See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320217339

THE CHARACTER OF LEADERSHIP: IS LEADERSHIP

Article · October 2017

DOI: 10.18374/EJM-17-2.5

CITATION READS
1 1,842

3 authors, including:

Robert W. Service James Reburn

Samford University Samford University
27 PUBLICATIONS   170 CITATIONS    9 PUBLICATIONS   40 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Good addition to CQ=Skills for STEM grads (2016) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert W. Service on 30 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE CHARACTER OF LEADERSHIP: IS LEADERSHIP

Robert W. Service, Samford University, U.S.A.

James P. Reburn, Samford University, U.S.A.
Joel R. Windham, Samford University, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT

There is little opposition to the statement that the world has seen a huge decline in the trust of institutional
leadership in business, politics, news media, educational institutions and religions. Much emphasis has
fallen on “core” competencies and “soft” “people” relational skills while little effort has revolved around the
fact that values are at the core of effective leadership (Service and Reburn, 2016). If leadership is not
directed toward creating other leaders and helping others realize more of their innate abilities through
self-fulfillment as ‘honest’ individuals, you have no sustainability (Northouse, 2016). And, yes, we always
hear someone has a good moral character, and wonder what is ‘it’ and what does it have to do with
leadership? Trust and trustworthiness, and truth and truthfulness exemplify moral character as the core
of institutional leadership and the consequent organizational culture—that is our ‘it.’ The character of
leadership is the point of this research. To address those issues we present a “KNOW DO BE” leadership
model useful for training, development, measurement, selection and rewarding toward enhancement.

Keywords: Leadership, Trust, Truth, Character, Leadership Quotient

1 INTRODUCTION

Leadership and Self-Deception (Arbinger Institute, 2000) reemphases what all leadership and
management researchers say, all efforts toward improvement start with self-assessment. Any
assessment of your truthfulness needs to be painfully honest. In How to Measure Your Life, Christensen
(2012) says when you break an honesty rule for yourself because of “extenuating circumstances” you
discover that life itself is extenuating circumstances. A fulfilling life requires each of us to put ourselves in
uncomfortable positions saying yes to opportunities others skirt for fear of failure or deemed to be too
hard. Avoiding all uncomfortable situations and difficulties will make you nothing and then you won’t have
to follow honesty—truth and truthfulness—rules for your life. Additionally you must know and control that
voice in your head called habits. Habits are always with us, leading to all success or ruin (Covey, 1998).

The only sustainable developmental activities direct one toward adaptability and innovation that cannot
exist going forward without credibility. Adapt, adjust, repurpose and innovative, but do not blow in the
winds of change without a compass. Making institutional trust improvements requires that one realize that
the management of old has to become leadership for innovations and change at some point for
sustainability. Today, management can be largely accomplished via automation. But, leadership is
required to move people into the unknown. This shift, with management and leadership, is required for
those being directed are as educated and informed as those they are charged with leading. We see
management as doing things right as they have been done in the past and leadership as doing the right
things to meet the future as it is becoming. Management is more about efficiency; leadership is more
about effectiveness. Management is structuring the known and leadership is moving forward into the
unknown with leaps of faith and trust! We now lead into a future that is increasingly murky, globally
complex and ever changing. Sustainability of the institutions of consequence within all societal cultures
increasingly revolve around organizations of commerce with those organizations’ values replacing
governmental and religious institutions as “the” leaders of individual values and societal norms. When
norms and mores’ are sufficient we have little need of laws and conversely when mores’ are insufficient
no laws will work: contemplate U.S. immigration policy and Sarbanes Oxley. If you are not honest about
where you are, might, can, want, ought and need to be, you won’t get there.

2 RECIPROCITY IS THE KEY TO RELATIONSHIPS

Leadership is defined by the form of one’s participation and involvement. In all life—especially
management, leadership, learning and working—influence only survives through practices that show one
knows relationships rule and sustaining relationships require mutual trust. In all humanness
pronouncements, engagement is key. People get engaged and live a more productive life when they buy
into the needs of others; when they see something in ‘it’ for themselves and others they care for. People
don’t care to hear what you have to say or lead, until you prove you care. People only make significant
changes in their lives when they see the need to do so with their heart and mind (Neck and Manz, 2013).
Without truth, truthfulness, trust and trustworthiness influential relationship will not last: no leadership. If
you are not truthful about yourself to yourself, little else matters. “It is better not to tell a white lie if you’re
paying too high a price or you believe the target will pay too high a price (Bernstein, 2017: A11).”

3 LITERATURE REVIEW—BUILDING THE CASE FOR OUR MODELS

The literature calls for useful leadership models to: 1) Develop-people that have the right knowledge,
skills, and abilities and that are willing to work for success through an organizational culture of honesty
and trust (Covey, Earley and others). 2) HTR (hire, train and reward) with the relatively rare and correct
balance of knowledge, skills and abilities with those who share the values of an organizational culture
based on the mutuality of trust (Schein, 2010). 3) Use comprehensive interdisciplinary approaches to
develop useful precepts (Bate, and Child, 1987). 4) Allow for complexity--leadership occurs in a world of
varied complexity, with interactive patterns among subunits of many varied constituents with competing
pressures for stability and change (Service and Arnott, 2006). 5) Provide frameworks for wisdom in
leadership and culturally appropriate actions. Requires a life-long commitment to searching and learning
(Elmer, 2002; and Hall, 2011). 6) Re-assert your and your organization’s competitive identity in this web
of relationships (Christensen, 2012—a pre-strategy guide; Collins, all dates; Porter, all dates; Schein,
2010; and Tjan, 2017). 7) Build individual and team efforts for power (authority relationships, supervision,
management, leadership), feelings, concerns, dependences. collaborations and competition—team and
individual efforts are foundational (Lencioni, 2002; and Mendenhall et al, 2008). “Banishing our conscious
and unconscious biases and adopting a mindset of openness expands, enriches, and diversifies. . . .
Openness removes prejudice . . . . Be adventurous, creative, and open-minded. . . . Build open and
honest relationships with communications (Tjan, 2017: p. 74 and 75).”

3.1 Religion’s impact on management and leadership—who, what, when, how and why
We need to note that the current authors are associated with a Christian University and feel in some
cases we need to “witness” about our faith (Broom and Service, 2014). Yes, we believe that the Christian
perspective is a good model to follow (Harper, 2014), but even that does not have to force the religious
aspects of conversion, faith and beliefs. Likewise, we see servant leadership as a great model though it is
seldom if ever practiced according to the principles of Robert Greenleaf (Service and Carson, 2009a).
Even noted atheists Richard Dawson has his beliefs and ethics of honesty and truth (1996). Yes, honesty
is not limited to the religious and certainly not to a certain religion. Therefore, in normal business or
teaching situations do not proselytize. Your ‘evangelism’ needs to be your actions and considered words.

The road to religious tolerance, individual freedoms, and the governments that guarantee self-
determination has been crowded, crooked and rough, but that tough road unquestionably has led us to
unparalleled economic growth and prosperity through many forms of freedoms of choice for opportunities
of success and fulfillment. Yes, many errors are made in reaching worthwhile destinations; errors, no
matter how bad, do not always make the destination bad.

Religion, more than any other factor in the world, has affected how we manage and lead others and
religion is the mother of all cultures (Service and Carson, 2009a). Today, more than any other time in our
memories, religion plays a part in the world’s directions. It often seems we are back to the days when the
world was fighting for the dominant religion, i.e., the Crusades, Spanish attempts to Christianize the New
World. Again, do not take this section wrong, for we are not telling you how or what to believe; we are
showing you some basics that help us in joint understanding of how religion has shaped us and our
worlds. Judeo-Christian views have shaped American thinking on leadership study and teaching just as
those views are the foundation for capitalism—which is the best system ever devised to generate the
wealth necessary to solve problems we face today. YES, leadership is ‘the’ answer for building a future
that’s worth living in, and management is a precursor to leadership. Everyone on earth is a product of the
nature and nurture. Don’t let people fool you and don’t fool yourself—you are made by many things that
have happened to you and your ancestors, purposeful and otherwise (Ridley, 2003). Religion makes most
people to a large degree so its precepts must be a part of leadership and management principles.

Stark in How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery, (2003)
described his work as social science, not as religion or philosophy. He worked hard to avoid implying or
denying the existence of God or to expressing his personal religious views. His main point revolved
around the human nature of seeking explanations for the meaning of our existence and unexplained
things. As Stark said: people seek religion not just for things they desire but for inspiration, meaning,
dignity and hope. Stark advances the notion that in the advanced and less sophisticated societies
“monotheism may well have been the single most significant innovation in history (p.1).” He goes on to
show that religion has been responsible for many of the good things that have happened in the world,
though many people don’t admit it. Stark further shows that the reforming impulses are aspects of all
religious organizations and that the Christian protestant reformation, started as early as the second
century, was the foundation for most democracy and individuality.

Foundational understandings of monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam help us develop
useful leadership models, roles and teachings based on trust and truth. These frameworks form
understandings of organizations, management, leadership, and other concepts related to our
surroundings and meanings of life. Renouncing these facts does not make them less so. All the thoughts,
theories, and theologies that resulted in more modern understandings of religions serve as models for our
study of abstract yet observable concepts as organizational management and leadership. Understand
histories of religions help us understand the foundational history of leadership. Perhaps our modern
media and political correctness keep us in a limited-perspective mindset?
So, then, let us finally be done with the claim that religion is all about ritual. . . . It was not the
‘wisdom of the East’ that gave rise to science, nor did Zen meditation turn people’s hearts against
slavery. By the same token, science was not the work of Western secularists or even deists; it
was entirely the work of devout believers in an active, conscious, creator God. . . . In these ways,
at least, Western civilization really was God-given (p. 376).
Religion has provided our foundation for governments, social-cultural systems, prosperity, leadership, and
understanding of the world. We should not blame the Religion; instead, blame our limited interpretation
and use of religion. Clearly religion led man out of the Dark Ages into the light, and replaced slavery with
freedom and opportunity.

In The Hungry Spirit Handy links religion and capitalism, and the freedoms they give us to succeed
(1998). He suggests social entrepreneurship and adjustments to our corporations and their members are
not at odds with religion. He says corporate members should become corporate citizens with
responsibilities and a culture they can buy into.
A truly open society accepts that there is no such thing as an absolute truth (xiv). . . . [I]f you
believe that most people are capable and can be relied upon, they will often live up to your
expectations (xix). . . . There are two great hungers and the greater hunger is ‘Why?’ Money
breeds creativity. Money also brings choice, and freedom of a sort (p. 4-5). . . . Money is a
necessary but not sufficient condition of happiness (p. 6). . . . .Markets don’t work where the
human cost of failure is unacceptable (p. 8). . . . Capitalism, then, would revert to its proper role, as
a philosophy designed to deliver the means but not necessarily the point of life. . . . Capitalism
helps the poor to escape from poverty (p. 50). . . . Creativity, choice and responsibility, morality
and community are the fruits of capitalism (p. 53). . . . To be free to move when opportunity
knocks. To be free to leave when it stops knocking (p. 65).
These statements support our models. Like it or not, religion and capitalism and have provided the best
framework of choices of opportunity for work and success the world has ever known. Their choices make
the need for leadership. And, there is something about Christianity and capitalism that needs to be
understood. Without the excess funds generated by Christians, who are about one-third of the world’s
population (control over two-thirds of its wealth) there would be little charity in the world. Americans at 5%
of the world’s population, control about 25% of the world’s domestic product and lead charitable
donations by a wide margin. America spends more on its military than almost all of the other 200
countries that have a military combined. Yet America spends only about 5% of GDP on its military. With
this economic and military clout, we have a responsibility to help the world with our power (regardless of
your persuasion of whether we are doing it correctly or not, it’s a responsibility). Likewise, we have the
responsibility to teach the world about the foundations of trust and truth in Leadership (Service and
Carson, 2009b and worldwide GDP stats).

Yes, Christians are the most generous people in the world, yet we give away only about 2% of our total
incomes. Americans are the most fortunate people in all of history, both freedom-wise and monetarily.
The U.S. minimum wage for one hour of work is about three days, income for over 2,000,000,000 people!
American’s spent more on Halloween than the GDP of the majority of countries in the world. Will those
reading this manuscript work to lead in such a way as to squander or spread wealth, well-being, and
freedom? Thinking beyond Christianity and America, will all the religious peoples of our small planet use
their religions for good or for ill (Service and Arnott, 2006)? Until people leading a religion admit, own and
denounce bad actions in the name of their religion, no changes will be made: the answer to terrorism.
Perhaps, the addition of biblical principles to common decision-making criteria found in business writings
and curricula can help students enhance their values as they support “Stakeholder Management” and
incorporate principles for decision-making regardless of faith or beliefs (Harper, 2014)?

There is a broad and deep ‘useful’ literature relating to Christian principles. Many of that literature
purposefully or otherwise puts religious beliefs instructive to managers and leaders at their core (Covey,
all; Dungy and Whitaker-principled, 2007; Greenleaf-servant leader, 1991; Isaacson-historic, 2007 and
2014; Morowitz, 2004; Nicolson, 2003; Niebuhr-a classic, 1964); Spong-a new approach, 2001;
Thornton—on orality, 2012; and Zacharias-among other gods, 2000). Other related categories call for a
new direction in management and leadership through an enhanced understanding of history, academics,
economics, markets, psychology, sociology, practice and, in some cases, related Christian principles
(Friedman all; Kennedy, 1987; Novak, 2002; and Pennock, 2000). Saroglou (2011) and O’Boyle (2012)
give us many principles of a major monotheist religion that can help in improving completeness of
decisions while Sirico (2000) purports that religion and business principles should not be separated.
Disregarding religion would likewise call for disregarding much of the social science in the area of
economic exchange, wealth creation, value added marginal thinking and many other aspects of
economics as “social science.” Even ‘empirical studies’ require a level of understanding that their
principles are not absolute (Gay, 2002), Emmett (2012) and Grassl (2012) show clearly that biblical
principles do NOT necessarily require faith any more than do more secular principles.

Wheeler and Sillanpää show how business decision-making has evolved from only investor return-on-
investment (ROI) to ascertaining and managing the impact of the decision on all stakeholders (1997).
Stakeholders are of course individuals or entities who may be affected by business. Effective business
education has a strong record of teaching decision-making techniques as they concentrate on profit-
maximization while identifying many of the softer variables that influence the revenues and expenses. No
doubt the importance of financial management education but with today’s twitter throw it all out there
press, we all had better ‘dang well’ be sure we look at the optics and the perceived morality involved.

Carroll and Buchholtz (2006) cover in the “Principles of Stakeholder Management” that do not debunk
religion. “The key words in the principles suggest action words that should reflect the kind of cooperative
spirit that should be used in building stakeholder relationships: acknowledge, monitor, listen,
communicate, adopt, recognize, avoid, acknowledge conflicts (p. 88).” Their manuscript offers many
examples of the extent to which businesses can implement a stakeholder management model,
highlighting successes while pointing out some pitfalls. Questions at the outset of the analysis should
identify: 1) Who are the stakeholders? 2) What needs does each stakeholder have? 3) How are the
stakeholder needs linked with the overall mission, vision and values? 4) What objectives will business
cases need to address for each category of stakeholder? 5) How can we account for how each
stakeholder will react? 6) Any and all tradeoffs between competing objectives or unintended
consequences.7) What are resource constraints?

While this section might seem like rabbit-chasing, we deem it necessary, since we need to go ahead and
admit facts about the most important foundations to the thinking of leaders and would-be leaders.
Nothing is more important in the thinking and actions of the majority of people in the world than their very
personal and real religions. We do not want to put anyone off, but we care about truth.

3.2 Conflicts, difficult people, habits, strength finders, and other research
A number of great books and articles have been written of late about conflict confident leaders,
managing teams and teens, and teaming (Alexander and Knippenberg, 2014). Using some of these
books many trainers have built courses to instruct people on how to handle conflicts in the workplace
effectively. What we see in those courses could be a subset of any honesty model. Empathize with your
words and listen, but avoid blame or judgment. These are the corner stones of handling conflict. Sound
familiar? Along those same lines, many are talking about honesty in management where wisdom,
respect, empathy, openness, self-awareness and humility are additional foundations for handling conflict
or intercultural exchanges (Service, 2012; and Service, Loudon and Kariuki, 2014). Conflict and
conversational types of training are mentioned here to suggest that if your organization is having too
many non-productive conflicts, read this article and then look up the literature on conflict resolution and
honesty in the work place (Covey’s, Speed of Trust, 2006; and Patterson, et al’s Crucial Conversations
Tools for talking when stakes are high, 2002). These works fit our KNOW DO BE tried and true model.

Buckingham and Clifton’s 2001, Now, Discover Your Strengths represents work taken from 30 years of
Gallup’s work with organizations trying to determine ways to maximize human potential within
organizations. It centers on the question: “At work, do I have an opportunity to do what I do best every
day (p. 214)?” The authors note that surveys say globally only 20% of employees working in large
organizations surveyed feel that they can answer yes to this question:
1. Each person’s talents are enduring and unique. 2. Each person’s greatest room for growth is in
the areas of the person’s greatest strength (p. 215). . . . What are your strengths? How can you
capitalize on them? What are your most powerful combinations? Where do they take you? What
one, two or three things can you do better than ten thousand people (p. 10)? . . . The key is to
identify your strengths and work to capitalize on them and to manage around your weaknesses. .
. . Fear of Failure [stops us from using our strengths too often] (p. 124).. . . . Our definition of a
weakness is anything that gets in the way of excellent performance (p. 148). . . . . I always start
by asking each new employee, ‘Are you a people person or a box person’ (p. 172)?
The thirty-four Themes of Strengths that follow will be included in our KNOW DO BE honesty leadership
model: 1) achiever, 1) activator, 3) adaptability, 4) analytical, 5) arranger, 6) belief-core values , 7)
command, 8) communication, 9) competition, 10) connectedness, 11) context, 12) deliberative-careful,
vigilant, 13) developer, 14) discipline, 15) empathy, 16) fairness, 17) focus, 18) futuristic, 19) harmony,
20) ideation-fascinated by ideas, 21) inclusiveness, 22) individualization, 23) input-collect ideas and
things, 24) intellection, 25) learner, 26) maximizer, 27) positivity, 28) relator, 29) responsibility, 30)
restorative-love to solve problems, 31) self-assurance, 32) significance, 33) strategic, 34) winning-others
over. Along those same lines, we see the StrengthFinder work where one is to focus ‘only’ on strengths
(Rath and Conchie, 2008). Though this is generally a good idea, we have found many who have
weaknesses so glaringly holding them back that no amount of increased use of strengths will help until
that problem is resolved.

Values base influence through leaders, is characterized by ambiguously-complex interrelated

relationships, communications, values, missions, motivations and visions (Pink, 2009; and Service and
White, 2012). This complexity shows when one views the varied constituents commanding attention with
their all too often mutually exclusive desires (Furrer, Tjemkes, Aydinlik and Adolfs, 2012;. Takeuchi,
2010; and Takeuchi, Seakhwa Yun, and Tesluk, 2002). The ability to clarify the complex and state it in a
way follows can understand and buy into is a skill that exemplifies leadership: practice this. It does seems
“unconscious processes are better when everything is ambiguous (p. 243)… [Acquire] a set of practical
skills that enable [you] to anticipate change (Brooks, 2011, p. 249).” And, technology does change how
one leads and that can be good or bad. We recommend you so some research here and suggest you
start with Li’s 2010, Open leadership: How social technology can transform the way your lead.

In Johnson’s Organizational Ethics: A Practical approach, we find the simple call that we do what is
morally right, that which we all want, regardless the consequences (2016). This is a good guide and,
moreover if someone does not understand this they are either morally bankrupt or thoughtlessly ignorant.
Forget lying to yourself. Looking at why CEOs fail you often see something related to dishonesty and very
often dishonesty with one’s self where the executive does not admit they are difficult to deal with (Dotlich
and Cairo, 2003). Finally, along these same lines one would do well to follow the career of G.E. famed
leader Jack Welch (the CEO of the century? Lane, 2008).

Continuing with a review of what the extant press has to say, regardless of politics we all should admit
that former U.S. President Obama was a good verbal communicator and the two books he wrote before
becoming president show he was also a good writer. In his books, Obama presents honest self-
evaluation truths that his critics would be hard pressed to disavow. Obama demonstrates in writing the
understanding of the necessity of evaluating one’s self and being true to the principles of listening and
changing (2004 and 2006). Obama showed he could listen and learn from those with whom he disagreed.

As an economist and journalist writers Levitt and Dubner produced the trend busting Freakonomics works
(2005 and 2009). These works along with Gladwell’s work helps us see real causes behind real issues of
leadership successes and failures—so often we misinterpret cause and effect. The recent Think Like a
Freak: How to Think Smarter about Almost Everything is a don’t miss read (2014). So, how does a
“Freak” think? Like a genuinely curious kid noticing new facts and views with few assumptions and
expectations without overthinking: open to the obvious and the totally unexpected and everything in-
between! Let’s look at a sampling of Freak that can be of use in leadership improvement:
[I]t takes a lot of time to track down, organize, and analyze the data to answer even one small
question well (p. 2). . . . if you ask the wrong question, you are almost guaranteed to get the
wrong answer (p. 49). . . . [Why so few people think clearly?] One reason is that it’s easy to let
your biases—political, intellectual, or otherwise—color your view of the world. . . . When was the
last time you sat for an hour of pure, unadulterated thinking? (p. 10). . . . The Three Hardest
Words in the English Language (p. 19) [I don’t know]. . . . these are multidimensional cause-and-
effect questions, which means their outcomes are both distant and nuanced. With complex
issues, it can be ridiculously hard to pin a particular cause on a given effect (p. 23). . . .The key
to learning is feedback. It is nearly impossible to learn anything without it (bolding and
underlining ours: p. 34). . . . Acknowledge the strengths of your opponent’s argument (p. 177). . .
. there are no magic bullets. All we’ve done is encourage you to think a bit differently, a bit
harder, a bit more freely (Levitt and Dubner, 2014: p. 211).

3.3 Teams and Teaming

When we administered an open ended surveyed to a group of young professionals about teamwork over
10 years ago, we found the most common reason they thought teams were formed was to avoid hard
choices on the part of management (Service and Arnott, 2006). We came up with the term “Chicken
managers” to describe why people often use teamwork. Those scared supervisors simply did not address
a problem with a team member choosing instead to form rules for the team. Someone comes in late, a
person always leaves the lights on, someone uses derogatory terms in emails, someone copies only for
CYA, well don’t tell them establish a new rule for the team: sound familiar (Service, 2010; and Service
and Carson, 2010) It seems the most productive team member is often punished when a supervisor does
not ask the worst member to do an important task. The ‘Chicken’ supervisor or team leader always has a
go to girl for anything they want done quickly and correctly: by doing this, who learns what would be a
good question. Study Figure 1 before we continue on teamwork.
Figure 1: Teamwork gone bad - The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Inattention
To Results
Status and Ego -
Avoidance of Accountability
Low standards _
Lack of Commitment
Ambiguity -
Fear of Conflict
Artificial Harmony -
Absence of trust
Invulnerability
If [using teams seems such a good idea it is because it] sounds simple, [well] it’s because it is
simple, at least in theory. In practice, however, it is extremely difficult because it requires levels
of discipline and persistence that few teams can muster (p. 190). . . .For all the attention that it
has received over the years from scholars, coaches, teachers, and the media, teamwork is as
elusive as it has ever been within most organizations (p. vii). . . . to achieve results. . . . is the
only true measure of a team (Lencioni, 2002: p. 42).

Make team meetings useful and engaging, but call out bad behavior when you see it. Don’t waste time.
Teams succeed because they are so exceedingly human and they fail for the same reason. If you want
people to work in teams first be sure that a team is called for when cases you use one. What do we want?
A collaborative adaptive committed competent person who is disciplined, engaged, enthusiastic and
intentionally prepared to act selflessly toward a shared purpose (Maxwell, 2002). And, yes, there is little
hope teams will work unless members know how they will be measured (Barner, 2000; Gibson,2001; and
Robbins and Finley, 1995).

Management signals what is valued by what is said and done: this applies doubly to teamwork and
exponentially to honesty. What leaders say and the actions they take trickle down through the
organization. Statements by leaders set expectations (Covey, Drucker, Maxwell and Mintzberg are
benchmarks). All good management practices may be undermined if management erroneously rewards
or in-genuinely compliments performance at an undesired level. Don’t complement the team when an
individual does a good job. Similarly, do not establish a rule to keep a few team members in line. We
often forget that top management forms a team (TMT) and that team determines an organizations culture.

3.4 Manger’s most dreaded task?

Next to firing an employee it is doing a performance appraisal (PA). Samuel Culbert’s (2008) article “Get
Rid of the Performance Review,” caused heated debate among the faculty at our university, among our
working MBA students, and with many business associates. Tellingly, Culbert addressed how
performance reviews or appraisals (PAs) are done, not how they should be done (he later proposed a
preview over a review); leaving one to wonder about the overall value of the PA. Our research indicates
that most employees report that their managers are ineffective in conducting a performance appraisal.
However, if we were to follow Culbert’s premise to its logical end, we would eliminate many management
functions because few work as advertised. Hunger and Wheelen (2011) remind us that anything of
importance, and surely performance appraisals are significant, requires a strategy. Further, they remind
us to mind our gaps, implying we have starting points (goals and objectives) and end points (measures)
defined so that we can track performance gaps. PAs can be enhanced by using “What, what, why,”
“Communications Respect and Trust (CRT)” and “TIPS” principles shown in this research (Covey all
dates; and Service and Loudon, 2010).

When asked to “Describe the performance appraisal function within your organization, not as it should be
but as it actually is” (as one of many open-ended research question with over 1,000 working MBAs), we
found that over 80% of the respondents’ experience with appraisals could be categories as “a joke”
(Service and Carson, 2008). Yet, almost everyone with five or more years of experience reports having
had at least one appraisal that is done properly. The most common excuses for poor performance
reviews are they are difficult to do correctly and they take a lot of time. So, difficulty and time consuming
override quality? Only if you measure for ‘better’ will you get better.

Corbin and Strauss (2008) help one understand how to recognize “All of the past is in the present . . . .
and all the future arises out of the present (p. 87).” Corbin recommends that leaders stay open because
early analysis is about generating initial conceptualizations that can evolve into core concepts that can
lead to theory. “[It is a] circular process (p. 145).” . . . The world is very complex. There are no simple
explanations for things. Rather, events are the result of multiple factors coming together and interacting
in complex and often unanticipated ways. . . . it is important to capture as much of this complexity . . . as
possible. . . . Obtain multiple perspectives (p.8).” See how these thoughts help us understand that
employee performance in any area is hard to measure, in part due to subjectivity, but it still needs to be
measured? Understanding the past helps us create a correct future.

Peter F. Drucker (1973) recommended MBO (Management by Objectives) which occurs when a boss and
an employee mutually define what the employee needs to accomplish and how those objectives will be
evaluated. Then the employee is evaluated on accomplishment of those objectives. Virtually all higher
education institutions today are deeply involved in “assurance of learning” and establishing meaningful
objectives for the management and faculty as they face accreditation reviews: MBO in use.

Never blame poor performance review results on the system; instead, blame the users. We have never
heard of a performance review system that says you can’t communicate with employees throughout the
year—I’ve got to wait for that annual PA? Famed TQM guru W. Edwards Deming said, poor performance
is more likely the failure of the manager than the fault of the workers (Service and Lockamy, 2008).
Formal performance appraisals should clearly state the desired goals with no hidden agendas (Black,
2007). Beyond that, good managers commit to Communications, Respect and Trust (CRT) in all human
interactions; and a continuous flow of management-directed TIPS (Timely Individualized, Performance,
Specific) as the foundation of managing. Yes, respect and trust are byproducts of honesty which is best
communicated by example: not what you say. Do what you say and say what you mean. Successful PAs
happen when the boss and the employee simply do not want to let each other, their peers and
constituents, or their organization down. Management must properly do the function of PA, letting one
know what's expected of them and how they are living up to those expectations. Do not throw in the towel
because it is hard to do! All organizations need records of objectives and accomplishments and more
effective communications, formal and otherwise, not less.

As noted above use the “what, what, why” model administered as TIPS for on-the-spot management
coaching. That is, when a manager or leader observes an action or inaction related to performance that
is wrong or incomplete, they should say right then, “This is what you did, this is what you should have
done and here is why.” Managers must marshal the guts to do this and when employees see the honesty
and openness within the directions given . . . a world of difference will occur in performance. Our CRT-
TIPS and “what, what, why” guides can direct organizational managers and leaders to greater
accomplishments. Common sense says we need to honestly document and discuss the good and bad.

3.5 Management from A to Z

We would be remiss if we did not say more about the human resource (HR) function within today’s
modern American organizations. Sadly, it is often among the most hated of function (Hammonds, 2010).
We believe this is because HR simply does not do what it should. HR should be a strategic partner in
leading and managing versus a policing function as the only privy of the department or function. All
managers and leaders should be first and last human resource managers (Ziskin, 2015—a must read).
We will not go over all management, but since management is a prerequisite to leadership in American
organizations we will cover items you might not find in a normal management text. We at least must cover
the more difficult HR function, though not to the level of detail we did the performance reviews. Strat by
admitting that in all of HR we must follow the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. Take action for the
right reasons as well as the legal reasons. Make all of your dealings above board and transparent with
tasks people in the beginning, middle and end of your leadership. Begin by understanding the overriding
infallible economic principles of open book management and then make sure everyone knows a bit about
economics. Economic rule #1 for a practicing manager is, if it is spent here it can’t be spent there and it
came from somewhere: marginal costs, trade-offs and cost benefit analysis. Also remember that there are
moral hazards involved in compromises. Understand hazards under rules of unintended consequences,
incentives and wishing over logic errors (Service and Carson, 2010a).

If you read any author about general management and leadership it should be Peter F. Drucker—he
came to represent honesty in the practice of management to us in our quest to teach and learn about
effectiveness in influencing other (1973, all; Buford, 2014; and Cohen, 2010). Drucker and others show
imperatives to organizational success are understanding 1) why someone would do business with you or
your organization, and 2) how to become and remain innovative. Always remember, when someone buys
a ½” drill bit, they don’t want that bit, they want half inch holes: in what, how many, where and so on are
their needs that you must understand and lead toward.

3.6 The Tougher Management Functions-overriding principle is honesty in all tasks

Hiring, training, rewarding, and terminating are all HR functions you need to understand. And, the
overriding HR goal is to get the right people at the right time with the right motivations and give them the
right goals and incentives—yes, HR is right . . . .right . . . right. The key to moving from manager to leader
lies not in what you have done in the past, but in what you are capable of at the next level. To increase
your management effectiveness, become an “almost” expert on honorable HR (Smith and Mazin, 2004).

On Staffing—“Surround yourself with an inner core that complements your leadership (Maxwell, 2002: p.
80).” A highly effective manager/leader, needs to create an organization that gets and keeps the best
people—where people want to work. Value based employees leave because:
1) They see no honest link between pay and performance or growth opportunities.
2) They do not see their work as honorable; their honest contributions are not recognized.
3) They do not get to use their talents because of unclear, unrealistic or corrupt expectations.
4) They will not tolerate abusive or dishonest managers/toxic environments (Branham, 2001).
People quit bosses not jobs! “No executive has ever suffered because his subordinates were strong and
effective (Drucker, from Maxwell, 2002: p. 95).”

The realities of diversity say we must began to take diversity of thought over diversity of appearance.
Likewise shift your thinking on all systems—rewards, rules and Standard Operating Procedure—toward
realizing that an excess of rules weakens all rules. Practice controlled burning of rules, systems, often.
On motivation, motivating others is next to impossible. Good managers have self-motivated employees
because they have no second-class disrespected subordinates. Moreover, international management is
becoming a requirement and if nothing else a global mindset spurs innovative creativity and trust.

Recognize that communications (telling is not communicating) only occurs when there is mutual
understanding and make sure employees know you hear them. Then empower by managing through
open shared responsibilities. Meeting all social value and responsibility as you go for we are a society of
organizations; and all organizational managers must respect the society within which they live and realize
they prosper only “with society. Staying up with and even ahead of the new realities is a must; able
leaders are alert to the political climate and to world economic trends with a moral compass (Gardner,
2003).

Yes, the fog of management is about persuasion and bringing people together to accomplish overriding
purposes: most often management is reported as, “grappling with the gray.” Planning, organizing,
directing, controlling and staffing are foundational, but so are management of the “realities” of the tougher
functions described above. To keep the hope of advancement into the top “leadership” roles alive in the
world of organizations, you must be a truthful and trustworthy manager who can clear the fog making
clear the path to accomplishment: performance. A manager keeps people on track, but it takes a leader
to move them to a new innovative future. You must move without the clarity of hindsight, but with the
knowledge of past actions and resulting performance. Winning organizations and individuals are capable
of rapid action that fits them (or their organization) with the evolving economic realities through focused
measurable values based on open honest decisions (Covey, all dates).
The realities shown in this research are solid. Do not let limitation of our work keep you from using what it
implies you need to know to achieve values based effective leadership; or the level you hope to help
others achieve through your teaching or research in management and leadership.

3.7 Organizational Culture: purpose-vision, trust-worthy, align-fit, talent-keep, innovate-example

Edgar Schein is the guru of ‘org’ culture. His life of researching organizational culture is unparalleled. His
concepts show how leaders define, and build cultures as assumptions are formed and evolved by what is
allowed, enabled and demonstrated until the culture becomes embedded in the climate where employees
live and work. Schein shows that managing authority relationship is tough and without the right culture it
is unlikely. Define, train and hire based on a culture you will lead with: then live it (Schein, 2010). Again,
don’t leave home without understanding how pervasive an organizational culture will become, purposeful
or not, useful or harmful culture will exist (Arnott, 2000; and Barney, 1995). Throughout this manuscript
we present guides and ways to improve organizational culture, but always honesty has to be the base of
any desirable culture. Without the truth and trust of an honest top management team or if truth and trust
take a back seat to anything you will not be happy with your organizational culture (Tjan, 2017).

3.8 Good People—all you need to know

We see most of what we need too in noted entrepreneur, strategy advisor and author Anthony Tjan’s
book Good People: The Only Leadership Decision That Really Matters (2017). Tjan’s “Goodness
Pyramid” presents the ideas of wholeness in wisdom and respect; compassion of generosity, empathy
and openness; and the truth of integrity, self-awareness and humility (p. 240). Don’t feel too good until
you realize your mindset and “intentions matter (p. 38).” Start and end by practicing integrity without
compromise. Remind yourself that when you make exceptions for yourself or others your exceptions
become your rules and habit: and habits will rule. Working and wishing for the advancement and
happiness of others and not satisficing separates the good from the not so good; and shows respect for
humanity that can only lead to good leadership. Learn to recognize, internalize, practice and share your
honesty as you manage and lead. Commit, help, practice and learn and then you can be. This dense
overview of Good People comes close to saying everything that needs to be said about the foundation of
honesty in the influence of leadership and management. Along these same lines, we see all of the work
of Collins related to great leaders as revolving around humility (all dates) and Covey related to trust (all
dates). There is so much more here than we weave into that goes way beyond classifications, rules,
guides or categories which naturally all too often result in unintended consequences (Conard, 2012; and
Rumsfeld, 2013). Tjan wraps up his excellent work with reminding us that it is all up to us for everything
begins and ends respecting people and having unalterable honesty and openness values.

We close our literature review with a classic that we used for years to teach and learn about leadership.
That is Kouzes and Posner’s The Leadership Challenge series which has gone through five additions and
many articles about and from the authors. The latest 5th edition celebrates the 25th anniversary of these
classic works (2012). Some of the examples and dates have changed, as well as notations of ever
heightening uncertainty requiring more re-adaptability, but the additions and attention in the differing
editions and the extant press has not affected the survivability of the basic Challenge principles. Starting
and ending with the identification of “credibility is the foundation of leadership (p. 23 of the 2002 3 rd
edition),” Kouzes and Posner’s top five practices to accomplish their subtitle of How to Make
Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations are: 1) model the way in all your actions as an employee,
manager or leader; 2) share you vision to inspire others toward the shared vision; 3) exhibit the wisdom to
properly challenge all processes to reassess how you accomplish leading and managing; 4) enable
others to act as you have modeled; and 5) exemplify encouraging the heart as you engage the mind.
This is the tip of the iceberg with Kouzes and Posner’s powerful messages. But when the rubber meets
the road and one must act, we see honesty over competency, inspiring over requiring and adapting over
accepting are concepts we got from the Challenge regardless of the message Kouzes and Posner
intended (also see 2006).

4 THE LEADERSHIP QUOTIENT (LQ©)

This section reviews much of the work of Service and others and it builds a measurable profile of
leadership useful for training with honesty at its base. The research that developed a quotient for
leadership, started in the late 1990s when an attempted to find texts useful in leadership self-assessment
and improvement was unsuccessful. The goal was a set of identifiable leadership precepts that were
measureable and teachable. The literature continuously stated that there was no single unified model of
leadership. But, as one of our student said, “there should be.” That effort resulted in Service and Arnott’s
270,000-word book that provided some 192 percepts of well-known and new quotients. Here we briefly
recount some of the LQ© development that has been more than well vetted in some 30 academically
refereed articles, used in many consulting assignments and with scores of students at the undergraduate
and graduate level. These practices continued to shape the LQ©‘s usefulness for over a decade.

This leadership quotient development was inspired by the notion of differing types of intellect which is
now well established in the psychological literature. These separate intellects (IQs) started getting
academic attention in Howard Gardner’s pioneering book Frames of Mind (1993). There Gardner labelled
seven basic types of intelligence: verbal, mathematical-logical, spatial, kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal,
and intra-personal. His work seems to explain some of the why related to traditional IQ tests being poor
at predicting success in many of life’s endeavors (Khalfa, 1994). Later much was written about a so
called 1) successful intelligence (SQ) and 2) emotional aptitudes (EQ) that seem to lead to success in 3)
relational leadership (Sternberg, 1996; Goleman, 1995; 1993; and McIntosh, 2011). All of these types of
intellects were more malleable than the traditional IQ, thus rendering them more appropriate for
improvement. Using this as a base we developed other types of intellect as delineated here. Close behind
this we saw Goleman extending Gardner into emotional intelligence (EQ). With EQ being defined as how
well someone manages their own emotions and can read and use the emotions of others. Accompanying
Goleman’s EQ was the work of Sternberg on successful intelligent (SQ) and a natural next step to us was
propose that if one could measure EQ, IQ and SQ there should be similar ways to measure Leadership.
Extrapolating one area, EQ, we see dimensions of EQ, self-awareness and management, social
awareness, and relationship management, that are critical to accomplishment of innovation through
others (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002). Goleman proclaimed that emotional maturity and soft skills
play a greater role than intelligence (as measured by the traditional IQ) in leadership success, because
differing intellects (Quotients) lead to more innovation. Looking for ways to separate and expand some of
the items identified in IQ, SQ and EQ lead to discovering and naming other quotients that we describe
here. LQ© makes IQ type measures more meaningful and applicable to us and our students in situations
we will face in the future (support in Covey 1999; Gulford 1967 and 1986; Pinker 2002).

4.1 The Nature versus Nurture Leadership Debate-has been settled

We recount a point made by Pinker (2002) in his book The Blank Slate: “Haven’t we all moved beyond
the simplistic dichotomy between heredity and environment and realized that all behavior comes out of an
interaction between the two (p. vii) . . .differences of opinion arise not because one mind is equipped to
grasp the truth and another is defective, but because the two minds have had different histories (p. 5).”
We present this to dispose of the nature versus nurture debate on leadership. Of course, it is both and
every single thing in the world is easier for some than others; yet, impossible for few that have normal
limitations. We are all differently abled. To better understand the complexity of the interaction of the
nature and nurture effects on leadership you should read Pinker’s book and study closely the theories of
the 1) blank slate, 2) noble savage, and 3) ghost within with an open mind! Over time we have all but
proven to ourselves that there are elements over and above the normal IQ measurement factors that
make a good SQ that are measurable, useful and malleable. We built our LQ© principles to meet the
necessity to measure and improve all manner of leadership competence (Bennett and Castiglioni, 2004).

4.2 Meat of LQ©

We began to see overall influences that direct leadership effectiveness as we explore the idea behind
multiple non-mathematical quotients. Our principles set a firm foundation of the notion and detailed
definition of LQ©. Yes, “We are in the midst of a major managerial paradigm shift that is transforming
what it means to be an effective leader (Clawson, 1999: p. 171).” “But leadership isn’t a position; it’s a
process. It’s an observable, understandable, learnable set of skills and practices available to everyone,
anywhere in the organization (Hesselbein and Cohen, 1999: p. 37).” LQ© innovatively clarifies the
complexities of interactions of people and processes involved in measuring and improving leadership.
For as Einstein said, “The significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of
thinking we were at when we created them (cited in Oakley and Krug, 1991: p. 13).”
LQ© as depicted in the formula in Figure 2 did not come from thin air. It came from over 1,100
respondents (average age of 36 with 15 years of working experience and 17 years of education), over 50
years of combined personal experiences and observation, 1,000s of published sources evolving or 10
years in some 30 articles (Service and Arnott, 2006). Our search for useful concepts extended to
psychological and instructive literature in an attempt to go beyond the normal “business leadership”
disciplines. Many pre-re-tests have solidified the understanding of all aspects of leadership ensuing LQ©
defines leadership as a measure of the precepts/components that are observably crucial when leadership
occurs. In this model, positive elements indicate effective or good leadership, and negative elements the
opposite. An important triangulation occurs when we witness an effective LQ© as a function of the
interaction of: 1) Leader, 2) Followers and 3) Environments (Situations) as in LQ©’s formula (and
relationally) in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2: Leadership Formula

LQ©=function of: characteristics and traits
Leaders Qs=DQ-Desire + RQ-Reality +BQ-Behavior +AQ-Appearance +
Follower Qs =CQ-Communications + PQ-People + EQ-Emotional + IQ-Intelligence] +
Environmental Qs=XQ-eXperience +KQ-Knowledge +SQ-Situation +MQ-Management.

Most of these quotients are relatively well known and easy to grasp. For example, it is well known that
honing desire, behavior, communications, experience and even management as defined in this research
are critical to leadership development. The LQ© concepts and precepts have been used successfully by
its original authors and others with college students, in military training and in T & D organizational efforts.
Note the words of Dr. Richard I. Lester who was teaching at Maxwell AFB when he wrote of the book
being recounted here: “An engaging and important book, The Leadership Quotient provides a realistic,
practical, and workable model to identify, measure, and improve leadership effectiveness (p. 112). . . .
Examining The Leadership Quotient is a rewarding experience. This reviewer is convinced that leaders
who successfully apply its principles will go a long way toward solving problems they may have with
themselves, their followers, or the situations they confront ( 2007: 113).” Yes, LQ© directs us to honestly
assess and realize the traits, abilities, and behaviors that we naturally have and do not have and how to
adapt those to followers and environments in order to influence, that is lead. After identifying and honing
those possibilities (maximize strengths) and figuring out a way around shortcomings (minimize
weaknesses) we can make progress as a leader (Service, 2005a). This is not a one-time task and we are
not offering a pseudoscientific pill to cure all leadership problems. “The more complex society gets, the
more sophisticated leadership must become. Complexity means change, but specifically it means rapidly
occurring, unpredictable, nonlinear change (sound like crossing cultures (Fullan, 2001: p. ix)?” The
measures are simple, their development and eventual application are not.

The current authors as practicing managers, consultants and professors see management as controlling,
arranging and doing things right. And, leadership as setting visions and doing the right things (inspired by
Maas, 1998; and Service all dates). “[L]eadership plays the prime role for the creation of excellence in an
organization (Kanji and Moura e Sa, 2001: p. 701).” As we have moved into the arena of global
competition shifting from managing for stability and control to leadership for speed, experimentation,
flexibility, change, and innovativeness becomes more critical (Chopra and Mlodinow, 2011; and Service ,
2009). “Leadership is the art of accomplishing more than the science of management says is possible
(Colin Powell quoted in Harari, 2002: p.13)”

The leadership guide pictured in Figure 3 demonstrates the art and science of leadership as it is used to
characterize the interactive influences of leaders. Study to understand the three interactive angles of
leadership and the 12 associated quotients: individually and interactively. Note your strengths and
weaknesses honestly and completely: honesty with yourself precludes honesty with others. Think about
how ‘dumb’ it is to be dishonest with yourself in an area you want to enhance; like a drug addict lying to
his councilor—won’t get better! Following are very brief overviews of each of the quotients represented in
the leadership quotient concept. In each Quotient you need to assess yourself against what is required to
advance your leadership effectiveness and develop a strategy for improving (Service.
DQ—Desire Quotient: Effort, persistence—willingness to do whatever it takes.
RQ—Reality Quotient: Correctly clarifying inclusiveness, objectives, forward-sightedness, etc.
EQ—Emotional Quotient: Self-awareness, social awareness, empathy, ability to control and read.
IQ—Intelligence Quotient: LQ’s IQ replacement SQ-appropriate, balance, fit—tough but figure it out!
CQ—Communications Quotient: Verbal, written, body language, dialect, clarity . . .
PQ—People Quotient: Ability to relate with people-social skills, poise and demeanor, teaming, etc.
BQ—Behavioral Quotient: Exhibited external focus, ethics, values, direction-that appeals to followers.
AQ—Appearance Quotient: Manifestation of correct level of confidence, dress-perspective of followers.
XQ—eXperience Quotient: Accomplishments.
KQ—Knowledge Quotient: Leader’s ability to learn, pay attention, recognize, imagine, keep up to date.
SQ—Situational Quotient: Ability to interpret cues and develop appropriate strategies.
MQ—Management Quotient: General admin skills, systems and procedures.
**Note that here we have outlined the positive aspects about each quotient, but each Q also has a
negative side which is generally the reverser of the positive.

FIGURE 3: Leadership Success Triangle=LQ©

LEADER’S

Skills & Traits

Desire to become
Ability to interpret the future
Emotional Intelligence
Successful Intelligence
FISO-Fit in yet Stand Out

Relationships LQ ©
Fit
FOLLOWER’S (people) balance ENVIRONMENTS (tasks)
Perceptions linked/relating ‘Fitability’ of leaders/matching
Your Appearance, behavior Knowledge of management, situations
communications & people skills & Experience
Leadership is human influence occurring when people do things together (Blanchard, 2007).
Requirements include: an understanding of self, others, and environments (situations); learning to
balance people, contexts and tasks; commitment, fit, intellect, principles, desire, and more. A leader’s
goal must be to help others realize more from their lives as they learn how to fit in yet stand out and make
a difference through others. A truly self-perpetuating leader develops others as leaders first and
foremost. The journey to personal leadership improvement starts with desire and self-awareness, and
develops into a continuous commitment to never ending development, and ends with practice: application
by you and your followers (Yukl, 2013 and Zecca, et al, 2013: honest rules). Learn to understand the
quotients and apply for you, your followers and your situations (Service, 2009a and b provide details
on all 192 precepts in the 12 Quotients and provides guides for those wishing to teach, improve or
measure leadership). We have produced and used an assessment and improvement booklet that depict
the 192 precepts in our leadership quotient and outlines how they can be used. (Available at
rwservice@samford.edu.

4.3 Leader’s characteristics and traits

Work to understand the applicability of LQ© (study Figure 3). Think about each quotient and remember
that effective leadership, and a satisfyingly successful life, requires a balanced fit among environments,
behaviors, contexts, processes, contents, and needs. Use the mentioned max-min principles to make the
best use of what you have and to render irrelevant weakness you cannot (or will not) change. We say
appropriate, balance, fit and it depends answers everything, and it does; but you must know what those
words denote and how to apply them: wisdom. “Consider well who you are, what you do, whence you
came, and whither you are to go (English proverb; from Safire and Safire, 2000: p. 209).” Learn from
challenging and conquering the context in fundamental ways (Bennis, 1989). “[L]eadership . . . is about
getting alignment and it’s about inspiring people to achieve (Fullan, 2001: p.19).” Well thought out
systems and organized processes do not become effective until the right people are in the right places for
 execution of the processes noted here and elsewhere. Great people need to have good processes. The
balance is tough but doable and powerful when achieved through the following: a) Adapting to followers.
b) Fitting with environments and tasks. c) Balancing self, followers, and the environment. d) Creating
adaptable “fitability” with time, place, people, and things. e) Fitting in before you Standing out. This is our
“leaderology” and it only works with honesty: truth, trust, truthfulness, trustworthiness. Study Figure 4
making your aim to model those behaviors and traits always working to get better.

FIGURE 4: KNOW DO BE Tried and True Leadership Guide

Appropriate Balance, leader, Fits-people, Leadership

‘learn’ followers & situations and Wisdom
situations ‘do’ cultures ‘do’ ‘be’

KNOW
learn and
L use
E ‘Truth’
A As LQ-Knowledge,
D Leaders skills
E Content
see self BE
R LQ-desire
reality emotions more
R Effective
intellect Learned
E
A LQ-experience & earned Leader
L knowledge
I ‘Trust’ strategy-mgt.
T As
Y followers LQ-comm. EQ
see leader
Process
Behavior
Appearance
DO
put into
practice

Leader’s Leader’s Followers’ Followers’

Truth Trust Truthfulness Trustworthiness

Truth & Trust in everything Foundation for Management & Leadership

words & actions = for leaders then followers emulate
LQ©

 Foundation of truth and trust enables one to lead others over time.
 Leaders are measured by ability to communicate with truth, clarity and conviction.
 Develop orgs that interact truthfully at all levels, foster innovative, customer focused organization.
 Understanding how you communicate-use best practices-become a lasting KNOW DO BE Leader.
 It is a life long journey of maximize strengths and minimizing weaknesses.
5 CONCLUSIONS

Think about Enron, World-Com, the “too big to fails,” UBBER, United, Delta, The U.S. President and other
candidates, the U. S. National Security Advisor, Bill O’Reilly, Brian Williams, Jason Blaire, pass the bill so
we can read it, hands-up don’t shoot, red line, read my lips and the list grows: the consequences of
dishonesty exemplified. We as practitioners and professors have managed and lead, researched, taught
and published for years about hard competencies and skills needed for management and leadership as
have many within the academy. All the while too many of us treat arranged empirical studies, useful or
otherwise, about hard and soft skills, as gospel when they are normally no less stories and opinions than
editorials in almost all cases. Empirical or pure perspective, of all studies we must ask ‘so what’ to direct
us toward applications that matter and will last. That has lead us to what really matters—core values
and related actions for if they are insufficient or misdirected those moral character issues will negate
base knowledge, skills, abilities, all competencies. It has been proven over and over in politics, education
and all areas of commerce that interpersonal effectiveness is most often the key deal maker or breaker
(Bedwell, Flore and Salas, 2014). And, people simply do not remain individually relationally successful
when they cannot be trusted or inspire trust, and trustworthiness requires and begets truth. Study and
understand how you will apply the KNOW DO BE Model in Figure 4 and you will grow as a leader as
long as you desire to do so.

In all organizations, it matters what leaders say and what they do, but it matters most who and what they
are. All managers and leadership do, say or are, indicate what is valued and how it is valued. All of the
Know Do Be aspects of leaders trickles down through an organization. The actions and persona,
purposeful or otherwise, of leaders override all types of TQM, policies, rules and so on, for you only get
systematic excellence by modeling, encouraging and rewarding ‘it.’ When you tolerate otherwise from
yourself or others you won’t get excellence. It is so simple at the core, say what you mean, mean what
you say; be on time, start on time, compliment or rebuke appropriately.

We feel sure we have not fully answered all there is to leadership. Perhaps we have succeeded in
generating even more questions, but maybe, just maybe, we will develop higher levels of questions within
the framework of honesty, truth and trust. Honesty is the multi-purpose tool in your leadership tool box
that can always be with you to act as your vulcanizer, super-duper glue, fasteners of shapes and sizes,
and even your ‘DuckTape’ for those quick fixes to hold leadership together. Do not let the shortcomings
of this research deter you simply remember that all humans doubt and struggle, and with the foggy
darkness of dishonesty and untrustworthiness there is no light. The beginning and ending answer is the
light of truth and trust. Even with freedom if it is within the darkness of lying and self-interest we will
stumble and fall, ultimately ending badly; but you can turn on the light with truth, truthfulness, trust and
trustworthiness and become a leader with lasting influence. So, go flip your ‘Know Do Be’ switch and
never, ever turn it off.

The true test of leadership and management is whether or not the leader or manager has helped those
they influence become the best they can are capable of becoming. High levels of effectiveness in this
lofty aim is not possible without trustworthiness and truthfulness.

REFERENCES

Alexander, L. and Knippenberg, D. V. Teams in pursuit of radical innovation: a goal orientation

perspective. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), Pages 432-438, 2014.
Arbinger Institute. Leadership and Self-Deception: Getting Out of the Box. San Francisco, Berrett-
Koehler, 2000.
Arnott, D. Corporate Cults: The Insidious Lure of the All-Consuming Organization. New York: AMACOM,
2000.
Barner, R. W. Team Troubleshooter. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black, 2000.
Barney, J. Looking inside for competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 9(4), Pages
49-61, 1995.
Bate, P., and Child, J. Paradigms and understanding in comparative organizational research, in J. Child,
and P. Bate (eds.) Organization of Innovation East-West Perspective, New York: Walter de
Gruyter, Pages 19-49, 1987.
Bedwell, W. L., Flore, S. M. and Salas, E. Developing the Future Workforce: An Approach for Integrating
Interpersonal Skills Into the MBA Classroom. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
13(2), Pages 171-186, 2014.
Bennis, W. G. On Becoming a Leader. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1989.
Bennis, W.G. and Nanus, G. Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper Books, 2003.
Bennis, W. G., Spreitzer, G. M., & Cummings, T. G. The Future of Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 2001.
Bennis, W. G. and Thomas, R. J. Crucibles of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, September, 80(9),
Pages 39-46, 2002.
Bernstein, E. A Guide to Little White Lies. The Wall Street Journal, Page A11, June 6, 2017.
Black, C. Basic Black: The Essential Guide for Getting Ahead at Work (and in Life). New York: Crown
Business, 2007.
Blanchard, K. Leading at a Higher Level. New York: Prentice Hall, 2007.
Branham, L. Keeping the People Who Keep You In Business. New York: AMACOM, 2001.
Brooks, D. (2011). The social animal: The hidden sources of love, character, and achievement. New
York: Random House, 2011.
Broom, L. S. and Service, R.W. Religion or Psychology? Making the Case for Economic and
Organizational Impact. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 9(1-2), Pages 51-83, 2014.
Buckingham, M. Go Put Your Strengths to Work. New York: Free Press, 2007
Buckingham, M. and Clifton, D. O. Now, Discover Your Strengths. New York: Free Press, 2001.
Buford, B. Drucker & Me: What a Texas Entrepreneur Learned from the Father of Modern Management.
Brentwood, TN: Worthy Publishing, 2014.
Carroll, A.B. and Buchholtz, A. K. Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management, 6th ed.,
Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western, 2006.
Christensen, C. M., Allworth, J and Dillon, K. How Will You Measure Your Life? New York: Harper
Business, 2012.
Chopra, D., and Mlodinow, L. War of Worldviews. New York: Harmony Books, 2011.
Cohen, W. A. Drucker on Leadership: New Lessons from the Father of Modern Management. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010.
Collins, J. Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap to Greatness and Others Don’t. .New
York: HarperCollins, 2001.
Collins, J. The 10 Greatest CEOs of All Time, Fortune, July 21, Pages 55-68, 2003.
Conard, E. Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You’ve Been Told About The Economy is Wrong.
New York: Penguin, 2012.
Corbin, J., and Strauss, A. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory (3th ed.). Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage, 2008.
Covey, S. Principle Centered Leadership. New York: Summit Books, 1991.
Covey, S. Living The 7 Habits: The Courage to Change. New York: Fireside, 1999.
Covey, S. The 8th habit. New York: Free Press, 2004.
Covey, S. with Merrill, R. The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything. New York: Free
Press, 2006.
Culbert, S. A. Get Rid of the Performance Review. The Wall Street Journal, October 20, Page R4, 2008.
Dotlich, D. L. and Cairo, P. C. Why CEOs Fail. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
Drucker, PF. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York: Harper & Roe, 1973.
Drucker, P. F. The New Realities. New York: Harper & Row, 1989.
Drucker, P. F. Management Challenges for the 21st Century. New York: Harper Business, 1999.
Dungy, T. and Whitaker, N. Quiet Strength: A Memoir. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2007
Elmer, D. Cross-Cultural Connections: Stepping out and Fitting in Around the World. Downers Grove, IL:
IVP Academics, 2002.
Emmett, R. B. “Review of the ‘Crisis of Global Capitalism: Pope Benedict XVI's Social Encyclical and the
Future of Political Economy’ edited by Adrian Pabst.” Journal of Markets & Morality, 15(2), Pages
487-91, 2012.
Frankl, V. E. Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1992.
Friedman, T. L. The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 2005.
Friedman, T. L. Hot, flat and crowded. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2008.
Friedman, T. L., and Mandelbaum, M. That used to be us. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
Fullan, M. Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Gardner, H. Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books (Originally published in 1983), 2011.
Gay, C. “Is Entrepreneurial Activity Necessarily Pleasing to God?” Journal of Markets & Morality, 5(1),
127-34, 2002.
Gibson, C. B. Metaphors and Meaning: An Intercultural Analysis of Concepts of Teamwork. Administrative
Science Quarterly, June, 2001: take from www.findarticles.
Gladwell, M. The Tipping Point: How little things make a big difference. Boston: Little, Brown, 2002.
Gladwell, M. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. New York: Little, Brown and Company,
2005.
Gladwell, M. Outliers: The Story of Success. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2008.
Goleman, D. Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books, 1995.
Goleman, D. Working with Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam, 2000.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. ‘Primal Leadership: The Hidden Driver of Great Performance’,
Harvard Business Review, Pages 42-51, December 2001.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., and McKee, A. Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional
Intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School, 2002.
Grassl, W. Review of ‘Human Development in Business: Values and Humanistic Management in the
Encyclical Caritas in Veritate’. Journal of Markets & Morality, 15(2), Pages 510-513, 2012.
Greenleaf, R. K. The Servant as Leader. Indianapolis, IN: The Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1991.
Guilford, J. P. The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
Guilford, J. P. Creative Talents. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited, 1986.
Hall, S. S. Wisdom: from philosophy to neuroscience. New York: Vintage, 2011.
Hammonds, K. H. Why We Hate HR, in Maidment, F. H. (editor). (2010). Annual Editions: Human
Resources 09/10 (eighteenth edition). Boston, McGraw Hill Higher Education, Pages 10-15,
2010.
Handy, C. The Hungry Sprit. New York: Broadway, 1998.
Harper, L. C. Learning to Make Good Business Decisions Better–Another Contribution Christian Colleges
and Universities Can Make to Improving Business Outcomes. The Journal of Business Inquiry,
13(1), Pages 61-69, 2014.
Hersey, P. H., Blanchard, K. H. and Johnson, D. E. Management of Organizational Behavior (10th
edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2013.
Hesselbein, F. and Cohen, P. M. (Editors). Leader to Leader: Enduring Insights on Leadership from The
Drucker Foundation’s Award-Winning Journal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.
Hunger, J. D. and Wheelen, T. L. Essential of Strategic Management (5th edition). Upper Saddle River
NJ: Prentice Hall, 2011.
Isaacson, W. Einstein: His Life and Universe. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2007.
Isaacson, W. The Innovators: How a group of hackers, geniuses, and geeks created the digital revolution.
New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014.
Johnson, C. E. Organizational Ethics: A Practical Approach. New York: Sage, 2016
Kennedy P. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, New York: Random House, 1987.
Khalfa, J. (editor). What is Intelligence? New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge,
1994.
Knapp, J. C. How the Church Fails Businesspeople (and what can be done about it) Grand Rapids, MI:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2011
Kouzes, J. M. and Posner, B. Z. A leader’s Legacy. New York: Jossey-Bass/Wiley, 2006.
Kouzes,J. M. and Posner, B. Z. The Leadership Challenge (5th addition—25th anniversary). New York:
Wiley & Sons, 2012.
Lane, B. Jacked Up. New York: McGraw-Hill., 2008.
Lencioni, P. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
Levitt S. D. and Dubner S. J. Freaknomics, New York: William Morrow, 2005.
Levitt, S. D. and Dubner, S. J. Super Freakonomics, New York: William Morrow, 2009.
Levitt, S. D. and Dubner, S. J. Think Like a Freak: How to Think Smarter about Almost Everything. New
York: Penguin Books, 2014.
Li, C. Open leadership: How social technology can transform the way your lead. New York: Jossey-Bass,
2010.
Maas, J. Winning’em Over: A new Model for Managing in the Age of Persuasion/Getting it Done: How to
Lead When You’re Not in Charge. Sloan Management Review, 40(1), Pages 103-104, 1998.
Maxwell, J. C. The 21 Most Powerful Minutes in a Leader’s Day. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2000.
Maxwell, J. C. Leadership 101: What Every Leader Needs To Know. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson,
2002.
Maxwell, J. C. The 17 Essential Qualities of a Team Player. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2002.
Maxwell, J. C. The 360 Degree Leader. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2006.
McIntosh, F. The Relational Leader: A Revolutionary Framework to Engage Your Team. Boston MA:
Course Technology, 2011.
Mendenhall, M. E., Osland, J. S., Bird, A., Oddou, G. R., and Maznevski, M. L. Global leadership:
Research, practice and development. New York: Routledge, 2008.
Mintzberg, H. Managers Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management
Development. San Francisco: BK Publishers, 2004.
Mintzberg, H. Managing. UK: Pearson Education, 2009.
Morowitz, H. J. The Emergence of Everything: How the World Became Complex. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press, 2004.
Neck, C. P., and Manz, C. C. Mastering self-leadership (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson, 2013.
Nicolson, A. God’s Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible. New York: HarperCollins, 2003.
Niebuhr, R. The Nature and Destiny of Man: A Christian Interpretation, Volume 1: Human Nature. New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1964.
Northouse, P. G. Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th edition). Los Angles: Sage, 2016.
Novak, M. Human Dignity, Personal Liberty: Themes from Abraham Kuyper and Leo XIII. Journal of
Markets & Morality, 5(1), Pages 59-85, 2002.
O'Boyle, E. J. The Acting Person and Personalist Capital. Journal of Markets & Morality, 15(1), Pages 89-
102, 2012.
Obama, B. Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. New York: Three Rivers Press,
2004.
Obama, B. The Audacity of Hope. New York: Crown Publishers, 2006.
Patterson, K. Grenny, J., McMillan, R. and Switzler, A. Crucial Conversations: Tools for talking when
stakes are high. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002.
Pennock, R. T. Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
Pink, D. H. Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motives Us. New York: Penguin, 2009.
Pinker, S. How the Mind Works. New York: W. W. Norton, 1997.
Pinker, S. The Blank Slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking, 2002.
Porter, M. E. Competitive Strategy. New York: Collier Macmillan, 1980.
Porter, M. E. Competitive Advantage. New York: Macmillan, 1985.
Porter, M. E. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Macmillan, 1990.
Rath, T. and Conchie, B. Strengths Based Leadership. New York: Gallup Press, 2008.
Ridley, M. The Agile Gene: How Nature Turns on Nurture. Great Britain: Fourth Estate, 2003.
Robbins, H. and Finley, M. WHY TEAMS DON'T WORK: What Goes Wrong and How to Make It Right.
Princeton, NJ: Peterson's/Pacesetter Books, 1995.
Rumsfeld, D. Rumsfeld’s Rules. New York: Broadside Books, 2013.
Safire, W. & Safire, L. Leadership. New York: Galahad Books, 2000.
Saroglou, V. Believing, Bonding, Behaving, and Belonging: The Big Four Religious Dimensions and
Cultural Variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(8), Pages 1320-1340, 2011.
Schein, E. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Service, R. W. (2009a). ‘The leadership quotient: Measuring toward improve’, Business Renaissance
Quarterly, 4(1), Pages 125-158, 2009a.
Service, R. W. The Leadership Quotient©’s Thought Experiment: A Framework For Leadership and
Management. International Journal of Business and Public Administration, (3), Pages 74-90,
2009b.
Service, R. W. Management: “Is versus “Should Be.” Problems and Perspectives in Management, 8(2),
Pages 21-43, 2010.
Service, R. W. Leadership and Innovation across cultures: CIQ-Contextual Effectiveness as a Skill,
Southern Business Review, 37(1), Pages 19-50, 2012.
Service, B. and Arnott, D. The Leadership Quotient: 12 Dimensions for Measuring and Improving
Leadership. New York: iUniverse, 2006.
Service, R. W. and Carson, C. M. Management and Leadership: Religion The “Mother of all Context.”,
Interbeing Journal, 3(1), Pages 37-43, 2009.
Service, R. W. and Carson, C. M. Becoming a More Effective Manager: Reality versus Hype, China-USA
Business Review, 9(11), Pages 21-41, 2010a.
Service, R. W. and Carson, C. M. Discrimination, Diversity and an HRM Model. Business Studies Journal.
2(1), Pages 29-47, 2010b.
Service, R. W. and Carson, C.M. Cross-Cultural Leadership: A Roadmap for the Journey, Academy of
Contemporary Research Journal, V(II), Pages 29-40, 2013.
Service, R. W. and Dance, J. W. Labeling versus Understanding versus Understanding: News, Views,
Opinions or Facts? Social Science Learning Education Journal, Pages 15-29, 2016.
Service, R. W. and Guess, A. K. Leadership Advantage: A People Person. Journal of Leadership
Accountability and Ethics,12(4), Pages 59-81, 2015.
http://t.www.na-businesspress.com/JLAE/ServiceRW_Web12_4_.pdf
Service, R.W. and Kariuki, K. Cross Cultural Leadership: African Example and Suggestions, Advances in
Management, 5(12), Pages 78-87, 2012.
Service, R. W. and Ledlow, J. Academic and Practitioner Realities of Management: On Religion and
Politics in Particular. International Journal of Business Disciplines, 18(2), Pages 1-22, 2007.
Service, R. W. and Lockamy, A. III. Managerial Promotions Formulas and a Human Resource
Management Model, Management Research News, 31(4), Pages 245-257, 2008.
Service, R. W. and Loudon, D. L. The “Is” Versus the “Should Be” of Performance Appraisals: Don’t
Confuse Them! Business Renaissance Quarterly, 5(3), Pages 63-84, 2010.
Service, R. W. and Loudon, D. A Global Leadership Quotient-GLQ: Measuring, Assessing and
Developing, China-USA Business Review, 11(8), Pages 20-40, 2012.
Service, R. W. and Loudon, D. Critical Issues: Academia Trumped by Truth or Consequences. European
Open Education Research Journal, Pages 1-22, September 2015.
Service, R. W., Loudon, D. L. and Kariuki, K. Cross-Cultural Leadership: Recommendations for Kenya,
Journal of Social Economics Research, 1(4), Pages 40-71, 2014.
Service, Robert. W., Loudon, D. L. and Sonius, D. Developing a Mindset for Rapid Incremental
Innovation. Review of Knowledge Economy, 1(4), Pages 74-89, 2014.
Service, R. W. and McEwen, J. K. Innovation Creates the Future when it Exemplifies Clear Strategic
Thinking over Reacting to Presenting Complaints. Strategic Management Quarterly, Pages 1-48,
March 2015.
Service, R. W. & Reburn, J. P. Leadership for Innovation: Fundamentals of Human Influence. Journal of
International Business Research and Practice, V(8), Pages 35-76, 2014.
Service, R.W., & Reburn, J.P. Academic Publication and Issues of the Day: U.S. Income Tax Paradigm.
Archives of. Business Research, 4(6), Pages 178-208, 2016.
http://scholarpublishing.org/index.php/ABR/article/viewFile/2472/1396
Service, R. W. and Reburn, J. P. Skills that Matter and Will Last a Lifetime. International Journal of
Education and Practice 4(5), Pages 183-206, 2016
http://www.pakinsight.com/pdf-files/art/61/IJEP-2016-4(5)-183-206.pdf
Service, R. W., and White, D. Leadership effectiveness for the rest-of-us, International Journal of
Business Leadership, 1(3). Pages 124-146, 2012.
Sirico, Robert A. The Entrepreneurial Vocation. Journal of Markets & Morality. 3(1), Pages 1-21, 2000
 Smith, S. A. and Mazin, R. A. The HR Answer Book. New York: AMACOM, 2004.
Spong, J. S. 2001. A New Christianity for a New World. San Francisco: Harper, 2001.
Stark, R. For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the
End of Slavery. Princeton University Press: Princeton and Oxford, 2003.
Sternberg, R. J. The Triarchic Mind. New York: Viking Penguin, 1988.
Sternberg, R. J. Successful Intelligence: How Practical and Creative Intelligence Determine Success in
Life. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996.
Sternberg. R. J. Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity Synthesized. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2003.
Thornton, W. P. Why Can't They Hear You? Orality Based Teaching for Cross-Cultural Trainers. Global
Impact Missions, 2012.
Tjan, A. Good People: The Only Leadership Decision That Really Matters. New York: Portfolio, 2017.
Welch, J. (with Welch, S.) Winning: Everyone Wants to Win, Not everyone Knows How. New York:
Harper Business, 2006.
Wheeler, D., and Sillanpää, M. The Stakeholder Corporation, London, UK: Pitman Publishing, 1997.
Wind, Y. and Crook,C. with Gunter, R. The Power of Impossible Thinking: Transform the Business of
Your Life And the Life of Your Business. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2005.
Yukl, G. Leading in organizations (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson, 2013.
Zacharias, Ravi. Jesus Among Other Gods. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2000
Ziskin, I. THRee: The Human Resources Emerging Executive. Hoboken, NY: Wiley, 2015.

Dr. Robert W. Service, is a Professor of Leadership at Samford University USA. Over a 20 year career,
demonstrated his ability as a problem solver, and executive before receiving his Ph.D. in strategy,
statistics and MIS from the University of Texas Arlington. As a professor, he won the University teaching
excellence award and he publishes extensively in areas of strategy, ethics, communications, information
systems, innovation, leadership, crossing cultures, HRM and many current issues of the day. He has
taught around the world.

Dr. James P. Reburn, is a Professor of Accountancy. In addition to teaching excellence in advanced

accounting topics, Jim has a proven administrate excellence record as a department chair, associate
dean and acting dean. Jim received his DBA. From Louisiana Tech and is a CPA. He publishes widely in
finance, accounting, banking, taxation and management.

Joel R. Windham, is the Vice President of Human Resources at Samford University. Joel has a Master’s
Degree and a long term background as a top level hospital administrator before entering the ranks of
academic human resources in 2017. For over 30 years Joel has managed and developed many in the
areas of management, leadership—all areas of human resources and strategic planning—with direct line
responsibilities. This is his entry into academia!

View publication stats