I almost missed a little byline on the last LRA Group mailing proclaiming: LRA Chairman: Rob Gillespie .
This is Rob Gillespie's pen picture presented at the AGM: 'Rob has lived in Lonehill for 2 years and is an electrical engineer by qualification. He previously acted as the chairperson for the Glenferness Residents Association and was actively involved in setting up their security initiative. He has been chairperson of the board of Welgevonden (the largest privately owned game reserve in South Africa) for 7 years. Rob has organisational strengths and would like to serve the community by providing management and control experience.'
Well, congrats on being voted in as Chairman, Rob... whilst I don't believe that we have met, I certainly hope that YOU can bring some fresh thinking and initiative to leading a massive change in the recent past order of things.
And, what is that past 'order' that needs to be changed? In my opinion, over the last +-18 months, it has been the seemingly confused order of... 'FIRE... er, Ready... er, Aim'.
An example of this was the strange approach to pre-investing in and preparing to foist Community Improvement District (CID) status on this community as the 'only' solution for our future. The 'only' solution - says who?
CID may well be only a small part (say 10 to 20%) of an overall solution to funding our community project. Meaning that we could well be missing a good 80% to 90% in alternative funding innovations and initiatives that could be the future backbone of this community.
Proposing a list of 'one' solution only and jumping to conclusions... leads to tunnel vision, and if combined with a 'FIRE'-first mentality can lead to one barking up the wrong tree.
Another example of 'FIRE... er, Ready... er, Aim' seems to have been the Ian Bell affair. Did he 'resign' as we were told or was he unceremoniously dumped? Did he take the LRA on and 'win' a settlement of some type as the Lonehill grapevine suggests? In an atmosphere of low trust where people close up shop on information, it is difficult to get to the truth. It just seems that someone or some group had a knack for shooting themselves in the foot. That's the problem with 'FIRE... er, Ready... er, Aim'.
I can point to a number of further such examples to highlight my point, but it is perhaps not conducive to building an atmosphere of NEW positive input should they be raked up again. I really am pinning my hopes for NEW positive developments on the NEW blood on the LRA board to become open, transparent and inclusive of stakeholders input on everything they do. Hopefully the lessons have been learnt.
So the first change of order is to get back to some simple basics of leadership strategy - getting to understand the lay of the land: i.e. 'Ready, Aim, FIRE'.
For example, if individual contributing householders have declined by +-18% in the last +-18% months to only +- 20% of the total number of individual households contributing (all while costs mushroomed), perhaps some house-to-house market research of the ENTIRE community is needed (it's only 5000 households, for goodness sake).
i.e. Find out what your Stakeholders want. Find out what their mass individual WIIFM (what's-in-it-for-me) needs are... and build an incredible WORLD-CLASS value proposition that makes it a no-brainer for them to get on board.
It's clear to me that there are many savvy successful business strategists and implementers living in this community who can contribute to Lonehill becoming a WORLD CLASS initiative... if they were just openly invited in to contribute into a consultative forum. So when do we get our FIRST open community forum meeting to contribute into..?
For those reading the POSITIVE article extracts and insights into quality Community Leadership that I refer to in each of my communications (and there is so much of this material available it's almost inexcusable to not consider applying it) you may be interested in reading the "7 C’s" of leadership development for social change (click on the link).
Regards
Trevor Nel - 705-2790
Custom Search
Monday, October 30, 2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Community Leadership for DUMMIES..!
And so, after the July 2006 LRA AGM debacle, and much in-between indignant wailing and baring of fangs, I hear that last Tuesday's 'repeat' LRA 2006 AGM was a much more genteel affair with a NEW board of directors elected.
So much for the community 'apathy' that we were told about at the previous meeting!
Just a little stirring of the community pot and we find plenty of applicants ready to step up to the plate and make their mark. That's the Lonehill community that I believe in.
I just cannot understand why the typical, silly, bureaucratic mentality keeps creeping in to managing our community... such as, to put limitations onto the number of people who want to contribute on the board. Flatten the hierarchies and get with today's world of recognising the quality and input of independent people.
Who says there should only be 10 director's? Who made that silly, arbitrary suggestion/decision? Especially when 15 or so concerned community members have the COURAGE to stand up in front of a crowd to openly commit to making a difference in Lonehill. Every one of them should be applauded for standing up and actively encouraged to get onto the board and make things happen.
I hear tell that someone said that it was because there wasn't a meeting room large enough to accomodate so many people. I sincerely hope that comment was not true, because if it is I will ask... why is 'common sense' so uncommon?
Being that I may well not be considered the brightest kid on the block for expressing my simple views, I offer an insight into the simplicity of information that I can understand. To each of the 'new' LRA board of directors, I seriously recommend that each reads a copy of Leadership for DUMMIES - by Marshall Loeb and Stephen Kindell to produce the kind of leadership and results that Lonehill is really looking for.
I'm very much a 'cause & effect' kinda guy, and when one sees the debacle that unfolded in Lonehill's community affairs in the past +-60 odd days (arising from the July AGM deacle), it's not difficult to trace back how this became the pressure valve release for a 2005/2006 season that left this writer, and many others, totally 'underwhelmed, unimpressed and unhappy' at the poor level of service delivery that we experienced. The signs were so simple to see.
So what in this writer's opinion can be pointed to as reasons for our recent debacle... especially for the 'new' leadership to take note of and rectify:
1. Rotten ATTITUDE towards customers and stakeholders. When leadership gives the impression that it thinks its own community is 'apathetic', 'unfairly critical', or 'uncooperative' they tend to become dismissively arrogant towards any criticism and develop a 'them & us' antagonism. This rotten attitude rubs off on to service providers who forget that the 'customer is king/queen' whether they are right or wrong. Both our recent leadership and service providers, in my opinion, treated their publics as their 'enemies' without being aware of it. I have a simple view: Apathetic Communities arise from Pathetic Leadership.
2. An acceptance of the MEDIOCRE. When leadership and service providers closet themselves away from their publics and ignore the unhappy feedback and fallout symptoms all around them they begin to believe in their own internal 'marketing' hype. Consequently they can become complacent and fallible to being caught out embarrassingly with their knickers.around their ankles. One's publics will tend to forgive the discretions of those who make them in the visible, active, open and transparent pursuit of higher goals with clearly demonstrable results. The same publics will take those same discretions - when made in a low-trust, high-suspicion, closed, non-inclusive, no-result environment - and they will crucify those who they believe to be the perpetrators. It's just human nature. What we will look for in this community is visible productivity, demonstrable achievement of goals,, EXCELLENCE and INNOVATION to increase the peace-of-mind and quality-of-life benefits to residents.
3. Lack of understanding of Polar Opposite Management Styles - the danger of GROUPTHINK. Uncommon sense is counter-intuitive, and often the road that 'groupthink' takes one down is directly opposite to that wanted by one's publics. A common saying is that 'Power Corrupts, and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely' and I believe that this applies in an environment where only one voice or idea is allowed to become the sole, almost intimidatory, 'power'. The only way to overcome 'groupthink' is to encourage open debate, criticism and comment - to turn current thinking on its head and to encourage full assessment of ALL alternatives.
Take a look at the polar opposite management styles below and choose for yourself which you believe last year's board and service providers chose to follow... and which you want for this year:
Interactive vs. Top-Down - Do you want to be able to interact openly with your Board before major decisions are taken or do you want your Board to prescribe to you what they believe is in your best interest?
Two-Way vs. One-Way - Do you want your Board to open channels of communication to listening to your honest input or do you want your Board to control and censor information?
Open vs. Closed - Openess creates a sense of belonging and teamwork, closed systems breed paranoia and suspicion - what community management system do you want in Lonehill?
Inclusive vs. Exclusive - Do you want your Board to include everyone who wants to participate and to motivate those currently not engaged or do you want your Board to promote ‘them’ vs ‘us’ divisions?
Fact vs. Spin - Do you want your Board to give you the honest facts, or to dress them up in 'spin' that masks the true picture?
I have my opinion as to what management style was adopted by our past LRA board and service providers... and I know that I want the direct polar opposite from this year's LRA board. What do YOU want?
So what would be the first magnificent step that the new board can take... well to me, it would be to immediately broaden the number of directors onto the LRA (just find a credible way to do it ASAP) to include all of those willing to commit to our community initiative as demonstrated at the AGM ... to introduce new thinking and innovative debate to search for and apply new alternatives and ideas.
My congratulations to those who stood up to the plate to be considered for the LRA board... may you take us massively forward with giant leaps.
Please don't fall into the trap of thinking that everything is now 'hunky-dory' because it ain't... find out why we were 'underwhelmed, unimpressed and unhappy' and nip that in the bud immediately. There is much that still has not been said that needs to be discussed. It's simple to do. Call that first FRIENDLY, non-confrontational public forum to openly discuss and debate the issues that really concern your publics.
Trevor Nel
4 Etterby Close, Lonehill - 705-2790
So much for the community 'apathy' that we were told about at the previous meeting!
Just a little stirring of the community pot and we find plenty of applicants ready to step up to the plate and make their mark. That's the Lonehill community that I believe in.
I just cannot understand why the typical, silly, bureaucratic mentality keeps creeping in to managing our community... such as, to put limitations onto the number of people who want to contribute on the board. Flatten the hierarchies and get with today's world of recognising the quality and input of independent people.
Who says there should only be 10 director's? Who made that silly, arbitrary suggestion/decision? Especially when 15 or so concerned community members have the COURAGE to stand up in front of a crowd to openly commit to making a difference in Lonehill. Every one of them should be applauded for standing up and actively encouraged to get onto the board and make things happen.
I hear tell that someone said that it was because there wasn't a meeting room large enough to accomodate so many people. I sincerely hope that comment was not true, because if it is I will ask... why is 'common sense' so uncommon?
Being that I may well not be considered the brightest kid on the block for expressing my simple views, I offer an insight into the simplicity of information that I can understand. To each of the 'new' LRA board of directors, I seriously recommend that each reads a copy of Leadership for DUMMIES - by Marshall Loeb and Stephen Kindell to produce the kind of leadership and results that Lonehill is really looking for.
I'm very much a 'cause & effect' kinda guy, and when one sees the debacle that unfolded in Lonehill's community affairs in the past +-60 odd days (arising from the July AGM deacle), it's not difficult to trace back how this became the pressure valve release for a 2005/2006 season that left this writer, and many others, totally 'underwhelmed, unimpressed and unhappy' at the poor level of service delivery that we experienced. The signs were so simple to see.
So what in this writer's opinion can be pointed to as reasons for our recent debacle... especially for the 'new' leadership to take note of and rectify:
1. Rotten ATTITUDE towards customers and stakeholders. When leadership gives the impression that it thinks its own community is 'apathetic', 'unfairly critical', or 'uncooperative' they tend to become dismissively arrogant towards any criticism and develop a 'them & us' antagonism. This rotten attitude rubs off on to service providers who forget that the 'customer is king/queen' whether they are right or wrong. Both our recent leadership and service providers, in my opinion, treated their publics as their 'enemies' without being aware of it. I have a simple view: Apathetic Communities arise from Pathetic Leadership.
2. An acceptance of the MEDIOCRE. When leadership and service providers closet themselves away from their publics and ignore the unhappy feedback and fallout symptoms all around them they begin to believe in their own internal 'marketing' hype. Consequently they can become complacent and fallible to being caught out embarrassingly with their knickers.around their ankles. One's publics will tend to forgive the discretions of those who make them in the visible, active, open and transparent pursuit of higher goals with clearly demonstrable results. The same publics will take those same discretions - when made in a low-trust, high-suspicion, closed, non-inclusive, no-result environment - and they will crucify those who they believe to be the perpetrators. It's just human nature. What we will look for in this community is visible productivity, demonstrable achievement of goals,
3. Lack of understanding of Polar Opposite Management Styles - the danger of GROUPTHINK. Uncommon sense is counter-intuitive, and often the road that 'groupthink' takes one down is directly opposite to that wanted by one's publics. A common saying is that 'Power Corrupts, and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely' and I believe that this applies in an environment where only one voice or idea is allowed to become the sole, almost intimidatory, 'power'. The only way to overcome 'groupthink' is to encourage open debate, criticism and comment - to turn current thinking on its head and to encourage full assessment of ALL alternatives.
Take a look at the polar opposite management styles below and choose for yourself which you believe last year's board and service providers chose to follow... and which you want for this year:
Interactive vs. Top-Down - Do you want to be able to interact openly with your Board before major decisions are taken or do you want your Board to prescribe to you what they believe is in your best interest?
Two-Way vs. One-Way - Do you want your Board to open channels of communication to listening to your honest input or do you want your Board to control and censor information?
Open vs. Closed - Openess creates a sense of belonging and teamwork, closed systems breed paranoia and suspicion - what community management system do you want in Lonehill?
Inclusive vs. Exclusive - Do you want your Board to include everyone who wants to participate and to motivate those currently not engaged or do you want your Board to promote ‘them’ vs ‘us’ divisions?
Fact vs. Spin - Do you want your Board to give you the honest facts, or to dress them up in 'spin' that masks the true picture?
I have my opinion as to what management style was adopted by our past LRA board and service providers... and I know that I want the direct polar opposite from this year's LRA board. What do YOU want?
So what would be the first magnificent step that the new board can take... well to me, it would be to immediately broaden the number of directors onto the LRA (just find a credible way to do it ASAP) to include all of those willing to commit to our community initiative as demonstrated at the AGM ... to introduce new thinking and innovative debate to search for and apply new alternatives and ideas.
My congratulations to those who stood up to the plate to be considered for the LRA board... may you take us massively forward with giant leaps.
Please don't fall into the trap of thinking that everything is now 'hunky-dory' because it ain't... find out why we were 'underwhelmed, unimpressed and unhappy' and nip that in the bud immediately. There is much that still has not been said that needs to be discussed. It's simple to do. Call that first FRIENDLY, non-confrontational public forum to openly discuss and debate the issues that really concern your publics.
Trevor Nel
4 Etterby Close, Lonehill - 705-2790
Friday, October 06, 2006
Why Stirring The Pot Makes For A Great Stew
After last night's 2nd meeting of proactive 'concerned residents' - aka the LRA Reform Group - I am reminded of the fresh, enthusiastic optimism within the Lonehill community team when, in 2001, we inititiated the merger of our Lonehill Security Action Group (LSAG) into a then moribund and technically-bankrupt LRA.
The impact on our community was AMAZING then... and I get the feeling that an even GREATER impact is about to be felt once again.
I was considering an alternative title for this piece - 'Why Stirring The Pot Is Better Than Boiling The Frog'... so you can choose which best suits this dual analogy below.
Quite simply, I believe that the syndrome of the boiling frog crept up on certain individuals responsible for ensuring service delivery and leadership within our LRA project over the past +- 18 months. In my opinion, with the temperature in the water never having been ratcheted too much above 'tepid', the LRA 'frog' became too fat, comfortable and glazy-eyed to notice what was beginning to happen around it.
The 2006 LRA AGM debacle then resulted in the heat being raised instantly under the pot which has made things extremely uncomfortable for the 'frog'... and the 'frog' doesn't like it.
So onto my second little analogy of the heat now being turned up under a pot of cooking stew. The more one turns the heat up, the more one needs to stir the pot to avoid two possible disasters in order to ensure that it becomes a GREAT stew:
1. The burning of the stew at the bottom of the pot - in which case, you may as well throw the stew away, and
2. In many recipes for great stews you will notice that - scum floats - and the accomplished cook tends to stir the pot to infuse the flavours or to remove the scum.
So, I am more than comfortable that a little stirring of the pot will result in a much better stew that will be even tastier than we have ever had in Lonehill.
Just listening to the new, fresh inputs last night, I got to wondering if they had all been reading the "Seven Essential Skills for Teamwork" :
Listening to each others' ideas.
- Asking each other questions both to clarify and challenge ideas.
- Seeking to persuade others that your ideas are sound.
- Respecting each other's role in the discussion.
- Helping each team member to express and understand ideas.
- Sharing one's insights and information with other team members.
- Participating fully and equally in the task at hand.
Now, therein lies a great recipe for cooking up an LRA stew to benefit our community.
Regards
Trevor Nel
Lonehill Resident - 705-2790
The impact on our community was AMAZING then... and I get the feeling that an even GREATER impact is about to be felt once again.
I was considering an alternative title for this piece - 'Why Stirring The Pot Is Better Than Boiling The Frog'... so you can choose which best suits this dual analogy below.
Quite simply, I believe that the syndrome of the boiling frog crept up on certain individuals responsible for ensuring service delivery and leadership within our LRA project over the past +- 18 months. In my opinion, with the temperature in the water never having been ratcheted too much above 'tepid', the LRA 'frog' became too fat, comfortable and glazy-eyed to notice what was beginning to happen around it.
The 2006 LRA AGM debacle then resulted in the heat being raised instantly under the pot which has made things extremely uncomfortable for the 'frog'... and the 'frog' doesn't like it.
So onto my second little analogy of the heat now being turned up under a pot of cooking stew. The more one turns the heat up, the more one needs to stir the pot to avoid two possible disasters in order to ensure that it becomes a GREAT stew:
1. The burning of the stew at the bottom of the pot - in which case, you may as well throw the stew away, and
2. In many recipes for great stews you will notice that - scum floats - and the accomplished cook tends to stir the pot to infuse the flavours or to remove the scum.
Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management - www.mrsbeeton.com
Stew gently for about 1/2 hour, and serve garnished with sippets of toasted bread. ... and as fast as the scum rises to the surface of the water, remove it. ...
www.mrsbeeton.com/17-chapter17.html - 105k - Cached - Similar pages
Point 2. seems to have been taken up by some some of the world's leading life masters to state these quotes:
"Society is like a stew. If you don’t keep it stirred up, you get a lot of scum on top." — Ed Abbey
'Life is like a stew, you have to stir it frequently, or all the scum rises to the top.' - Tom Robbins
So, I am more than comfortable that a little stirring of the pot will result in a much better stew that will be even tastier than we have ever had in Lonehill.
Just listening to the new, fresh inputs last night, I got to wondering if they had all been reading the "Seven Essential Skills for Teamwork" :
Listening to each others' ideas.
- Asking each other questions both to clarify and challenge ideas.
- Seeking to persuade others that your ideas are sound.
- Respecting each other's role in the discussion.
- Helping each team member to express and understand ideas.
- Sharing one's insights and information with other team members.
- Participating fully and equally in the task at hand.
Now, therein lies a great recipe for cooking up an LRA stew to benefit our community.
Regards
Trevor Nel
Lonehill Resident - 705-2790
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
