Discussion: View Thread

Paul, I teach leadership and ethics in a Jesuit University in relation
to health care professions. And, I believe my courses are fairly
effective; but, I do not imagine myself to be teaching the essence of
leadership when I am simply teaching a complex skill set. The
overriding themes of my graduate and undergraduate leadership courses
are drawn from the wisdom of Lao Tsu. He says that "mastering others is
strength, mastering yourself is true power; knowing others is
intellegence, knowing yourself is true wisdom". Throughout my courses,
students are challenged to know themselves deeply. They are asked to
name their strengths and confront their fears and weaknesses - their
"shadows" as Parker Palmer calls them. They are expected to express a
personal mission and they are reminded continuously that it is their own
self knowledge and character that will distinguish them as a leader.
They will do this, or not, based on their own initiative and insight -
not anything I can teach them. The bulk of the course co sists of skill
sets - systems thinking, counseling and listening skills, conflict
resolution, team faciliation, motivation, etc. They can benefit from
refining these skills because we all benefit from improved interpersonal
skills, but I do not believe these are what will make them leaders. The
heart and soul of leadership is passion, commitment and self mastery.
You can't package that in a skill set.

Deb Bennett-Woods

Beautifully and clearly stated, Deb!

Edryce

--- Deb Bennett-Woods <DebBWoods@aol.com> wrote:
> Paul, I teach leadership and ethics in a Jesuit
> University in relation
> to health care professions. And, I believe my
> courses are fairly
> effective; but, I do not imagine myself to be
> teaching the essence of
> leadership when I am simply teaching a complex skill
> set. The
> overriding themes of my graduate and undergraduate
> leadership courses
> are drawn from the wisdom of Lao Tsu. He says that
> "mastering others is
> strength, mastering yourself is true power; knowing
> others is
> intellegence, knowing yourself is true wisdom".
> Throughout my courses,
> students are challenged to know themselves deeply.
> They are asked to
> name their strengths and confront their fears and
> weaknesses - their
> "shadows" as Parker Palmer calls them. They are
> expected to express a
> personal mission and they are reminded continuously
> that it is their own
> self knowledge and character that will distinguish
> them as a leader.
> They will do this, or not, based on their own
> initiative and insight -
> not anything I can teach them. The bulk of the
> course co sists of skill
> sets - systems thinking, counseling and listening
> skills, conflict
> resolution, team faciliation, motivation, etc. They
> can benefit from
> refining these skills because we all benefit from
> improved interpersonal
> skills, but I do not believe these are what will
> make them leaders. The
> heart and soul of leadership is passion, commitment
> and self mastery.
> You can't package that in a skill set.
>
> Deb Bennett-Woods


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

The type of decision-making situation described as his starting point by
Paul closely resembles that regularly faced by entrepreneurs. As the
entrepreneurship literature over the last 25 years has evolved, through
several apparent dead-ends, a growing focus has been on the factors that
differentiate entrepreneurs who achieve sustained, long-term success, from
those who are able to start something and grow it, then lose it. That body
of work may help answer some of Paul's challenges to us.

Here's what I think the emerging picture shows:

1. Successful entrepreneurs have deep knowledge of the fields in which
they venture. One of the most important issues in separating the successes
from the others is the ability of the successful ones to choose their
issues. They do NOT take risks -- they exploit advantages that would be
risks to other people. Hence, it really matters what ventures they choose;
successes come of deep preparation.

2. No attractive successes are well known in advance. Competition and
information being what they are, new entrants quickly flow into a field
that is shown to be "attractive" (that IS the meaning of the term!) and
reduce marginal returns to normal levels. Hence, successes come from
opportunities which must be shaped and adapted to as they evolve. The
abilities to experiment intelligently, to learn and to continuously devise
new solutions to emerging problems are essential skills for successful
entrepreneurs. Indeed, many great entrepreneurial stories have arisen from
situations in which inadequate solutions were continuously revised until
enough of the right answers started to come together, creating a lift-off
condition. Note, however, that lift-off only starts a successful journey;
it must be continued through continuous learning and adaptation. The
future will never be an exact replica of the past, so B-schools have to
teach students more than memorization of historical cases. Our students
have to graduate with rich databanks of historical experiences, and the
thinking skills that allow them to use those data to triangulate new
solutions.

3. Some entrepreneurial resources are partially transferrable. Success in
one arena doesn't automatically produce success in a different field; in
fact, it is normally insufficient. Additional learning, adaptation,
gathering of additional resources, may all be required to parlay success in
one area into success in another. With each success, however, those
resources get easier to gather. Credibility, perhaps the most valuable
entrepreneurial resource, accumulates. The venturing process can be
learned and refined. Serial successes remain relatively rare, however,
because human failings (like arrogance or timidity) can easily overwhelm
human wisdom. Success and successful models remain fragile. Self-check
mechanisms, like reading, advisory boards, recreation, etc. can be used to
limit that frailty.

In conclusion, I answer Paul that we MUST make a difference in our
students' abilities to handle the kinds of fast-paced decision-making
environments he posits. We do have many tools. Not everything we do in
B-schools supports this kind of decision-making, nor will experience alone
suffice. The combination of ongoing research, theory-based teaching,
experiential education based on existing (and hypothesized) knowledge, and
an active search for problematic situations all help improve the capacity
of our graduates to improve their competence in this kind of challenging
environment.

Yes, we can teach in this area, and no, we don't have it perfect yet.

Best regards for a challenging and enlightening year!

Tom Bryant

(Liaison between MED and ENT Divisions of the Academy of Management)


.....................................................
Prof. Thomas A. Bryant, Ph.D.
Director, Entrepreneurial Management Programs, Rutgers Business School,
State of New Jersey Chair in Small Business and Entrepreneurship
111 Washington Street, Newark, NJ 07102-3027, USA
Tel: (973) 353-1062; Fax: (973) 353-1664
tabryant@andromeda.rutgers.edu

Thanks Tom for your thoughtful response. I am grateful for many other
insightful contributions.

There is Chinese saying: The market place is like a battle field. I am a
strong believer in the power of learning and education, but I am afraid that
often business schools and universities do not pay enough attention to
personal development as opposed to professional or academic development. If
a person has so many unresolved issues and biases, which tend to be
projected into situations, he or she is more likely to form wrong
judgements. More later.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Bryant
To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Sent: 1/8/2002 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Can we teach...

The type of decision-making situation described as his starting point by
Paul closely resembles that regularly faced by entrepreneurs. As the
entrepreneurship literature over the last 25 years has evolved, through
several apparent dead-ends, a growing focus has been on the factors that
differentiate entrepreneurs who achieve sustained, long-term success,
from
those who are able to start something and grow it, then lose it. That
body
of work may help answer some of Paul's challenges to us.

Here's what I think the emerging picture shows:

1. Successful entrepreneurs have deep knowledge of the fields in which
they venture. One of the most important issues in separating the
successes
from the others is the ability of the successful ones to choose their
issues. They do NOT take risks -- they exploit advantages that would be
risks to other people. Hence, it really matters what ventures they
choose;
successes come of deep preparation.

2. No attractive successes are well known in advance. Competition and
information being what they are, new entrants quickly flow into a field
that is shown to be "attractive" (that IS the meaning of the term!) and
reduce marginal returns to normal levels. Hence, successes come from
opportunities which must be shaped and adapted to as they evolve. The
abilities to experiment intelligently, to learn and to continuously
devise
new solutions to emerging problems are essential skills for successful
entrepreneurs. Indeed, many great entrepreneurial stories have arisen
from
situations in which inadequate solutions were continuously revised until
enough of the right answers started to come together, creating a
lift-off
condition. Note, however, that lift-off only starts a successful
journey;
it must be continued through continuous learning and adaptation. The
future will never be an exact replica of the past, so B-schools have to
teach students more than memorization of historical cases. Our students
have to graduate with rich databanks of historical experiences, and the
thinking skills that allow them to use those data to triangulate new
solutions.

3. Some entrepreneurial resources are partially transferrable. Success
in
one arena doesn't automatically produce success in a different field; in
fact, it is normally insufficient. Additional learning, adaptation,
gathering of additional resources, may all be required to parlay success
in
one area into success in another. With each success, however, those
resources get easier to gather. Credibility, perhaps the most valuable
entrepreneurial resource, accumulates. The venturing process can be
learned and refined. Serial successes remain relatively rare, however,
because human failings (like arrogance or timidity) can easily overwhelm
human wisdom. Success and successful models remain fragile. Self-check
mechanisms, like reading, advisory boards, recreation, etc. can be used
to
limit that frailty.

In conclusion, I answer Paul that we MUST make a difference in our
students' abilities to handle the kinds of fast-paced decision-making
environments he posits. We do have many tools. Not everything we do in
B-schools supports this kind of decision-making, nor will experience
alone
suffice. The combination of ongoing research, theory-based teaching,
experiential education based on existing (and hypothesized) knowledge,
and
an active search for problematic situations all help improve the
capacity
of our graduates to improve their competence in this kind of challenging
environment.

Yes, we can teach in this area, and no, we don't have it perfect yet.

Best regards for a challenging and enlightening year!

Tom Bryant

(Liaison between MED and ENT Divisions of the Academy of Management)


.....................................................
Prof. Thomas A. Bryant, Ph.D.
Director, Entrepreneurial Management Programs, Rutgers Business School,
State of New Jersey Chair in Small Business and Entrepreneurship
111 Washington Street, Newark, NJ 07102-3027, USA
Tel: (973) 353-1062; Fax: (973) 353-1664
tabryant@andromeda.rutgers.edu

Paul,

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, it's probably not the
business school's fault. The problem stems from society at large.

Travis Bradberry


>From: Paul Wong <wong@twu.ca>
>Reply-To: Management Education and Development Discussion
><MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
>To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>Subject: Re: Can we teach...
>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 17:37:47 -0800
>
>Thanks Tom for your thoughtful response. I am grateful for many other
>insightful contributions.
>
>There is Chinese saying: The market place is like a battle field. I am a
>strong believer in the power of learning and education, but I am afraid
>that
>often business schools and universities do not pay enough attention to
>personal development as opposed to professional or academic development. If
>a person has so many unresolved issues and biases, which tend to be
>projected into situations, he or she is more likely to form wrong
>judgements. More later.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tom Bryant
>To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>Sent: 1/8/2002 2:21 PM
>Subject: Re: Can we teach...
>
>The type of decision-making situation described as his starting point by
>Paul closely resembles that regularly faced by entrepreneurs. As the
>entrepreneurship literature over the last 25 years has evolved, through
>several apparent dead-ends, a growing focus has been on the factors that
>differentiate entrepreneurs who achieve sustained, long-term success,
>from
>those who are able to start something and grow it, then lose it. That
>body
>of work may help answer some of Paul's challenges to us.
>
>Here's what I think the emerging picture shows:
>
>1. Successful entrepreneurs have deep knowledge of the fields in which
>they venture. One of the most important issues in separating the
>successes
>from the others is the ability of the successful ones to choose their
>issues. They do NOT take risks -- they exploit advantages that would be
>risks to other people. Hence, it really matters what ventures they
>choose;
>successes come of deep preparation.
>
>2. No attractive successes are well known in advance. Competition and
>information being what they are, new entrants quickly flow into a field
>that is shown to be "attractive" (that IS the meaning of the term!) and
>reduce marginal returns to normal levels. Hence, successes come from
>opportunities which must be shaped and adapted to as they evolve. The
>abilities to experiment intelligently, to learn and to continuously
>devise
>new solutions to emerging problems are essential skills for successful
>entrepreneurs. Indeed, many great entrepreneurial stories have arisen
>from
>situations in which inadequate solutions were continuously revised until
>enough of the right answers started to come together, creating a
>lift-off
>condition. Note, however, that lift-off only starts a successful
>journey;
>it must be continued through continuous learning and adaptation. The
>future will never be an exact replica of the past, so B-schools have to
>teach students more than memorization of historical cases. Our students
>have to graduate with rich databanks of historical experiences, and the
>thinking skills that allow them to use those data to triangulate new
>solutions.
>
>3. Some entrepreneurial resources are partially transferrable. Success
>in
>one arena doesn't automatically produce success in a different field; in
>fact, it is normally insufficient. Additional learning, adaptation,
>gathering of additional resources, may all be required to parlay success
>in
>one area into success in another. With each success, however, those
>resources get easier to gather. Credibility, perhaps the most valuable
>entrepreneurial resource, accumulates. The venturing process can be
>learned and refined. Serial successes remain relatively rare, however,
>because human failings (like arrogance or timidity) can easily overwhelm
>human wisdom. Success and successful models remain fragile. Self-check
>mechanisms, like reading, advisory boards, recreation, etc. can be used
>to
>limit that frailty.
>
>In conclusion, I answer Paul that we MUST make a difference in our
>students' abilities to handle the kinds of fast-paced decision-making
>environments he posits. We do have many tools. Not everything we do in
>B-schools supports this kind of decision-making, nor will experience
>alone
>suffice. The combination of ongoing research, theory-based teaching,
>experiential education based on existing (and hypothesized) knowledge,
>and
>an active search for problematic situations all help improve the
>capacity
>of our graduates to improve their competence in this kind of challenging
>environment.
>
>Yes, we can teach in this area, and no, we don't have it perfect yet.
>
>Best regards for a challenging and enlightening year!
>
>Tom Bryant
>
>(Liaison between MED and ENT Divisions of the Academy of Management)
>
>
>.....................................................
>Prof. Thomas A. Bryant, Ph.D.
>Director, Entrepreneurial Management Programs, Rutgers Business School,
>State of New Jersey Chair in Small Business and Entrepreneurship
>111 Washington Street, Newark, NJ 07102-3027, USA
>Tel: (973) 353-1062; Fax: (973) 353-1664
>tabryant@andromeda.rutgers.edu




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com