help them do that.
And you trust them.
And you build relationships with them oftrust, and you empower them, not by giving
(01:01:53):
them power, but by activating the powerthat's already in them, and then training
and educating and helping them grow.
And when you do that, the organization,they thrive, the organization thrives.
That's the point.
That, that's the fundamental point.
And you create a structure in the wholeorganization that enables that to happen.
(01:02:14):
So you get rid of a lot of thebarriers to innovation, but you still
maintain a structure and a set ofprinciples and values that give people
a framework within which to work.
Then you give them informationabout what's going on.
How does your project fit witheverything else that's going on?
And what do you need to accomplish,not only in your own group,
(01:02:36):
your own project team, but do itin a way that feeds the whole.
And people, people love towork in that environment.
I'm not kidding you.
Once you get a taste, of living andworking in a leading through environment.
You never want to go back
Because you go to work and it'sa good place and you go home.
(01:02:57):
Yeah, you're tired.
You've worked hard, but you're fulfilled.
You're happy.
You feel like you're making a difference.
You have meaning in your life becauseyou're spending so much time at work.
You should be, it shouldbe a meaningful experience.
People never want to goever to that old way.
And that's what happens when leadersget that vision that we can create
(01:03:18):
something here that is so powerful.
People never want to leave.
And they give us their best all the time.
Then it becomes, okay, we're doing this.
And then you do what youneed to do to bring it about.
That's leading through.
Aidan McCullen (01:03:34):
Amen, brother.
That's a lovely way towrap it up, isn't it?
I love the way that you broughtthat from what could have been a
dark place right back to the light.
And I leave that, I'm usingthat language specifically.
And we've nicely tied together, bythe way, what I planted the seed of
earlier on about this idea of walkingthe tightrope between freedom and unity
(01:03:56):
and bringing people together as well.
It's been an absolute pleasure.
For people.
I'm sure when I get in touch with you orfind out more, where's the best place?
Kim Clark (01:04:05):
So I think we're all on LinkedIn.
, , the book has a website justleading through one word.
co and , get to us that way as well.
Aidan McCullen (01:04:15):
Well, great job and as I said, I highly recommend
it for its readability, which isa big thing, but also the stories.
There's unusual case studies that isnot the typical case studies in there.
There's some great case studies andit all brings you through this lens
of the old paradigm and the newparadigm, the leading through paradigm.
(01:04:37):
By the way, I have a copy here.
The guys don't even have a copy.
I got, I got an advanced copy.
I was showing them what it looked likeand the size of the book, et cetera.
Authors of leading through activatingthe soul, heart, and mind of leadership.
Kim, Jonathan, and Erin Clark.
Thank you for joining us.
Kim Clark (01:04:55):
Thank you.
We find ourselves in a profound moment of opportunity
(00:03):
unlike any other in human history
and yet it is clear that our organizationsoften fall short of harnessing that power
to help people and communities thrive.
The culprit is the old ways of working,thinking, leading, and a paradigm.
That focuses on using powerover people to control them.
(00:24):
Restricting personal agency andenforcing compliance in a coercive
bureaucratic hierarchy the leadershipwe need requires a new way of thinking.
behaving and organizing.
A living paradigm thatis flexible and adaptive
.Today's book is a proposal for that new paradigm one wherein we are all
(00:47):
leaders or at least can be, this isthe soul heart and mind of leadership.
The new paradigm is designed to activatethem throughout the organization this
is what our guests call, leading throughit is a very important book written
by former dean of harvard businessschool his business school professor
(01:11):
son, management consultant daughter , itis a pleasure to welcome all three
of those authors of leading throughactivating the soul heart and mind of
leadership, kim jonathan and erin clark.
Welcome to the show
Kim Clark (01:27):
Thank you.
Erin Clark (01:28):
Thank you.
Jonathan Clark (01:28):
Thank
Aidan McCullen (01:29):
it's great to have you with us guys i am so impressed by
firstly okay i'm from an irish familyoutside that most people are happy to
get through thanksgiving dinner togetherlet alone writing a book and a book with
this much research so, bravo to you guysfirst of all i thought we'd share how
(01:50):
each of you bring your own experiencethe book, maybe we'll start ladies first
erin then we'll go to john and then.
end with kim . i love the greatadage of innovation that innovation
happens at the intersections, it's theintersections of both your different
disciplines and what you've seen boththe challenges and the opportunities
Erin maybe we'll start with you.
Erin Clark (02:12):
Sure.
Thanks, Aiden.
What I brought to the book, I think myexperience as a, I like to refer to myself
as an accidental management consultant,actually, was never in my career kind of
track how you set off in your career andyou think this is where we're headed.
This was never it.
(02:32):
But here we are 20 plus years in, And, oneof the things, and I'm incredibly grateful
for that career and the opportunitiesfor, to work with the organizations
I've had the opportunity to work with.
It's given me a living laboratory,if you will to look at this
(02:53):
challenge of leadership.
And I think that that experience iswhat I brought to this book is the
opportunity to, to see that playout in so many different contexts.
And to recognize that there's To see itwork so well in some situations and then
(03:15):
fall apart to see it not get tractionand not be able to see leaders and
executives and organizations struggle,to find my own sense of frustration
as a leader, as I've grown and takenon increased responsibility in the
organizations that I've been part of.
And then just in life to bring theexperiences of my own life and wrestling
(03:41):
with that dynamic between living lifeand the challenges that life brings and,
and, and, and work and the trade offsthat you make, and how do you address
all of those challenges, as a leaderand, and try to create value for yourself
(04:03):
and for the communities you're part of,for the organizations you're part of.
And I think I always tell the storyabout how did we come to write this book
in terms of we talk shop as a family.
And it went from family dinnerconversations or party conversations.
(04:23):
And then we started to see thatthere were these things that we
would share that we and we'd seekeach other out, to share them and,
and wrestle with these challenges.
And then we started to see patterns.
And, and so it became interestingto think about each of our different
(04:45):
perspectives on a common issue thatwe were each seeing and that there
might be something powerful there.
Aidan McCullen (04:52):
John what about you what was your experience to add to Erins,
Jonathan Clark (04:56):
Well, I, I've spent my career, studying
organizational performance.
Actually, the impetus for thatinterest came when I was a kid.
I was an athlete.
I played a bunch of sports and was alwaysjust interested in how can I be better?
How can I help my teammates be better?
(05:19):
What makes a team perform its best?
And that carried throughinto my professional life.
that interest.
And I spent the first part ofmy professional life studying
healthcare organizations.
I just became so confused as to whyso many healthcare organizations can
do these unbelievable things, performmiracles even, while others just
(05:41):
flounder and, and are just terrible.
And so I spent a lot of timestudying that issue , and
doing empirical work, right?
Using data to try touncover what's going on here.
And I just kept coming back.
To the concept of leadership andand that pushed me in a direction
of really trying to understand howmuch do leaders really matter, right?
(06:03):
That's actually a question.
I think for most people,it's intuitive, right?
Leaders matter.
But in the academic world,there's actually this whole.
component of organization theory,people who make the argument
that leaders don't matter.
Actually, everything else is determinedby other things and that leaders
play a largely ceremonial role.
(06:24):
And so I became interested inthat and explored that, that issue
and not surprisingly discoveredfor myself that in fact, leaders
do matter and they matter a lot.
But maybe not in the way that you might,you might think, naturally we're not
talking about where we're not onlytalking about executive leadership.
(06:46):
We're not just talking aboutthe CEO or other C suite folks.
What we've found is, , the kindof leadership that matters is
the kind of leadership thatpermeates an entire organization.
Organizations of all kinds, right?
Families teams, companies, communities,governments, , the organizations that
(07:11):
really thrive, that perform their verybest produce wonderful outcomes are
those in which leadership permeatesevery unit, every corner of every unit.
And, where that leadership helpsthe people in that organization to
thrive, because at the end of the day,we've found that it's thriving people
(07:34):
that create thriving organizations.
And, and that's what Ibrought to this book.
And, and I hope it's part ofthe message that comes across
and what we've, put together.
aidan_1_08-02-2024_150023 (07:43):
will your your deep research send me down many
many rabbit hole so i took a lot longerto read the book that i should have
because i kept going to the footnoteso that's you that's you that's on you.
But thank you.
You had this huge researchand massive footnotes for
each of the chapters as well.
So I, I thank you for that kind of Kimfor you, you have been a leader for, of
(08:10):
many organizations, but I thought we'dstart actually for you in a different
way, because the Genesis for youactually began many decades ago 1979 on a
beautiful spring day in Detroit, Michigan.
Kim Clark (08:24):
Yeah, that was a, that was a seminal experience, as they say.
I was in a, in a automobile plant,assembly plant, which by the way, is
a, is a marvel, it's just incredibleto be in one of these large, huge
plants that create cars, so wesaw people working and we're just
(08:49):
Studying productivity and quality.
And it was part of a nationalacademy of engineering study group.
And I was the junior guy.
And it was just really interesting to seethis technology in action and so forth.
But what was really striking was thatpeople who worked on the line, on the
assembly line, everything they did wasbasically choreographed by people in the
(09:13):
industrial engineering group who were noton the floor, they're upstairs somewhere.
They had about a minute toaccomplish their basic tasks.
And everything was choreographed.
We then had the opportunity to seethem, meet people and talk to people and
learned what they did outside of work.
(09:34):
It was astonishing.
These were people running the localparent teacher organization, their
schools, they're running they'remanaging the soccer team or the baseball
team, or they were restoring boats.
They were, fixing up new cars.
They're very talented and theyhad a lot of leadership skill,
but when they Came to work.
(09:57):
It was like those leadership skills becamecompletely unused by the organization.
They worked just nothing.
They didn't do anything.
And then the astonishing thing wasWe found exactly the same thing
everywhere we went in that corporation.
If you go into a marketinggroup or finance or engineering
(10:18):
or product development or Rand D, you saw the same thing.
You saw this focus on control,on compliance, and even the
people, the striking thing waseven the people in engineering.
And product Dylan who are creating newthings, they had this very heavy structure
on top of them and a very bureaucraticprocess that they had to deal with.
(10:43):
And it was really quite remarkable sothat was the genesis of, of looking
at the, what we call the power overparadigm in action, this legacy paradigm
that goes way, way back in history.
And one of the things thathas had a big impact on me.
And I've been in steel companiesseeing the same things I've been in
(11:08):
semiconductor companies, IBM, big,huge organizations that are in the
technology world, big software companies,and you see exactly the same thing.
So that's why we came to see,there's a there's a legacy paradigm.
It's like a legacy computer system.
It's like deeply embedded,very expensive, hard to change.
(11:31):
And people take it for granted.
This is just how you work organizations.
And I, I think that's one of thethings I brought to the book is
a, is a recognition that we wereall immersed in this paradigm.
We go to school, like yourelementary school is run like that.
And universities are run like that.
And so we're all, all immersedin it and we need to change it.
(11:56):
And fortunately, we'vehad some experiences.
I had a lot of experiencesbeing a leader myself.
So has John.
And so was Erin.
And we took those experiencesand we realized that we.
Had run counter to that legacy paradigm.
Our feeling about what was rightto do in an organization was
(12:17):
to do something very different.
And we began to understand and explore.
And what's happened in the book is we'vegone back and look at our experience,
at our research, at our practice,at all the companies we've observed.
We've been inside.
I think if you make a big list ofall of the, all of the different
kinds of industries there are,we've been in most of them.
(12:40):
either writing cases, doingresearch, doing consulting.
And so we've had this broadexperience, pulled that together
and then tried to articulate.
What's this new paradigm that wethink really makes a difference?
And that's what became the book.
And it started about six years ago,just in conversations with each other
about maybe we should write a book.
(13:03):
And I'll tell you, one of thegreat joys of my life has been
to write a book with my children.
Cause I knew these people whenthey were teenagers, and if
you'd said then, Oh, Kim about.
2025 years from now, you're goingto write a book with these people.
I thought you gotta be kidding me.
Jonathan Clark (13:24):
Actually, Aidan, we need to clarify something there.
The truth is, when we were kids, Erinabsolutely, absolutely was the kind of
you knew Erin was going to be great.
I on the other hand,
I was out in the wilderness somewhere.
, , Kim Clark: well, it's been a great joy.
Aidan McCullen (13:44):
And I remember, so for Erin and John, last time I spoke
to Kim on the show, he said this, hesaid, I'm having such a great time
writing this book with my family.
So he was saying that as youwere writing it , he said those
things, Kim, you teed us up.
You mentioned the power over paradigm.
We'll explain that.
You reminded me and John, I'd say you'vedefinitely read this book of a book there.
(14:07):
The one best way about Fred , Winslow,Taylor, and Taylorism, it's about
the scientific matters, whichis the, the, the bloody problem.
, why we've had this power overparadigm because it was seen as the
best way for efficiency, et cetera.
And I just wanted to point out onething, Kim, you mentioned there
about , the automotive, industry, and.
(14:28):
I still ask people today about thisparadigm and they will say that, Oh,
well, it's needed in manufacturing.
And you prove that's notthe case with a great case.
So you have CEMEX , in the book John,I'm sure this was your one Cleveland
clinic as well, where people think thereneeds to be a hierarchy in somewhere
like healthcare, which you've provedisn't the case , but because Kim,
(14:50):
you said this, each of you share.
Your personal story of the old paradigmerin you with a client john yourself
driving change and kim with byu idahopathway program, maybe we'll share
this because again i think this isgreat for context and as you know
you talk very much about context andinformation and get it right from the
(15:12):
start to help people understand whatthe vision is so let's get this in first
and then we'll get to the paradigm.
Kim Clark (15:18):
So let me go first.
I will reverse the order.
Maybe I had the great blessingof being president of BYU Idaho.
We started this program called Pathway.
which is a program designed to helppeople who don't have access to higher
education, for many reasons, , getaccess to it , and be able to succeed.
(15:40):
So we started this programand we discovered something
that was really discouraging.
People who would go throughthe program and were ready to
matriculate in the university.
would drop out.
They had spent a year preparing, going toschool, taking courses and got good grades
(16:01):
and they qualified to matriculate in adegree program or a certificate program
in the university, but they drop out.
And so we thought, what, what's going on?
So we began to investigate and discoveredthat whereas the pathway program for
them was very easy to access online,It was very simple, very friendly.
(16:24):
When they got to university, itwas like a whole new universe.
And it was incrediblydifficult to navigate.
For example, I'll giveyou one simple example.
Everything they encountered wasdesigned to support students on campus.
And these students were online.
Many of them lived in foreign countries.
So they'd get a prompt.
(16:46):
From the system would say, go to theregistrar's office and sign this document.
What?
Because the registrar's officewas in Rexburg, Idaho, and
they were living in Ghana.
It's just ridiculous stuff like that.
So we had to go to work and, wediscovered that there were just this, all
(17:07):
these bureaucracies, set of rules that hadbeen designed over the years and years.
to control what happened on the campus.
And we just were immersed in thisthing and we decided this can't happen.
So two things happened.
One, we changed it.
For the pathway students andeventually create their own
(17:29):
information system and then connectedit to the university seamlessly so
they don't have to deal with it.
And then we went to work on theuniversity to change that structure.
So it became much simpler, mucheasier to use many fewer rules and
ending up trusting the students.
That was the key element that changed.
(17:52):
So for me, that was an eye opener.
That even in a wonderful place, andthat's a wonderful university, that
paradigm , was there we needed to,we needed to work on to change it.
And we did.
Aidan McCullen (18:08):
The bureaucracy is very much part of the power over paradigm
and again it's a control mechanism thatthe bureaucracy some of it's needed
as you talk about there's a trade off,what's a absolutely something that is
a killer for listeners to the show.
They talk so much about how there'sbottlenecks because of the old way and
it shows that there's no trust of themand then they feel disempowered as
(18:31):
well john let's share your experience.
Jonathan Clark (18:35):
When I took over as chair of the department of management at
the University of Texas at San Antonio,I just, I just, I already knew this
because I'd been a faculty there for acouple of faculty member for a couple
of years, but I really discovered justhow miserable people were and not just
(18:55):
faculty staff to people were just unhappy.
And and so I, I just began toinvestigate why I talked to
everybody in the department to tryto figure out what was going on.
And it turned out the, the key issuewas power at the end of the day.
For years, in fact, decades,the department had been mired
(19:20):
in a set of power dynamics.
that caused different factions inthe department to just perpetually
be competing with each other forpower and control in the department.
And it just led people in the departmentto do all sorts of things that that
(19:41):
were unethical immoral, unkind.
Lots of backbiting people, I don'tknow, trying to get in each other's way.
People trying to controldecision making processes and
it was making people miserable.
And yet people didn't, they didn'tquite grasp that that was the problem.
(20:06):
This is the paradox of the power, powerover paradigm is that people think that
power over is the way to get things done.
And in fact it, it perpetuatesitself because you can use power in
that way to get some things done.
But in reality using power in thatway is self limiting because you're
(20:31):
going to make people miserable.
And what happens when peopleare miserable, they disengage.
And that was the story at UTSAwhen I took over as chair.
People were just disengaged.
People, in fact avoidedcoming into the office.
And so we set ourselves on a path andI, I got a number of my colleagues
to work with me to, to try to changethose dynamics and bring the faculty
(20:54):
together to create a set of values andexpectations for people and to create a
vision of what we were trying to become.
And it was a lot of work and,and it took a few years to, I
think, really bear fruit, but.
But it worked.
And I think now that department, ourdepartment is, is a wonderful department.
In fact, we, we became anexemplary department when the
(21:16):
university decided to stand forour one status from the Carnegie.
Institute.
And and so anyways, it I think it's a,it's a, it helped me solidify in my mind.
Cause this was all actually happeningwhile we were working on the book
that helped to, to solidify in my mindthat the paradox of, of power over
(21:39):
and, and really the, the detrimentalnegative effect that it can have
aidan_1_08-02-2024_150023 (21:42):
That's elements and now i know who peppered
the book with sports analogies aswell there's a lot of them in there
there's a i don't know if you saw thisthere was a speed skater i think she
was chinese speed skater and she useda totally unorthodox approach to win.
In the olympics you want to go justthe other day in the olympics and she
just went early to win the race likeand she end up laughing everybody
(22:06):
and she was she looked like she waslast but she had locked them all and
they just couldn't catch her cause sheran so early and it reminded me of.
The bravery to break the mold andthat's what you really did there
because you can get results by followingwhat everybody else does in sports.
I've had coaches that come innew coach comes in and there's a
(22:28):
huge fear for them to break themold of what everybody has done.
They also need the support of a higherlevel like a board or our colleagues
to go look this is gonna take timethere's a huge step back before we
take a few steps forward that's a hugechallenge for people as well because
you can you said, get results byhammering down milk the cash cow don't
(22:52):
invest in the future etc that paradox.
Is is a huge challenge maybe beforewe go to erin and erin's experience
of the power over paradigm you mightshare that because that would have
been difficult for you i'm sure,
Jonathan Clark (23:04):
Very difficult.
At the end of the day, or youhave to change people's mindsets.
It's a mindset shiftthat has to take place.
And they have to haveto see and understand,
not just the detrimental impactof power over, but also the
(23:26):
beneficial effects of, of.
a different way.
And at the end of the day it, itactually didn't, it turned out to
not be that part of it turned out tonot be as difficult as I anticipated
because people, people want to be happy.
And when people are not happy andyou, and you help them to see why
(23:47):
they're not happy and you show them,a better possibility, they, they get
excited about it and they love it.
And they, they want.
They want it and they are willing to dohard things in some cases, to get it.
And and that, so that's what, that'swhat, that's what we were doing it
(24:09):
at UTSA and people were very happy.
I had, I had a a really importantexperience, a very simple
experience last year when.
One of my most skeptical colleagues, oneof my most skeptical colleagues came up
to me after a meeting and actually, thiswas a department meeting in which we, we
(24:30):
had the best attendance we'd ever had.
Department meetings for yearswere attended by 10 or 12 people.
This, this meeting had 35 people at it.
She came up to me and she said.
You were right.
Aidan McCullen (24:46):
they're beautiful words to hear.
Kim Clark (24:50):
I had the same
experience at, Harvard business school.
I used to give talks to the faculty.
When I served as Dean there, that rancounter to the basic fundamental aspects
of what it meant to be a faculty memberbecause faculty members are inherently
independent, autonomous entrepreneurs.
(25:12):
That's essentially who they are.
And I, I gave talks about how, look,if we invest in each other and take
time to work together and actuallyhelp each other and work together,
Even at the expense of our own work inthe short run, eventually we'll create
(25:33):
an environment that's so powerful.
All of us will be more productive than wewould have been had we behaved selfishly.
That was really, really hardfor a lot of people to grasp.
And but the parts of the school thatreally got it actually it works.
(25:53):
It works.
It's a much better environment.
You're more productive, actually.
So I had, when I left the school, I gota letter from the most skeptical guy
and he wrote me a littlenote and a little letter.
And he said, I just have to tell you,when I first heard you talk about that,
I thought, am I at Harvard university?
(26:14):
Is this guy crazy?
Like, what is he talking about?
And they said, but then later Idecided I'm going to try this.
Not just at school, but I'mgoing to try this in my personal
life, my family, so forth.
He said, I just have totell you, you were right.
It works.
And I've never been happier.
And I'm so grateful that youtaught me that principle.
(26:37):
So the principles are true, actually.
And when you practicethem, good things happen.
It happens.
And that's part of the messageof the book, that leading
through is what you want to do.
As you adopt these ideas, it's have thecourage and the strength to just move
it and move it until you hit that pointand all of a sudden it just develops its
(27:01):
own momentum and it's awesome becausewhat happens, this is, this is one of
Erin's phrases, but what happens is athriving human being is a powerful force
And when you get a bunch of thrivinghuman beings working together, it's
absolutely incredible what happens.
It really is.
So what we say is the legacy paradigmand the power over paradigm doesn't mean
(27:26):
those organizations never do anything.
Because they do things and they,they improve and they deploy
stuff and things happen, but thepotential in them is so much more.
That's what this paradox is about.
Aidan McCullen (27:42):
Beautiful i'm gonna put a signpost there for just a reminder
audience cuz there's a very key pointand something you alluded to there and.
Is the book is that you have a bunchof entrepreneurs essentially that
are stifled and you're stiflingtheir energy their potential.
And I think that's such an important,we'll use that as a metaphor for, well,
(28:06):
that's the same in any organization,like you saw in Detroit , they have
potential, but it's stifled, butthere's also a paradox in there.
And this, I just sent a, and shesays, hi, by the way, Wendy Smith.
I sent her an excerpt from your bookbecause she just wrote a book called
both on thinking the power of, yeah.
And I was talking about the, I sent herthis and I said, this, this will speak to
(28:30):
exactly your point that there's a tradeoff between a certain amount of control.
And then unity.
So how do you actually, how do you,how do you create unity and freedom
? And it's really, really difficult.
That unity, freedom paradox isactually throughout the book and
it's something that can be achieved.
And we'll come back to thatin a moment, but I just wanted
(28:52):
to just remind our audience.
We'll come back to that.
That is such an important element,the way I think of you all now
is you've created this lensand now you see it everywhere.
Scott Anthony, was tellingme that one of the things,
Christine Clay Christiansen's, hiswife used to laugh about what she said.
I think Clay has an S curve carvedinto the inside of his glasses
(29:14):
and he sees them everywhere.
And I was thinking, that'swhat's happened to you.
You've created this power overparadigm framework I should say,
leading through paradigm framework.
And now you see it everywhere.
And Erin, you see it.
not only in your own life andin your own organization, but
we are clients all the time.
Erin Clark (29:34):
Yeah, I think, I think in the example that I, that I share,
it actually speaks to, I think what mydad was just talking about and, and,
and this, this, This false sense oftrade off that you mentioned, right?
That, that, that you, that youcan't have aligned unity and
(29:55):
freedom of action at the same time.
And the, the example that I sharein the book is an experience
I had working with a client.
And a lot of times in consulting,, especially in strategy, the project
can can sometimes be short and,this was a situation where we
were in it for a little while.
So we had that benefit, whichwas, an advantage, , being able to
(30:15):
actually see some of these dynamicsstart to play out and recognize
that while we weren't actually thereto solve this particular issue.
That I highlight in the book, , that wehad an opportunity by, being there to,
to support that, because it was, it wasimportant to the overall outcome that
we're trying to create for that plan.
But what we saw was a new leader,new to the organization, also new
(30:37):
to this particular area, coming in,inheriting a team from somebody who'd
been there for a very long time.
An organization that was verysiloed in its operations.
but entering a new, , area and I'llshare because I think it's important.
I don't say this in the bookbecause trying to protect, , client
(30:58):
confidentiality, but this is apharmaceutical company entering a new
product area, a new therapeutic area.
And I think that helped in somerespects, because one of the levers
that this leader was able to pullwas, I think part of the, what allows
you to create unity is tapping into.
, The soul, heart and mind of thehumanity of people and, , inheriting
(31:20):
this very siloed, , very competitive,which I think Jonathan talked about
as well, my dad referenced, right?
We're very competitive, , high, achievement oriented organization
with a, with a pretty clear setof, this is the way to success.
And it's a little bit cutthroat.
I guess this is what you could say.
(31:42):
, And recognizing that actually for usto, to move into this, this area of
opportunity for the organization , wasgoing to require us to do some new things.
differently and those thingsare really things we do well.
So how do I, as a leader, how do Iget folks to choose , to do that?
(32:04):
, when there's nothing structuralgiving them that incentive to do that.
The other thing I'll mention, I don'tknow that I mentioned this part in
the book too, is that their teamwas very small, , but they needed
the support and collaboration fromacross a whole other set of areas.
This is increasingly true inmany organizations, right?
Where my span of control ordirect authority is very limited.
(32:28):
And so in order to actually get thingsdone and collaborate in the ways that we
need , to be effective, I have to partnerwith and collaborate with a broad set
of folks and there was this recognitionthat there's really, , some structural
, and cultural challenges to overcome.
And I think the lever that was pulledhere among a number of other things, but
was really tapping into what some of whatJonathan and my dad mentioned too, is
(32:51):
tapping into the, the humanity of those.
People involved , and speakingto a higher sense of purpose.
, and recognizing an opportunity tobuild alignment, not through structure,
not through hierarchy or authority orany sort of, typical method that had
(33:12):
been in place in this organization,but through , our general desire
as human beings to do better.
And in this case, save people's lives.
And to tap into that and to findthe opportunity build momentum
around the chance to have a realimpact in the world in that way.
(33:33):
And then to tie that back to theindividual actions that I as a
team member or as a participantin this process have to play.
Over time, part of what played out waswhat we've discussed is a recognition
that, , people want to be happy, right?
And the dynamics of organizations oftenset us up to feel like we have to
(33:56):
play this game and participate in this.
This dynamic , that the way tosucceed is to play a certain way
to the example that you mentioned.
And I do think it takes incredibleamount of courage , to choose to
break out of that, , and to tap intosomething that, , on the surface may
or may not have anything to do withthe day to day of the work we do.
(34:18):
but if we can really if we can broadenthe aperture and, and take a step back
and really consider, , from a, senseof purpose and meaning, , then I think
there's, there's something there.
And I find that that's really , wherewe can tap into a shared sense of, of
alignment, , where , I don't need tohave formal authority over a group of
(34:39):
people in order , to build alignment.
and actually to have that alignment whilealso giving them the freedom of action
to innovate and create in the ways thatthey need , to create value, , in the ways
that they see and take that opportunity.
That's, I think what we're,what we're talking about with
this, with this new paradigm.
And, I love what you say about puttingon those, those glasses and we now now
(35:02):
that we framed it, we see it everywhere.
And it's true.
I see it everywhere.
And I think in the book, we,we try to make this point,
but it can feel overwhelming.
Like, how can I possibly take this on?
And at the same time, and I thinkthis example that I share in the book
is, , it's actually not that hard.
(35:25):
it's a lot of things if you lookat it at the more broad systemic
level, but if you look at it just atwhat's the first step or the first
thing that I can, that I can do,
, we're all human and we share common,, traits and, and tapping into some of that,
I think is where some of this starts.
(35:46):
i was thinking about when youwere saying that that one of the
biggest challenges is the bravery.
what also the persistence of the powerover paradigm and by that i mean that,
many and many of them are men are stillin board positions but they're also over
certain age and that age is often fromthe paradigm the previous paradigm and
(36:10):
then even the origin of many managersi'm sure you saw this came in in the
factories you visited in the seventiesand eighties, were ex-military and that
paradigm was very much power over cuzi probably needed to be even more maybe
i don't know maybe it needed to be morebut the paradigm is there and then,
(36:32):
you have somebody coming in i alwaysthink of the case study of paul o'neill
the former ceo of alcoa coming in.
First big meeting town hall meeting.
He announces that Alcoa is going tobe the safest company in America.
Some stock analysts sold their stock.
They're like, Oh, and there's a no jobcoming in as CEO of the company or sell
your stock, this place is going to tank.
(36:54):
And then it takes off.
And by focusing on this habit, thisorganizational habit, and I'm saying
that to set up , the challenge is yourbook talks about very human stuff.
heart mind love and they're languagesthat were not used to in the business
world we still have this dominantgordon gecko and wall street kind
(37:18):
of character and even if you're anexecutive having the bravery, like you
did jonathan bringing in a new paradigm.
You will have people who are thedetractors originally have lots of
those skeptics and that's where ittakes this immense bravery to step
above that and go you know what i'mtaking off the mask i'm gonna be human
(37:39):
i'm gonna expose my heart i'm gonnamake mistakes all this kind of stuff.
Business does not like that
I had a chance to speak on someof this this week , and literally
said to the audience, I said beforeI go on to this next section, I'm
just going to let you know, this istypically the moment where I start
to see the eyes roll in the audience.
When I start to use words like loveand, and humanity and tapping in really,
(38:04):
really the soul, heart and mind, right?
We sometimes write specialistsports analogies, we can get
over that and, use those still.
But when you add the soul piece to it,it adds another dimension that again,
starts to lead into that the wallsthat I think we've started that this
(38:27):
the legacy paradigm is Enabled us toput up it between who we are as human
beings and our work selves and our worklives And, , at the end of the day,
, we are humans, I'll, I'll sharejust really briefly this particular
conversation that I was part of thisweek was all about generative AI and the
(38:51):
journey that we're all embarking on innavigating change and transformation and
how we work and opportunities to createincredible value with these new tools.
And, , depending on how you approachit and how you look at it and I
said , to the group that our successin this journey collective as a
(39:12):
world society will depend less onour ability to tap into the value
of the technology than it will totap into the value of our humanity.
We have to make the most of our humanitiesfor this to really be successful.
You just look at the lastseveral sort of transformative.
Gifts that have happened inthe world over the last just
(39:33):
30 years that I've been alive.
, Are we better off?
We can say that the more value has beencreated in the world because of the
Internet and because of cyber, becauseof cloud and all of these things.
And certainly we will likelylook at this next AI and say
more value has been created.
(39:56):
Wouldn't we really want to also look andbe able to say humanity is better off?
I don't think we can say that rightnow about this sort of, the path
that we've, I think we can say prettyfirmly humanity is not better off.
More value maybe, but people?
Are miscible.
(40:19):
So it doesn't have to be that way.
I think that's part of the part ofwhat we're hoping to get across with
using that kind of language and reallybeing more human and how we talk
about leadership and organizations
Kim Clark (40:31):
when you framed the issue around the the difficulties
and the challenges, that'sexactly why we need leaders.
That's, that's the whole point.
Leaders mobilize people.
They learn how to help people mobilize,to bring about That's the whole point.
(40:55):
Action and learning and changethat improves the viability and
vitality of the organization.
That's what leadership is.
And if you have that idea that getsembedded in your heart, then there's
some, some great things that can happen.
So what you've articulated thereis exactly why we wrote this book.
(41:17):
It's to create a kind of paradigmof leadership that brings
about exactly that kind of veryproductive change for the people.
involved for the organizationsand ultimately for the
society in which they live.
Aidan McCullen (41:30):
Jon, i think you're gonna come in were you?
Jonathan Clark (41:33):
yeah, I was just going to building on what Erin said, comment , that
a lot of the misery that people experiencecomes because they essentially, it's like
they have to take off their humanity.
When they go to work, workhas become so depersonalized.
It's like, okay, I got to takemyself off and put, put it over
(41:53):
there, put on my battle gear.
And, and, and show up to work.
And that's just it's just miserable.
It's miserable for People.
, Erin has a great story that she tellsabout a colleague, I think it was a
colleague who realized one day thathe was coming to work and speaking
(42:14):
in a different way, literally likeusing different language and speaking
in a different tone and voice atwork , than he, he did at home.
Maybe Erin, you can, you canshare your thoughts about that?
Erin Clark (42:27):
Yeah, so this was actually experience during the, the height
of, of, mid 2020, we had the GeorgeFloyd incidents here in the U.
S.
And, the challenge of the pandemic,plus our black colleagues at work we were
really trying to wrap our arms around.
The emotional,
(42:48):
of that moment and in a conversation, with one of my colleagues, who's a
black man, who I've worked with fora number of years and, and I just
never occurred to me, but he saiddo you know how I speak differently?
not just I use different words,but my tone is different.
(43:10):
My whole way that I show upand present myself is different
at work than it is at home.
And that really struck me.
That for him black man and a blackprofessional, how challenging that,
that must have been and must be.
(43:31):
I think I'm sure it continuesfor many of our colleagues.
But it had me also recognizethat there are aspects of
that that are true for me too,
and, and that are true for all of usin some respects and, as we've written
this book one of the things that it'sreally shown me is the opportunity for
(43:53):
us to really strip away some of that.
It's sort of part of this deeply embeddedlegacy paradigm, but to feel like you
have to really be someone fundamentallydifferent in order to be successful.
Or in order to fit,, in aparticular dynamic is to me,
(44:15):
part of why we're so miserable.
Aidan McCullen (44:17):
i was a professional sports player for a while and when
i went to the workplace i remembersaying to my wife i remember going
you know this place i feel like.
I'm holding my breath and going intoa swamp and only to get out the other
side and can i go now i can go backto my real life but the problem is
(44:38):
we spend so much time and work and.
It's something i feel incrediblygrateful now that i work for myself
cuz i don't have to put on thatmask anymore but i still see most
of the planet having to do so.
And it really saddens me.
And you know, what's why I love supportingwork like this and the bravery to write a
book like this as well, because not enoughpeople talk about it, not enough people
(45:01):
share it, but we all know it, we all knowit deep inside as well, , but my wife said
to me, and this is my point in tellingyou the story, she goes, That's just
work and she meant it which was actuallyincredibly sad she's like that that's
the way it is you know you've been luckyyou've been you've worked for a sports
club or many over your time and, peoplewanted to go to work but most people don't
(45:27):
and then the other thing i discoveredin my research is that people who really
hate their jobs have incredible hobbies.
Because they live for the hobby afterwork and it's like you said about
automotive company these people hadlives outside and that's what was getting
them through the drudgery of the daywas knowing that this was at the end
(45:49):
of the day and unfortunately that'ssometimes that's alcohol for some people.
it's going to the bar whatever it isto drown the sorrows before having to
do it the next day as well but i wantedto tell you so because i was gonna
be sarcastic about this and go wellthank god that paradigms gone and, it
doesn't persist in relatively modernin of organizations doesn't happen
(46:12):
in place like amazon for example ifyou talk about this in the book that
amazon, had adopted it all these ways.
Absolute efficiency everything is measuredi even read recently that they have,
monitoring in the vans of the fulfillmentguys and girls that to see if they're on
(46:33):
their phone and they could be scratchingtheir neck and it will pick up actually
they were on their phone so everythingis measured, just like Taylorism
before jeff bezos as you tell us left.
Amazon he recognized this and he's tryingto instill the change of the power over
paradigm to a leading through paradigm i'dlove you to share this cause this shows
(46:53):
that there is Light amidst the darkness.
Kim Clark (46:56):
Yeah.
It's a, it's actuallya really great story.
It's a cautionary tale because there'ssort of two parts to the story.
The first part is one of themost highly regarded innovative
companies on the planet.
Was mired in this paradigm andthey use the paradigm to do
(47:20):
exactly what it was designed todo, to control, to get compliance.
And they exploited it in softwareand all sorts of monitoring
devices, sensors, very creatively.
And, they created a delivery system that.
It's pretty amazing actually, butthe human cost was considerable.
(47:44):
So that's one part of the story.
They also did the same thing inthe part of the organization.
That's very creative wherethey're innovating and so forth.
And there it was in any way, insome ways, even more cutthroat and.
and damaging to people than itwas in their distribution and,
and fulfillment center operations.
(48:06):
But then there's this other part ofthe story, which is a recognition
on the part of Jeff Bezos.
And I think in lots of, lots ofother people in the organization
that, whereas they had a great run.
In their business, thefuture was not going to be as
bright if they didn't change.
(48:27):
And he left this sense thatleadership is not the hard edge.
Pushing people and really crushing people.
It's just not the right thing.
And I think you can read between thelines and what he was, what he said
is that the words that we need tohear about leadership and Amazon are
(48:50):
not only high standards, pressure soforth, they need to be joy and fun
and fulfillment and energy at work.
And he also, you could readit to say, that's the future.
But I think he was alsosaying, we've done great.
(49:10):
We could have been even greaterhad we had this earlier.
And you can see in you don't seea lot of the failures in Amazon.
They don't talk about them that much.
They had some very, very good.
Productive innovations, , butthey had a huge number of things.
They tried, it didn't work and, we're pretty significant failures.
(49:34):
And I think part of the story is thatthey've tried to say, like, we're
going to, we're going to run thisplace differently in the future.
So it's a, it's an example of thelegacy paradigm being deeply embedded.
So embedded in the ethos oforganizations that a startup starts
at a startup becomes mired in it.
(49:55):
And yet, the counter storysaid, realization, we've got to
invest in our people, we've gotto lead differently because the
future is going to be different.
Aidan McCullen (50:04):
We haven't even got past my the introduction pretty much
i just want to tell our audience,there's loads in the book there's ten
chapters, our conversation has flowedabout the introduction we haven't even
got into the depths of the book i wantto share on the screen though for you
those people watching us on youtubeand now on spotify video as well.
that you can see a diagram onthe screen and one of the keys.
(50:31):
So Jonathan's a scholar of organizationaldynamics but Kim is also the person who
brought to light the concept of modularityand modularity is very much at the heart
of leading through paradigm, Jonathan,you're going to take us through this
diagram that are shown on the screen.
(50:51):
With the lens of modularity.
And because this is how you getstarted, this is, as you said
earlier on, you can get started.
You need to take the first step,and this is a great way to do so.
Jonathan Clark (51:03):
Well, modularity is a, as we've alluded to this idea of a tension
between freedom and unity and, and mostorganizations, Ranjay gulati, who's a
professor at Harvard Business School,has a great, a great article where he,
I think highlights the, the tensionbetween freedom, freedom and unity.
And he describes it as a tug of war.
(51:25):
In most organizations, this is a tugof war between freedom and unity.
And unfortunately, Unity wins thebattle most of the time because when
people start thinking about givingpeople freedom because they're so
mired in the power over paradigm, it'sjust so hard for them to imagine that
(51:45):
they can achieve the integration andthe innovation and the outcomes that
they seek by giving people freedom.
modularity breaks that trade off.
It it ends that, , it's possibleto end that tug of war using
the principle of modularity.
And , we highlight three, characteristicsof modularity, that really touch
(52:10):
every part of an organization.
Those three characteristicsare the framework for action.
The approach to integration and thepower dynamics and the approach to these
dimensions of the organization is verydifferent in a leading through context
than it is in a , power over context.
(52:30):
The frame framework for action is reallyabout how you design the organization,
the role of hierarchy, , how youget action, how you make decisions.
In a power over paradigm, thefocus, the mindset is control,
(52:53):
control through, through compliance.
And , this really involves the beliefsthat you harbor about people too, right?
There's this belief that peopleare, it's not just that people
are slothful or inherently lazy.
It's also that There's this mindsetthat people can't do their best work
(53:15):
and don't really know what to do withoutthe, without the intelligence and
decision making capacity of some smallgroup of people in the organization.
And Leading Through breaks through that.
Leading Through recognizes thatthere's power and potential in people.
People are not a variable to belimited and constrained and managed.
(53:39):
People are a source of inspirationand talent and ingenuity.
And Leading Through isaimed at unleashing that.
And the framework for action thatunderlies the Leading Through
paradigm is all aimed at unleashingthat potential in the people.
But when you give people freedom, rightthere is the risk that things will fray,
(54:07):
that you won't be able to retain thatunity that you seek as an organization.
In fact, unity is the veryreason that organizations exist
in the first place, right?
Organizations allow us through thatunity to accomplish , things that
we couldn't accomplish on our own.
And so you need mechanisms to integrate.
(54:29):
the work that people are doingthroughout the organization.
And and the key to that in theleading through paradigm is what
we call visible information.
, it's an approach to integration thatrelies less on executive authority
and hierarchical supervision and moreon shared commitment to values and
(54:50):
purpose, shared understanding of thestrategy of the organization and and
the other elements of the organization.
And it, it's a sharedness that results incommitment and people bringing their work
together and choosing using their agency.
And their talents to to dothe work of the organization.
(55:15):
And as, as our reference to power andthe power over paradigm suggests, power
is a central element of all of this.
If you can't get the power dynamics,even if you have a great framework
for action and , you're moving inthe direction of visible information
without those power dynamics,without the right power dynamics,
(55:35):
it's going to be a losing battle.
And the power dynamics and leadingthrough again are really all about
activating the potential, powerthat is already in people, right?
So it's not just about, I have power, Ineed to learn how to give it to people.
There is an element of that.
It's also about understanding thatpeople already have power within them.
(55:59):
what we need to do is unleash that power.
Aidan McCullen (56:01):
Nicely said, man.
I thought we'd share, Kim, I wasthinking about something that you
talked about in the book, while youtalk about heart and love and words like
that, you're not Pollyannish about it.
You say that, look, difficultdecisions need to be made also by,
by leaders, like being an empatheticleader does not mean you're soft and
(56:23):
you're going to make soft decisions.
If you, for example, have a badapple, one has snuck into your
organization, or you have a colleaguewho's not pulling their weight you
can deal with that again with empathy.
And this is a story thatyou share from the book.
Kim Clark (56:39):
Yeah, it's a, it's a really good point because leadership
is all about mobilizing people.
And so you really need to understandthe people and take advantage of the
opportunities and the power that'sin them to activate it within them.
That's what Jonathan just described.
But sometimes there are people who havereal problems and they, for whatever
(57:04):
reason, they either fail to performor they do things they shouldn't do.
And so you have to take action to do that.
And one of the, one of the principlesthat's so important in the leading
through paradigm is that every actionyou take, whether it's a decision you're
making or supporting people or dealingwith problems, you need to do it.
(57:29):
With soul, heart, and mind, which meansyou, you do it in a different way.
You don't take action.
For example, you might need toremove somebody from, from the
organization or help them in someway to get out of the situation there
because they're, they're, they're.
proving not to be productive, but youdon't do it in a, in a, in a way that
(57:55):
creates more darkness in the organization.
You just don't you do it in a waythat brings more light in and that way
you have to treat people differently.
The example that you refer to is, isreally a, A very powerful experience
that I had, which was somebody inmy department that I lived in before
(58:15):
I became Dean was just, Oh, theonly word I can think of is poison.
This person was angry all the time.
Cantankerous, contrary anddidn't do very good work.
And it was, it was like anightmare for the people who
(58:36):
had to work with this person.
And it went on and on.
And we tried to get help from our HR groupand try to figure out what can we do?
And, and there was a lot ofdocumentation and there were efforts
made to train, to help people andhelp this person understand this
is what we expect and so forth.
So it was a lot of work with this person.
(58:57):
It wasn't perimetry,but it never happened.
And so I became Dean.
And one of the first things I didis I, I talked to the head of HR.
I said, tell me about this situation.
Like what, what is going on?
Why is this?
He said, well, fundamentally.
We just can't take action becausewe're afraid of the union.
(59:19):
So this was a unionized workforce.
And I said, well, what, what do you mean?
He said, well, if we, if we get ridof this person, they could, they could
sue us, they could Extend this out.
I said, okay, so how longdo you think it will take?
And he said, Oh, it'sabout three or four years.
It could take three or four yearsgo to court and we could lose.
(59:41):
And it costs us a huge amount of money.
I said, okay, so you're telling methere's two states of the world.
One, we go on, the person leaves,we fire them, and then we get sued
and it might take three or fouryears and it costs a lot of money.
Meanwhile, the person's gone.
Or we have this person here for along time and everybody's dying.
(01:00:04):
I pick the first one.
So we've done everything wecould to help this person.
But this person is not well,something fundamentally wrong.
They, they can't be in this environment.
It's not good.
So they did, they took actionand you know what happened?
The union leader came back to usand said, what took you so long?
(01:00:29):
Cause they knew they weren't stupid.
They're smart.
They knew this was a bad situation.
And this person was justnot in a good place.
And so I learned a good lesson.
You gotta be careful.
You have to take care ofpeople and try to help them.
So we did everything we could to help.
But in the end, we had to take action.
(01:00:50):
We should have taken action ayear before that because it's been
going on for a couple of yearsand I just learned a good lesson.
You, you'd have to treat people well,be careful how you do things so that
you follow leading through principles,but you have to take action because
there are lots of people who sufferin the organization if you don't.
So they become discouraged.
(01:01:11):
When you don't deal with problems, theywonder like, what are you thinking?
You're telling us all these goodthings, but you're not doing things
that we need you to help us with.
So that was a, that was a good thing.
And it, it harks back to the fundamentalprinciples that, We were talking about
it, Jonathan took us through so well,which is fundamentally, you have a view
(01:01:31):
of people that people are human beings.
They're pulled to do wrong.
Sometimes they're, they're,they want to do good.
And you got to create acontext where they choose good.
And you help them do that.
And you trust them.
And you build relationships with them oftrust, and you empower them, not by giving
(01:01:53):
them power, but by activating the powerthat's already in them, and then training
and educating and helping them grow.
And when you do that, the organization,they thrive, the organization thrives.
That's the point.
That, that's the fundamental point.
And you create a structure in the wholeorganization that enables that to happen.
(01:02:14):
So you get rid of a lot of thebarriers to innovation, but you still
maintain a structure and a set ofprinciples and values that give people
a framework within which to work.
Then you give them informationabout what's going on.
How does your project fit witheverything else that's going on?
And what do you need to accomplish,not only in your own group,
(01:02:36):
your own project team, but do itin a way that feeds the whole.
And people, people love towork in that environment.
I'm not kidding you.
Once you get a taste, of living andworking in a leading through environment.
You never want to go back
Because you go to work and it'sa good place and you go home.
(01:02:57):
Yeah, you're tired.
You've worked hard, but you're fulfilled.
You're happy.
You feel like you're making a difference.
You have meaning in your life becauseyou're spending so much time at work.
You should be, it shouldbe a meaningful experience.
People never want to goever to that old way.
And that's what happens when leadersget that vision that we can create
(01:03:18):
something here that is so powerful.
People never want to leave.
And they give us their best all the time.
Then it becomes, okay, we're doing this.
And then you do what youneed to do to bring it about.
That's leading through.
Aidan McCullen (01:03:34):
Amen, brother.
That's a lovely way towrap it up, isn't it?
I love the way that you broughtthat from what could have been a
dark place right back to the light.
And I leave that, I'm usingthat language specifically.
And we've nicely tied together, bythe way, what I planted the seed of
earlier on about this idea of walkingthe tightrope between freedom and unity
(01:03:56):
and bringing people together as well.
It's been an absolute pleasure.
For people.
I'm sure when I get in touch with you orfind out more, where's the best place?
Kim Clark (01:04:05):
So I think we're all on LinkedIn.
, , the book has a website justleading through one word.
co and , get to us that way as well.
Aidan McCullen (01:04:15):
Well, great job and as I said, I highly recommend
it for its readability, which isa big thing, but also the stories.
There's unusual case studies that isnot the typical case studies in there.
There's some great case studies andit all brings you through this lens
of the old paradigm and the newparadigm, the leading through paradigm.
(01:04:37):
By the way, I have a copy here.
The guys don't even have a copy.
I got, I got an advanced copy.
I was showing them what it looked likeand the size of the book, et cetera.
Authors of leading through activatingthe soul, heart, and mind of leadership.
Kim, Jonathan, and Erin Clark.
Thank you for joining us.
Kim Clark (01:04:55):
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
1. Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
2. Stuff You Missed in History Class
Join Holly and Tracy as they bring you the greatest and strangest Stuff You Missed In History Class in this podcast by iHeartRadio.
3. Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.