Doomed to be just “good?”
When you tell a recovering perfectionist that “good is the enemy of great,”[1] you tend to create an existential crisis for said person. In fact, it may take that person a few days to remind herself that great does not necessarily mean perfect…or so I hear.
Anyway, most times I read Jim Collins’ book, Good to Great, I find myself excited all over again about the ideas of being part of the process of leading a mediocre organization into an effective and excellent organization. And most times I read this book I am reminded that I so far to go to become what Collins and his team call a “Level 5 Leader.”[2] This time, however, I found myself wondering if I can even become a Level 5 Leader. In this book, Collins describes the Level 5 leaders he has studies as, “quiet, humble, modest, reserved, shy, gracious, mild-mannered, self-effacing, understated,” etc.[3] Quiet? Um, nope. Reserved? Not so much. Modest? What does that even mean? No. These are not the words people who work with me would use to describe me. So does that count me out? Am I forever destined to be stuck at Level 4 leadership? Did I mention I’m a recovering perfectionist?
Throughout Collins’ book, I kept coming back to this idea that, not only may I not be able to be the leader Collins describes, but since I don’t operate in the business world any longer I’m not sure how to apply these ideas. As I read, I filled the margins of the book with questions and “yeah, but” statements, as well as huge orange highlighter question marks. My existential crisis grew exponentially with the chapters. When I first read this book, it had been as a person who worked in an easily quantifiable world. Now, not only do I not work in that world and do not fit the “model” Level 5 characteristics, my focus for the future is in the area of non-profits and higher education – the social sector.
Well, lucky for me Dr. Clark assigned Collins’ follow-up monograph, Good to Great and the Social Sectors. Quickly Collins set aside my worries about my capability to join the ranks of Level 5 leaders. “Level 5 leaders differ from Level 4 leaders in that they are ambitious first and foremost for the cause, the movement, the mission, the work – not themselves – and they have the will to do whatever it takes (whatever it takes) to make good on that ambition.”[4] Hey! I’ve been accused of that! (One fellow faculty member may have even called me “ruthless” in my ambition to better the critical thinking skills of our students, but I digress…) It seems that quiet and mild-mannered are not necessarily critical characteristics, but a determination to stick with the cause definitely qualifies as critical. It’s not the quietness, but the deflection of ego that matters.
The rest of Collins’ little monograph read like a happy love letter to me about the possibilities of leadership and organizational greatness in the social sector. Suddenly Good to Great made sense again. So much so that I could trace the simplicity of Max DuPree’s Leadership is an Art throughout. Collins’ book feels like the research project that backs up DuPree’s theories and anecdotal evidence. Look at these comparison quotes: “The art of leadership (is) liberating people to do what is required of them in the most effective and humane way possible,”[5] (“First Who…Then What…they first got the right people on the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and the right people in the right seats…”[6]). “Leaders should leave behind them assets and a legacy,”[7] (“Level 5 leaders set up their successors for even greater success…”)[8] The connections between these two books delight me. More than that, they allow me to see where I fit in the concept of leading a good organization to a place of greatness in the social sector. They also give me deep hope for the future leaders I want to be a part of developing. If I can see myself here, then young people filled with passion for their mission will see themselves in these two books as well. My hope is that pastors will be able to read these books and determine to lead great churches, that artists will determine to ruthlessly pursue the mission before them, and that teachers, social workers, police officers, and others can be encouraged to refocus on their mission and create what Collins calls, “pockets of greatness” in their organizations.[9]
[1] Jim Collins, Good to Great, (New York: Harper Collins, 2001), 1.
[2] Collins, 21.
[3] Collins, 27.
[4] Jim Collins, Good to Great and the Social Sectors, (Boulder, CO: Jim Collins, 2005), 11.
[5] Max DuPree, The Art of Leadership, (Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press, 1989), 1.
[6] Collins, Good to Great, 13.
[7] DuPree, 13.
[8] Collins, Good to Great, 38.
[9] Collins, Good to Great and the Social Sectors, 14.
About the Author
Kristin Hamilton
13 responses to “Doomed to be just “good?””
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great post Kristin.
It’s too bad that we tend to categorize leaders by numbers, letters or by any designation. What Collins calls a level 5 leader in one setting, may end up being a level 0 leader in another. I’ve seen it happen more than one time—in the business world and in the church. The complexity of leadership within a given organization is so layered and intertwined that to designate someone a 5 or a 0 would, in many situations, only function in that particular setting. All that to say, one of the problems I have with the number system is that people tend to judge their leadership against an often unrealistic or unattainable scale. Also, they tend—good or bad— to carry that number with them for the rest of their lives.
I think you made an excellent and important point when you spoke of your desire to train future leaders. That is a sign of a great leader! You can carry that designation wherever you go. Thanks for a great post.
Thank Jim! I agree that we have to be careful when we label leaders, but I’m not so sure measuring our leaders according to a definable scale is a bad thing. When I looked at the 1-5 scale that Collins proposes, I could see where I needed to make certain improvements if I want to be the type of leader who synergizes an organization to the next level.
Let me bounce this off of you and you can tell me what you think…I think Peter and Paul were often Level 5 leaders who moved the mission of Christ forward. I can, however, see where they reverted to Level 3 or Level 4 leadership by letting their ego and personal ideas get in the way. That’s when the two of them clashed. Paul, specifically, became what we may call “ruthless” when he told Peter he was simply wrong about Gentiles and told him to get on board with the mission. I wonder what would have happened if Peter dug his heels in and refused. Would Paul have told him that he needed to get off of the bus?
Kristin, I could use a little of your existential leadership!!
As always you find the weak places in the book and thoughtfully interact with them. Since you are in LGP you have been called to be a leader. I’m not sure as you pointed out that everyone is called to be “the” leader. If there’s a leader, then there must be people who are being led?? And just what is leadership anyway?
Ok, I love your philosophical posts!!
Thanks Mary!
I agree that we aren’t always called to be “the” leader. That’s why I resonated so deeply with Collins’ example of the science teacher who created a pocket of greatness in a system that is not always great. It showed me that I don’t have to make a whole organization great, but I am responsible for my own little area.
“Did I mention I’m a recovering perfectionist?”– oh, that was YOU you were describing?? 😉
“It seems that quiet and mild-mannered are not necessarily critical characteristics, but a determination to stick with the cause definitely qualifies as critical. It’s not the quietness, but the deflection of ego that matters.”– And isn’t that a good thing for us noisy, bold and passionate people? Passionate, yes, that fits you well.
Haha. I knew you and others in this cohort would resonate with that whole perfectionist thing!
It IS a good thing for those of us who are noisy, bold and passionate about our mission (and life in general). Thank you for the encouragement!
“Level 5 leaders differ from Level 4 leaders in that they are ambitious first and foremost for the cause, the movement, the mission, the work – not themselves.”
This quote made me pause and reflect. Not all Christians are called to be leaders. Or are they?
Yes, within the function of “the body of Christ” we all have different talents, abilities, and even authority (by the way, modern westerners HATE the concept of authority, but I digress).
Having said that, ALL FOLLOWERS OF JESUS are called to …”first and foremost for the cause, the movement, the mission, the work – not themselves.”
I need some more time to process this. Thanks Kristen.
I’m needing time to process this as well, Stu. I’m not sure we all (Christians in general) think of ourselves as leaders, but I think we all do lead in our own areas. You are right that being mission-focused rather than self-focused is crucial for every Christian. I think about how we chose to raise our children, the jobs we chose to accept, decline, and leave, and the way we choose to use our assets. These are the places where our “leadership” has the possibility of moving from good to great.
Beautiful hope Kristin and I hope with you that leaders can find “pockets of greatness” in anything they do. It seems to me, churches stand a chance of shifting in old mindsets and becoming more culturally relevant if they apply some of these principles. You also gave a good reminder to be content with being “good enough” as shame can take root in constantly not feeling “good enough”. I’m sure Brene Brown would agree with me. It’s my belief grace needs to be a key characteristic along with humility in leading churches and organizations into greatness. Otherwise, a disciplined focus can also sound pretty legalistic.
Yes, Jen, Brene Brown has been working on me a lot lately! I think there is room for some things to be good enough rather than great, especially if we are truly “mission” focused. It’s something I am trying to learn.
Your statement “give me deep hope for the future leaders I want to be a part of developing,” represents a person who understands the vision and mission of the organization and has invested in it.
It is great to work at a place that has developed an atmosphere and platform which encourages others to be great in what they do.
It really is, Lynda. Sadly, those organizations aren’t very plentiful. 🙂
Kristen,
The ‘pockets of greatness’ concept is a really important one, especially for those of us in the ‘church leadership’ world.
So often we confuse ‘great’ with ‘big’….. Bigger is often better for the business world, but for the church that is definitely not true.
I do think as good stewards of the gifts we have been given, we have to do our best to be ‘great’ – but we can’t just assume that means bigger and more…..