In the following video, Terrence Wing delivers his popular keynote on “Managing Modern”. This is a multi-part presentation. In this segment, Terrence sets up the challenge of a multigenerational workforce.  He begins the discussion who each of these workers are and what they are looking for out of their careers.

• Traditional Generation (Also known as the Great Generation)
• Baby Boomers
• Generation  X
• Generation Y

Review the video below to learn more about each of these generations

Now that you’ve reviewed the video, let’s process it with some questions for you to think about.

1. Which generation do you belong to?
2. How have you used your knowledge of the generations to manage your team and business?
3. What challenges does a multi-generational workforce impose on your management style?
4. What are the benefits of having a multi-generation workforce?
5. What values does the Traditional/Great Generation have for you?
6. What challenges do you have managing the Traditional /Great Generation?
7. How do your customers see this generation?
8. How do other employees see this generation?
9. How are you tapping into the talent of this generation?
10. What are you doing to keep this generation’s skills in line with the increasing demands of your business?

These questions should surface thoughts about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of your management style. It’s a great conversation tool to use with your team and your manager to navigate opportunities at work and build effective strategy. Continue to follow this series to learn more about what it takes to “Manage Modern”.

You can follow Terrence on Twitter @TerrenceWing or @LiquidLearn

In the following video, Terrence Wing delivers his popular keynote on “Managing Modern”. This is a multi-part presentation. In this segment, Terrence sets up the most recent managerial styles of today’s generations.

1. Industrial Management

2. Behavioral Management

3. Knowledge Management

Review the video below to learn more about each of these management styles.

Now that you’ve reviewed the video, let’s process it with some questions for you to think about.

1. What management style fits into the culture of your organization?

2. What evidence suggests that is the culture?

3. What management style do you portray naturally?

4. What management style are you expected to demonstrate at work?

5. What challenges do you see with each of the management styles?

6. What are the benefits of each of the management styles?

7. What situations would suggest that a blended approach to management would be more conducive?

8. What management style would be difficult in what type of environment?

9. What management style would fit well in what specific environment?

10. Which management style seems to work best when you are being managed?

These questions should surface thoughts about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of your management style. It’s a great conversation tool to use with your team and your manager to navigate opportunities at work and build effective strategy. Continue to follow this series to learn more about what it takes to “Manage Modern”.

You can follow Terrence on Twitter @TerrenceWing or @LiquidLearn

A strategy to Navigate Challenging Conversations can be critical to your success as a manager or co-worker. The right strategy preserves or improves your relationship with the other party or parties. Challenging Conversations don’t have to be reactive. You can plan them out.  Structure can help you cover important steps and content. It also helps you build a level of consistency as future opportunities present themselves. The following eLearning course is designed to help you build that structure to Navigate Challenging Conversations.

Join Jean Franzblau as she takes you on a tour of a simple and powerful model designed to help you navigate the obstacles of confrontation and exit on the other side with progress and a stronger relationship with the other person.

To view the course on a full screen, click here.

You can follow Jean Franzblau on twitter @jeanfranzblau

You can follow Liquid Learn on twitter @LiquidLearn

Like the Pictionary game, Leaders must figuratively draw detailed images of where they are trying to lead the team. Without that descriptive vision, followers will focus in multiple and different directions like the first few moments of the game. In a former post, I defined Vision.

This final condition, Vision is when direction emerges. Sometimes it is the successor of Malaise. As Vision is imposed or shared collectively by a group, other conditions may be initiated that stimulate Leadership.

Vision is the start of the rulebook for the game.  Without Vision, it is difficult to stimulate followership and results. Every Leader must be able to communicate the existing Vision or create a Vision to help their team gain traction and move in the proposed direction. Vision without clarity is an idea not a Vision. A Leader’s Vision must come into focus before it can be ranked as Vision.

Many great companies are catapulted to that status in part to their Vision. Starbucks Corporation is the story of a company with vision.  Wikipedia states, Starbucks is the largest coffeehouse company in the world. That ranking doesn’t come easy. They have over 17,000 stores in 49 countries. 11,000 of those stores are in the United States. Starbucks grew to this size from a single coffeehouse in Seattle. In his book, Pour Your Heart Into It, Author and CEO Howard Schultz doesn’t start with explaining the company’s origin through financial statements. In the book, Howard Schultz states,

“The other (how the company was formed, the first being commitment to coffee) is the vision and values I bought to the company: The combination of competitive drive and a profound desire to make sure everyone in the organization could win together. I wanted to blend coffee with romance, to dare to achieve what others said was impossible, to defy the odds with innovative ideas, and to do all this with elegance and style.”

If you are a Starbuck’s fan like me, it seems that Mr. Schultz accomplished his vision. When I go to Starbucks, I experience my coffee unlike pulling up to a convenience store gas station for my caffeine fix. The two experiences couldn’t even be compared in this fan’s humble opinion. Based on Starbuck’s growth, it seems I don’t stand alone.

Earlier in my career, I was managing a sales team. Like any team and organization, we had challenges ahead of us. In this instance, I was in a position to hire each employee, train them, and deploy them to their territories. Some would call that a luxury as opposed to adapting an existing team. Both have their pros and cons which I will have to make a point of writing about in a future blog post. Before I could proceed to hire my team, I had to build my Vision. Strategically, this wouldn’t be different from the companies and every level in between. However, it needed to be drawn with detail relevant to my team and our micro challenges.

I formulated a Vision based on what I felt the team needed to be successful. This wasn’t taken lightly either. It was one of my biggest priorities to get started and steering the team to it was just as critical as we began our day to day activities.  My Vision was, my team would be looked at by our clients as an undeniable and invaluable asset through our consultative posture.  I didn’t envision a team of 10 sales people. I envisioned a team of professionals who would help their clients navigate obstacles and solve problems regardless of selling a product. Selling the product was secondary. Selling the relationship was primary.  Turns out this Vision and the hard work of my team propelled our sales to the top 5 districts in the nation. Vision has incredible propulsion when it is clear and correct.

The headlines are riddled with organizations that have great Vision or are distracted from their Vision. The latter is usually followed by declining stakeholder value. A strong leader must take the reins and lead the beast towards a strong Vision. Think of times when you witnessed Vision.

• What was the event?
• How did you or the Leaders approach it?
• What tactics were used to keep the Vision in focus?
• Was the Vision aligned to higher levels in the organization?
• Did the Vision become a reality? Why or Why not?

Vision is often forgotten or given a low priority. It is very easy to become distracted by life instead your Vision. Day to day events can detour you, putting you in reactive mode. A Leader’s compass often starts with a Vision representing true north. From there, they can navigate the rough currents and find that evasive land mass called success.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing and @LiquidLearn

The opening may or may not be you but I would have to declare that in my experience everyone becomes at least slightly on guard when in the mist of change. Putting up your defenses is not necessarily a bad thing as long as they can be quickly withdrawn as the facts become evident. Change is a condition that triggers the release of Leadership. I previously defined this Leadership Condition.

The condition of change is when an element that hadn’t existed in the present is introduced into the organization or team. Change could include technology, policy, people or any variable that disrupts normal currents within the organization or team. Change can also stimulate other conditions like Adversity and Selection.

Change can be independent or intertwined between the fabric of a more complex situation including other Leadership Conditions. When change is present a strong Leader will recognize that Leadership is needed if everyone is to survive.

A newspaper writer once commented on the invention of Ford’s Model T Automobile. Clearly hind sight is 20/20 but this writer didn’t have that luxury. He stated,

“ Ford’s Model T is nothing more than a rich man’s toy and the automobile will never replace the bicycle”

Change is best left to the experts. Clearly he couldn’t be more wrong as we know today, the automobile is integrated into many facets of modern living. Households have multiple cars and the advances of the engine now have us reaching for the stars via the moon, mars and other celestial bodies. Change was good. But let’s take a more modern look at change.

On September 11, 2001, the world changed before our eyes. Most people alive today can remember clearly what they were doing that morning as American Civilians were attacked and tragically murdered. Even our global neighbors felt this sinking feeling in their stomachs knowing that at this instant change was inevitable. 2,995 souls were stolen from us on that day. If you were at work, or home or anywhere, life stopped as we all stared into our televisions to try to grasp if this event was really happening. Emotions were horrifying as we witnessed the incredible loss of life in as little as 2 hours. That was almost 1500 people dying per hour or 25 people every minute during that nightmare.

As Americans we realized much needed to change. Our airport security increased to unprecedented levels. We began a national debate on who was responsible and how would we retaliate. Early, there were more questions than answers. Within our macro and micro communities, Leaders stepped up to help us all adjust to how this infamous event would change the way we live. During change, people need Leadership.

I was consulting a group of business owners on Leadership and Social Media. Sure it may seem like an odd partnership but they are very relevant and related to each other.  This particular group was not part of the early adaptor crowd and they were curious but their initial thoughts were that Social Media was a fad. Those of you who know the value of Social Media would disagree sure. This group was right and wrong at the same time. The Social Media they knew probably was a fad. The Social Media I know is here to stay until it evolves into something better. They were part of a community who was starting to use Social Media and they feared it because they didn’t understand it.  Change threatens some people and they may recoil into adversaries if a Leader doesn’t step up to lead them to the light.  After some training and demonstration, they realized they were not that far behind and they could learn these new tools. Many negotiated their fears and moved through the dark cloud. The others, they’ll come along as they discover value.

Change is a delicate tool. The right tools can incite productivity or the wrong tools can delay it. A strong Leader will step up in the mist of it. His or her followers depend on that leadership. Think of the change you have either been victimized by or acted as a catalyst for your goals.

• What was the event?
• How did people feel about it? Was the change seen as a friend or foe?
• Who stepped up and what did you notice them doing?
• What made you step up to Lead the team through it? Or what prevented you from stepping up?
• What was the outcome?

Change is an opportunity to succeed. It can propel you out of malaise and adversity.  It can surface the leader in those you never noticed. It can change a team, organization, a nation, even the entire planet. As a leader it is up to you to recognize this condition and bear the burden of paving the path to success for those following.

You can follow me on @TerrenceWing and @LiquidLearn

Unless we live on a deserted island we all experience Assembly. It is a common Leadership Condition. Think of how many times you needed to meet with a group of people. Whether it was social or professional, the gathering was an example of Assembly. One of the ingredients needed for the meeting to qualify it as Assembly is purpose. You may walk into a room that has several people gathered. This may not qualify as an Assembly if the people aren’t gathered for a common purpose. In a previous post, I defined Assembly.

This condition is when a group is formed. Often it is a natural ingredient as teams develop. Assembly draws out leadership by activating selection, typically. Although any of the other conditions can also be activated by this.

Assembly may be the call for Leadership or it could be a by-product of another condition like Adversity. Sometimes people Assemble to deal with a problem. Sometimes the Assembly forms as defense mechanism to adversity. There is safety in numbers or so they say. Whatever, the case, a Leader is needed to help the Assembly resolve its purpose.

One of the largest and controversial Assemblies of late (at least at the time of posting this entry) is the Tea Party Movement. This is not a political commentary of any kind nor an admission or omission of my political views. It is merely a relevant example. The Tea Party Movement does offer us a very grand scale opportunity to observe Assembly in the making.  The Movement started in 2009.  People assembled in response to three national issues.

• Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (which was the banking and Wall Street bailout)
• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (which was the stimulus package)
• 2009/ 2010 Health Care Reform Bills

The adversity of a strained economic system stimulated Assembly for this vocal group. Wikipedia reported that the movement started with a single voice suggesting a re-enactment of the Boston Tea Party, a colorful portrait of America’s historical displeasure with the then taxation policies of England. The themes of the two Assemblies are even similar. That voice, sparked one of the most televised and mentioned grass roots political efforts of our time. As the group evolves, it has birthed leaders in several people, most of which come from conservative affiliations. The Tea Party Movement is an example of the Leadership Condition, Assembly.

Not every Assembly is political or grand. I currently serve on the Board of Directors of the Los Angeles Chapter of the American Society for Training and Development. This group is focused on improving workforce performance through learning.  One of our charges is to look at emerging learning technologies to evaluate how they can be used to help our mission. We all have been living through a tech boom as of late. Tech based tools seem to emerge every day. This expansion created a sense of urgency for the Board. We didn’t want to fall behind and needed to ensure we were providing our members with the right resources. A committee was formed. The committee Assembled to evaluate our chapter’s commitment to technological advances and develop an appropriate implementation strategy.  This condition of Assembly created an opportunity for several Board Members to step into Leadership roles and guide the committee to results.

Assembly, whether covert or overt is a common condition. As purpose falls over a gathering, the need for Leadership emerges. Think of the times you witnessed Assembly.

• What was the situation?
• What stimulated the Assembly (other conditions)?
• How did the Assembly form (Voluntary or involuntary)?
• Did you emerge as the Leader?
• What made you or another person the candidate to Lead?
• How will you approach Assembly in the future?

Assembly is an opportunity to move a team forward. It is an invitation for any great Leader. In many ways, it is a virgin opportunity to build something from the grass roots. The opportunity may provide a freshness not seen in existing groups. You have a chance to build the right culture when it is an infant Assembly. Assembly is the open door of an emerging community with a welcome mate inviting the right Leader inside.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing and @LiquidLearn

Selection may seem a little more obvious as a Leadership Condition then some of the other conditions mentioned in previous posts. It isn’t necessarily shrouded in dramatic stimulation but could simply be an expected tour of duty. It can be activated as a result of other Leadership Conditions as well as act as a trigger itself. Following is a definition of Selection:

This condition is when someone is chosen to Lead despite the presence of another condition. Selection is often a by-product of assembly. The leader is chosen by motion or appointment during selection.

The condition of Selection is common. It is often ritualistic or customary. It can exist as a result of every condition. It is simply the recognition that someone needs to be out front giving direction.

There are two types of Selection.  They are Natural and Forced Selection. Natural Selection is an internal process. Those directly involved accept the posturing of the Leader based on any number of variables to include experience, heir apparency, relationships, wealth, etc.  The second type is Forced Selection. This is sometimes internal but usually external. Someone other than the appointed sees the need to Select that individual to Lead. This could be management choosing a leader for a committee.  A team could be forming and the organization wants or needs someone to lead that team.  Don’t think of Force as a negative. It is simply an external force pulling someone into a Leadership position. Forced and Natural Selection can both be practices comfortably accepted by the recipients and their followers. The benefit or challenge with either depends solely on the culture of the organization.

The Dot.com model presents us with multiple examples.  In 1994 Jerry Yang and David Filo founded Yahoo. What started as a Stanford University project turned into what we know today as one of the top 3 internet search engines.  The project quickly moved from academic classwork to the full blown enterprise we all know today. As the sight gain “Rock Star” popularity, Jerry and David sought capitol funding from venture capitalist. Once they were successful acquiring this funding, they incorporated their organization.  Now was the time for them to Select their Leadership. They hired Tim Koogle of Motorola fame as the CEO and Jeffrey Mallett, founder of Wordperfect was Selected as the COO.  In this case, Yahoo drew us the picture of a Forced Selection.

In a non-profit where I occasionally volunteer, I witness numerous examples of Natural Selection. One in particular occurred when a position became vacant. This position was handling the local recruiting efforts for a popular University.  The previous occupant had taken on a different role in the association hence the opportunity. As volunteers, all were victims of a busy schedule and pending priorities. Despite this, a member who had been a part of the association for a number of years stepped up. Know him, he wasn’t planning on taking on this responsibility. I later asked him why the change of thought. He didn’t have a concrete answer but he settled for knowing he was the right person to do it.  His selection was Natural. Some internal trigger, stimulated him to step up and Lead.

Selection, Natural or Forced is a common condition.  There are advantages and disadvantages to both types.  For example Natural Selection may posture the wrong leader. However, Forced Selection is no guarantee for strong Leadership either. Think of the times you witnessed Selection.

• What was the situation?
• Why was Selection necessary?
• Was it Natural or Forced?
• Were you chosen through either method?
• What seemed to be the criteria for Selection?
• Were there other conditions that triggered the Selection?

Selection like all the Leadership Conditions is an opportunity for positioning talent. The process of Selection must be sound to increase the opportunities for success. The more flaws in the process the greater the chance that the wrong Leader may be challenged to negotiate the organization’s goals.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing and @LiquidLearn

The call for Leadership during Malaise is less robust to the common Leader, but it is just as important. An exceptional Leader will see Malaise as potentially disruptive as he sees Adversity. Malaise is defined here.

The condition of Malaise is when members are comfortable in their condition and do little to change it. The Leader will recognize malaise as an adversary and quickly convert this condition into one of adversity or change.

Malaise can also be directional. It can be described when members are settling for a directional path without intervention beyond the routine. Malaise can be a destructive Leadership Condition when not addressed.

One of the most recent and infamous examples of the destructive power of Malaise was with General Motors prior to US government intervention to rescue this failed auto manufacturer. The automobile industry was trending towards a shift based on technology and consumer demands. More and more compact hybrid automobiles were entering the mainstream. The Toyota Prius (despite its later challenges) was experiencing record sales. This was a hybrid the public wanted. More and more automobile manufacturers were either extending or creating new lines using hybrid technology. One of the last holdouts was General Motors (GM).

GM had manufactured large, powerful, fuel-consuming trucks mostly. They banked their future on the sale of these vehicles despite the shifting current toward hybrids and fuel efficient models. Despite the noise around them, they chose to ignore it and continued to manufacture what they knew best. They were comfortable with their product lines and confident that this market would hold up for them into the future.  GM and the UAW (United Auto Workers Union) drifted into the sleep of Malaise.  This condition then quickly changed as the US government intervened with a bailout and forced a change in management and philosophy. Leadership emerged outside of the organization as opposed to within.

GM and the UAW is an example of Malaise on a grand scale with an economic impact felt across the entire United States and even globally.  Not every example exists at such a macro level. While working with a Sales Organization, I was tasked to help them improve sales force performance. The team I was working with had recently experienced success. As I looked at the success, I realized the goals for this year had been adjusted (downward) because the team had struggled dramatically in the previous years. Other teams were doing exceptionally well historically while this team struggled (with the exception of their most recent performance). The recent success of this team wasn’t due to a dramatic outbreak in sales and demand. The trend had been so challenged that the goals were dropped to help the team ramp up. The local management may have realized this but their recent success gave them a false sense of security. Sure enough after dramatically exceeding their goals, the company readjusted and gave this sales team challenging sales objectives for the following year.

The local management wasn’t pro-active to this. Sales Representatives became comfortable with their success as if it would continue indefinitely. They went about their day status quo. Neither the local management or their sales force looked beyond their current success to anticipate the pending Adversity that usually ends a period of Malaise. In this particular case, the sales force did not recover until they entered a period of Adversity. The management failed to answer the call for Leadership that Malaise communicates. Answering this call can often enable a team to avoid Adversity through preparedness.

Malaise is a dangerous condition. In it there is very little preparation for Adversity or Change. Both of which always seem to lurk around the corner. During Malaise, Leaders stimulate action as if there was a different condition pending.  Think of times when you witnessed Malaise.

• What was the situation?
• Who if anyone responded to the condition?
• How did you respond to the condition?
• Did a Leader emerge during Malaise or did the condition change first?
• Was the leader the apparent person to lead the charge or did an unlikely Leader step up?
• What could a Leader have done to lead his team out of this condition?

Understanding the Leadership Condition of Malaise allows the Leader to posture himself to lead successfully. A seasoned Leader will hear the call as clearly as if it were some of the more obvious conditions.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing and @LiquidLearn

Adversity is likely the most obvious yet arguable the most powerful. When I say powerful, it may call the Leader forth with greater demand than some of the other conditions. That is not to say it is any more or less relevant. The conditions do not exist on a scale of importance. In the last post, I defined Adversity.

Adversity is when an obstacle prevents forward motion toward goal completion. As adversity presents itself the Leader will identify this as an opportunity and use her skill to navigate the team or organization to smoother currents.

Adversity usually forces the team to a crossroads. That is to either progress with looming consequence or alter course with uncertain risk. Someone is bound to make a decision. That someone is typically the Leader.

At the time of this post, we are in the midst of a global economic crisis. Countries are losing their bond ratings. States are facing pending bankruptcy. Companies are laying off employees. In America, like many countries, we are witnessing some of our highest unemployment figures in decades. Housing is still struggling to rebound from its bottom. All of this is a clear indication of Adversity. We all are faced with the need to make a decision about our path because its current trajectory would seemingly place us in a condition of unfortunate consequence. Legislators are making laws. Governors are streamlining operating budgets. CEOs are reorganizing corporate structure. Effectively or not, people are elevating their Leadership posture and taking action.

Adversity doesn’t have to be as complex as I just stated. It can sometimes be a subtle annoyance that derails progress. I had been doing some work with an organization in the food industry. While I was conducting a needs assessment, the manager of this particular facility had just received a phone call. The day for him was already stressful having me there. Despite that, we had broken the ice and he was now pretty comfortable with my presence. He settled into the knowledge that I was there to help him and his team. Then the phone call changed his demeanor. He went from “I may go out for a drink with this guy” to “the world is ending” in an instant. Turns out, the health inspector was in the store to follow up on an infraction he had noted from an earlier inspection.

There were two Adverse Conditions that existed for that manager. First was my intrusion. Initially, that is how he saw it. I was an outsider there to threaten how he managed his store. At least that was probably his first impressions. Then the arrival of the health inspector bought the level of Adversity up another notch. To his credit, he acted. He handled his business with me. Providing more than enough assistance to prevent me from getting in his way or his employee’s way any more than was necessary. Next, he handled the health inspector as did many of his department heads as well. Adversity arrived and a Leader emerged.

Both examples demonstrate different levels of Adversity but both prove that a call to Leadership is eminent. Now that is not to say that the Leader who answers will do so with precision, accuracy, and competence. Nonetheless someone will step up typically to assume responsibility.  Competence is something we will discuss in a future post.  Think of times when you witnessed adversity.

• What was the Adverse Condition?
• Did you step up or someone else?
• Was the nominee the apparent person to handle or did someone move out of their comfort zone to assume a Leadership role?
• Was the Leader expected to take action?
• Did the team nominate him for the role?
• Did the organizational leadership select her for the role?

The advantage of knowing that adversity exists or is looming gives you an opportunity to position yourself to handle this condition and Lead your team to success.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing or @LiquidLearn

The next series of posts will cover topics on leadership. We’ll start here with recognizing conditions for leadership.  These conditions are both passive and active. Nonetheless, each can create a platform for the Leader to emerge and elevate his or her team’s level of performance. The word performance is critical to this analysis of leadership. It is the end point which a leader is ultimately judged upon.  For the purposes of this post, we’ll define performance as the distance traveled towards the completion of a goal.

Many of the great organizations seem to have a similar definition of leadership. By “Great” I mean they have a strong return on investment for their stakeholders. These stakeholders include employees, the community, clients and shareholders. In his book, Good To Great, author Jim Collins researched these great organizations and found that the leadership performed at a high level. He defined it as Level 5.

“Level 5 Executive Leaders channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company. It is not that Level 5 leaders have no ego or self interest. Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious- but their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves”. (Collins, 21)

Collins provides us with an appropriate definition of leadership (or at least a stage of leadership) as a reference point for this blog series. With that in mind, we can explore the conditions that exist which will stimulate the emergence of the leader.

The Six Leadership Conditions are in many ways a call to action. The potential leader may be at bay or occupied in another leadership role until at least one of these conditions present themselves. Some of the conditions may coexist as well. The Six Leadership Conditions are as follows.

1. Adversity – This condition is when an obstacle prevents forward motion toward goal completion. As adversity presents itself the Leader will identify this as an opportunity and use her skill to navigate the team or organization to smoother currents.
2. Malaise – This condition is when members are comfortable in their condition and do little to change it. The Leader will recognize malaise as an adversary and quickly convert this condition into one of adversity or change.
3. Selection – This condition is when someone is chosen to lead despite the presence of another condition. Selection is often a by-product of assembly. The leader is chosen by motion or appointment during selection.
4. Assembly – This condition is when a group is formed. Often it is a natural ingredient as teams develop. Assembly draws out leadership by activating selection typically. Although any of the other conditions can also be activated by this.
5. Change – This condition is when an element that hadn’t existed in the present is introduced into the organization or team. Change could include technology, policy or any variable that disrupts normal currents within the organization or team. Change can also stimulate other conditions like Adversity and Selection.
6. Vision – This final condition is when direction emerges. Sometimes it is the successor of Malaise. As Vision is imposed or shared collectively by a group, other conditions may be initiated that stimulate Leadership.

As you’ve read, some of the conditions may coexist, while others may exist exclusively. Often a condition may be the stimulant for a stronger condition. Leadership may also shift as the conditions shift. That may happen based on the Leaders competence in handling the new condition or the followers perceptions of the Leader’s ability. Strong Leaders do possess a high level of competence to Lead in all the conditions. However, we cannot state that this is true of every Leader as some remain untested in certain conditions. In the next posts, we’ll review these conditions to give you a stronger understanding of each.

You can follow me on Twitter @TerrenceWing or @LiquidLearn