Top Seven Takeaways from Dare to Lead
Brene Brown wrote Dare to Lead so that her readers would have a well-researched practical framework for “what it takes to be a daring leader” in their places of work.[1]
I first heard the name “Brene Brown” maybe a decade or so ago. The term that comes to mind when I think about Dr. Brown’s contribution to the life-work-leadership conversation is vulnerability. She certainly deals with this subject in Dare to Lead, but in doing so I was able to walk away with a different perspective on how she frames vulnerability.
A couple of things stood out as I processed the way she defined vulnerability. First, here’s the way Brown defines it in the context of work: “Vulnerability is not winning or losing. It’s having the courage to show up when you can’t control the outcome.”[2] Additionally, Brown dispelled myths of how others believe she has used the term in the past. Brown writes, “I am not a proponent of oversharing, indiscriminate disclosure as a leadership tool, or vulnerability for vulnerability’s sake.”[3] I walked away with a better understanding – I think – of how she uses the term. 1) Being vulnerable doesn’t mean shelving wisdom in your communication and 2) Being vulnerable means being able to lean into hard and difficult conversations while seeking the flourishing of others without losing your identity. Simon Walker’s Leading with Nothing to Lose actually comes to mind here, and I’ll say more about that below, but first….
It seems that Brown enjoys lists (ten behaviors, six myths, four skills, etc.), and so in that spirit here’s my third “top ten” list. Actually, it’s a “top 7” list.
My top SEVEN takeaways from Daring to Lead:
- Brown provides a great definition for a leader. She writes, “I define a leader as anyone who takes responsibility for finding the potential in people and processes, and who has the courage to develop that potential.”[4] This is both a good complement to Peter Northouse’s definition of leadership AND a bit of a divergence. Northouse focuses more on the outcome of what a leader does – “influenc(ing) a group…to achieve a common goal”[5] – whereas Brown seems to focus more on the heart posture of the leader, courageously considering others and their potential in the process of leading. Their flourishing (the individuals and the organization) needs to be the leader’s aim.
- In her research, she presented a great question: “What, if anything, about the way people are leading today needs to change in order for leaders to be successful in a complex, rapidly changing environment where we’re faced with seemingly intractable challenges and an insatiable demand for innovation?”[6] Reading this, I feel like I’m on the right track with the question I sent to several leaders earlier this year – leaders I hope to convene this summer. I asked, “If I pulled together people from several different disciplines…and we met in Atlanta, and we started talking about an institution/institute/endeavor to answer a problem… What sort of problem exists in the evangelical/institutional/education world that needs a new endeavor (solution)?”
- “We need braver leaders and more courageous cultures.”[7] Brown believes that we need leaders who are willing to “rumble” with vulnerability, one of the four skills needed to lead with courage.[8] By “rumble” she means being able to enter “a discussion, conversation, or meeting defined by a commitment to lean into vulnerability,”[9] and remember the way she describes vulnerability, as I mentioned above.
- “Perfectionism and fear are keeping people from learning and growing.”[10] This was one of the behaviors that Brown found to be getting in the way of organizational success.[11] This seems consistent with why many leaders hesitate to make difficult decisions, and this is a real challenge for someone like me, an Enneagram 5, who doesn’t want to appear incompetent. After all, the fruit of the 5’s work needs to demonstrate perfection and a strong grasp that one has mastered a discipline. Ha!
- “Own the fear, find the cave (referencing Jonathan Campbell), and write a new ending for yourself, for the people you’re meant to serve and support, and for your culture.”[12] This sounds like another public intellectual – Jordan Peterson. In Maps of Meaning, Peterson sums up what he wants his readers to do, stating, “Risk your security. Face the unknown. Quit lying to yourself, and do what your heart truly tells you to do. You will be better for it, and so will the world.”[13]
- There are echoes of Simon Walker in Brown’s definition of vulnerability. At the very least, to rumble with vulnerability in the way Brown promotes (again, see her description of vulnerability above), the leader needs an identity or connection that doesn’t depend on the outcome of the conversation or meeting. Walker writes, “The undefended leader is the one whose needs are met through an unconditional attachment to an Other, in which she finds identity, belonging and affection.”[14]
- Daring leaders need to be differentiated leaders. Brown writes, “Daring leaders must care for and be connected to the people they lead.”[15] I would add that Christian leaders need to be rooted and grounded in something – actually, someone – both before and while they connect with those they serve. They need to connect as leaders who find purpose and meaning in their connection to God (attached to the “Other”!) and God’s purposes for their lives so that they can indeed serve the people they lead without needing their applause. This posture helps leaders to be both connected (what Brown says leaders need to be) AND separate, grounded in who they are in Christ. In this way, leaders can “look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” (Philippians 2:4)
[1] Brene Brown, Dare to Lead, New York: Random House, 2018, Kindle version, 3 of 299.
[2] Ibid., 19 of 299.
[3] Ibid., 34 of 299.
[4] Ibid., 4 of 299.
[5] Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice, Seventh Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2016, 6.
[6] Ibid., 6 of 299.
[7] Ibid., 6 of 299.
[8] Brown writes, “Courage is a collection of four skill sets that can be taught, observed, and measured. The four skill sets are: Rumbling with Vulnerability, Living into Our Values, Braving Trust, Learning to Rise.” (Brown, 10 of 299)
[9] Ibid., 10 of 299.
[10] Ibid., 9 of 299.
[11] Ibid., 7 of 299.
[12] Ibid., 272 od 299.
[13] Jordan B. Peterson, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, New York: Routledge, 1999, 447.
[14] Simon P. Walker, Leading with Nothing to Lose: Training in the Exercise of Power, Carlisle, CA: Piquant Editions Ltd, 2007), Kindle Version, location 2392 of 2753.
[15] Brown, 12 of 299.
About the Author
Travis Vaughn
9 responses to “Top Seven Takeaways from Dare to Lead”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Travis
Great job weaving together so many of our authors and texts. I too found that Brown’s thinking overlapped with so many of our DLGP themes.
I’m intrigued by the question you’re building a project around: “If I pulled together people from several different disciplines…and we met in Atlanta, and we started talking about an institution/institute/endeavor to answer a problem… What sort of problem exists in the evangelical/institutional/education world that needs a new endeavor (solution)?” What are your top 3-5 issues that you can imagine addressing in this way?
Kim,
First, I’m not sure that I am actually asking the right question. I thought about that today. I may preface the gathering with what kind of question we should tackle. Second, the top issue is going to be in the realm of what and how to go about helping leaders to be formed (leader formation, education processes, and institutions are all subjects that came up). Third, the topic of an ecosystem has also come up. Fourth, a key issue will be how to equip emerging Christians/leaders in a number of different sectors to faithfully engage the public sector while also following the way of the cross (giving up power for the good of others). Those are all issues that have come in some of the responses.
Travis… SO GOOD. I loved this whole blog, but you nailed it at the end for me:
“… so that they can indeed serve the people they lead without needing their applause.”
Yes we need to be connected to people, but even more connected to God. Connected but differentiated. Courageous to serve God’s purposes and God’s people without needing praise from those people.
I always learn, am stretched and am encouraged when I read your blogs. You inspire me and your word intrigues me. I hope I can learn more of your story in the next year.
See you in DC
Thanks, Tim. That quote about not needing the applause was inspired by Walker’s material. Simon Walker continues to be one of my favorite authors we’ve read during this program.
Thanks for your kind words and for your encouragement, Tim. I do look forward to connecting while we are in D.C. You have provided a great pastoral presence to this cohort, and I, too, am encouraged as I read your blogposts. You model well the kind of vulnerability Brown writes about.
Hi Travis- I really liked how Brown highlighted for you that “being vulnerable means being able to lean into hard and difficult conversations while seeking the flourishing of others without losing your identity.” this comment of course makes me think about my research and my hope to help people have the hard conversations without necessarily agreeing at the end. I know your work also intersects with that intention. Did you get any takeaways that will help you with your work in that regard?
Jen, Brown’s work did not necessarily intersect with my NPO, though more than an inspectional reading might reveal points of connection. I do see how her writing around the subject of vulnerability — well-differentiated vulnerability, to include an idea from Friedman — would directly connect with your research, especially if you throw in Walker’s Leading with Nothing to Lose into the discussion. Where Brown DID connect had more to do with what she said about “care and connection (as) irreducible requirements for wholehearted, productive relationships between leaders and team members.” (Brown, 12, Kindle version)
Thanks for your post Travis. I believe we blogged once before about being Enneagram 5’s….but your post above struck a chord with me as I seek to resolve a ‘wicked problem’ of an organizational org-chart adjustment. I’ve been struggling for months with it…and my first realization (6 weeks ago?) was that I was trying to find a solution that everyone would be happy with (likely related to my non-daring, somewhat conflict-avoidance leadership style!). Today, you reminded me that a solution with ‘no problems’ is not going to magically appear for me with more data and more thinking. There is NO perfect solution….so I have to let that go and choose, “The best bad idea” I’ve got (one of my favourite movie lines from Argo….but one, as a 5, I naturally resist!). Thanks for moving me one step closer to a decision! Have a great summer…
Ha! So, I suppose that as a five you don’t want to put forward a “best bad idea” (great line), because 5’s only put forward excellent ideas indicative of their high level of competency (translated — 5’s don’t want to appear incompentent!).
I resonated with Brown’s statement about our culture having an “insatiable demand for innovation,” and I think that creeps into our churches and church-affiliated endeavors and organizations. The drive to innovate for innovation’s sake sometimes puts forth a solution (or idea, or product, or service) that no one was asking for in the first place. Of course, the argument could be made that there are some innovations that needed to happen, even though no one was seeking the innovation, but that’s another subject.
Maybe you just need to lean into your system 1 way of making this decision in this case. I’d love to see your present org chart and then the one you have in mind.
Travis,
Thank you for the seven takeaways. Your number 6, There are echoes of Simon Walker in Brown’s definition of vulnerability. At the very least, to rumble with vulnerability in the way Brown promotes (again, see her description of vulnerability above), the leader needs an identity or connection that doesn’t depend on the outcome of the conversation or meeting. Walker writes, “The undefended leader is the one whose needs are met through an unconditional attachment to an Other, in which she finds identity, belonging and affection.”, was quite profound. I had not made the connection to Walker’s undefended leader. Thanks for a great post, Travis. Have a great Summer…see you in DC.