Notes #28 Organization Focus: Project Adventure & Karl Rohnke

[As part of the Leadership Notes series I will highlight several organizations that may be useful to know or even be involved in as leaders.]

Back in Notes #14, I mentioned a “spin-off” group from Outward Bound (OB) called “Project Adventure” (PA).  Project Adventure was established in the early 70s to bring the teachings of OB to everyone.  This would be done not with the intense long-term outdoor experience of OB, but with the creation of “challenge courses” (aka “ropes courses”) and initiative games and activities.   The purpose of this was to bring groups together, build trust, and break down some of the artificial barriers people build between themselves, and maybe gain a better understanding of themselves as well. While originally focused on high school students, they quickly branched out to other youth, including “at risk” youth, as well as adults.   Some of their programs and concepts include Adventure Based Counseling, Challenge by Choice, and the Full Value Contract.  

A major figure in much of this is Karl Rohnke.  A former OB instructor, he was one of the founders of PA and wrote many works there.  He left in 1996 after being director and president, and later co-founded High 5 Adventure Learning Center.

So let’s take a look at some of the terms used.  First off, some may dismiss this as just fun activities.  Well, they are that, but they do serve a purpose.  Some can be used with groups, to bring them together (with the use of “icebreaker” events), to break down barriers within groups (usually with “cooperative games”), and to bring them together in a team (with “teambuilding games”).  And teambuilding games can be used to help a group become a team, as well as to help a team leader become a better leader.  Some activities are referred to as “initiative problems”, where the team is given a challenge they must overcome (and not just physically, but something they must work out as a group).

As noted, many of these activities have a purpose.  A mistake that many of us make is thinking we should explain the purpose before the activity.  A sort of “in this activity, you will learn X”.  Too often, this is a bad idea, as it can set wrong expectations.  In such learning, it’s better to have the activity occur, then afterwards hold a debrief with the group, and using facilitation, asking open ended questions to draw from the participants their experiences and what they got out of it.  This often difficult to do for many people, because we are often taught how to present, but not how to facilitate.  And facilitation is critical for these activities to work well.

Project Adventure uses some other concepts as well.  Adventure Based Counseling (ABC) is a group counseling model that uses a carefully sequenced and processed series of experiential activities to elicit behavior change.   This is usually done with people in need of such counseling, including at-risk youth and others.  So the aim is not just in a learning experience, but a change in behavior.  Challenge by Choice is a cornerstone concept of PA.  It’s about encouraging the participant to challenge themselves and participate fully in the experience at-hand, and not force them into the experience.   The Full Value Contract is also an integral part of PA’s programs.  It aims to create an emotionally and physically safe environment supported by all group members.  It asks of the members to: 1) to create safe and respectful behavior that the group will operate under, 2) commitment to that behavior by everyone in the group, and 3) to accept the responsibility to maintain that behavior by all.

Some of the major works by Project Adventure & Karl Rohnke include:

“Cowstails and Cobras”, first published in 1977, and replaced by “Cowstails and Cobras II” in 1991, is their first book (written by Rohnke) on their approach to adventure games and challenge courses, and gives full info on how to implement the program.   It’s a good book, but doesn't have the large number of games & activities as others do, BUT does give information on how to use such activities.

For several years, Rohnke published a newsletter called “Bag of Tricks” that gave more games.  Out of these several books were published.   “Silver Bullets” was the first of these, first published in 1984 and recently updated/revamped with a new 25^th Anniversary edition in 2009, and is one of their classic works on initiative games, adventure games and trust activities.

Rohnke would put out further collections from “Bag of Tricks” (“Bottomless Bag”, “Bottomless Baggie”, and “Bottomless Bag Again”). All of these are out of print, but a revised edition of the last book has been released as “Bottomless Bag Revival” (2004).  However, if you have that book, “Revival” is essentially the same work.

“Quicksilver” (1995) by Rohnke and Steve Butler, was created as a sort of sequel to “Silver Bullets”.  More games and initiatives, but also included is a leadership/facilitation section that emphasized how they work, and how to apply them.  Check out the “Foes & Questors” game in this book. 

“Youth Leadership in Action”, ‘written by and for youth leaders’ is a book of cooperative and group games intended for use by youth groups.  A great resource for crew or VOA youth leaders to take a look at.

“Islands of Healing” is PA’s main work on “Adventure Based Counseling”, which is their combination of adventure education and group counseling.  This is not something I’ve looked into, but if you are dealing with at-risk youth, this may be of use.  They have a follow-on work, “Exploring Islands of Healing” as well.

Since leaving PA, Karl has continued to publish works.

“Backpocket Adventure” (1998) by Rohnke & Jim Grout is a small book of games and activities that DON’T need props (or props that would fit in your back pocket, hence the name).  That is the thing with many of these games: you need to build up a collection of ‘stuff’ to use in them.  Several adventure games sites will sell you the items (you sometimes need things beyond what you will find in your local toy or sports good store), and game leaders wind up with a large bag of such props.  But what if you don’t have them?  A few books like this one focus on “no props” games.

More recently, Rohnke started a new series of books called “Funn Stuff” to replace “Bag of Tricks”, but only 4 came out.  The content of these has been compiled as “Funn ‘n Games” (2004), giving yet another big book of adventure games, initiatives, trust activities, and miscellaneous fun.  “Funn”, by the way, stands for “Functional Understanding’s Not Needed.”

Per Karl, he recommends getting “Funn n Games” or “Quicksilver” as the first books to get, as they have lots of games.

As noted, after leaving Project Adventure, Karl helped founded High 5 Adventure Learning Center.  Like PA, High 5 provides program and services in the field of adventure games, including training and certification.  They have a store with books and equipment for sale.

I recommend that people check out the sites at both PA and High 5, as well as Rohnke’s site.   Both groups offers seminars and training, as well as on-line stores with resources (books, equipment, etc). I touched on only some of the works they have available at these 2 sites, the ones I’ve used and am aware of, and didn’t really get into out of print works (check out amazon or alibris).  But there are many other works out there from other groups and individuals.  Some of the major ones (in my opinion) will be covered in future Notes very soon.

To finish things out, here are some videos.  Here is an interesting, if brief, interview with Karl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeQ4P9A_8cc .  A video of a group that went to a No Prop workshop at PA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx5erzi2TLk .

Notes #27 Team Assessments

We are all part of groups of people working together, whether at work, in our units, in other levels of this and other organizations.  But is that group a team?  And how good of a team is it?  How can you assess that team?  Here are a couple of different, but similar models.

Blanchard et al (authors of the various situational leadership concepts we've touched on in past Notes) uses the PERFORM model.  PERFORM is:

• Purpose and Values
• Empowerment
• Relationships and Communication
• Flexibility
• Optimal Productivity
• Recognition and Appreciation
• Morale

PERFORM is covered in several of their works.  It was first put forth in “High Five: The Magic of Working Together” and is also covered in Blanchard’s “Leading at a Higher Level”.  The idea of PERFORM is that these 7 characteristics are key for a successful team, what Blanchard calls a ‘high performing team’, which he sees as a result of using situational team leadership (see the Note on that topic).  Basically, the characteristics are:

• Purpose and Value- what is keeping the team together and moving forward?  Members need to have a goal in mind (purpose) and shared values.
• Empowerment- members need to be empowered to be able to achieve that common goal.  Basically, the authority to act and make decisions.
• Relationships & Communications- the members of the team need to communicate together, not just with or only with, the leader.  Only then does the team come together as a team.
• Flexibility- members of the team need to be able to adapt to changes.  This is necessary as each member brings something different to the task at hand.
• Optimal productivity- this is what happens when you have a ‘high performing team’.  When you have a team dedicated to the goal and committed to high standards, they will use problem solving and decision making to achieve that goal.
• Recognition & Appreciation- members are responsible for and deserve recognition and appreciation for achieving both individual and team accomplishments.
• Morale- is about a sense of pride and satisfaction in a job well done as a team.  We all understand that high morale helps achieve success.

While most of these concepts seem obvious, too often we have to be reminded of them.

Another, different but similar, concept I found is enunciated in the recent book Extraordinary Groups: How Ordinary Team Achieve Amazing Results (www.extraordinarygroups.com).  I first read about it in an article in “Toastmasters Magazine” (March 2011) in the article “What Makes an Exceptional Team?” (you can read that article here: http://magazines.toastmasters.org/publication/?i=72188)

The authors of that book have set down 8 traits of “Extraordinary Work Groups”:

• Compelling purpose: we are inspired and stretched in making this group's work our top priority.
• Shared Leadership: we readily step forward to lead by demonstrating our mutual responsibility for moving our group toward success.
• Just enough structure: we create the minimal structure (systems, plans, roles, tasks) necessary to move our work forward.
• Full engagement: we dive into our work with focus, enthusiasm and passion.
• Embracing differences: we value the creative alternatives that result from engaging differing points of view.
• Unexpected learning: we are excited by what we learn here and how it applies to other work, other groups and our lives outside of work/organization.
• Strengthened relationships: our work leads us to greater trust, interdependence and friendship
• Great results: we work toward and highly value the tangible and intangible outcomes of our work together.

The article touched on some of those traits. I though this list was interesting. Several of them match up with the PERFORM model.  Others are additions.

So, let’s get to the heart of the matter, assessing teams.  Are the teams you are a part of achieve these points, whether it’s the PERFORM or the Extraordinary Group?  As I read thru both of them, and thought about the many groups, large & small, that I've been on at work, in various orgs, etc, I find that those groups that have most or all those traits were more successful, and those that lacked many of them not so much. A lot of this is due to the leadership and vision of the leader (or lack thereof). But also the others in the group and how they are involved also have an effect.  When most people in the group took on those traits, the more successful the group was, even in spite of the leader. 

I have seen groups that existed because the leader had a vision.  He either recruited others who shared that vision, recruited others who had necessary skills and got them to buy in to the vision, and others who agreed with the vision who sought out and joined that leader.  These groups were almost always successful.  A variant of this is the group in which all the members have a shared vision, and due to this vision they came together to achieve it.  Usually one among them became the leader, tho sometimes the vision was so strong within the group, that this “leader” was more of a spokesperson for the group then a true leader.  These groups also are almost always successful.

Less successful are the groups where, tho the leader had a vision, didn’t feel that the other characteristics listed above were important.  They might have succeeded, more due to the fact that the members wanted things to succeed, but they weren’t as successful as they could have been, and it’s certainly wasn’t as much fun (indicated low morale) as it could have been.

Purpose & Values/Compelling Purpose & Full Engagement is difficult when you have leaders (and members) who aren't committed to what the group is about, and are only there as a reward for past work.  (I always say a job is a job, not an award.  There should be an expectation of doing the work.)  It’s like they are there as a ego boast and not to accomplish things.

Empowerment/Shared Leadership is difficult, when the leader refuses to recruit additional members of the team (or have any team at all), or share leadership (power to a degree, responsibility would be a better idea, which is really what empowerment is) with others on the team.  Empowerment is all about the members having the power to act and make decisions.  But many leaders, fearing a loss of power, refuse to allow this.

Just Enough Structure is difficult when the leader refuses to recruit others to the team and tries to run it a one-person operation, or the group refuses to setup the structure.  You need some structure to get things done, and in absence of any structure, nothing gets done (except by individuals on their own).  Of course, too much structure can also be a problem, when you have leaders who build a huge organization of people (with titles), all of whom do nothing and get in the way.

Flexibility/Embracing Differences is difficult when the leader refuses to recruit people who may have a contrarian view of things and may challenge the leader with different views/ideas.  Too often the desire to have people of like mind means that those with differing views/ideas are shutout.  People should be recruited for their skills and knowledge, not for being “yes” men.  Obviously, you don’t want people who are totally against the vision of the group, but someone with a different take on it, or see a different path to that vision is good.

Relationships & Communications/Strengthened Relationships doesn't happen if the leader doesn't allow the team to really come together as a team.  Again, it could be that fear of losing power.  If the team comes together, they may feel they don’t need the leader (or perhaps feel a different leader would be better).

All this then short circuits any chance of getting Great Results/Optimal Productivity.  The goal will get done, because there will be members of the group who will want to ensure that stuff is done, but think of how more successful the group could be with better leadership in place?  And how much more fun?  The work may be hard, but it could be enjoyable hard work.

And when it comes to Recognition & Appreciation, do the members of the team get any, or does it all go to the leader for their own glory?  This is especially true, again, when you have “leaders” who often times took on a role mainly for the recognition they would receive.  How many people have we seen who took on a role mainly because it would get them an award?

So take a look at some of the groups and teams you are involved in.  See how many of these characteristics they exhibit.  How might you do something to change it?

Notes #26- More on Motions

When speaking of motions, there are some other things to be aware of.   There are, in fact, 23 different motions.  Do you need to memorize them all?  No.  In fact for most people and most situations, you need to be familiar with only a handful or so.  We will cover the most useful of these in the next 2 Notes. 

First off, every motion has certain characteristics. It’s important to be familiar with these characteristics. It can be difficult to memorize the characteristics of every motion, but thankfully there are various charts and cheat sheets you can get and use during your meetings.

The characteristics are:

1. Precedence
2. Application
3. If in order when another has the floor
4. Seconded
5. Debatable
6. Amendable
7. Vote needed
8. Reconsidered

What do these mean?

1. Precedence. For some motions (a dozen of them), there is an order of precedence. Thus, if a motion is being considered, you can put forth a motion of a higher precedence, without waiting for that motion to be finished. Main motions (those motions that bring forth new business to be considered, which was the main focus of the previous Note) have the lowest precedence. Some motions have no precedence, btw.

2. Application. What is the purpose of this motion? This is important, because some motions have somewhat confusing names and some motions seem to have identical purposes. You need to be sure you are using the right motion for the right reasons.

3. As noted, when someone has the floor, you have to wait your turn to make a motion. HOWEVER, there are some motions that you can use even if another member has the floor.

4. Does the motion require a second? Some don't.

5. Can the motion be debated (discussed)? Some don't allow it.

6. Can the motion be amended (changed)? Some can't.

7. What kind of vote is needed to pass the motion? Most motions need only a majority vote. Certain motions require a 2/3 vote (these are motions that affects member's “parliamentary rights” of debate). Some motions don't need a vote.  (refer to the Note on voting for more on this)

8. Can you reconsider the vote on a motion? Some allow it, some don't


In addition, motions are put into one of several groups: Main Motions, Subsidiary motions, Privileged Motions, Incidental Motions, "Bring Back" Motions.

What are these groups?

Main motions bring new business before the group as motions or resolutions.

Subsidiary motions are motions that apply to the main motion, by changing them, setting them aside, and the like.

Privileged motions are important because they have precedence over other motions and are not debatable. All deal with the business of running the meeting.

Incidental motions are related to the main motion, but in such a way that they need to be dealt with NOW.

"Bring Back" motions are a motions that bring back issues for consideration to the group. These can be motions that were set aside and the like.

As noted, one need not memorize motions, but you need to be familiar with them, and using various charts during your meeting can help.  Here are some resources for these charts. 

You can download several free charts at Jim Slaughter’s website (http://www.jimslaughter.com/articles.htm).  He has a great chart of the parliamentary motions, and two others that are useful are “Preside Like a Pro” and “Presiding Phrases”, which can help the person chairing a meeting to move things along.

The National Association of Parliamentarians has several items for sale in their store that are useful.   They have several plastic cards with basic information on them, such as handling a motion, chair’s guide, vote calculator, ranking motions, and subsidiary motions.  Their basic information leaflet is one I get by the 100 and pass out at seminars I do.  This one has it all in one place.

Notes #25- Motions: How they work

In previous works in this series, we have eluded to the concept of "motions" in meetings to get things done. But what are they all about, and how do you deal with them?

In most cases, all the decisions an organization will make will be due to 'motions' being made by the members, discussed, and then decided upon. (in cases where you have MEMBERS making decisions vs just your officers) How this is done is really very easy, but can be confusing to those not familiar with them.

Motions are handled in this seven step process:

1. Obtain the floor
2. Make the motion
3. Have it seconded
4. Chair repeats it
5. Motion is discussed/debated
6. Vote is taken
7. Result is given

How is each step handled?

1. OBTAIN THE FLOOR. Before you can state your motion, you must 'obtain the floor'. And you can't do this unless there is nothing else pending. In other words, if the group is currently working on another matter, your motion will have to wait. Hopefully, your chair will say "Is there any other new business?" once other matters are finished, indicating it’s ok to put forth something new. This is your chance to make your motion. Obtain the chairs attention, by either raising your hand or standing (depending on the size of the group and its customs). Hopefully, the chair will recognize you and you can make your motion (The chair may say "the Chair recognizes...")

2. MAKE THE MOTION. Now that you have the floor, make your motion. Start it off by saying "I move that", and clearly state your motion. Do NOT say "I'd like to make a motion...", or "I make a motion that..." or "I so move..." or the like. Do NOT spend time explaining or justifying the motion (you'll get your chance later). Make it short and sweet, and sit down. IF the motion is a little complex, have it written down and give copies to the chair and secretary.

3. THE MOTION IS SECONDED. Now that you have stated the motion, it needs to be seconded. Seconding ONLY means that at least one person feels the group should consider the motion. The seconder is NOT obligated to vote for the motion or be in favor of it. (they may in fact be against it, and may be seconded it so that it can be considered and defeated!). All that is needed is someone to say "Second!" If no one does, the chair can prompt for a second ("Is there a second"). IF THERE IS NO SECOND, the motion is lost and that's it (Chair "Motion is lost due to lack of a second. Is there any new business?"). If there is a second, we move to the next step.

NOTE: in small committees (12 or less), you may dispense with the need for a second.

4. CHAIR REPEATS IT. The chair then says "It has been moved and seconded that..." This make sure everyone is clear on what we will be discussing.

5. MOTION IS DISCUSSED/DEBATED. At this point, members can now discuss the motion. As noted in previous points, we are discussing ONLY the motion. The old style is for the chair to say "Are you ready for the question?", but it is simpler to say "Is there any discussion?" THE MAKER OF THE MOTION gets to speak first, by the way. This is now their chance to expound on the motion, and convince people to vote for it. Afterwards, everyone else gets to speak. It is a good idea for people to make it clear where they stand by saying "I speak for the motion/I speak in favor of the motion" or "I speak against the motion/I speak in opposition to the motion" and then explain why. Should there be a lull in those obtaining the floor to speak about the motion; the chair may prompt for further debate by saying "Is there any further discussion?"

There ARE limits to how long you can speak and how often.  The standard rule is twice on the same motion for 10 minutes each.  The organization is free to change this for the organization all the time (thru a “Standing Rule” of the organization) or for that meeting or for just that motion.

6. VOTE IS TAKEN. Once it is clear everyone has had their say, OR someone has forced the matter by 'calling the question' and ending debate, the chair will put the motion to a vote. Before doing so, the chair should again repeat the motion so that everyone is clear as to what they are voting on (helpful if the motion was changed thru amendments). The chair should say "The question is on the adoption of the motion to...". And then put the matter to a vote (see the Note on Voting).

7. RESULT IS GIVEN. After the vote is taken, the chair needs to announce the results: "the ayes have it and the motion is adopted" or "The noes have it, and the motion is lost", or the like.  As noted on Voting, you do not give a count of the vote, just who prevailed.

FREQUENT QUESTIONS

SECOND- as noted, and which bears repeating: Seconding just means that at least one person feels the group should consider the motion. The seconder is NOT obligated to vote for the motion or be in favor of it. (they may in fact be against it, and may be seconded it so that it can be considered and defeated!). Seconding is not needed in small committees or groups less than 12. Also, once seconded, you can't withdraw your second. And, if debate begins before a second is formally given (which it shouldn’t), then the second is assumed.

MINUTES- what goes into the minutes? The motion as it was voted on, who made it (don't need who seconded it), and the outcome (adopted or lost). "It was moved by John Smith and seconded that we increase our dues to $100 a year. The motion passed."

AMENDMENTS- during discussions on the motions, the members CAN make changes to the motion (add, remove, reword, change). These are call amendments. This will be covered in a future Note.

Notes #24 Tribal Leadership

Tribal leadership is an interesting concept about large groups that exist within organizations (both companies and non-profit groups).  Tribe is the term the authors chose, and has nothing to do with native Americans or African tribes or the like.  “Tribes” are groups of 20-150.  Below 20 is where you have teams.  And when a group goes over 150, will split into 2 tribes.  So smaller organizations may comprise one tribe, whereas larger organizations may have 2 or 3 or more tribes.

So what is your “tribe”?  It’s more than just your circle of friends.  It’s the group of people you work with at your company or in the organizations you are in.  It’s the people you probably have in your contact list (phone or email).  Your ‘circle of acquaintances’, which is more than just your friends.  As the authors put it, if you met them on the street, you’d at least say “hi” to them.

This is all covered in the book Tribal Leadership by Dave Logan, John King, and Halee Fischer-Wright (2008, paperback edition in 2011 with new intro and afterward).  They have a website: www.triballeadership.net .

There are some good videos on YouTube that explain this concept, but these should be used as an introduction, not as a replacement for reading the book.  The TED video is a good intro, and for a longer overview take a look at the Google talk or the Rypple video:

TED video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTkKSJSqU-I

Plug on the book: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2h954Hz2Rk

Google talk on book (long): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jirePLc0U1A

Rypple video series (long): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKM4Nf1HI7M

The authors speak of 5 stages of tribes and the people in them.  Each stage has certain characteristics.  They speak of a theme of each stage, which is illustrated by a certain phrase.  There is a mood of people at each stage and how they work together (or not).  People can move up the different stages, so it’s both a function of the attitude of the individuals, and their leader(s) as to what kind of tribe it is, sometimes it’s the ‘system’ (corporate culture) the people are a part of that defines the stage you’re in (leave that system and you can level that stage).  And, yes, people can move down in stages as well.  Someone with a Stage 1 attitude who comes into a higher stage tribe will either be changed or removed.  The efforts of a leader can transform a lower stage tribe to a higher one, but the members of the tribe also need to be willing to change. 

What then are these 5 stages?

Stage 1 is marked by the attitude “life sucks”.  Only about 2% of groups operate here.  This is the stage of criminals and gangs, a group of hostile people.  In a company, this would be a group that is stealing from the company or the like.

Stage 2 is a big step up from Stage 1.  Its theme is “MY life sucks”, a little different.  About 25% of groups are here.  This is the type of group you see on The Office or when you visit the department of motor vehicles.  People don’t care, and it shows.  In many cases, this has been caused by the culture of the group.  People have been beat down.  No among of touchy-feely stuff like team building exercises, motivational posters, or the like will change things.

Stage 3 is the dominant culture of groups, with 49% of groups being here.  Its theme is “I’m great”, with the unspoken completion of “and you’re not”.  This is where you have a group of experts, who do not work together (and why should they?  Each one feels that “I’m great, and you’re not”), and so it’s a culture of the ‘lone warrior’ (“oh, I had to do all this work, because no one else can do it.  After all, I’m great, and you’re not”).  Everyone is in it to win it for themselves.   Again, the system these people are in is what causes this attitude.  It’s not necessarily that people are selfish or the like, but the system they are in causes them to be this way.

One big characteristic of this stage is the relationship between people.  It’s always between two people.  The authors use the term “dyadic” for this.  But the relationship is a negative one.  This is not a mentor/mentee relationship or a partnership.  Here the two-way relationship is more of a leader and a follower, where the follower is told what to do and only given limited amount of information.  If a leader has several followers, then the relationship still is between the leader and each individual follower, there is no teamwork, there is no connection between the different followers.  If you chart the relationships, you get a wheel/spoke, instead of an interconnected web.  This is an important point, as changing this is an important factor in moving a group to Stage 4.

As noted, the largest group of tribes are at this stage.  A perfect example of this is the movie “Office Space”.  Lumbergh, the manager, is the classic example of the “stage 3 boss”.  All his underlings are weak Stage 3 or Stage 2.  Stage 3 bosses prefer weak Stage 3 people or Stage 2 people, as they can dominate them.   The character of Milton is at Stage 2, who is pushed back to Stage 1 by Lumbergh.  And you see the result of this.

Stage 4 is next, and it’s a huge jump for Stage 3.  Here the theme is “we’re great”, with the unspoken completing being “and they’re not”.  This is actually the stage that tribal leadership should be trying to move people to (I’ll explain why shortly).  About 22% of groups are here.  And it can be very difficult to get here, both for the leader and for the followers.  The leader needs to move beyond the “I’m great” attitude, and think in terms of what is best for the group.  But once done, it’s the place to be.

The concept of “they’re not” is that usually Stage 4 tribes have a “rival” they are ‘fighting’ against.   For companies, it could be the competition, in colleges, it’s a rival college.  For tribes at Stage 4 to move to Stage 5, this rival needs to be more abstract.  So for a pharmaceutical company, their rival is not the competition so much as diseases.

Stage 5 is the final stage.  Here the theme is “LIFE is great”.  Unlike in Stage 4, there is no attitude of an ‘enemy’ to fight per say.  But one thing that is pointed out is that this stage is unstable.  What you want as a goal is to get to Stage 4, and move the group at times into Stage 5.  But in Stage 5, great things happen.

Servant leadership & tribal leadership

In learning about tribal leadership, I wondered where (or even if) servant leadership fits in.  The authors make no mention of it, and I have no idea if they know about it.  But in going over things, and the aspects of leaders in the different stages, it seems clear to me that the leaders of stage 4 & 5 tribes are likely to be servant leaders.  Servant leaders in stage 1, 2, 3 tribes would be working hard to get their tribe up to stage 4 & 5.  Now, this doesn't mean that a stage 4/5 leader is automatically a servant leader, but most likely they will be.  If you read the book, it’s also clear that the “stage 3 boss” is a leader-first leader, the opposite of the servant leader.

As many of us are involved in large groups, this work has value.  I first learned of it from Toastmasters when they ran an article in the August, 2011 issue of the Toastmasters magazine.  And they had the main author speak at their International Convention in 2011 and they gave out copies to people.  As I look around in many of my groups, I do see a lot of Stage 3 tribes.  I do see attempts at creating Stage 4 tribes.  And I see Stage 3 tribes that the boss is trying to disguise as Stage 4.  This is actually something the authors warn about: the fake Stage 4.

An example of this is in the Rypple video.  This quote was given:  “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world.  Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead.  I've heard it before and agree.  I've seen great things done in many of the organizations I am part of, lead by people with a vision for something better.  This is an example of a stage 4/5 leader. But author David Logan has this corollary: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtless, uncommitted people can prevent the world from changing.  Indeed, they do so every day.” (he says that 70% of tribes do this.)  And sadly, I've too often seen this.  Someone trying to make a change, but is stopped by others in the organization because they lack the vision or want to come up with some reason to stop it or just don’t want change.  What is especially sad is that too often the people doing the blocking wrap themselves in the rhetoric of the Stage 4 leader or a servant leader, which in my mind means they really don’t understand the concepts.

A great concept and I encourage all leaders to check it out.