Consideration

Contrary to, what seems to be, popular belief – the world (earth) revolves around the sun – not you - not me.

The vast majority of problems, in business, leadership, public policy - the world - are rooted in the absence of consideration. At some level we do understand this; consider the Charter of rights and Freedoms (Canada) Constitution (United States), both created in an attempt to ensure that basic rights are protected, in other words, to be "considerate" of all. The problem is that many use these rights in acts that are completely inconsiderate of others, which I suppose, proves the point that we can't force or legislate consideration. This [consideration] has to come from within every individual.

The greatest cause of driving accidents is not speed or alcohol use as is commonly touted, but rather a lack of consideration among drivers. A signal light is to advise other drivers who are near to you that you are about to make a lane change. This is basic consideration. If a driver is in the left hand lane (fast lane in North America), and another driver – driving faster - wants to get by you, why not move out of the way? Those who run red lights, text or talk on the cell phone while driving clearly don't care about anyone else.

Consideration is absent among those who drive personal vehicles that are so loud that we can hear them within seven kilometers (four miles). Why do we require noise bylaws that restrict noise levels at certain times of the day? Shouldn't this [be quiet while others are trying to sleep] be obvious? We even have signs that instruct dog owners to pick up their dog's crap. Why is this [signs] even necessary if we were considerate of others?

Self-centeredness is the root of all evil. Every crime committed can be traced back to the root of self-centeredness. If people thought of someone else, other than themselves, when they were about to steal, kill, lie, cheat, etc., they likely would not.

Think about the greatest leader your path has crossed; are they generally more considerate? Now consider the level of thoughtfulness toward others among the leader (s) whom you would not aspire to model.

Great leaders are considerate.

Consideration

Critical Thinking

The bag of cat food reads "new improved taste – your cats will love." How do they know that? Do cats even have a sense of taste?

Some say that the arctic ice cap is melting and will cause the sea levels to rise. However, when the ice in a beverage glass melts the liquid does not overflow. Reason: the level of water rises when the ice is put into the glass – it's called displacement as described in the law of buoyancy – which most learn in grade 6 science. Therefore, if all this ice floating in water has already displaced its weight, why will the sea levels rise if it melts? And yes, the ice is floating in water – there is no land on the top of the globe. Besides, how would you get sea ice on land?

It is irresponsible not to question. Some are educated beyond intelligence and common sense and lose sight of the basic truths. I actually presented the facts outlined above to an environmental scientist and stumped him. He had never considered this (and I am not referring to my new cat food).

Coca cola has declared that they will be donating money to help the Polar bears. Has the recession impacted the bears? Seriously, what will that money be used for? Supplying food would destroy them as they would lose their natural instinct to hunt on their own. If melting ice is endangering them, I don't think money can make the necessary ice required. Why do we think that the Polar bears are in trouble in the first place? Is this from the same people that declare sea levels will rise with melting ice? A five-minute fact check reveals the following: Polar bear populations have risen worldwide from 5,000 in 1950 to somewhere between 20,000 & 25,000 today, despite the hundreds killed every year through hunting. How does that translate into "Polar bears are in trouble?"

Common sense isn't all that common any more. It's not like there is a lack of information in today's world, but people generally believe what they hear on the six o'clock news without question. This kind of blind obedience has resulted in horrendous outcomes: such as communism in the former Soviet Union and the holocaust, which combined have been responsible for the murder of over 100 million people.

There is one source of the truth – it is not relative or situational. We used the think the world is flat. We used to think that certain races were inferior. We used to think we were heading into an ice age. What we believe determines how we act. Therefore, we must ensure that what we believe is true.

Accurate facts cannot be denied. Everyone has an opinion, but opinions are like noses – everyone has one and they usually have a couple of holes in them. Consider all points of view. Debate is one of the best methods to hear other opinions and points of view. Be skeptical. Be suspicious. Especially, If there is a reluctance to debate or back up opinions with facts.

The problems of the past could have been avoided if individuals sought after the truth. Future problems will be prevented with the same approach.

We all have a responsibility to question.

Critical Thinking

Refreshing Honesty

I have been watching the X Factor series on TV (similar idea to the American Idol) with Simon Cowell as one of the judges. Simon Cowell is well known for his blunt and controversial criticisms – he says it the way he sees it and based on his comments I can't image that he holds anything back.

It's actually quite refreshing; someone who is completely honest and says what he means and means what he says. There is no political correctness in this guy whatsoever. Everyone knows where they stand with him.

He is generally not even nice about it, no sugar coating. I imagine most people think he is harsh, mean, and perhaps rude.

Question: What is worse?

Lying and deceiving someone by telling them what they want to hear rather than what you really think?

Or,

Being completely honest and saying what you really think in an effort to help?

There are four judges on this television show, but it is clear that Simon Cowell is the most respected. We especially wait to hear his opinion above the other three, regardless of how harsh it may come across, because we know that it will be an honest opinion. Society is craving honesty in communication.

The first step to encouraging honesty is to accept and understand one simple fact: Having hurt feelings is a choice.

Refreshing Honesty

Blame – A Destructive Force

Blaming everything and everyone else is a reality that is literally destroying societies.

• Failing to pass a test is the fault of the test, the teacher or the school.
  
• A speeding ticket is somehow the fault of either the police or the limit sign not placed in a convenient enough location to see in the short spurts of time the driver is looking up between text messages.
  
• "Occupiers" have camped out in cities all over North America blaming the rich for all the problems in the world.
  
• People are offended because someone said something that "offended" them.
  
• Poor business results are due to the recession, the system, competition or the government.
  
• The criminal commits crimes because of their upbringing, race, colour or perceived disadvantages they have had in life.
  

When we levy blame (accountability) against someone else, it tends to abdicate all responsibility for doing anything to solve the issue. This renders people powerless – it creates victims, which shuts down ingenuity, suppresses creativity and smothers progress.

When my kids were very young I was not concerned when they would blame their sister or their toy for being upset, because I knew they would grow out of it. But really, what do you say to a person that is vibrating with contempt for the police because they were introduced to the effects of pepper spray after hurling rocks, bottles and Molotov cocktails at them? How do you respond to a businessperson that blames all of their problems on everything and everyone else?

The right response / approach / attitude is to consider what my part is in this situation. Instead of blaming someone else for my problems, what if I ask myself what I may have done / currently doing / not doing to cause this problem and what or how can I take action to resolve it. If I accept responsibility for my own problems, not only will I avoid repeating, I am most likely to take productive action to change them. (Notice the emphasis on first person in the preceding two sentences).

Whining is not taking action. Forcing others to solve your problems is not taking action. Positive leadership takes action that is constructive – never destructive.

Blaming others is a waste of energy and creates powerless victims. Looking in the mirror for accountability and action will cause you to enjoy great success.

Now, if you feel contempt for me because of the feeling of guilt you have after reading this . . . you might have a blame problem.

Blame – A Destructive Force

Larger than life

Jack Layton's (leader of the Canadian New Democrat Party), recent passing – a victim of cancer – was a shock to many Canadians. Regardless of your opinion of Jack's politics / methods, it is difficult to argue with the fact that he was effective. Jack was extremely focused, energetic and charismatic and his leadership in the most recent federal election won his party their highest number of seats on record.

However, in retrospect, the vast majority of votes were for Jack Layton and not necessarily for the NDP party or their platform. In certain ridings, individuals were elected that were unknown to voters and completely absent during the campaign. This voting "fever" was termed "orange crush," because orange is the party's official colour. In the riding that I live – a majority conservative riding – I noticed an extremely large sign on a resident's lawn for Jack Layton. The irony is that in Canada, we don't vote for the leader, we vote for the specific MP (member of Parliament) and the party that wins the most seats forms government. In essence, NDP voters put all their hope on one man – Jack Layton.

The problem with this is that Jack Layton was the NDP party / the NDP party was Jack Layton. His passing leaves a gigantic vacuum. Jack was larger than life and there is no one that can fill the void left by his passing.

If the leader is "it," the one with the all ideas, all the energy, all the solutions and fails to mentor others to become like them and eventually be them; the reign of their organization is finite.

Leaders must work to become irrelevant.

Larger than life

Should others follow your lead?

Should others follow you? Is your leadership worth following? If the world acted and did as you do, would the world be a better place?

Consider the example you set for your family, particularly your kids. Would you be proud if they acted the same as you?

Reflect on your driving habits; do they exemplify what you would like to see in other drivers?

The greatest leaders are not those that are the loudest, who stand out among the crowd with grandiose personalities, but rather the meek, mild and most considerate. They are not pushovers, but instead stay on course and seem to do the right thing without inflicting causalities along the way. They treat others as they themselves would like to be treated.

I believe that the greatest leaders this world has and will see are those that we don't name or write books about. They remain behind the scene, out of the limelight and set the example for all to follow. They seem to follow this principle:

Be of the same mind toward one another; do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own estimation. Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. Respect what is right in the sight of all men. If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. Romans 12:16-18

Our actions speak louder than our words.

Should others follow your lead?

Top Leaders Must be Visionary

Some people are visionary and some are not. Each has their place regardless and is invaluable when positioned correctly. However, placing individuals incorrectly can be catastrophic.

Those that are visionary, see the future clearly in their minds eye. They can describe visually what their ideal future looks like. Their vision can seem completely unrealistic and impractical to many, but can galvanize large numbers of people. Everyone wants to be part of something great. Consider Kennedy's vision on May 25, 1961 to put a man on the moon before the end of the decade. Not only was this achieved on July 20, 1969, this audacious goal was a catalyst for a renewed spirit of hope and technological pride that reset the course of the nation with benefits for years to come.

Those that are strategic are best able to plan the course to the leader's the vision. It is my observation that those that are visionary are not particularly strategic and vice versa. The humble leader recognizes their natural talents and relies on others to balance off in the areas where they are weak.

Visionary leaders take groups of people, even entire countries, to heights that most never dreamed possible.

Leaders at the top of any organization / government must be visionary. While this is not the only requirement necessary for success, I believe it [success] is impossible without. Just look into any current failing organization / country and you will find a leader that lacks vision.

How do you know if you are visionary? If you can describe, in clear pictures - as if you are already there - what your organization looks like in the future, right now without having to conceptualize – you are likely a visionary.

Top Leaders Must be Visionary