Every leader needs a flight plan since leading means doing the right things, and managing means doing things right.

Leaders often face the challenge of introducing change to those who simply see no need for it. From my research on effective leaders, there are certain steps a leader must take to bring about such a change effectively.

For example, school administrators have the tough role of being change agents and leaders in a challenging environment. They must work within a system populated by noisy, eloquent stakeholders who are continually scrutinizing every action-a system that can be best characterized with the oxymoron "an organized anarchy," because most of the individuals in a school system have much education and are highly individualistic.

During my term as a university president, I always felt that presiding over the faculty was like herding cats. And my saying about faculty members is that "if you meet one, you meet one." But that individualism is part of what makes leading such a group so exciting. Vision and Mission

The question ultimately becomes, How does a leader rally individuals-from different disciplines and different areas of expertise-behind an over-arching and compelling vision?

The first thing all leaders must do, regardless of whether they are leading General Motors or IBM or a school system, is to clearly articulate a vision. Whether the leader calls it a strategic intent, mission, conviction, set of beliefs, or vision, it must be communicated clearly, compellingly, forcibly, and simply. And it isn't enough to talk generally about strategic goals or objectives. A vision must be communicated ceaselessly, indefatigably, and endlessly in all sorts of ways. It isn't enough to do it through memos, newsletters, or satellite broadcasts. Most of the communication must be done eyeball to eyeball. In addition, that vision must be anchored in realities.

Most organizations have terrific vision statements. Companies are great at printing mission statements on three-by-five laminated plaques along with elaborate lists of company visions and values. Dazzling documents like this are useless.

I once consulted for a large utilities firm in Southern California which had a wonderful vision statement called the "Six Commitments." These commitments hung on the wall of every office. But not one of them was anchored in reality, and not one of them was implemented. For example, one commitment was, "We believe in the autonomy of the worker and in self-managed work teams and in empowerment." But in that company you would have to get six signatures to take a 25-mile trip away from the office.

Another company stated, "We believe in teamwork," and yet there was an implicit norm that one never brought to surface conflict or dissent or disagreement. Well, how can you create teamwork when you never bring to the surface differences, healthy dissent, and creative conflict?

Executives must not just articulate a simple and compelling vision, but they must take this vision into account when doing everything that they do-when thinking about recruiting and reward systems, when considering empowerment, when changing the structure, when pursuing new markets, and when making decisions.

The only way a leader is going to translate vision into reality-an ability that is the essence of leadership-is to anchor and implement and execute that vision through a variety of policies, practices, procedures, and systems that will bring in people and empower them to implement the vision.

Leaders must also discover the individuals who are "variance sensors," who expect things beyond the current reality, who see the need for change, and who have the future in their bones.

I view any change as a three-act play. Act One is creating the vision. Act Two is changing the system and implementing it. Act Three is stabilizing and putting into effect those system changes that went on in the second act.

This idea is similar to the old paradigm that Kurt Lewen talked about many years ago regarding the three acts of changing. He said that the first act is to "unfreeze;" the second act is to "start changing;" and the third act is to "refreeze." And this cycle must be continual. After the freeze, unfreeze again; keep changing and keep refreezing.

I used to think that running an organization was equivalent to conducting a symphony orchestra. But I don't think that's quite it; it's more like jazz. There is more improvisation. Someone once wrote that the sound of surprise is jazz, and if there's any one thing that we must try to get used to in this world, it's surprise and the unexpected. Truly, we are living in world where the only thing that's constant is change.

While change, as Machiavelli observed, "has no constituency," leaders must create an environment that embraces change not as a threat but as an opportunity. That requires leaders to listen to-and act on-the multiple sounds around them. Leaders must encourage their organizations to dance to forms of music yet to be heard.

The leader's role is to impart a sense of vision, purpose, strategic intent, mission. A leader must embody a powerful distillation of an organization's purpose and objectives. Management, on the other hand, is more concerned with doing things right-with efficiency, with control mechanisms and the short run.

Essentially, the manager administers and the leader innovates. The manager is a copy; the leader is an original. The manager maintains; the leader develops. The manager accepts the status quo; the leader is always questioning and challenging the gospel. The manager focuses on the systems and structure; the leader focuses on people. The manager relies on the control; the leader inspires trust. The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective. The manager imitates; the leader originates.

The manager asks "how" and "when," and the leader asks "what" and "why." Effective leaders do not tell their subordinates "how." Instead leaders try to create a tapestry of intentions. Over-Managed and Under-Led

Today's organizations are over-managed and under-led. They are overly concerned with policies, practices, procedures, and rule books and not enough concerned with the important issues like empowerment, trust, mission, and an over-arching and compelling vision. Basically, leadership is all about translating intention and vision into reality. Leaders keep their eyes on the horizon, not just on the bottom line.

In times of rapid change, there is no substitute for leadership. Unfortunately, most organizations are based on an old-fashioned form of bureaucracy, the mind-set of control, order, and predict. Those are the things of management. If we existed in an environment where we could control, order, and predict, a manager would be a terrific thing. Bureaucracy in a stable environment, as it was in the Victorian era, would be a great social invention.

But today, organizations are unhinged. They are confusing and full of surprises. We are all children of chaos. And so we must develop and educate leaders who originate, innovate, and have the imagination to see what the future will be like.

A problem with organizations such as IBM, Sears, Westinghouse, and Eastman Kodak is that their leaders were so immersed in details, with trivia-with "administrivia"-and with the "how-to" that they forgot what's important. For example, IBM used to have a plant in Kentucky, that was losing money because it was manufacturing typewriters. So they spent a half-billion dollars to re-engineer the plant to make printers. But they were making the wrong printers because they didn't see the potential in the laser printer. And in a few months, they were surpassed by Hewlett-Packard and Apple. It's an example of doing things right, but doing the wrong things. Portrait of a Leader.

Leaders have certain traits in common

• First, they share a great deal of self-knowledge. They have a strong sense of who they are as human beings. Leadership is character, and character is knowing one's ingredients.
• Second, they have a strongly defined sense of purpose. Achieving, successful leaders know what is important. And they always are reminding people of what's important. It's not enough to just have vision; it's not enough to just know your objectives. Instead, a leader must create an environment where people are aware of why they are there. You can see this even in a university. Occasionally when we will gather in the faculty club and talk, someone will say-always in jest to conceal the basic truth-"wouldn't this be a good place to be if only there weren't students around." Well, why are we there? Why are we administrating school systems and universities? Primarily we are there to help educate students to be successful in life. Everything else is a cost factor or a commentary.
• Third, leaders have the capacity to generate and sustain trust. And the way they tend to do this is by being candid, by communicating effectively and by exhibiting a sense of constancy and caring. If leaders can somehow communicate and in that communication show that they care, show that they're candid and indicate their competence, then they will generate and sustain trust.
• And, leaders have a bias toward action. It makes no sense to be in the dugout or kibitzing from the bleachers. Leaders are at bat. They play even if it means making errors. And when they make errors, they learn from their errors.

Leadership is nurtured with on-the-job education through role models. People learn to be leaders through difficult experiences and when they face adversity. They learn through the pain and agony of having to come up with the hard answers. In some cases, being fired was the learning experience leaders looked back on as a focus of their leadership training; in other cases it was having to down-size. In one case it was having to take over an inexperienced group of subordinates. But ultimately, the only way people learn about leadership is by being placed into situations from which they can learn and get feedback from valued sources around them.

Leadership doesn't come from genes. It doesn't come from reading or listening to lectures. It comes through the hard-earned experience in the arena rather than watching from the balcony.
 

Warren Bennis, a contributing editor to Executive Excellence, is Distinguished Professor of Business Administration at the University of Southern California, (213) 740-0766.