Authority is a blunt instrument that compels action from subordinates. It delivers well in situations with a high degree of urgency but it depends on power differential. It doesn’t work as well as it used to in our evolving culture, and those who use it frequently are highly likely to be undermined and avoided.

In practice I find sticking to any one method or structure too restrictive and mechanical. Instead I try to bring all of my experience and insight to the conversation and adjust my approach to what the leader needs in the moment.

Healthy leaders build more bridges than they burn…

Fourteen years in and Catalyst has a lot to celebrate and some new opportunities to explore

After some important changes in our approach in 2021 and in anticipation of continuing to emerge from the restrictions of the pandemic we have prioritized two offerings to charities for 2022.

Charity leaders, especially in an ongoing pandemic, struggle to align limited funds, staff, energy, and capacity among all the competing demands that fit within the broad idea of "do your job". The needs are relentless and even the most effective among us have to prioritize. Unfortunately, we can't do it all.

Charity leadership is harder than ever. COVID-19’s lasting impact, economic fallout, and global uncertainties with no clear end in sight have made the best plans and practices fall apart around us. The leadership approaches we were trained in can’t answer all the questions we have to ask now. On top of that, many of the ways we’ve developed leaders in the past are now impossible.

Whether it's by choice, by retirement, or by termination, too few leaders show their best selves on the way out. This pattern holds true across industries and the costs of it are deeply damaging.

In a time and culture where there can be a lot of affirmation for posting or saying things that dismiss or demean others in search of a clever mic drop moment I sometimes struggle. The thing is, I can be highly judgmental and I'm quick witted enough to craft some pretty clever tweets that could probably earn me some kudos from those on my side.

But that's not what I deeply want.

Too often we tolerate people who's attitudes, behaviour, or relational failings are negatively impacting the entire group. It's so tempting to keep trying to nudge them into line or justify the need to wait just a little longer before making the move, especially if they are otherwise productive. Some blend of compassion, confusion, and cowardice extends the situation and increases the damage.

What if we reframe the dynamic?

For some people, moving any block from the stable tower (even if the tower is becoming outdated and declining in results) puts the whole tower at risk. They can't discern which pieces are load bearing and they are afraid everything that has been accomplished could be destroyed by moving the wrong block.

Understanding that healthy is not truly a binary reality: neither leaders nor organizations can be fairly typed as definitively healthy or unhealthy; there are still some strong tendencies that are worth considering.

It's funny and fascinating to me that the entire planet has somehow agreed that finishing first, second, or third is deserving of a precious medal and historic acclaim, but fourth is essentially meaningless. It's interesting that the current system didn't start at the first modern Olympics in 1896, but eight years later. I can't find any explanation of why there are three winners instead of just one, or four, or seven. And yet it's absolutely ingrained into the collective conscious of humanity.