• http://www.varsityblah.com/about Eugene (Editor, Varsity Blah)

    Great article, Dave! It’s like they say in Success Built to Last: “There is no greater feeling in life or freedom in the world than to know that you can be yourself and part of a group that is engaged in a cause that is greater than you are.”

  • http://lifeisntover.wordpress.com Jeff P

    Nice article and a great reminder that the community is greater than the individual.

  • http://financialphilosopher.typepad.com/thefinancialphilosopher/ The Financial Philosopher

    Outstanding and thought provoking! I have a few lingering questions:

    If those “successful” Fortune 500 companies were led by highly individualistic or even authoritarian leaders, do you believe the companies would be successful or be able to maintain that success?

    Do you not believe that a “Stage 4″ company’s success is at least partly attributable to a visionary leader?

    What percentage of those Fortune 500 companies were led by CEO’s who were there from the inception of the company?

    I highly agree that the employees ultimately create the success of a business but a truly great or truly poor leader can make or break it as well…

    I know a brief blog post is not sufficient to get your larger point across. Perhaps I should read your book to answer my questions!

    Thanks for insight and thoughts…

    • http://www.triballeadership.net Dave Logan

      On Collins, actually, our major finding challenges his research. Our findings show that “built to last” is a myth (quoting Tom Peters here). A tribal leader can propel a tribe to stage 4 in a matter of weeks, and the resulting enthusiasm and focus can get the momentum going quickly. No need for a flywheel. Different tribes within the same company can also take on different strategies—violating (with success) the hedgehog principle.

      What brings a tear to my eye, literally, is going back to companies we studied in the mid to late 90s that were stage 4-5. Today, several have fallen to the entrenched mediocrity of stage 2. The causal factor, as far as we can tell, is that the politics of stage 3 displaced the connection to a noble cause, and then the companies began adding bureaucracy. Although well intentioned, these additions told people they weren’t trusted, and the culture began muttering “our lives suck.”

      Let’s step back. Ken Wilber (and before him, Don Beck) describes research in four quadrants: inner-hidden, inner-observable, collective-hidden, and collective-observable. Collins focuses on inner-observable (his levels of leadership) and collective-observable (systems). Maslow focuses on inner-hidden (the hierarchy of needs). We focus on inner-hidden (culture), using the language people use, and how they naturally organize, as evidence for what is unseen.

      According to Wilber (and others in the integral movement), progress happens as a spiral through all four quadrants. Self-actualized leaders (Maslow) tend to behave as Level V individuals (Collins), producing systems (Collins, and many others, such as Larry Greiner’s organizational evolution work) that focus on results, and create cultures in that say “life is great” (Tribal Leadership).

      One quadrant can lead the way—and one using only Collins will focus on systems and observable leadership. The other quadrants will then become limitations on how far success can go.

      Until this study, we didn’t have a solid, stage development model for how groups of people work together.

      Without an understanding of all four quadrants, our ability to really make change is limited. That’s why we believe Tribal Leadership is so important.

  • http://effortless-wealth.blogspot.com Michael Miles

    Excellent post. As a leader in an organization, I can certainly see that we have been through some of this – I can recognize bits of each stage from different segments of the organization.

    http://effortless-wealth.blogspot.com

  • http://chrisguillebeau.com/3x5 Chris Guillebeau

    It sounds interesting, but like the others I would like to know more about the research beyond the hypothesis. It sounds like a Good To Great type of theory, and some of those are just derivative of Jim Collins’ already great work.

    But of course, you could be on to something as well. Thanks for sharing.

  • Dave Logan

    Wow. Great questions, and thank you!

    First, if the companies were led by authoritarian people, would they be able to maintain that level of success? Yes, for a while, but only in pockets. Imagine a Stage 3 manager–managing with dyadic relationships, thinking knowledge is power (rather than relationships are power), using information and misinformation to maintain control. Within that structure, it is possible for “bubbles” to form of Stage 4, often with one or two key people keeping the disruptive influences away. Keep in mind, this is the case in MOST corporations in our study. A great question we asked in the research was “what culture stage best expresses the actions of senior leaders (intentionally vague).” Depending on the industry, 30-90% said Stage 3.

    Can Stage 4′s success be attributed to a visionary leader? In part. A Stage 4 leader doesn’t “cast a vision” and get others to “buy in.” Rather, he or she builds the tribe to Stage 4, and then the tribe recognizes that person as the leader. Think George Washington. He wasn’t the smartest person, or the most articulate. But he acted as a conduit so that the tribes–Virginia landowners, militia officers, fellow representatives in the Continental Congress–formed a common purpose around shared values. At that time, people recognized him as the leader.

    What percentage of Fortune 500 companies were led by CEOs who were there from the inception. Very few. Some time, let’s get on rant about “professional management.” Usually not worth much, except for the $100 million they get paid.

    Thank you. Insightful questions are the greatest gift.

  • http://stanleybronstein.com MrPositioning.com (Stanley Bronstein)

    Leaders merely set the tone for the culture in a company.

    I discovered this while interviewing 80 highly successful people for my upcoming book filled with success stories.

    I saw it over and over and over. A good leader simply sets a tone where virtually everyone in the company believes that life is great. From that point on, everyone thrives.

    If a leader can make the workplace “fun”, then it ceases to be work and it becomes play . . . Even adults love to play.

    MrPositioning
    Stanley F. Bronstein
    Attorney, CPA, Author and Professional Motivational Speaker

  • Pingback: Links for Super-Charged Living - April 12, 2008 | My Super-Charged Life

  • http://www.mayaelhalal.com Maya Elhalal

    What a great post! Thank you for sharing these findings. Do you know if there’s a questionnaire or some sort of personality test that allows you to discover the stage of language of an applicant you’re considering?

    Maya

  • http://lynn-yeagerouhsc.edu Lynn

    Great article, and very thought provoking. Are the results of your study published somewhere so that other can view them?

  • http://www.guyfarmer.com/leadershiptraining Guy Farmer

    Great insights Dave. I frequently think of great leadership as being able to get out of the way and help others shine. It’s a selfless position that emerges when people are happy with who they are and are equally joyful to help others grow and succeed. Leadership is also frequently about what our employees say about us once we’ve left the room and do when we’re not around.