Aiming for Perfection: An Exploration of Leadership and Excellence

Aiming for Perfection: An Exploration of Leadership and Excellence James E. Braggs Quality Systems Specialist The Boeing Company Long Beach, CA james....
Author: Dorothy Clark
1 downloads 4 Views 179KB Size
Aiming for Perfection: An Exploration of Leadership and Excellence James E. Braggs Quality Systems Specialist The Boeing Company Long Beach, CA [email protected]

Robert D. Lesniak Quality Systems Specialist The Boeing Company Long Beach, CA, [email protected]

SUMMARY: The most solid foundation for sustained business success involves cultivating a culture of excellence. Leadership strategies that target perfection, focus on means, and sustain commitment maximally position individuals and businesses to become excellent. The extent to which an organization is positioned for excellence can be assessed by the following questions: what is the organizational aim, what method will be used to achieve that aim, and what type and level of commitment are being fostered? The most common organizational aim is improvement. While appearing on the surface to be similar to the pursuit of perfection, they are distinct and have fundamentally different cultural and organizational implications. Further, many methods and commitment levels are compatible with an improvement imperative, yet far fewer methods and commitment levels are compatible with the pursuit of perfection.

INTRODUCTION: An axiom of today’s business environment is “improve in order to compete.” Companies accept that they must improve as a requirement of doing business. Today, companies vary widely both in the approaches they adopt, as well as in their relative effectiveness. A company can concentrate on improving its internal business processes while its overall rate of improvement may be insufficient to remain competitive. Also, a company can realize innovative technological breakthroughs and yet be unable to sustain its advantage over the long run. Long-term business success will depend on the rate of improvement as well as the capacity of the company to sustain that rate over the long-term. The issue is not solely whether a business is getting better, but whether it is improving fast enough to remain competitive and can sustain that competitive advantage. Further, not all improvement strategies will result in sustainable longterm business growth, even if they result in significant short-term gains. Competitive pressures often drive businesses to adopt tactical improvement strategies that focus on near-term results. A corporate culture is inevitably shaped as a consequence. By design or default, a business culture will be created. The question is: does the emerging culture enable the business to thrive or create a sustainable future?

THESIS: The most solid foundation for sustained business success involves cultivating a culture of excellence. Leadership strategies that target perfection, focus on means, and sustain commitment maximally position individuals and businesses to become excellent.

The extent to which an organization is positioned for excellence can be assessed by the following questions: ƒ What is the aim? (perfection or improvement) ƒ What method will be used to achieve that aim? (by means or by ends) ƒ What type and level of commitment are being fostered? (sustained or situational) The same leadership questions can be reframed to easily apply to an individual’s pursuit of excellence. This paper will explore how these questions affect both organizations and the people within them. Companies typically embrace the continuous improvement paradigm. This framework emphasizes change, whether incremental or breakthrough, but focuses on improvement over baseline performance. This framework differs dramatically from a framework that targets perfection, which focuses on the difference between the current state and a perfect end state. When perfection is targeted, the metrics indicate the proximity to the clear perfect target. This contrast between perfection and improvement and their implications will be explored as the first leadership question. Equally important is the approach by which the aim is accomplished. Two frameworks broadly organize this issue. The first framework involves managing by results. The focus in this framework is typically on outcomes. The second framework concentrates on the means to achieve outcomes. The implications of this contrast will be explored as the second leadership question. Organizational cultures vary in the extent to which they foster and develop leadership commitment. The critical distinction is the duration of that commitment. Sustained commitment can be defined as the willingness to continue allocating resources to a course of action even when the gains may be non-linear with plateaus, setbacks, and re-examinations. Both the organizational aim and the method by which that aim are achieved affect the type and level of commitment. This paper will contrast and explore the implications of sustained and situational commitment as the third leadership question. Finally, a hypothesis can be formulated about the relationship between specific leadership choices and inspirational leaders. Specifically, inspirational leaders describe the path to a perfect end state and make a compelling invitation to others to partner on the journey. These leaders create a culture of excellence by nurturing an environment where individuals commit to sustained personal development as part of their role in the organization. They must place the members of the organization within an inspiring vision in which they see their development as being aligned with an overarching organizational pursuit of perfection. The overall result is that, over time, a high proportion of the company’s employees will embrace the mindset of sustained personal excellence and apply that mindset to the exigencies of business performance. In short, inspirational leadership begins by targeting perfection, emphasizes the means to achieve it, and nurtures an environment where commitment to the vision can be sustained.

APPROACH: If one begins by accepting the basic premise that the three leadership questions posed above will be answered according to the intellectual frameworks of the leaders, then it follows that those answers will have predictable consequences. To establish such a relationship between the intellectual frameworks and excellence, the three critical leadership questions are examined according to the typology below. A culture of excellence must be discussed in relation to both

the individual as well as the business. This paper will explore the focus and consequences of leadership choices over the short and long-term. Short--Term Short

Focus

Targeting Perfection

Aim

Personal Excellence &

Targeting Improvement

By Means

Method By Ends

Business Excellence Sustained

Commitment

Consequences

Focus

Short--Term Short Long -Term Short -Term Long--Term Long

Consequences

Short -Term

Focus

Short -Term

Consequences

Short -Term Long-Term

Focus

Short -Term Long -Term

Consequences

Short -Term Long -Term

Focus

Long-Term

Long-Term

Short -Term Long -Term Short -Term

Consequences

Situational

Long -Term

Focus Consequences

Long-Term Short -Term Long-Term Short -Term Long-Term

Business and Personal Excellence Typology The approach distinguishes between the pursuit of perfection and perfectionism. Perfectionism is retrospective and judgmental in its point of view. It devalues what has already been done because it is not perfect. The pursuit of perfection is prospective and nonjudgmental; it asks the question: What choices should be made today to move closer to the perfect end state? Perfection is conceptualized here as an idealized perfect end state. The pursuit of this perfect end state involves the belief that there are limitless opportunities for refinement. Although perfection can never be fully realized, it represents an evolutionary shared vision that inspires a drive for excellence.

AIM: PERFECTION OR IMPROVEMENT (FOR INDIVIDUALS) Targeting perfection at the personal level is synonymous with the pursuit of excellence. Personal excellence begins with the conscious choice to do your very best, to work on becoming your very best. The first condition is to desire excellence, to consciously choose to be your best

at whatever you do. “The freedom to be your best means nothing unless you are willing to do your best.” - Colin Powell It may begin with a larger dream or personal vision. “Ideals are like stars: you will not succeed in touching them with your hands, but like the seafaring man on the ocean desert of waters, you choose them as your guides, and following them, you reach your destiny.” – Carl Schurz It may begin in small ways by doing excellent work. “Perfection consists not in doing extraordinary things, but in doing ordinary things extraordinarily well.” – Angelique Arnauld. John Wooden, the famous UCLA basketball coach, once stated, “When you improve a little each day, eventually big things occur. When you improve conditionally a little each day, eventually you have a big improvement in conditioning. Not tomorrow, not the next day, but eventually, a big gain is made. Don’t look for the big, quick improvement. Seek the small improvement one day at a time. That’s the only way it happens – and when it happens, it lasts” (as cited in May, 2007, p. 178). When individuals target improvement, they adopt a framework that emphasizes incremental change. The framework may target a simple improvement over their current state or involve making better choices today than in the past. The framework will tend to emphasize options and solutions known at the time the improvement is targeted. Thus, this framework is predicated on the current state. Targets and benchmarks will be based upon an incremental change over the original baseline. An alternative framework targets a perfect end state. Individuals that adopt this framework begin by engaging in an evolutionary visioning process that may take considerable time and effort. The vision that emerges out of that process clarifies the ultimate change desired. The more passion and energy this vision evokes, the greater the motivation to align choices with this vision. The imperative is to screen out choices that are inconsistent with this view. Further, acting in concert with this vision strengthens the belief that the vision can ultimately be realized. As the strength of this belief increases, a compelling personal vision inspires a person to remain resolute in the pursuit of personal transformation.

Focus Short-Term Perfection Aim

(Excellence)

Improvement

Aligning choices with an evolving personal vision

Making better choices than in the past

Long-Term Personal transformation

Targets or benchmarks

Personal Focus: Aiming for Perfection vs. Improvement

Individuals’ perspectives change when they aim for excellence. New possibilities are considered; however, those possibilities co-exist with preexisting constructs that have been accepted in the past. The struggle in this period is to free oneself from those limitations and desire and embrace a higher standard. Long-term, individuals embrace this higher standard and the practices that are associated with excellence become habitual. Pursuing excellence then involves consistently reflecting a high personal standard in one’s work. A long history of excellent work becomes the distinguishing mark or personal legacy of the individual. When a person targets improvement, tangible evidence of progress is used as the yardstick. As long as positive change is observed, then the movement forward is considered legitimate. The distinctive feature of this perspective is incremental change, that is legitimate in and of itself whether that change approximates the individual’s potential or not. Long-term, this perspective is validated by clear evidence of personal growth. This growth reflects and is consistent with a mindset of change that is expected but relatively unstructured. In this view the personal growth may be characterized by uneven and unsustained growth. Consequences Short-term Perfection Aim

(Excellence)

Improvement

Changes in perspective and personal habits

Tangible evidence of progress

Long Term

A personal legacy

Personal growth

Personal Consequences: Aiming for Perfection vs. Improvement

AIM: PERFECTION OR IMPROVEMENT (FOR BUSINESSES) For a business, leadership establishes perfection as a target by concentrating on, defining, and understanding the flow of value to the customer. Value represents any transformation in a product or service that the customer is willing to pay for, and that is done right the first time. Any rework or waste in the operational and transactional processes represents a discount to that value, either by reducing the desirability of the product or service, or by increasing the costs associated with the flow of value to the customer. Therefore, the very notion of value implies perfection; the delivery of an undiscounted service or product to the customer. Value is defined by the customer, and is created within a business’ operational and transactional processes. Seeing the value flow through a business is the first step in aiming for a perfect end result. The aim should be to understand, from the systems to the process level, how

the structure of work affects process outcomes and how the outcomes constrain or support the creation of value. If leadership substitutes any other short-term business targets for value, then the capacity to actually see how value is created is diminished. Long-term, the objective is to create a system where the value flows efficiently to the customer. The organizational metrics are established to measure and improve the speed with which value is created. This drives leaders to focus on the relationship between time and quality, driving down both waste and cycle time concurrently. This represents the classical business transformation to a lean enterprise; an enterprise that is agile, adaptable, and responsive to customer demands. By contrast, when improvement is the focus, leadership concentrates on a change over baseline. The emphasis is on the current condition as a framework for organizing improvement. The targets are set relative to that baseline, whether those targets are rational or not. Since the existing performance of the business is the starting point, any significant change for the better is considered a desirable outcome, even if the outcome is seriously below the potential of the organization involved. Additionally, when leadership targets elements of a business for improvement that are separate from the value stream, sub-optimization can result. Improvements can occur that do not add value from the customer’s perspective. Therefore, improvement alone – as an organizational aim – is insufficient to position a company for sustained competitive advantage. Long-term, if the current performance of the business continues to be the yardstick for future improvements, the tendency will be to rely on benchmarking as the criteria for success. While benchmarking might be appropriate in some contexts, the potential risk is that the benchmark might be below the potential of the organization, or worse, the company can target a benchmark without developing the innate capability to achieve it. “There’s a simple explanation for why Toyota’s success is hard to replicate. Their system drives a universal focus on ground-level innovation, to the point that the pursuit of perfection is part of who they are not just what they do. Toyota’s factory floor associates might implement over a dozen ideas per shift. Managers might spend over half their time on a portfolio of ideas and projects. So by the time a competitor has observed, lifted, and installed a certain method, Toyota is already doing it differently. And better than it’s ever been done before.” (May, 2007) Focus Short-Term

Long-Term

Perfection

Value creation

Business transformation

Improvement

Delta over baseline

Aim

Trends and benchmarks

Business Focus: Aiming for Perfection vs. Improvement Deep organizational knowledge is sacrificed when improvement is the target since the organizational metrics tend to take precedence over value creation. Learning cycle times increase as process knowledge diminishes. These disadvantages are offset by the short-term gains that frequently accompany the adoption of the improvement model. Indeed, the reinforcement that comes from short-term results tends to obscure the serious nature of the reduced knowledge base necessary to build a sustainable future. Targeting perfection has the opposite effect. Process knowledge increases as the organization concentrates on creating customer value. The need to improve systems thinking, teaming skills, and communication across functions helps to position the company for future gains. These foundational activities help build the overall understanding of the value stream. While necessary, these activities may not realize immediate gains. Since the long-term focus is on the speed with which value is created, the consequences of a highly efficient value stream can be a sustainable competitive advantage, as operational excellence becomes the differentiating factor in the marketplace. Further, the pursuit of perfection allows an organization to better understand how customer value is created and to better target the perfect flow of value to the customer. Businesses that are able to create more value will differentiate themselves from their competitors, and will gain both customer loyalty and growth opportunities in the market.

Consequences Short-Term

Long-Term

Targeting Perfection

Gains may not be realized immediately

Sustainable competitive advantage

Improvement

More likely to see immediate gains

Rate of improvement may lag competitors

Aim

Business Consequences: Aiming for Perfection vs. Improvement

METHOD: BY MEANS OR BY ENDS (FOR INDIVIDUALS): When individuals initially choose to pursue excellence, they often focus on personal mastery of skills and competencies. The means to excellence is preparation, building a solid foundation of knowledge and expertise. Initially, these individuals become proficient in selected skills, as

these are perceived as enablers of success. In the long-term, individuals who focus on means commit to lifelong learning and development. By contrast, individuals who focus on ends de-emphasize preparation, concentrating instead on achieving milestones and accomplishments. They measure success by whether the ends were met or not, rather than by an increase in domain knowledge. Long-term, this mindset focuses on high-leverage opportunities. Focus Short-Term

By Means

Personal mastery, skills, and competencies

By Ends

Milestones and accomplishments

Long-Term Lifelong learning and development

Method High-leverage opportunities

Individual Focus: Targeting Means vs. Targeting Ends In the short-term, individuals who focus on means gain new knowledge and skills. These individuals are not only interested in learning new skills, but also lessons from their mistakes. They regularly invest in their personal development. Over time, these individuals gain domain expertise. By concentrating on the ends, the individual may achieve a series of goals. The method of achieving the goals may not result in repeatable performance, or the goals achieved may be unsustainable. Further, in doing so individuals may incur an opportunity cost; they may lose the chance to learn new and more effective ways to achieve their goals.

Consequences Short-Term

By Means

Gain knowledge or skill

Long-Term

Domain expertise

Method By Ends

Gains may not be repeatable

Opportunity for new knowledge lost

Personal Consequences: Targeting Means vs. Targeting Ends

METHOD: BY MEANS OR BY ENDS (FOR BUSINESSES): W. Edwards Deming argued against a management strategy centered on meeting arbitrary targets at the expense of process knowledge. Toyota’s often-quoted philosophy is “the right process will produce the right results.” This defines a managerial philosophy: management by means. This will be contrasted with management by ends, and their implications to building a sustainable culture of excellence will be examined. Companies may adopt strategies that have been proven to work such as Lean, Total Quality Management, and Six Sigma. Efforts to implement these strategies often wilt away as dramatic short-term results are not realized. Even though these strategies are intended to position the company for the long-term, the significant foundation of training, teaming, collaboration, improved learning cycles, and communications across functions takes considerable time and commitment. These strategies can be undermined by a focus on ends, where the short-term results are seen as the rationale for their implementation. If any of the foundational steps are poorly implemented, any improvement strategy will be undermined, and yet these steps seldom create immediate results. Again, a corporate culture is created in this context as well. When the commitment wanes, the lesson being taught to the employees is “another flavor of the month”... The focus on means for a business involves a dive into the quantifiable behavior of processes, and a determination that the process behavior is capable of meeting customer requirements. This requires an engagement with the processes, and an understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between the process and the resulting customer value that’s created. Process capability can be thought of as the probability that a process will pass on a perfect result to the customer. Long-term, the measurements of a series of processes can be used to understand and improve the capability of a system. The systemic capability of a process can be defined as the probability that a series of processes and their interactions will produce a perfect outcome for the customer. In contrast, the focus on process outcomes involves identifying, measuring, and managing the results of the process. The focus is on the scoreboard rather than the fundamentals. There is a

drive to achieve the ends whether the means can be achieved or not. This leads to setting targets that may not be rational; for example, “Reduce cost by 50% next year.” Long-term, when a process is managed by ends, there is a tendency to concentrate on distinguishing between good and bad performers. The managerial emphasis for improvements will tend to be focused on the weak areas of the business.

Focus Short-Term

Long-Term

By Means

Process capability

Systemic capability

By Ends

Results, numeric targets

Weak areas of the business

Method

Business Focus: Targeting Means vs. Targeting Ends Performance management is the logical outcome of performance measurement when the managerial focus is on means. Performance management must be predicated on the delivery of customer value, must be related to the means to achieve those targets, and the targets must be within the capability of the system. Performance measurements that improve process capability help tie together process performance and organizational learning. The first discovery of process measurement is that few processes are stable and capable. This is because a capable process is the consequence of an intentional management decision. They will not occur by chance. A focus on means is the first step to bringing stability and capability to a collection of business processes. The short-term goal is for management to look at the entire system, and to recognize that they own it and commit to improving it. Leadership ownership of systemic capability may lead to an asymmetric allocation of resources across the enterprise. The interests of the enterprise as a holistic system take precedence. The emphasis is on optimization, building a collaborative corporate culture, accelerating learning cycles, and creating highly predictable processes across the value stream. By contrast, when an organization leads by ends, it concentrates on good and bad performance, rather than a deep understanding of value creation. Because process measurement is not emphasized, there is insufficient awareness of the special causes of variation that can cause periodic crises. There is a tendency to pursue the numbers; to trigger fear and destructive competition. Long-term, leadership by ends creates instability. A consequence of unstable processes is unpredictable results. Although pockets of excellence can exist, their gains are often difficult to sustain.

Consequences

By Means

Short-Term

Long-Term

Understanding of process stability and capability

High probability of meeting customer requirements predictably

Method By Ends

Clarity about good and bad performance

Instability, higher incidence of crises

Business Focus: Targeting Means vs. Targeting Ends

COMMITMENT: SUSTAINED VS. SITUATIONAL (FOR INDIVIDUALS): The following typology depicts the short and long-term focus of individuals with sustained vs. situational commitment. Individuals who pursue excellence have sustained commitment characterized by a short-term focus on doing all tasks well. These individuals exhibit a constant behavioral pursuit of excellence. Over time, they become known by the excellent work they do. These individuals have a tendency to view all tasks as learning opportunities. In the long-term, excellence is conditioned on preparation. By focusing on excellence in everything they do, these individuals create the fertile soil for personal growth and development. Individuals committed to excellence do not count the cost of their commitment. They never ask, “What is the minimum that I can do.” Rather, they ask, “What is the most I can do?” to forward the effort. They commit to doing what is difficult. “If there is no struggle there is no progress.” - Fredrick Douglas (as cited in May, 2007, p. 221). Individuals committed to excellence also stay focused in the face of setbacks or hardships encountered along the way. “The very greatest things – great thoughts, discoveries, inventions – have usually been nurtured in hardship, often pondered over in sorrow, and at length established with difficulty.” – Samuel Smiles (as cited in May, 2007, p. 218). By contrast, individuals who have situational commitment can be characterized by having a focus that is selective in nature. These individuals choose which assignments or endeavors they will put forth their best effort. Over the long-term, these individuals are always looking to find the fertile soil rather than cultivating it.

Focus

Sustained

Short-Term

Long-Term

Do all tasks well

Creating the fertile soil

Commitment Situational

Selective

Finding the fertile soil

Personal Focus: Sustained vs. Situational The following typology depicts the short- and long-term consequences of a focus on sustained vs. situational personal commitment. Individuals with sustained commitment to excellence view achievement in all tasks as opportunities for personal learning and development. An individual’s work is no longer viewed as a series of independent tasks, but rather a continuum that positions individuals for greater discoveries in the future. Over time, this sustained personal commitment to excellence results in a transformed self-definition for the individual. Excellence is no longer what individuals do, it is what they become. By contrast, individuals with short-term situational commitment want to realize achievement without personal change. Examples would be losing weight by crash dieting or cramming for an exam. There may be some near-term gains or improvement, but the gains will likely be unsustainable with reversion to the prior state. Situational commitment over time will result in an inability to visualize the perfect end state. Individuals will constantly search for the next big thing. As a result, they will experience wide variation in performance.

Consequences Short-Term

Sustained

Achievement as opportunity to further personal learning and development

Situational

Achievement without personal change

Commitment

Long-Term Transformed self-definition

Wide variation in performance

Personal Consequences: Sustained vs. Situational

COMMITMENT: SUSTAINED VS. SITUATIONAL (FOR BUSINESSES) Dr. W. Edwards Deming’s first rule was “Establish Constancy of Purpose,” the idea that quality is achieved only with a sustained commitment. Deming viewed a sustained commitment as a central tenant of business excellence. The key question is how to foster a culture that sustains a commitment to excellence. What would it look like? What would be the near-and long-term consequences? The following typology summarizes the characteristics of sustained commitment and contrasts it with situational commitment. When a business commits to establishing a culture of sustained excellence, it must commit to preparation. The focus is to build a collective and individual willingness to persevere through difficulty, speak the truth, question assumptions, and cultivate a diversity of perspectives that can be harnessed to serve of the needs of the business. Lastly, the culture must strive to view the business enterprise as a system. The leaders must concentrate on building an enabling infrastructure. Training, resources, and staffing must visibly reflect the commitment of leadership at the highest level to transform the organization. The transformation must be clearly articulated. In contrast, situational commitment levels vary with interests, current business priorities, and other factors. Leadership is viewed as shifting from one priority to another. They tend to exhibit visible signs of commitment such as slogans or exhortations, rather than establishing the substance of that commitment: behavior change. Situational commitment will not have a deep foundation, and will tend to fade over time. As this happens, real sustainable improvements become rare. Without deep process knowledge, explanations for events may be offered without rational empirical evidence or understanding. This will increase the probability that resources will be wasted. Additionally, there will be a tendency to look for the latest fad, the latest quick fix, or the next big thing.

Focus

Sustained

Short-Term

Long-Term

Build enabling infrastructure

Constancy of Purpose

Commitment Situational

Looking for the “next big thing”

Visible signs of Commitment

Business Focus: Sustained vs. Situational Commitment The hallmark of sustained commitment is behavior change over time. Leadership actions are always under observation; inconsistencies between words and deeds are picked up quickly. An organization learns to sustain its commitment in large measure through the actions of the leaders over time. Because the character of sustained commitment may not result in dramatic short-term results, the management team must resist the temptation to waiver from the vision. They must lead by example, and model sustained commitment even in the face of difficulty. Long-term, the result is leadership integrity and coherence. By contrast, situational commitment is focused on activities that target quick results. Although near-term successes may be realized, they may not be in the interests of the company. This can lead in the long-term to episodic rates of improvement characterized by declines and plateaus. Consequences Short-Term

Long-Term

Sustained

Gains may not be immediately realized

Enterprise coherence and integrity

Situational

Achievements that may not be beneficial to the company

Commitment Rate of improvement Episodic – declines and plateaus

Business Consequences: Sustained vs. Situational Commitment

INSPIRATIONAL LEADERSHIP: This paper has argued that leaders create a culture of excellence by nurturing an environment where individuals commit to sustained personal development as part of their role in the organization. Leaders must place the members of their organization within an inspiring corporate vision in which they see their development as being aligned with an overarching organizational pursuit of perfection. The overall result is that, over time, a high proportion of the company’s employees will embrace the mindset of sustained personal excellence and apply that mindset to the exigencies of business performance. Inspirational leadership is the process by which the path to a perfect end state is clearly described, and a compelling invitation is made to others to partner on the journey. “When a there is a genuine vision (as opposed to the all-too-familiar ‘vision statement’), people excel and learn, not because they are told to but because they want to.” (Senge, 1990). If the elements of a culture of excellence are not in place, then the compelling invitation morphs into a shared slogan. Without a foundation of sustained commitment to the means of creating the perfect end state, then the credibility of the leaders will be diminished. Inspirational leaders, therefore, attempt to consciously connect people’s individual interests with something larger than themselves. By providing a deeper meaning or purpose for their actions, they seek to evoke a passionate sustained commitment to excellence. However, the relationship between leadership and excellence must first be clearly understood. Although inspirational leadership can multiply the effects of sound quality leadership, it must be predicated on correct principle. The largest effects of an inspirational vision occur when leaders believe that the vision is ultimately attainable. When they strongly believe in the vision, they present more compelling arguments for the pursuit of excellence, and they are more likely to inspire others. Those who have been inspired then become leaders themselves, able to inspire merely by the force of their convictions, or by the evidence of their sustained commitment. This is the infectious nature, the force multiplier of inspirational leadership. All of this is based on the premise that given a choice and a clear path, most people will choose excellence. Leaders must first have a clear, unambiguous end state that is objective and visible to the world. They must understand the means to attain that end state before they can invite others to partner on that journey. Armed with a clear path and strong conviction, the invitation can be persuasive; offering to show others how to become world class. For such an invitation to be compelling it must both resonate with the individual, and also place that individual within that vision; for example, “if I can show you how to become world class, to prove it where no one can dispute it, to separate yourself from all other teams, will you agree to partner with me?” If given a chance, most people will choose excellence.

CONCLUSION: This paper has examined three leadership questions in light of the overarching goal of creating a sustainable culture of excellence. Although these questions were examined separately, they are best understood when examined together. Their interrelationships have serious implications. The pursuit of a sustainable culture of excellence is enabled and strengthened through a proper understanding of their relationships. The paths are uniquely different. Obviously, there are many possible paths that a leader can choose based on these questions.

However, only one path is compatible with aiming for perfection. To aim for perfection, one must focus on means and foster sustained commitment. All other paths target improvement. One conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that an organization cannot target perfection by working by ends rather than means and having situational rather than sustained commitment. Leadership is about making choices. A leader will choose to pursue excellence or improvement, to manage by means or by ends, and will encourage sustained or situational commitment. A leader’s effectiveness can be measured by the extent to which individuals in the organization feel free to pursue excellence. In the end, excellence is determined by the nature of the choices that are made by the leadership and embraced by the organization. The leader must target perfection, lead by means, and foster sustained commitment.

REFERENCES: Arnaud, Angelique, (nd). Perfection quote. Retrieved 12/22/2008, from http://quotationsbook.com/quote/29825/ Deming, W. Edwards, 1993. The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education. Cambridge: MIT Press. Johnson, H. Thomas, and Broms, Anders, 2000. Profit Beyond Measure: Extraordinary Results though Attention to Work and People. New York: The Free Press. Liker, Jeffery, 2004. The Toyota Way. New York: McGraw-Hill. May, Matthew E. 2007. The Elegant Solution: Toyota’s Formula for Mastering Innovation. New York: The Free Press. Powell, Colin, cited from http://www.projectlifeusa.org/commitment.htm, referenced on 12/22/2008. Senge, Peter M., 1990. The Fifth Discipline, the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Schurz, Carl, cited from http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/2631.html , referenced on 12/22/2008