Category: Leadership

Organizations of Hope: Businesses run volunteer programs that build social capital and meet community and business needs

BY GILL ROBINSON HICKMAN

I first became interested in what I call "organizations of hope" in the 1970s. Organizations of hope are companies that engage in social action through employee-volunteering and other action-oriented programs. Their involvement in social responsibility differs from monetary contributions alone, though they make monetary contributions, too.  Their employee-volunteering programs and partnerships with nonprofit organizations offer hope for a better society by giving person-to-person and employee-to-community contributions of time, expertise, and commitment.

Still, they must meet their business mission, handle continuous change, and answer to stockholders, corporate boards, and multiple stakeholders.  

But companies are proving that they can accomplish all these missions.

Economists and business experts argue employee volunteer programs, especially on company time, are antithetical to the purpose and well-being of business.   Yet, internationally volunteer programs continue to increase. Why? Because companies see their future as linked with the community's future. And, because today's stakeholders expect companies to demonstrate responsibility and contribute to the collective good of society beyond their traditional role of job creation. Continue reading Organizations of Hope: Businesses run volunteer programs that build social capital and meet community and business needs

Beyond the Myth: Real philanthropic leaders aren't lone wolves

BY KAREN ZIVI AND MICHAEL MOODY

Political scientist Dr. Karen Zivi is assistant professor at the Jepson School of Leadership Studies. Dr. Michael Moody is a sociologist, a consultant to nonprofit and philanthropic organizations, and the co-author of Understanding Philanthropy (2008). ۬

If there were a TV show called The Leader, what would the main character be like? A new NBC series that aired this summer, The Philanthropist, offers a telling answer to this sort of question. Teddy Rist is a playboy billionaire who runs a successful multinational corporation and maintains a party lifestyle that puts him on gossip-magazine covers. He is, however, haunted by the death of his young son, and it's this grief that fuels his globe-trotting generosity. The show chronicles, in often touching and always action-packed ways, Rist's unlikely transformation from mere celebrity into The Philanthropist.

At first glance, Rist fits a fairly common stereotype of a philanthropist. He is a rich, white, Western man who uses his money to fund his ideas about how the world should be improved. But Rist's approach to giving is more Indiana Jones than John D. Rockefeller. He is always singularly focused on one unambiguous, indisputably noble goal in a black-and-white world of pure good versus pure bad. Fixing a problem, redressing an injustice, helping someone in need are all simply matters of summoning the courage to do the obviously right thing. Rist jumps in personally, gets things done by whatever means necessary, and gets out. And along the way he usually breaks laws, cuts corners and angers potential future allies.

Most of all, Rist is a lone wolf. He is most often on his own when doing his good works, save for his long-suffering bodyguard and the occasional friend or dutiful minion. He conceives his plan on his own and is usually the only one who thinks it will work. He barrels into his risky schemes with a passion born of intensely personal motives, and the success of his missions is measured in individual terms. It comes in an expression of gratitude from a single aid worker, a smile from a single child or the temporary satisfaction of this single dedicated philanthropist. Continue reading Beyond the Myth: Real philanthropic leaders aren't lone wolves

Panel of experts ponders executive power and contemporary politics

The Jepson School’ of Leadeship Studies’ John Marshall Center for the Study of Statesmanship’s Great Book Conference on Oct. 16-17, 2009 featured “Taming the Prince: The Ambivalence of Modern Executive Power” by Harvey Mansfield. This panel discussion on October 17, 2009, led by Dan Palazzolo, University of Richmond, highlighted “Putting Theory into Practice: Executive Power in Contemporary Politics.” Panelists included William Galston, The Brookings Institution, John Yoo, University of California, Berkeley, Terry Eastland, The Weekly Standard and Harvey Mansfield, Harvard University.

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/TNGg4cz1y24" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

The Hand That Wields the Baton: New cultural leader should bring more than musical mastery

BY SANDRA J. PEART AND SUE ROBINSON

Dr. Peart is dean of the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. Sue Robinson is director of the school's Community Programs Office, which partners with metro organizations, including the Richmond Symphony.

On Sept. 26, the Richmond Symphony christened the renovated Carpenter Theatre as its permanent home, with the opening night of its Masterworks season featuring guest or Alastair Willis of Seattle. Two more final candidates in the months-long audition for a new artistic leader for the region's symphony will take the stage in October and November.

A new maestro will be named by 2010. While patrons have had the pleasure of seeing each of the nine candidates in performance, the search committee has a harder task before them.

As the figurehead for the orchestra, the conductor often has his or her back to the audience. But where the artistic direction of the symphony goes, so goes the audience and, in many regards, the arts organization's future.

Music directors play three overlapping roles: principal conductor and performing musician; artistic director, who has the artistic vision for the organization; and community arts leader, an advocate, ambassador and teacher working on behalf of the orchestra in its community. This definition is from the American Orchestra League. The complexity of the conductor's role is seen in the league's dauntingly long list of traits that include:

  • Comprehensive knowledge of the history of music and its relationship to Western civilization
  • An understanding of musician governance structure and collective bargaining
  •  Ability to work collaboratively with management, boards, volunteers and members of the orchestra
  • Thorough grounding in professional ethics
  • Language skills to coach singers in French, German, Italian, Latin, Russian and Spanish, and the ability to read source materials in original languages
    Knowledge of the visual arts, particularly of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, as well as a fundamental knowledge of works of literature and drama that have had a considerable impact on music.

According to the league, "the conductor’s craft may be described as an art of persuasion by which musicians, audiences and communities come to share a deep connection with the orchestra and its repertoire. Passion, intellect, insight, musical talent and charisma all come into play. A conductor’s authority flows from the respect he or she commands, the power of his or her musical vision and the skill and facility by which musical ideas are communicated through physical movement as well as verbal instructions." The mystique that surrounds the conductor's role can obscure one of the most complicated leadership roles around, particularly these days.

Beyond this mastery of the craft of music and conducting, the conductor needs a vision for the orchestra's engagement with its community and must lead his organization in programming, outreach and education that realizes that potential. The conductor must understand the orchestra's challenges and role in a changing society and serve as an influential community advocate for music and music education. Continue reading The Hand That Wields the Baton: New cultural leader should bring more than musical mastery

Earning is not Leading

Joanne B. Ciulla posted this to Washington Post’s blog  On Leadership. The topic was how to develop better leaders for Wall Street.  

Plato made a simple argument about crafts and wages that sheds light on the failure of some leaders on Wall Street. He write, “Medicine provides health, and wage-earning provides wages; house-building provides a house, and the wage-earning that accompanies it provides a wage.” His argument extends to leadership.

The craft of leadership focuses on producing benefit to others, not the leader. Like medicine and house building, the craft of leading is not about earning wages. Wall Street often equates people who know how to earn high wages with people who know how to lead. It believes that market systems, not value systems, are the best way to choose leaders. The first step towards building new leaders in the financial sector entails searching for competent people who care about the craft of leadership, not the size of their paycheck.

Democracy Knocking: First-time candidate works the sidewalks with a smile and a handshake

BY TOM SHIELDS

In the movie The Candidate, a young Robert Redford plays Bill McKay, an idealistic, budding politician who believes in going directly to the voters. There is one scene where a voter approaches McKay in the parking lot of a flea market. The voter hands McKay a hot dog and then proceeds to punch him in the face. McKay gets up, bloodied, realizing that he probably lost that vote.

The interaction between candidate and voter in American politics has always been an interesting dance. In August we saw that during several sometimes-contentious congressional town-hall meetings across the country. Having taught politics for many years, I would tell my students that the voter-candidate exchange was the crux of democracy, but of course that was theoretical. Having worked with other political candidates, I knew of that interaction firsthand, but from an aide's perspective. As a candidate for the House of Delegates I have been like McKay €” bright-eyed and hopeful for the best.

The first thing that all candidates must do is to get out and meet with as many voters as possible. The best way to do that is door to door. I remember well the first door that I knocked on in March; I was very nervous. I had canvassed for several campaigns over the years. Knocking on that door as a candidate felt very different: I couldn't hide. It was my name on the literature that I handed out, and it was my ideas and opinions and point of view laid out in detail.

I approached the door, rang the bell and waited. No one appeared. I grew more nervous. Then I knocked really hard. A woman peered curiously through the window. She slowly opened the door and said, "Yes, can I help you?" I extended my hand, anxiously, and said, "I'm Tom Shields, and I'm running for the House of Delegates." The woman looked at me, smiled and said very nicely, "It's nice to meet you. I appreciate you coming by." The anxiety inside melted away as I realized I had become a candidate for public office. I had entered into the democratic process.

Since that cold day in March, I have personally knocked on more than 5,000 doors while my campaign has knocked on more than 8,000. I still find it a thrill to approach the house of a voter with the great expectation of discussing the issues that will be of concern to that individual or family. Continue reading Democracy Knocking: First-time candidate works the sidewalks with a smile and a handshake

Religion in the public square and a call for civility and reasonableness

The Richmond Times-Dispatch editorial page August 17 featured a book by Jepson professor Douglas A. Hicks. 

“In Galatians we read, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female . . . .” There is neither Republican nor Democrat, neither conservative nor liberal, neither religious right nor religious left. Douglas Hicks has written an excellent little book with a title that teaches, With God on All Sides: Leadership in a Devout and Diverse America.

An associate professor of Leadership Studies and Religion at the University of Richmond’s Jepson School of Leadership Studies, Hicks discusses religion in the public square. He writes that while faith (whether practiced in a formal religion or denomination, or expressed as “spirituality”) cannot be segregated from secular politics, it can be addressed in ways that do not insult or divide. There are bad approaches and good ones. His advice extends not only to the faithful but to those who disdain religion in all its manifestations. The jeremiads of Christopher Hitchens, for example, do not help. The interventions of the late Jerry Falwell did not help, either.

Hicks examines three recent examples of religion’s role in public debate — the Wren cross at the College of William and Mary; Bill Clinton’s response to the Monica Lewinsky scandal; and the election of a Muslim congressman from Minnesota. The first and the last have Virginia connections. The William and Mary implication is obvious; the Virginia tie to the Islamic congressman relates to former Rep. Virgil Goode’s thundering against the use of a Quran for a swearing-in ceremony at the Capitol of the United States. Continue reading Religion in the public square and a call for civility and reasonableness

Effective leaders take time out to unplug, refresh and vacation

Joanne B. Ciulla penned this timely essay for the Washington Post’s blog “On Leadership.” She, and others wrote in response to this question on the so-called vacation conundrum: “Everyone understands leaders should make time to recharge, yet there are also expectations these days that they remain available, informed and plugged in while on vacation. How should they strike that balance?

The word “vacation” comes from the Latin root vacare, which means, “to be unoccupied.” When leaders go on vacation they should “vacate” their job and title. If properly undertaken, vacations are more than therapeutic – they are constructive.

Leaders need to get away because it iseasy for them to lose perspective on themselves and their work. This loss of perspective sometimes results in unethical and/or ineffective behavior. Vacations offer leaders a different place to stand – an observation point for looking at who they are and what they do.

The British essayist and self-confessed workaholic, G.K. Chesterton, suggested in his 1928 essay, “On Leisure,” that three ways to properly enjoy one’s leisure:

The first is being allowed to do something. The second is being allowed to do anything and the third (and perhaps most rare and precious) is being allowed to do nothing.

Leaders should try hard to heed Chesterton’s advice even if they have a duty to be reachable at all times. There are few leaders who have to be as on call much as the president, but even he can steal some time to do something, anything, or nothing.

Leaders who are unable to take vacations or unplug while on vacation may not be very good leaders because they have failed to develop a staff that they trust to run things or make good judgments on when to call them if there is a problem, or they are insecure in their position. A good leader should be able to vacate the office with the instructions: “I will not check-in, call, email, text, or tweet you, but you can reach me at this number if there is a problem.”

Videos, blog posts, more posted from Strategic Leadership for Social Good conference

Some 200 nonprofit and government sector leadres met July 24 at the University of Richmond to discuss Strategic Leadership and Social Media for Social Good. The conference was for decision-making representatives of nonprofits and government agencies.  For videos and biographies and to take part in the conference virtually Continue reading Videos, blog posts, more posted from Strategic Leadership for Social Good conference

Liberal Arts and the Jepson Way: Yes, Virginia, leadership can be taught

BY JOANNE B. CIULLA

About 20 years ago, Savannah business leader and University of Richmond alumnus Robert S. Jepson Jr. gave the university $20 million to start a school of leadership studies. I was one of the four faculty recruited to design the school and its curriculum. We briefly grappled with the question “Can leadership be taught?" which is frequently accompanied by the question, “Are leaders born or made?” We came to the conclusion that neither question was particularly useful.

What the first question means is this: If students take a leadership course, will they become leaders? I wish education could offer such guarantees. I’ve been teaching ethics for 34 years. Imagine how wonderful it would be if I could guarantee that every single student I ever taught would be ethical. Do all students who take an art course become artists? No. Often the ones who do become artists have a natural talent, but not always. Some artists are indeed born, but there are also people who become artists because they take a course, develop an interest in it, and work hard to be good at it. Furthermore, even the most naturally talented artists benefit from a class on art. All of this, of course, applies to leadership too.

The second meaning of the question, “Can leadership be taught?” concerns what one teaches in such a course. After all, generals and CEOs know about leadership, but what do college professors know about it? When we designed the Jepson School of Leadership Studies, we had very clear answers to these questions: We teach liberal-arts courses. How could one possibly understand leadership without exploring history, the classics, literature, religion, philosophy, art, political science, psychology, sociology, etc.? The Jepson School faculty and curriculum is about half social science and half humanities. As a philosopher, what I know about leadership is what some of the greatest minds in history have to say about the subject, what my colleagues in psychology know is about empirical studies about leadership and how people think and how groups of people interact. Continue reading Liberal Arts and the Jepson Way: Yes, Virginia, leadership can be taught