Integer Leadership Consulting

In the NYTs Tuesday, August 23rd, edition, the front page article, “Do God and Science Mix? More Now Saying Yes,” is worthy reading for organizational leaders. Leadership studies, as an interdisciplinary focus, are based on the “science” of leadership and organizational theory. In both areas, from the academic perspective, there is little room for discussion about theology or God. The NYTs article begins,

“At a recent scientific conference at City College of New York, a student in the audience rose to ask the panelists an unexpected question: “Can you be a good scientist and believe in God?” Reaction from one of the panelists, all Nobel laureates, was quick and sharp, “No!” declared Herbert A. Hauptman, who shared the chemistry prize in 1985 for his work on the structure of crystals. Belief in the supernatural, especially belief in God, is not only incompatible with good science, Dr. Hauptman declared, “this kind of belief is damaging to the well-being of the human race.”"

The article concludes with a quote from Dr. Francis S. Collins, a scientist and a Christian….

“Dr. Collins said he believed that some scientists were unwilling to profess faith in public “because the assumption is if you are a scientist you don’t have any need of action of the supernatural sort,” or because of pride in the idea that science is the ultimate source of intellectual meaning. But he said he believed that some scientists were simply unwilling to confront the big questions religion tried to answer. “You will never understand what it means to be a human being through naturalistic observation,” he said. “You won’t understand why you are here and what the meaning is. Science has no power to address these questions—and are they not the most important questions we ask ourselves?”"

I raise the issue that Organizational Leadership is most effective when it integrates theory/science with theology/spirituality. This integration most accurately addresses process, structure AND human value and meaning. These issues of meaning, value and contribution face each of us whether we lead or follow. If they are indeed the most important questions we ask, should not our leaders lead the way into this conversation?

In the NYTs Tuesday, August 23rd, edition, the front page article, “Do God and Science Mix? More Now Saying Yes,” is worthy reading for organizational leaders. Leadership studies, as an interdisciplinary focus, are based on the “science” of leadership and organizational theory. In both areas, from the academic perspective, there is little room for discussion about theology or God. The NYTs article begins,

“At a recent scientific conference at City College of New York, a student in the audience rose to ask the panelists an unexpected question: “Can you be a good scientist and believe in God?” Reaction from one of the panelists, all Nobel laureates, was quick and sharp, “No!” declared Herbert A. Hauptman, who shared the chemistry prize in 1985 for his work on the structure of crystals. Belief in the supernatural, especially belief in God, is not only incompatible with good science, Dr. Hauptman declared, “this kind of belief is damaging to the well-being of the human race.”"

The article concludes with a quote from Dr. Francis S. Collins, a scientist and a Christian….

“Dr. Collins said he believed that some scientists were unwilling to profess faith in public “because the assumption is if you are a scientist you don’t have any need of action of the supernatural sort,” or because of pride in the idea that science is the ultimate source of intellectual meaning. But he said he believed that some scientists were simply unwilling to confront the big questions religion tried to answer. “You will never understand what it means to be a human being through naturalistic observation,” he said. “You won’t understand why you are here and what the meaning is. Science has no power to address these questions—and are they not the most important questions we ask ourselves?”"

I raise the issue that Organizational Leadership is most effective when it integrates theory/science with theology/spirituality. This integration most accurately addresses process, structure AND human value and meaning. These issues of meaning, value and contribution face each of us whether we lead or follow. If they are indeed the most important questions we ask, should not our leaders lead the way into this conversation?

On the front cover of the NYT today, August 16, 2005, there is a lead article on the deterioration of patient care, meaning, caring for patients as feeling human beings undergoing excruciating experiences of dehumanization at the hands of indifferent medical personal as well as the uncontrollable failure of their bodies. Benedict Carey quotes, “the point is that, when they talk about quality of health care, patients mean something entirely different than experts do,” said Drew Altman, president of the Kaiser Foundation. “They’re not talking about numbers or outcomes but about their own human experience (italics mine), which is a combination of cost, paperwork and what I’ll call the hassle factor, the impersonal nature of the care.”

You could take this quote and, in many respects, apply it to many organizational contexts today. Every organization has do deal with its own internal limitations that act as road blocks to quality care for internal staff and external clients. Yet, all too often, organizational leaders forget that the “impersonal nature of the care” is the chief nemeses to any aggregate performance of a business. How leaders care for (train, develop, and value) the people who provide the services to others will always be the “sine qua non”(the essential, crucial, or indispensable ingredient without which something would be impossible) of best organizational practices. As long as this vacuum exits in organizations and as long as organizational leaders are unwilling to invest the money, staff and time into closing this dehumanizing gap, the problem will certainly contribute to perpetuating the sense of hopelessness, loneliness and insignificance in people.

How do organizations grow their leadership capacity? How do organizations define the processes and the context that drive their Internal Universities or Leadership Development Institutes? Regardless of the size or complexity of the organization, whether for-profit or non-profit, whether public or private, clearly defined Leadership Succession and Development strategies are crucial to sustaining the synergy, identity and performance-excellence of the business enterprise. While most organizational leaders would agree with the above statement, it is amazing how many organizations continue to devote a poverty of attention, time and money to this lynchpin of organizational sustainability.

For organizations ready to begin or refine the conversation about designing an Internal Leadership Development Strategy and the commensurate processes that are critical to the success of that Strategy, Integer Leadership Consulting uses a six-fold process:

*Collaborating on Leadership Vision and Mission Design
(Why are we in the Leadership Development business?)

*Aligning Macro Organizational Objectives and Values With A Strategic Leadership Process
(How will our Leaders Expand and Grow our Business?)

*Defining the Knowledge Base, Personal and Performance Criteria for Leaders
(What do we want our leaders to “be” and “know?”)

*Positioning and Deploying Leaders within the Organization to Apply Learned Behaviors, Attitudes and Knowledge.
(Where do we place our leaders to maximally impact our organizational culture?)

*Encouraging, Empowering and Reflecting with Leaders to ensure personal success and increased awareness of self and organizational effectiveness.
(What will we do to ensure our leaders are appreciated and valued?)

*Measuring the Return on Leadership Development Programs and Processes.
(When will we know that our efforts are successful?)

If you are responsible for developing, refining and enhancing your organization’s strategies for leadership training, you are encouraged to speak with Jeff Yergler at Integer. Whether you are at the beginning of exploring organizational leadership succession for your organization or if you are seeking to reframe your existing leadership “university”, please call Integer at: 253-230-1024 or email at: jdy@integerleadership.com.