doug smith training

I'd prefer it if status was not a factor. Especially, when it comes to leadership, wouldn't it be better if we didn't need to concern ourselves with status? But there it is: status as a constant. In the face of all of the surface maneuvers around status, we also have the opportunity to prove our professionalism. If we can focus on the mission when other people focus on their own personal enhancement, we can get more done. People are more likely to follow a leader who serves the mission first and their own esteem much later. I'm not saying that esteem isn't important, only that it should be down on your list after serving your mission and other people -- especially the people you lead. When we are challenged -- when people force an issue to see how professional we are -- that can be managed skillfully. We do not need to over-react. We do not need to cover our exterior. An opportunity to prove your professionalism is reason to celebrate, because it can be a convincing...

In my studies about performing and writing plays, one of the things that I learned was that there is always status in every scene. If two people are in a scene, one of them has higher status than the other and then for the rest of the scene there is a kind of struggle over that status. The one with lessor status strives to win, the won with higher status strives to preserve. It may not hold up for EVERY scene, but if you watch for it you'll see how prevalent that is. Why is that? Could it be that in LIFE we also struggle for status? Could it be that when we sense that we are being treated as if our status is lower than others that we do not like that and work to change it? If, as a leader, you visibly treat your team members as underlings, they will notice. If you treat them as equals -- keeping in mind different levels of responsibility -- as equals your team members will respond with more initiative. Isn't that more of what you really want? Whether or not you like it or suppo...