I’ve been going through some life changes recently (everything is great), but my schedule is shifting, I’m doing things at different times of the day, and I’m figuring out what else I can shake up.
I used to (I think) be a musician - or at least I used to play music a lot and sometimes get paid. I’ve probably only played an instrument a handful of times over the last ten years, but I’ve been thinking more and more lately about trying to play again. While I am confident I won’t be horrible, I’m equally as confident that I won’t be nearly as good as I was a decade ago. I frequently claim that a lot of what I do in leadership positions was learned from music, so at the very least, I should play more just to see if I can find any more parallels.
Levels of Leadership
One of my favorite leadership books (at least defined by the number of times I’ve re-read or referred to it) is John Maxwell’s The Five Levels of Leadership (this is the first obvious omission from my post on my favorite books). It focuses on leadership as influence vs. leadership as a position.
The levels are all about the influence you have and the people whom want you to lead them.
At the first level, you’re in a position of leadership. You’re a manager or you’re in charge of something.
At the second level, people give you permission to lead them - i.e. people follow you because they want to.
The third level is about results - people follow you because you help them get shit done.
The fourth level is about developing people - people follow you because you have helped them grow.
The fifth level - or pinnacle, as Maxwell describes it, is about developing leaders. People follow you because of who you are and what you represent.
The higher the level of leadership, the greater the influence and the greater the impact. Each level builds upon the previous level, and leaders must master each level before moving on to the next.
I like the model - both for my own growth, and for the growth of others. I’ve used it to recognize why leaders may fail (you can’t get your team to reach results if they don’t yet trust you enough to give you permission to lead them).
In addition to the model, the book has a lot of pragmatic advice that I take to heart including the importance of building relationships, focusing on delivery and results, and the importance of developing people.
New Tricks
I discovered this week that at 75 years old, Maxwell has started to write music. It's not great music, but it's not bad, and a great example of trying something new - and frankly (as someone who studied music composition), I’m a bit jealous how not-bad it is.
One heading from his article really stood out.
If you’re at the head of the class, you’re in the wrong class.
…which is a play on the quote by Confucious, “If you are the smartest person in the room, then you are in the wrong room.”
And also similar to advice I followed strictly when studying music, “If you’re the best player in the band, you’re in the wrong band”. I was always good about finding better players who would seek me out to play with them. While I wasn’t the best player, I was the best at collaborating and figuring things out - so I did my best to help the group perform better, and in turn, I learned a lot from better musicians.
Outliers?
And of course, this reminds me of a story in Outliers, by Malcom Gladwell that has stuck with me. The premise of Outliers is that success is often determined by factors beyond individual talent and effort, including the environment and circumstances you come from or work in.
In one part of the book, Gladwell tells the stories of the students who barely make the cutoff for admission to the top college of their choice. While it’s exciting to go to an elite university, these students struggle. His research suggests the idea of attending schools where you can be in the top 20%, which he refers to as the "Big Fish-Little Pond Effect." This concept suggests that students who attend schools where they are in the top 20% of their class are more likely to have high self-esteem and achieve greater success in their careers than those who attend schools where they are in the bottom 20%.
Conflicting Advice?
As with most things in life, there’s a balance here. While you want to be in the top 20% (Gladwell is right), you don’t want to be at the very top either (Maxwell is also right). In fact Gladwell also tells a story of star high school students who go to elite universities and do poorly because after being the top student in high school for years, they are dismayed that at University they can only be in the top 5%.
Short story - challenge yourself, but give yourself a chance for success. I’m good enough to play with the house band at the local bar, but I’d get nothing but stress playing in Tower of Power.
John Maxwell's foray into music and his willingness to try new things gave me a good kick in the pants. It's yet-another reminder that we need to constantly challenge ourselves to learn and grow and seek out new experiences and opportunities that help us expand our horizons and develop new skills - or even reinvest in some stale skills.
At the end of the day, I think happiness comes to those who are willing to take risks, try new things, and push themselves to be their best.
I’m off to go play some scales.
-A
Scales? I've been playing them (and many other things) for a bit over seven years now (since retiring). Giving up the tech life and working on becoming a musician (seriously, for the first time despite being a music major in my initial college experience) has been challenging. And rewarding. And happiness-inducing...
So, yeah.
Do you know about the Zone of Proximal Development in education? It seems relevant