Mistakes Educational Leaders Make. ERIC Digest, Number 122.

Most administrator training programs focus on what educational leaders "should" do rather than on mistakes or what they "should not" do. We believe knowing what not to do is as important if not more important than knowing what to do. This belief is based on the premise that the behaviors a person should avoid are far fewer than the behaviors a person should exhibit. It is also based on awareness that the negative fallout of one mistake may be fa r-reaching, offsetting the beneficial effects of a number of positive actions. According to Davis (1997), approximately one in three principals leave their pos itions involuntarily. Most states provide limited due process protection for pri ncipals who are at risk of losing their positions. In the absence of administrat ive tenure, principals legally become "teachers on special assignment" who can b e demoted without cause (Davis). Considering these factors, Davis asserts there is a need for understanding the kinds of leadership behaviors that create proble ms for principals and those they are responsible for leading. Hogan, Raskin, and Fazzini (1990) investigated three types of flawed leadership. They found individuals can possess well-developed social skills and an attracti ve interpersonal style yet still exhibit flawed leadership behaviors. WHAT TYPES OF MISTAKES DO LEADERS TEND TO MAKE? Most of the shortcomings and mistakes school administrators make fall into the c ategory of poor human relations. Bulach, Boothe, and Pickett (1997) asked 375 Ge orgia educators who were enrolled in graduate programs to list and rank the type s of mistakes their administrators made. Fifteen categories of mistakes were identified: poor human-relations skills, poo r interpersonal-communication skills, a lack of vision, failure to lead, avoidan ce of conflict, lack of knowledge about instruction/curriculum, a control orient ation, lack of ethics or character, forgetting what it is like to be a teacher, inconsistency, showing favoritism, failure to hold staff accountable, failure to follow through, snap judgments, and interrupting instruction with public- addre ss-system announcements. Mistakes that can be subsumed under the category of poor human-relations skills occurred most often, Bulach and his colleagues found. Lack of trust and an uncar ing attitude were the two behaviors most frequently associated with this categor y of mistakes. These two behaviors tend to go together. That is, if a person per ceives that the supervisor does not care, it is likely that trust will be absent . After all, why trust others when you believe they do not care about you? Other mistakes associated with caring and trust were failure to give "warm fuzzi es," failure to circulate with staff, staying distant, not calling teachers by t heir names, failure to delegate, and failure to compliment staff. Generally, adm inistrators who display these shortcomings have a very strong "task orientation" as opposed to a "people orientation." Principals who are abrasive, arrogant, aggressive, uncaring, and inattentive to the needs of others are far more likely to lose their jobs (Davis). Such charact eristics impede the development of support among teachers, parents, and communit y agencies. These qualities are interpreted as a lack of savvy and people skills . Behavior of this nature leads to ineffective management of the diverse politic al demands of the job and failure to establish trust and confidence. One final mistake in this category dealt with the inability to motivate staff. T eachers believe many administrators do not know how to motivate staff except thr ough position, reward, and coercion. Leaders who attempt to motivate by exercisi

ng these forms of power tend to be task-oriented. This type of leadership behavi or often results in low staff morale (Bulach and others). Martin (1990) focused on mistakes of unsuccessful principals in Oregon. Seventythree percent of responding superintendents had supervised a principal whom they had to release, transfer, or "counsel out" of the principalship. Reasons cited for a lack of success were avoidance of situations, lack of vision, poor adminis trative skills, and poor community relations. In DeLuca and others' (1997) study, which collected data from 507 superintendent s in Ohio, respondents were asked to assess the impact of twenty-three deficienc ies. These areas were reduced by a factor analysis to a set of seven clusters. S ignificant negative relationships were found between maintaining one's position as a principal and deficiencies in the following clusters: "problem-solve/decisi on-making" and "delegating/monitoring." According to Davis, the second most frequent reason principals lose their jobs i s failure to make decisions and judgments that reflect a thorough understanding of school issues and problems. WHAT ABOUT INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS? In the study by Bulach and others, the second most frequently occurring mistake made by principals deals with a category of behavior labeled "poor interpersonal communication skills." The example most frequently given for this type of mista ke was failure to listen. Doing paperwork in the presence of visitors and not ma intaining eye contact were examples of behaviors illustrative of failure to list en. A perceived failure to listen is often interpreted by the speaker as a sign of not caring, whereas the perception that the receiver is listening is viewed b y the speaker as a caring behavior. These findings are supported by Davis, who asked California superintendents to r ank the top five reasons why principals lost their jobs. Given a list of twentyone at-risk leadership behaviors, the most frequently cited response focused on failure to communicate in ways that build positive relationships with parents, t eachers, students, and colleagues. IS GIVING FEEDBACK A PROBLEM? Bulach and colleagues found that ineffective principals had interpersonal commun ication problems in the areas of giving and receiving feedback. Examples offered by teachers were failure to provide feedback regarding the following: when supe rvisors visited teachers' rooms; how teachers handled a fight; how teachers hand led a parent conference; and what type of discipline students received when sent to the office. On the receiving end, some supervisors reprimand teachers in front of their coll eagues instead of doing it privately. Just as it can be detrimental to reprimand students in front of the whole class, it is also unprofessional for supervisors to reprimand teachers in front of their peers. CAN LEADERSHIP TRAINING PROGRAMS BE IMPROVED? Interpersonal communication and human-relations skills are closely associated. L istening, caring, and trust are interrelated. Listening conveys a caring attitud e, and caring is a building block for trust (Bulach 1993). The ability to build trust is an essential human-relations skill that facilitates interpersonal commu nication. Little attention, however, is given to these two areas in leadership p reparation programs. Leadership assessments conducted at the State University of West Georgia's Profe ssional Development Center revealed that the curriculum in the administrator pre paration program in the Department of Education Leadership and Foundations at th e State University of West Georgia contained very little training in human-relat ions or interpersonal-relations skills. Since the assessment, a human-relations seminar has been developed to address this weakness in the training program (Bul

ach and others 1997). HOW CAN LEADERS AVOID CAREER-ENDING MISTAKES? Data provided by teachers who participated in the study by Bulach and others (19 98) send a clear message that school administrators are making mistakes that cou ld be avoided if they were aware of them. Also, this study provides evidence tha t the overall climate of a school is affected by the number of mistakes an admin istrator makes. As stated by Patterson (1993), "We need to learn from the pain a nd pitfalls encountered on the road to success." Hagemann and Varga (1993) caution against sweeping mistakes under the rug. Inste ad, they emphasize the importance of admitting one's mistakes and moving on. Alt hough acknowledging a poor decision is tough, the sooner it is done the better. In closing, Davis offers six suggestions for avoiding career-ending mistakes: (1 ) evaluate and refine your interpersonal skills; (2) understand how you perceive the world around you; (3) don't let your past successes become failures; (4) lo ok for organizational indicators that your leadership may be faltering; (5) be a ssertive in developing a professional growth plan; and (6) and recognize the han dwriting on the wall by making the first move. RESOURCES Bulach, C. R. "A Measure of Openness and Trust." PEOPLE IN EDUCATION 1, 4 (Decem ber 1993): 382-92. ED 506 570. Bulach, C.; D. Boothe; and W. Pickett. MISTAKES EDUCATIONAL LEADERS MAKE. 1997. 10 pages. ED 404 737. __________. "'Should Nots' for School Principals: Teachers Share Their Views." E RS SPECTRUM (Winter 1998): 16-20. Davis, S. H. "The Principal's Paradox: Remaining Secure in a Precarious Position ." NASSP BULLETIN 81, 592 (November 1997): 73-80. Deluca, Joseph; J. Rogus; C. D. Raisch; and A. W. Place. "The Principal at Risk: Career Threatening Problems and their Avoidance." NASSP BULLETIN 81, 592 (Novem ber 1997): 105-10. Hagemann, B., and B. Varga. "Holding On." THE EXECUTIVE EDUCATOR 15, 2 (March 19 93): 37-38. EJ 459 392. Hogan, R.; R. Raskin; and D. Fazzini. "The Dark Side of Charisma." In MEASURES O F LEADERSHIP, edited by K. E. Clark and M. B. Clark. 343-54. New Jersey: Leaders hip Library of America, Inc., 1990. Martin, J. L. SUPERINTENDENTS AND UNSUCCESSFUL PRINCIPALS: A LIMITED STUDY IN TH E STATE OF OREGON. 1990. ED 316 937. Patterson, Jerry L. LEADERSHIP FOR TOMORROW'S SCHOOLS. Alexandria, Virginia: Ass ociation for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1993. 115 pages. ED 357 470 .

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mistakes Educational Leaders Make ERIC Identifier: ED422604 Publication Date: 1998-06-00 Author: Bulach, Clete - Pickett, Winston - Boothe, Diana Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management Eugene OR. Most administrator training programs focus on what educational leaders "should" do rather than on mistakes or what they "should not" do. We believe knowing what not to do is as important if not more important than knowing what to do. This belief is based on the premise that the behaviors a person should avoid are far fewer than the behaviors a person should exhibit. It is also based on awareness that the negative fallout of one mistake may be fa r-reaching, offsetting the beneficial effects of a number of positive actions. According to Davis (1997), approximately one in three principals leave their pos itions involuntarily. Most states provide limited due process protection for pri ncipals who are at risk of losing their positions. In the absence of administrat ive tenure, principals legally become "teachers on special assignment" who can b e demoted without cause (Davis). Considering these factors, Davis asserts there is a need for understanding the kinds of leadership behaviors that create proble ms for principals and those they are responsible for leading. Hogan, Raskin, and Fazzini (1990) investigated three types of flawed leadership. They found individuals can possess well-developed social skills and an attracti ve interpersonal style yet still exhibit flawed leadership behaviors. WHAT TYPES OF MISTAKES DO LEADERS TEND TO MAKE? Most of the shortcomings and mistakes school administrators make fall into the c ategory of poor human relations. Bulach, Boothe, and Pickett (1997) asked 375 Ge orgia educators who were enrolled in graduate programs to list and rank the type s of mistakes their administrators made. Fifteen categories of mistakes were identified: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * poor human-relations skills, poor interpersonal-communication skills, a lack of vision, failure to lead, avoidance of conflict, lack of knowledge about instruction/curriculum, a control orientation, lack of ethics or character, forgetting what it is like to be a teacher, inconsistency, showing favoritism, failure to hold staff accountable, failure to follow through, snap judgments, and interrupting instruction with public-address-system announcements.

Mistakes that can be subsumed under the category of poor human-relations skills occurred most often, Bulach and his colleagues found. Lack of trust and an uncar

ing attitude were the two behaviors most frequently associated with this categor y of mistakes. These two behaviors tend to go together. That is, if a person per ceives that the supervisor does not care, it is likely that trust will be absent . After all, why trust others when you believe they do not care about you? Other mistakes associated with caring and trust were failure to give "warm fuzzi es," failure to circulate with staff, staying distant, not calling teachers by t heir names, failure to delegate, and failure to compliment staff. Generally, adm inistrators who display these shortcomings have a very strong "task orientation" as opposed to a "people orientation." Principals who are abrasive, arrogant, aggressive, uncaring, and inattentive to the needs of others are far more likely to lose their jobs (Davis). Such charact eristics impede the development of support among teachers, parents, and communit y agencies. These qualities are interpreted as a lack of savvy and people skills . Behavior of this nature leads to ineffective management of the diverse politic al demands of the job and failure to establish trust and confidence. One final mistake in this category dealt with the inability to motivate staff. T eachers believe many administrators do not know how to motivate staff except thr ough position, reward, and coercion. Leaders who attempt to motivate by exercisi ng these forms of power tend to be task-oriented. This type of leadership behavi or often results in low staff morale (Bulach and others). Martin (1990) focused on mistakes of unsuccessful principals in Oregon. Seventythree percent of responding superintendents had supervised a principal whom they had to release, transfer, or "counsel out" of the principalship. Reasons cited for a lack of success were avoidance of situations, lack of vision, poor adminis trative skills, and poor community relations. In DeLuca and others' (1997) study, which collected data from 507 superintendent s in Ohio, respondents were asked to assess the impact of twenty-three deficienc ies. These areas were reduced by a factor analysis to a set of seven clusters. S ignificant negative relationships were found between maintaining one's position as a principal and deficiencies in the following clusters: "problem-solve/decisi on-making" and "delegating/monitoring." According to Davis, the second most frequent reason principals lose their jobs i s failure to make decisions and judgments that reflect a thorough understanding of school issues and problems. WHAT ABOUT INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS? In the study by Bulach and others, the second most frequently occurring mistake made by principals deals with a category of behavior labeled "poor interpersonal communication skills." The example most frequently given for this type of mista ke was failure to listen. Doing paperwork in the presence of visitors and not ma intaining eye contact were examples of behaviors illustrative of failure to list en. A perceived failure to listen is often interpreted by the speaker as a sign of not caring, whereas the perception that the receiver is listening is viewed b y the speaker as a caring behavior. These findings are supported by Davis, who asked California superintendents to r ank the top five reasons why principals lost their jobs. Given a list of twentyone at-risk leadership behaviors, the most frequently cited response focused on failure to communicate in ways that build positive relationships with parents, t eachers, students, and colleagues. IS GIVING FEEDBACK A PROBLEM?

Bulach and colleagues found that ineffective principals had interpersonal commun ication problems in the areas of giving and receiving feedback. Examples offered by teachers were failure to provide feedback regarding the following: when supe rvisors visited teachers' rooms; how teachers handled a fight; how teachers hand led a parent conference; and what type of discipline students received when sent to the office. On the receiving end, some supervisors reprimand teachers in front of their coll eagues instead of doing it privately. Just as it can be detrimental to reprimand students in front of the whole class, it is also unprofessional for supervisors to reprimand teachers in front of their peers. CAN LEADERSHIP TRAINING PROGRAMS BE IMPROVED? Interpersonal communication and human-relations skills are closely associated. L istening, caring, and trust are interrelated. Listening conveys a caring attitud e, and caring is a building block for trust (Bulach 1993). The ability to build trust is an essential human-relations skill that facilitates interpersonal commu nication. Little attention, however, is given to these two areas in leadership p reparation programs. Leadership assessments conducted at the State University of West Georgia's Profe ssional Development Center revealed that the curriculum in the administrator pre paration program in the Department of Education Leadership and Foundations at th e State University of West Georgia contained very little training in human-relat ions or interpersonal-relations skills. Since the assessment, a human-relations seminar has been developed to address this weakness in the training program (Bul ach and others 1997). HOW CAN LEADERS AVOID CAREER-ENDING MISTAKES? Data provided by teachers who participated in the study by Bulach and others (19 98) send a clear message that school administrators are making mistakes that cou ld be avoided if they were aware of them. Also, this study provides evidence tha t the overall climate of a school is affected by the number of mistakes an admin istrator makes. As stated by Patterson (1993), "We need to learn from the pain a nd pitfalls encountered on the road to success." Hagemann and Varga (1993) caution against sweeping mistakes under the rug. Inste ad, they emphasize the importance of admitting one's mistakes and moving on. Alt hough acknowledging a poor decision is tough, the sooner it is done the better. In closing, Davis offers six suggestions for avoiding career-ending mistakes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. evaluate and refine your interpersonal skills; understand how you perceive the world around you; don't let your past successes become failures; look for organizational indicators that your leadership may be faltering; be assertive in developing a professional growth plan; and recognize the handwriting on the wall by making the first move.

This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational Resear ch and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract No. OERI RR9300 2006. The ideas and opinions expressed in this Digest do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI, ED, or the Clearinghouse. ERIC Digests are i n the public domain and may be freely reproduced. RESOURCES

Bulach, C. R. "A Measure of Openness and Trust." PEOPLE IN EDUCATION 1, 4 (Decem ber 1993): 382-92. ED 506 570. Bulach, C.; D. Boothe; and W. Pickett. MISTAKES EDUCATIONAL LEADERS MAKE. 1997. 10 pages. ED 404 737. __________. "'Should Nots' for School Principals: Teachers Share Their Views." E RS SPECTRUM (Winter 1998): 16-20. Davis, S. H. "The Principal's Paradox: Remaining Secure in a Precarious Position ." NASSP BULLETIN 81, 592 (November 1997): 73-80. Deluca, Joseph; J. Rogus; C. D. Raisch; and A. W. Place. "The Principal at Risk: Career Threatening Problems and their Avoidance." NASSP BULLETIN 81, 592 (Novem ber 1997): 105-10. Hagemann, B., and B. Varga. "Holding On." THE EXECUTIVE EDUCATOR 15, 2 (March 19 93): 37-38. EJ 459 392. Hogan, R.; R. Raskin; and D. Fazzini. "The Dark Side of Charisma." In MEASURES O F LEADERSHIP, edited by K. E. Clark and M. B. Clark. 343-54. New Jersey: Leaders hip Library of America, Inc., 1990. Martin, J. L. SUPERINTENDENTS AND UNSUCCESSFUL PRINCIPALS: A LIMITED STUDY IN TH E STATE OF OREGON. 1990. ED 316 937. Patterson, Jerry L. LEADERSHIP FOR TOMORROW'S SCHOOLS. Alexandria, Virginia: Ass ociation for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1993. 115 pages. ED 357 470 . ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Four Mistakes Leaders Make by Dr. Waylon B. Moore Dr. Han Finzel, leader to hundreds of Christian workers, has sharply fused toget her the mistakes of leaders with the Biblical solutions. He passes on his perspe ctive in The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make. These mistakes are common to the poi nt of being accepted leadership styles. But, they're wrong! May I combine 40 years of ministry perspective with highpoints of the Mistakes book's first four chapt ers? I'll concentrate on the pastor's roll in leadership. Parent, pastor, teacher, sibling . . . you're a leader! How do you spell leadersh ip? I n f l u e n c e. That's it! A one-word definition. Anyone who influences someone else o something has led that person. Another definition might be: A leader takes peo ple where they would never go on their own. We are in a crisis of Biblical pastoral leadership. Why have eight pastors in me ga-churches lost the staff person closest to them? Each had a pastor who made a severing kind of mistake in leadership. Another large church pastor required the evangelism staff worker to produce two public professions of faith every Sunday. Two staff men in a row with that job resigned, getting divorced. The third worke r resigned in time to save his marriage. The senior pastor never related the sta ff family breakups to his ego demands. Later, immorality and divorce ruined his ministry. Why are leaders failing? First, few leaders have had any training. Some leaders just wing it all their lives with constant staff turnover. Second, today's leaders

may lack the diligence to discern true godly models. And, if found, they may no t get the critical mentoring from these busy leaders. Many pastor-leaders try to copy large-church leaders, thinking that baptisms, buildings, and budget succes ses equal Biblical leadership. Not necessarily. Many magnetic communicators, onl y observed from a distance, have private tragedies in their families and ministr ies when seen close-up. Also ministers often lack basic skills for common leaders hip demands. There is, lastly, the confusion over the conflict between secular and Biblical leadership values. Adopting many current business practices with staff people can guarantee tragedy. The privilege of leadership is a high calling . . . and adventure. Let's see the m istakes and some practical answers to becoming Biblical leaders. The Top Four Mistakes 1. The top-down authority attitude. 2. Prioritizing paperwork before peoplework. 3. The absence of genuine affirmation. 4. No room for mavericks. The Trap of Top-Down Authority Attitudes People fall into this losing attitude for five basic reasons: It's traditional . . . old dad did it, the army, and my boss. It's by far the most common model pe ople use. It's the easiest for it takes little thinking, only threats. It comes naturally, for that is the way we are. And it certainly reflects the depravity o f man. Satan began the problem, and he is called the deceiver still. What is the model to counter top-down leadership? It is what some prefer to call servant leadership. The servant leader idea has been around in business circles since the 60's, contained in a landmark work written by Douglas McGregor, Human Side of Enterprise. Let's illustrate. Instead of everyone in the organization there to serve the lea der (and the Lord?), the leader is at the bottom of an inverted pyramid, with ever yone resting on his shoulders. Dr. Finzel explains: I spend countless hours helpi ng others be effective by providing them the facts, the energy, the resources, t he networks, the information, or whatever else they need to do an effective job. Most of my day is spent laying aside my own priorities to help others fulfill t heirs. Jesus on the night he was betrayed showed his servant heart in the upper room wa shing the disciples' feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his Master. (John 13:15-16). Putting Paper Before People Some signs of a paper-pusher even if he doesn't make lists of lists may be seein g people as interruptions, preferring to work alone, or being a poor listener. P erhaps his self-worth is based on accomplishment more than relationships. Henri J. Nouwen in his book Out of Solitude, writes A few years ago I met an old professor at the University of Notre Dame. Looking back on his long life of teac hing, he said with a funny twinkle in his eyes: I have always been complaining th at my work was constantly interrupted, until I slowly discovered that my interru ptions were my work. This is the great conversion in life: to recognize and belie ve that the many unexpected events are not just disturbing interruptions of our projects, but the way in which God molds our hearts and prepares us for his retu rn. Thomas Watson, founder of IBM, built one of the most successful companies in his tory because he never allowed the organization to replace people as his number-o ne focus. During one meeting managers were reviewing customer problems with Mr. Watson. On the table were eight to ten piles of papers, identifying the sources of problems: manufacturing, engineering, etc. After much discussion Watson walke d slowly to the front of the room and, with a flash of his hand, swept the table clean and sent papers flying. He said, There aren't any categories of problems h ere. There's just one problem. Some of us are not paying enough attention to our customers. He turned and walked out. What has been found is that the higher the rank, the more interpersonal and human

the undertaking. Our top executives spend roughly 90 percent of their time conc erned with the messiness of people problems. A seminary Dean shared with me the s hocking trend of small church pastors copying the mega church leaders in isolati ng themselves from ministry and wanting educational staff do most of their pasto ral work except preach on Sundays. Perhaps this may reflect the desperate need f or a people skills curriculum and especially the personal touch of mentoring in seminaries? In reading the Gospels have you made the amazing discovery that Jesus spent more time touching people and talking to them than in any other action ? Jes us was not primarily task-oriented even though He knew He had only three years t o train 12 men to carry on the movement that would change the world! How Are People Changed? Of all the change agents around us, what is the most impacting? How may we influ ence others into Christ likeness? Look back in your mind to what has had the gre atest impact on your growth. A book, a tape, a sermon? Every survey gives the sa me answer, A person, or a number of key people with whom we have had real-life pe rsonal contact, have been the primary change agents in our lives. In one word: me ntors. Since this is true, a leader can qualitatively deepen his ministry impact with a mentoring touch with staff and church leadership. This is beyond his public min istry. Jesus made his private ministry training his disciples how to pray, witness , nurture, and disciple. Jesus refused to be comfortably insulated, and mentored his team of 11 into greatness and extraordinary spiritual production. Biblical leaders, intimate with Christ's heart, mentor staff. Every church problem, money, personnel, needs, has its answer in God's provision of a Spirit-filled man or woman. You build them by mentoring. Paul gave his rea son for living as: I know that I shall continue with you, for your furtherance an d joy of faith. (Philippians 1:25). You can invest in two or three a year. Nothin g I have done in ministry over the decades has paid off like this mentoring hear t-ministry to staff and key men at church. And my failures have been in the mist akes Dr. Finzel has highlighted. Another Way to Spell Leader What could be better than a pay raise? Affirmation! Leadership has as much to do with the soft sciences as with getting things done. We wildly underestimate the po wer of the tiniest personal touch of kindness. Your people need varying levels of affirmation. Most affirmations, however, are biodegradable and must be replenishe d regularly. We all remember positive sentences said to us, and play them again an d again. I know one exceptional Christian Education Minister who would never hav e left a pastor had this busy, spiritual leader focused simple kindness on his s taff. The pastor still doesn't know why staff moves. How do we encourage others? First, by listening (see James 1:19 ). The L in Lead er stands for listening. Then we E Empathize (see Romans 12:15 ). Rejoice with t hose that joy, weep with the sad. Ask the Holy Spirit for the heart of Christ to feel with the one with whom you're talking. Next, Biblical leaders are good at comforting. Pain is standard in ministry and leadership. Our pain experiences be come comfort avenues for others (see 2 Corinthians 1:3, 4 ). And we carry others burdens, fulfilling the whole law of Christ (Galatians 6:2). Listen, Encourage, A ffirm, Disciple, Empathize, Respect those God has placed in your hands! Potentia l miracles surround every leader. Praying together can begin the process of bond ing their heart with yours. This is my continual prayer, the perfecting of your c haracters. (2 Corinthians 13:9, Williams). Make Room For Mavericks Maverick Industrialist Henry Ford said, I'm looking for a lot of men with an infi nite capacity for not knowing what can't be done. Is there room for mavericks in your organization, your house? The new staff member can bring fresh ideas, excit ement, and valid perspective. Yet many soon flame out from the cold water spraye d by the leader. Leaders who have lost the quest to jump into a new century and win, rarely encourage the maverick staffer. Webster defines a maverick as a pione er, an independent individual who does not go along with a group. No staffer is t o be a rebel. Rebels are like witchcraft, and must never be hired (see 1 Samuel 15:22,23). It is rarely the institutional core of the church, but its radical fr

inge that makes the mega strides advancing Christ's cause worldwide. Joseph, Moses, Jesus, Paul, were all counter-culture in impact. Tom Edison and G eorge Washington Carver were strange inventors who changed our world. Chester Ca rlson was laughed out of town for inventing the Xerox process. A Swiss watchmake r invented the quartz watch. His superiors rejected the idea. Americans and Japa nese patented it, and Switzerland went from 85 percent global market share of wa tches to less than 15 percent. When I suggested we evangelize Southern Methodist University to a leader years a go, he did not take to the idea. We were busy. I protested. My leader taught me a great lesson. He said, If you believe God hears my prayers, that I desire to ob ey Him, pray that God will tell me. I prayed four months. Suddenly the leader tol d me to begin evangelizing SMU. One of the harvest of students won and changed w as the university president's son! My maverick personality had to be willing to trust God to work in and through His leader. All of us have failed in leading at home, on the job, in the church. But Jesus i s the Lord of change. Come unto Me. Get honest before God. Repent. Confess your si n also to those who follow you. Let's return to Biblical leadership. The model f or our ministry is still Jesus.

-------------

------------------------------------------------

01: The Nature of Organizing, Entrepreneuring and Reengineering Good people and those who want to cooperate will work together most effectively if they know the parts they are to play in any team operation and the way their roles relate to one another. This is true in business or government as it is in football or in a symphony orchestra. Designing and maintaining these systems of roles is basically the managerial function of organizing. Managing of Organizing and Organization In addition, to make a role work out effectively, provision should be made for s upplying needed information and other tools necessary for performance in that ro le. In this sense that we think of Organizing as, 1. The identification and classification of required activities. 2. The grouping of activities necessary to attain objectives. 3. The assignment of each grouping to a manager with the authority (delegatio n) necessary to supervise it. 4. The provision for coordination horizontally and vertically. An organization structure should be designed to clarify who is to do what task a nd who is responsible for what results, to remove obstacles to performance cause by confusion and uncertainty of assignment, and to furnish decision-making and communications networks reflecting and supporting enterprise objectives. The term Organization implies a formalized intentional structure of roles or pos itions.

Formal and Informal Organization Formal Organization means the intentional structure of roles in formally organiz ed enterprise. Informal Organization is a network of personal and social relations not establis hed or required by the formal organization but arising spontaneously as people a ssociate with one another. Organizational Division: One aspect of organizing is the establishment of depart ments. The word department designates a distinct area, division or branch of an organization over which a manger has authority for the performance of specified activities. Organization Levels and the Span of Management While purpose of organizing is to make human cooperation effective, the reason f or levels of organization is the limitations of the span of management. In other words, organization levels exist because there is a limit to the number of pers ons a manager can supervise effectively, even though this limit varies depending on situations. A wide span of management results in few organizational levels, and a narrow span results in many levels. Problems with Organization Levels The division of activities into departments and hierarchical and creation of mul tiple levels are not complete desirable in themselves. First, levels are expensive. Accountants refer to such costs as overhead or burden o r General and Administrative in contrast to so called direct costs. Real product i s accomplished by factory, engineering or sales employees, who are, or could log ically be accounted for as direct labor . Levels above the firing line are predominan tly staffed with managers whose cost it would be desirable to eliminate. Second, department levels complicate communication. An enterprise with many leve ls has greater difficulty communicating objectives, plans and policies downward through the organization structure than does a firm in which the top manger comm unicate directly with employee. Omission and misinterpretations occur as informa tion passes down the line. Levels also complicate communication from the firing line to the commanding superiors, which is every bit as important as downward co mmunication. Finally, numerous department and levels complicate planning and control. Operational Management Position: A situational Approach Principle of span of the management states that there is a limit to the number o f subordinates a manager can effectively supervise, but the exact number will de pend on the impact of underlying factors. (This include the degree of training o f subordinates that is required and possessed, the clarity of authority delegati on, the clarity of plans, the use of objective standards, the rate of change, th e effectiveness of communication techniques, the amount of personal contact need ed and the level in the organization) Examining what consumes the time of manage rs in their handling of superior-subordinate relationships and ascertaining devi ces that can be used to reduce these time pressures will be not only a helpful a pproach for determining the best span in individual case but also a powerful too l for finding out what can be done to extend the span without destroying effecti ve supervision. Factors determining an Effective Span Apart from such personal capacities as comprehending quickly, getting along with people, and commanding loyalty and respect, the most important determinant is m anager s ability to reduce the time he or she spends with subordinates. This abili ty naturally varies with managers and their jobs, but several factors materially

influence the number and frequency of such contacts and therefore the span of m anagement. Need for Balance What is required is more precise balancing. One must balance all the costs of ad opting one course or the other, not only the financial costs but also costs in m orale, personal development and attainment of enterprise objectives. An Organizational Environment for Entrepreneuring and Intrapreneuring The essence of entrepreneurship is innovation, that is, goal-oriented change to utilize the enterprise s potential. The Intrapreneur and Entrepreneur An intrapreneur is a person who focuses on innovation and creativity and who tra nsforms a dream or an idea into a profitable venture by operating within the org anizational environment. In contrast, entrepreneur is a person who does similar things, but outside the organizational setting. Entrepreneurs have the ability t o see an a opportunity, obtain the necessary capital, labor and other inputs, an d the know-how to put together an operation successfully. They are wiling to tak e personal risk of success and failure. Creating an Environment for Entrepreneurship Since it is a managerial responsibility to create an environment for effective a nd efficient achievement of group goals, managers must promote opportunities for entrepreneurs to utilize their potential for innovation. Entrepreneurs take per sonal risks in initiating change, and they expect to be rewarded for it. Finally , entrepreneurs need some degree of freedom to pursue their ideas; this in turn, requires that sufficient authority be delegated. Innovative persons often have ideas that are contrary to conventional wisdom . The Wharton school in Philadelphia has an entrepreneurial center. Important requirements for becoming an entrepren eur are self-confidence, willingness to work hard, experience with the product, good general education and some money to start. Innovation and Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurs have creative ideas they use their management skills and resource to meet identifiable needs in the marketplace. If successful, an entrepreneur ca n become wealthy. An innovation applies not only to high-tech companies but equa lly to low-tech, established business. Worthwhile innovation is not a matter of sheer luck; it requires systematic and rational work, well organized and managed for results. Innovation comes about because of some of the following situations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The unexpected event, failure or success. The incongruous- what assumed and what really is. The process of task that needed improvement. Change in the market or industry structure. Change in demographics. Changes in meaning or in the way things are perceived. Newly acquired knowledge.

Innovations based solely on bright ideas may be very risky and are, at times, no t successful. The most successful innovations are often the mundane ones. Reengineering the Organization

Reengineering is fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business process to achieve dramatic improvements in critical contemporary measures of performan ce, such as cost, quality, service and speed. Key aspects of Reengineering 1. Fundamental Rethinking: What the organization is doing and why. Systems an d procedures were often outdated, inefficient and completely unnecessary. 2. Radical Redesign: not modification but a reinvention. Radical redesign oft en results in radical downsizing with detrimental effects on organizations. Down sizing or rightsizing is not the primary purpose of reengineering, intent is reduc ing costs, without necessarily addressing customer needs and expectations. While radical redesign, accompanied by downsizing, may indeed result in short-term co st savings, but it may also negatively affect the remaining work force. Teamwork has become increasingly important in the modern organization. But team efforts are built on trust and trust has to be built over a long period of time. With ra dical redesign, trust can be destroyed at once. 3. Dramatic Result: Dramatic improvements are moderated by failures. Some 50 to 70 per cent of reengineering efforts fail to deliver the intended the dramati c result. 4. Process: The need for carefully analyzing and questioning business process is indeed important. However, the process analysis must go beyond operations an d must include the analysis and linking the enterprise to the external environme nt. Various subsystems need to be integrated into a total system. Process of tra nsforming the inputs into outputs must go beyond technological and human aspects , and indeed the total managerial system as suggested in this book. Integrating reengineering with other systems through a new systems model called M anagement by Processes can be suggested to overcome some of the weaknesses of the narrowly focused reengineering approach. The Structure and Process of Organizing Looking at organizing as a process requires that several fundamentals be conside red. 1. The structure must reflect objectives and plans, because activities derive from them. 2. It must reflect the authority available to an enterprise s management. 3. An organization structure, like any plan, must reflect its environment. Ju st as the premises may be economic, technological, political, social or ethical, so may be those of an organization structure. Organizational structure must be designed to work, to permit contributions by me mber of group and to help people gain objectives efficiently in changing future. A workable organization structure can never be static. There is no single organ ization structure that works best in all kind of situations. An effective organi zation structure depends on situation. Organization structure must take into acc ount people s limitations and customs. This is not to say that the structure must be designed around individuals instead of around goals and accompanying activiti es. But an important consideration is the kind of people who are to staff it. Logic of Organizing 1. Establishing enterprise objectives. 2. Formulating supporting objectives, policies and plans. 3. Identifying, analyzing and classifying the activities necessary to accompl ish these. 4. Grouping these activities in the light of human and material resources ava

ilable and the best way, under the circumstances, of using them. 5. Delegating to the head of each group the authority necessary to perform th e activities. 6. Tying the group together horizontally and vertically, through authority re lationship and information flows. Note, organizing does not imply any extreme occupational specialization. To say that tasks should be specific is not to say they must be limited and mechanical. In any organization, jobs can be defined to allow little or no personal leeway or the widest possible discretion. One must not forget that there is no best way to organize and that the application of structural organization theory must tak e into account the situation. --------------------------

----------------The nature and purpose of organizing by admin on November 29, 2006 THE NATURE AND PURPOSE OF ORGANIZING It is often said that good people can make any organization pattern work. Some e ven assert that vagueness in organization is a good thing in that it forces team work, since people know that they must cooperate to get anything done. However, there can be no doubt that good people and those who want to cooperate will work together most effectively if they know the roles they are to play in any team o peration and the way their roles relate to one another. This is as true in busin ess or government as it is in football or in a symphony orchestra. Designing and maintaining these systems of roles is basically the managerial function of orga nizing. For an organizational role to exist and be meaningful to people, it must incorpo rate (1) Verifiable objectives, which, as indicated in part, are a major part of plan ning; (2) a clear idea of the major duties or activities involved, and (3) An understood area of discretion or authority so that the person filling the

role knows what he or she can do to accomplish goals. In addition, to make a role work out effectively, provision should be made for s upplying needed information and other tools necessary for performance in that ro le. It is in this sense that we think of organizing as (1) the identification and cl assification of required activities, (2) the grouping of activities necessary to attain objectives, (3) the assignment of each grouping to a manager with the au thority (delegation) necessary to supervise it, and (4) the provision for coordi nation horizontally (on the same or similar organizational level) and vertically (e.g. corporate headquarters, division, and department) in the organization str ucture. An organization structure should be designed to clarify who is to do what tasks and who is responsible for what results, to remove obstacles to performance caus ed by confusion and uncertainty of assignment, and to furnish decision-making an d communication networks reflecting and supporting enterprise objectives. Organization ? is a word many people use loosely. Some would say it includes all the b ehavior of all participants. Others would equate it with the total system of soc ial and cultural relationships. Still others refer to an enterprise, such as the United States Steel Corporation or the Department of Defense, as an organization. ? B ut for most practicing managers, the term organization implies a formalized inte ntional structure of roles or positions. In this article the term is generally u sed in reference to a formalized structure of roles, although it is sometimes us ed to denote an enterprise. What does intentional structure of roles ? mean? In the first place, as already implie d in defining the nature and content of organizational roles, people working tog ether must fill certain roles. In the second place, the roles people are asked t o fill should be intentionally designed to ensure that required activities are d one and that activities fit together so that people can work smoothly, effective ly, and efficiently in groups. Certainly most managers believe they are organizi ng when they establish such an intentional structure.

------------------------------

http://mbdhir.blogspot.com/2009/10/nature-of-organizing-entrepreneuring.html

" What Types of Mistakes Do Leaders Tend To Make? Most of the shortcomings and mistakes school administrators make fall into the category of poor human relations. Bulach, Boothe, and Pickett (1997) asked 375 Georgia educators who were enrolled in graduate programs to list and rank the types of mistakes their administrators made. Fifteen categories of mistakes were identified: - poor human-relations skills, GO IG IE LJ GS - poor interpersonal- communication skills, (GO) - a lack of vision, GO IG - failure to lead, - avoidance of conflict, IE LJ GS DEF DEF

- lack of knowledge about instruction/curriculum, a control orientation, GO IG IE LJ GS lack of ethics or character, forgetting what it is like to be a teacher, inconsistency, DEF

showing favoritism, failure to hold staff accountable, failure to follow through, snap judgments, and interrupting instruction with public- address-system announcements. "