I can\u2019t remember the number of times I\u2019ve heard my husband tell me how difficult it is to coach people who either do not want to be coached, or who are not ready to be coached. That\u2019s why at the start of any potential coaching engagement, he asks clients to do a \u2018coachability\u2019 test. My husband simply does not want to waste his time people who do not want to change.<\/p>\n
Friedman takes this idea one step further. He believes leaders should focus on changing themselves first rather than on those who are simply \u201cunmotivated to change.\u201d Instead of focusing one\u2019s energy on trying to change an organisation or individual, focus instead on becoming a \u2018well-differentiated leader\u2019, differentiation that refers to a direction in life rather than a state in being. According to the author, differentiation is \u201ccharting one\u2019s own way by means of one\u2019s own internal guidance system, rather than perpetually eyeing the \u2018scope\u2019 to see where others are at.\u201d [1]<\/a> It\u2019s an idea that is more to do with emotional being, strength and the fabric of a person\u2019s existence, rather than a person\u2019s behaviour. It is evident through:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n This kind of leader has the capacity to influence others through his or her very nature, their presence or \u2018being\u2019. Such a leader\u2019s presence (\u2018self\u2019) can influence an entire organisation, without even needing to be in close in physical proximity to all concerned. As Friedman writes, \u201cleaders function as the immune systems of their institutions\u2026the crucial issue of leadership in democratic societies may not be how much power they exercise but how well their presence <\/em>is able to preserve that society\u2019s integrity.\u201d [3]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Basically, Friedman believes that the world needs the kind of leaders with maturity of character over college qualifications. Individuals who are not conflict-avoidant, or care more for people\u2019s feelings than the well being of an institution. Leaders who possess the courage to take responsibility for their own lives, who are decisive, self-regulated, persistent, possess vision and clear principles, and can take well-defined stands. For Friedman, this kind of self-differentiated leaders is important because a \u201cleader\u2019s self is essential to the integrity of a community.\u201d [4]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Overall I found A Failure to Nerve<\/em> a great follow on from Exit, Voice and Loyalty<\/em>. In summary, well-differentiated leadership:<\/p>\n Focuses on strength; is concerned for one\u2019s own growth; works with motivated people; matures the system; seeks enduring change; is concerned to define self; is fed up with the treadmill; looks at one\u2019s own stuckness; is challenged by difficult situations; recognizes that reactivity and sabotage are evidence of one\u2019s effectiveness; has a universal perspective; sees problems as the focus of pre-existing anxiety; adapts towards strength; has a challenging attitude that encourages responsibility; is more likely to create intimate relationships.<\/em> [5]<\/a> That\u2019s the bar to conquer, the standards to reach, the challenge of maturity to attain that Friedman has set. It seems an impossible task, yet the need for this kind of leadership is so great, one cannot hide. May God give me the power of His presence, to empower mine.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a>\u00a0Edwin H. Friedman, A Failure Of Nerve: Leadership In The Age Of The Quick Fix<\/em> (New York, NY: Church Publishing, 2007) 183<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Friedman, 183<\/p>\n\n