Courage

A recent posting on courage prompted thinking about the term and a couple of the ways it may show up in our work.

Many years ago I asked poet Maya Angelou “What is the most important human virtue?” and in lightning speed, she said: “Courage.? The courage to bear witness.? The courage to stand for what is right.? The courage to be yourself.? The courage to tell the truth as you see it without blame or judgment.”? When I heard her do a dramatic reading of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s letter from a Birmingham Jail, I was deeply moved by “In a real sense all life is inter-related. All men are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be, and you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be... This is the inter-related structure of reality.” ? The two searing principles from these interactions embedded in my work are telling the truth as I see it without blame or judgment and embracing the interdependent whole of our human endeavor.? Both require a great deal of effort to live by.

We @talenttelligent believe that science methods are about self-correcting thought—-which gets us closer to the truth of a method, process, or strategy.? Science is sometimes messy and often leads to more complex questions—-whatever the area of study (neuroscience, organizational psychology, physics, etc.).? Answers keep changing as we become more sophisticated with our questions and abilities to examine new evidence.? For example, the considerable growth of evidence in the last decade that when talking about development in organizational life, we need to consider the vast psychologically different worlds of individual contributors, middle managers, and people at the top of the house.? Rather than one set of behaviors trickling down into the organization, the needs and demands that promote the success of individual contributors are quite different from those of managers and executives.? This inherently means if we are serious about development in the fullest sense, we have to approach the three groups differently.

By following the evidence, we found that the potential to take on larger roles and responsibilities in organizational life has 12 definitive markers and 25 precise practices.? While everyone has varying degrees of potential to learn and grow, not everyone has the potential to evolve the capabilities to run an enterprise.? It simply isn’t the case that everyone has the interest, motivation, and what it takes to take on ever-increasing levels of responsibility and challenge.? So, ascertaining the kinds of challenges to assign to help people grow is aided by a scientific-oriented approach to potential. We call this assignmentology which is about the right assignment at the right time for growth.

Another example is in the use of forced ranking of the behaviors that matter. We know that individuals who are promoted into management and executive ranks are typically exceptional in many ways. While it is uncomfortable to have to decide which among the behaviors being ranked may need the most attention, it ultimately provides more discerning feedback that helps the individual gain clarity on development going forward. It takes courage for HR leaders and LD leaders to convince others that taking the time and making the effort to carefully rank what is the best to least effective behaviors benefits the individual and the organization.

It has been our @talenttelligent goal to have the courage to put forth a science-based approach in identifying, nurturing, and placing talent within an enterprise.? Our libraries of Roles and Practices promote the best capabilities of everyone so each individual can be who they “ought to be.”? We know that this is hard work and that it takes time, and often the journey is slow.? Everybody wins with this approach by being respectful of the complexity of the individual and the organizations that employ them.