Leadership During Times Of Prolonged Uncertainty - part #2

Remember The Stockdale Paradox

As we seek this deeper wisdom within paradoxes, we also need to remember The Stockade Paradox. Jim Collins writes about this paradox in his book, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap. . . and Others Don't (HarperBusiness, 2001). The paradox originated from Navy Vice Admiral, James Stockade’s experiences as a POW during the Vietnam War, where he survived years of torture and deprivation by balancing his harsh and painful reality with a strong belief in a better future. As Collins explains, this paradox is based on the ability to “retain absolute faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, AND at the same time confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.” 

By combining a realistic acceptance of our current challenges, i.e. working within a VUCA environment, with a stedfast and optimistic outlook, i.e. we can, and we will over time prevail in the midst of this prolonged uncertainty, we can, and we will generate successful outcomes. In short, by holding two contradictory truths at the same time, and with regular coaching and support, leaders can get better at leading in the midst of these challenges. 

Still, we need to remember one other key point from the aforementioned book. As Collins writes, “Good is the enemy of great.” Right now, many leaders and managers can, to a degree, embrace The Stockdale Paradox, but when it comes to the point that they need to make a decision, I often hear them defer to a that’s good enough mentality. This is a major problem when dealing with prolonged uncertainty. It often reflects decision fatigue, cognitive overload, and a touch of just wanting to give up and go with the path of least resistance. 

I can not fault leaders who choose this path. That would be an example of grit gaslighting. As Tasha Eurich in her book, Shatterproof: How to Thrive in a World of Constant Chaos (And why resilience alone isn’t enough) (Little, Brown Spark, 2025), explains: “… grit gaslighting, a common phenomena, where, instead of validating our stress or distress, our commitment to coping with it is questioned. Often, grit gaslighting comes from people in positions of authority or well-meaning but unaware family and friends.” I have met many people who are deeply committed to the work they are doing, and completely overwhelmed and exhausted by the complexity and uncertainty that surrounds them. To solve this problem in the world of leadership, we need to approach this as a team problem, not just an individual effort problem. 

Surround Yourself With The Right People

Patrick Lencioni in his book, The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive (Jossey-Bass, 2000), writes about the importance of building and maintaining a cohesive leadership team. As he notes, “cohesive teams build trust, eliminate politics and increase efficiency by knowing one another's unique strengths and weaknesses,  openly engaging in constructive ideological conflict, holding one another accountable for behaviors and actions, [and] committing to group decisions.” In this kind of team environment, grit gaslighting would not be permissible or accepted. Instead, there would be open and engaging discussions about what are, and what are not acceptable, behavioral choices.

But, upon reflection, I think leaders jump too quickly to a focus on improving teamwork during prolonged uncertainty, and miss a key point of Lencioni’s work, namely to build the team, not just improve or maintain the team. The focus on building the team is often skipped over in the rush to get things done. 

Martine Haas and Mark Mortensen in their article called “The Secrets of Great Teamwork” from the June 2016 issue of the Harvard Business Review, writes, “Today’s teams are different from the teams of the past: They’re far more diverse, dispersed, digital, and dynamic (with frequent changes in membership).” From my perspective, given this important insight, we need to make sure we have “the right people in the right seats on the bus,” referencing the work of Jim Collins in his book, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap. . . and Others Don't (HarperBusiness, 2001). 

The difficulty of this metaphor is that Collins did not initially define what are the characteristics of “the right people.” It was not until he wrote the book, How The Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In (HarperCollins, 2009), that he gave a clear answer to the question, “What makes for the ‘Right People’ in key seats?.” In this book, he gives the following answer: “the right people fit with the company’s core values; the right people don’t need to be tightly managed; the right people understand that they do not have ‘jobs’, they have responsibilities; the right people fulfill their commitments; the right people are passionate about the company and its work; the right people display ‘window and mirror’ maturity.” The outcome of choosing the right people when building a team and later maintaining or improving it, is that you create a culture of discipline and a shared mindset based on a common understanding of what matters most. You also are choosing people who have a combination of technical and social skills that can handle uncertainty. 

Nevertheless, we as leaders need to make some tough choices when it comes to people. First, we must stop hiring and retaining people who routinely screw things up, or create levels of disruptive toxicity at the team level. If we tolerate these poor and misaligned behaviors, we will consistently have issues and problems that take our time and attention away from focusing on the right things, operationally and strategically. Having the right people in place reduces distractions and increases engagement and healthy teamwork, all of which is vital to coping with prolonged uncertainty. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

Leadership During Times Of Prolonged Uncertainty - part #1

Introduction

In 2011, Jim Collins and Morten Hansen in their book, Great By Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck - Why Some Thrive Despite Them All (HarperCollins, 2011), wrote: “Given this rise of complexity, globalization, and technology, all of which are accelerating change and increased volatility, we must come to accept that there is no ‘new normal.’ There will only be a continuous series of ‘not normal’ times.” Fifteen years later, their words seem prophetic. They also could have been written yesterday about the events that are happening today. 

Currently, we are living in a VUCA environment, borrowing a term from the US military. This is a time period where things are volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. The implications are that instability is chronic, uncertainty is permanent, change is accelerating, and disruptions are common. All we know for certain is that we can neither predict nor govern most events.

Furthermore, we are worried about the possibility of phase transitions (wide-reaching disruptions triggered by small shifts, like market crashes or social movements), and the possibility for compound extremes (multiple co-occurring disruptions like a natural disaster during a recession). We also are concerned about the convergence of AI, advanced sensors, and biotechnology. Simultaneously, many people are experiencing chronic, compounding, and highly stressful challenges across multiple areas of their life (work, family, health, etc.). 

When we step back and look at all that is happening, and all that has happened, we come to realize that our challenges have become more difficult and complex, and that our organizational systems, and personal and professional mindsets have not evolved as quickly as the changes that are happening all around us. Thus, we are confronted with an important question: How can we strengthen our capacity to adapt during this period of prolonged uncertainty?

Embrace Paradox

Brene’ Brown in her book, Strong Ground: The Lessons Of Daring Leadership, The Tenacity Of Paradox, and The Wisdom Of The Human Spirit (Random House, 2025), writes: “Paradoxes embrace ambiguity, expose our intolerance for uncertainty, push our boundaries, and, if we hang on long enough, often force us to deny the comfort of our ideologies for a deeper wisdom that is a more honest reflection of the human experience and the human spirit.” As she continues, “In its original Greek, paradox is made up of two words, para (contrary to) and dokein (opinion). The Latin paradoxum means ‘seemingly absurd but true’.” And right now, there is a lot that is seemingly absurd but true. Therefore, we need to embrace these paradoxes.  

Wendy Smith, Marianne Lewis, and Michael Tushman in their article called, “Both/And Leadership,” in the May 2016 issue of the Harvard Business Review, write that the source of our uncertainty in the business world comes from three questions. The first question is: “Are we managing for today or for tomorrow?” This is the innovation paradox where we are challenged to balance today’s needs vs. tomorrow’s needs. The second question is: “Do we adhere to boundaries or cross them?” This is the globalization paradox where we are challenged to balance global integration vs. local interests. The third question is: “Do we focus on creating value for our shareholders and investors or for a broader set of stakeholders?” This is the obligation paradox where we are challenged to balance social mission vs. financial pressure. In each of these questions, we have to seek the concept of both/and rather than the more comfortable choice of either/or. 

From my perspective, the first step in this process of embracing paradox is to check our perception. There are two ways to see the world, namely the observing eye and the perceiving eye. Ryan Holiday in his book, The Obstacle Is The Way: The Timeless Art of Turning Trials into Triumph (Penguin, 2014), explains that the observing eye sees what is there, while the perceiving eye sees more than what is there. The goal for leaders during prolonged uncertainty is to see things as they really are, without any of the ornamentation, or self-imposed stories we project on to what is happening. 

Yet, as we choose to see in this manner, we must recognize that our perspective on the problems we are dealing with is always missing something, namely an in-depth understanding of our own history and “baggage.” And, at the same time, we must recognize that when we hear of other people’s perspectives or problems, we always see their history and baggage. 

So, when we choose to see things as they are, we must always check our perspective with others who we trust and can offer grounded insights and perspective over time. This check-in with trusted mentors, coaches, allies, and confidants requires us to step back from the press of current events, and instead choose to see the larger picture of the world. We need to do this step back in order to prevent and/or limit any level of myopic thinking, i.e. a short-sighted way of thinking that focuses on immediate problems and concerns, and short-term gains while neglecting long-term consequences and broader implications for the business. Myopic thinking always lacks foresight and the ability to consider how current actions will affect future growth and innovation. We do all of this, because the most dangerous perspective to hold is one where we think we can change everything, or something specific that is not ours to change. This is the tenacity of paradox, and the reason why we must seek “a deeper wisdom that is a more honest reflection of the human experience and the human spirit.”

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

The Importance Of A Good Day

On most mornings, people get up and get ready for work. As they go through their morning routines, they all want the same thing, namely to have a good day. While this varies to a degree by person, most people just want a day where they can make progress on things that are important to them, know that their job matters, and to work with people who are kind, thoughtful, and respectful. And if, by the end of the day, all of this has happened, then they can feel like it was a good day. 

Nevertheless, this is not the typical experience for many people. Most people encounter problems that are difficult to define, and have no easy solutions. Most people work with other people, who, at times, do not treat them or others well. And finally, most people don’t feel like they are making progress on things that matter the most to them. Instead, they feel like they are battling poorly designed systems, technology that is not helpful, and a company culture that says one thing, but does something completely different. In short, many people find their work life, frustrating, boring, and unsatisfying. And they feel powerless to change it. 

Yet, in the midst of this, most people hope for something better. They want a life and a job where they feel connected with others, and a sense of belonging that comes from doing things that make a difference in the lives of others. They also want a life and a job where they feel heard, and respected for what they know and what they do. At the same time, they want to be seen as a person, rather than just a warm body filling a box on the company’s org chart. And finally, most people want to feel like they have a life of choice and integrity, where they do not need to compromise their beliefs and values in order to make ends meet at the personal and family levels.

As leaders, I think we underestimate the importance of people wanting to have a good day. Typically, we are focused on getting things done, and, if we are honest, the sooner the better. We also are focused on generating positive KPI’s (key performance indicators) that show we are doing the right thing and generating the right outcomes. Then, the people who we report to will be pleased with us, and reward us in various ways, be that a promotion, positive feedback, or some monetary amount. 

But, most people do not have this option. They just wake up in the morning, get ready for the day, and then go to work. And everything that they did not get done the day before is still sitting there on their desk, wanting their time and attention. Meanwhile, a wide variety of new problems have surfaced that also call for their time and attention. 

So, how do we as leaders create a good day for those we work with on a daily basis?

First, leaders need to invest their time and energy in getting to know the people that they work with on a daily basis. As Marcus Buckingham in his book, The One Thing You Need to Know ... About Great Managing, Great Leading, and Sustained Individual Success (Free Press, 2005), explained: “great managing is not about transformation - if you dedicate yourself to transforming each employee into some predetermined perfect version of the role, you will wind up frustrating yourself and annoying the employee. Great managing is about release. It is about constantly tweaking the world so the unique contribution, the unique needs, the unique style of each employee can be given free rein.” As he continues, “To excel as a manager you must never forget that each of your direct reports is unique and that your chief responsibility is not to eradicate this uniqueness, but rather to arrange roles, responsibilities, and expectations so that you can capitalize upon it. The more you perfect this skill, the more effectively you will turn talents into performance.” And when we turn talents into performance, we create the conditions for someone to have a good day. 

Second, leaders need to help people achieve their goals on a regular basis. Teresa Amabile and Steve Kramer in their article called “The Power of Small Wins” (Harvard Business Review, May 2011), report some interesting results after a decade of research which included a deep analysis of daily diaries kept by teammates on creative projects. What they discovered is something they call the Progress Principle, namely “Of all things that can boost emotions, motivation, and perceptions during a workday, the single most important is making progress in meaningful work…. And the more frequently people experience that sense of progress, the more likely they are to be creatively productive in the long run.” From what they shared, I am convinced that making progress in meaningful work is vital to people experiencing a good day. 

Third, leaders need to be able to work at multiple levels within the company. As F. Scott Fitzgerald pointed out, “The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.” I think the best leaders, who create the conditions for optimal performance and positive work engagement, approach the future with three questions in mind, namely Where are we now?, Where do we need to prepare for the future?, and Where do we need to innovate?. This three way approach helps them work on the organization, and in the organization as needed. It also helps them to focus on making current operations better, and focus on preparing everyone for the future. 

While leaders may not be able to control everything about the work day, they can take steps on a daily basis to make the work environment a positive and respectful place. As I have learned over the years, leaders get what they exhibit and what they tolerate. Starting this week, we need to get to know our people better, and we need to help them achieve their goals on a regular basis. Finally, we need to ask ourselves the aforementioned three questions to make sure we are working on the organization and in the organization. The weeks and months ahead may be stressful, challenging, and complex, but the importance of people having a good day is a powerful and rejuvenating experience. And we all need to experience more good days rather than fewer good days.  

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

Lessons Learned From Participating In Many Meetings

Having spent a career sitting in a wide variety of large and small conference rooms and in a wide diversity of meetings, there was one phrase I would hear over and over, week after week, month after month. It was “I hear you.”  Sometimes, this was said to shut someone up. Other times, it was said to communicate that their message was received. And often, it was just said reflexively, and didn’t indicate a thing other than “let’s move on to the next subject.”

But, upon reflection, I have come to realize two, small but important things about communication. First, listening and understanding are not the same thing. Second, seeing and recognizing are not the same thing either. 

So many times, a meeting would become extremely unproductive, because someone in a management or leadership position would equate listening and seeing as being equal to understanding and recognition. And, when I was facilitating these meetings or engaging in complex levels of strategic planning during these meetings, this lack of perspective would set a group back, at times, weeks, months, or even longer in their capacity to move through the challenges before them as individuals, and as a group. 

When I encountered this situation, it took a great deal of energy to stop the group and back them up to the place where things became awkward, or went metaphorically south. I had to help all involved recognize that hearing someone saying something, i.e. the sound waves of their voice entered their ears, and a sound was registered, was not, on any level, a point of understanding. As I taught my students for many years, awareness is not understanding, and hearing is not clarity. 

The other phrase that I routinely heard people say in meetings was “I see what you mean.” The translation of this phrase was again, “I got it.” Message received, and time to move on to the next thing on the list. Or it was the leader’s opportunity to restate their point of view or argument of why the other person’s point of view was not workable. Either way, this phrase routinely shut down dialogue, and any on-going exploration of a topic or subject of discussion. 

Given my age and my experience, both of these phrases remind me of something the late Stephen Covey wrote: “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.” The goal is to do more than indicate you have received the message being sent to you. In reality, the goal as a leader is to gain a more complete understanding of someone’s perspective on the topics at hand. This choice can build a healthy, trust-based relationship, as well as help with current and any future conflicts, and improve overall communication. 

Furthermore, the intent of the leader should be to understand what is being said, and not to react to what is being said. This requires active listening and putting aside our own perspective or biasses in order to fully comprehend the thinking and feeling of another individual. In short, we need to engage in the conversation rather than simply focus on our response. 

For when we choose to do this, we remember two important things. First, people bond with leaders before they will ever bond with, and then execute a plan. Second, people have to trust the messenger before they trust the message. So many times, in so many meetings, in so many cities, I have seen great leaders understand this and role model it. And so many other times, I have see other leaders miss these two key points and fail miserably in their ability to communicate, and to create ownership of important, and, at times, vital strategic changes to take place. 

While I no longer travel for work like I did for many years, I still recognize, and know the importance of clear communication, and it’s direct connection to building and maintaining trust. As Stephen Covey explained, “Trust is the glue of life. It’s the most essential ingredient in effective communication. It’s the foundational principle that holds all relationships.” 

And for us here today, we need to remember to improve our listening and our understanding. We also need to improve our seeing and our recognizing. For when we do this, we are building trust, that key foundational principle that binds all relationships.

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

The Choice To Serve

In a world where people are feeling disconnected, distrustful, and overwhelmed, the concept of leadership is often wrapped in some form of mystical and abstract definition, surrounded by inadequate words from the human vocabulary. As a result, many people struggle with what is leadership, and how to lead. When they look around to find the answer, all they see are fear-and-shame-based, or rank-and-yank forms of leadership. And none of this inspires them, or helps them answer the question of what is leadership. 

When I was teaching my year long course on leadership and organizational change, I would have students read nine different books, and numerous articles on the subject of leadership. I remember one time during our third class session, a student came up to me during a break, and they were deeply frustrated.

“I’ve done all the readings, Geery, and none of the authors you assigned agree with each other. Every one of them sees it from a different angle. So, what’s the truth around all of this?”

“You’re right,” I replied. “This is why you need to decide, based on the research and your own personal experience, what makes sense to you, and what works best given your skill set and mind set. You need to find your clarity, and your truth on this subject.”

“Huh. Okay. I will do that.” And over time, they did just that. They found their answer, and became a very effective leader in their organization.  

For me, the best leaders I know are stewards of what matters most, and, at the exact same time, they are 100% focused on building a better future for all. They embrace this two prong approach of stewardship and service, and live with the tension between these two elements, namely a desire to maintain what is important, and a desire to improve what is most important. 

Right now, I fear that too many people have come to tolerate, and even expect, that leaders always act in a self-centered manner. As Patrick Lencioni in his book,  The Motive: Why So Many Leaders Abdicate Their Most Important Responsibilities (Wiley, 2020), writes “… if reward-centered, self-centered leadership becomes the norm, young people will grow up believing that this is what it means to be a leader….. I believe it’s long past time that we, as individuals and as a society, reestablish the standard that leadership can never be about the leader more than the led.” Then, he continues “… leadership is meant to be joyfully difficult and selfless responsibility…. Perhaps people will stop using the term ‘servant leadership’ altogether, because everyone will understand that it is the only valid kind. And that is certainly worth doing.”

From my perspective, the pathway to this kind of leadership requires something that is rarely, if ever, discussed in the world of leadership. As James Kerr in his book, Legacy: What The All Blacks Can Teach Us About The Business Of Life (Constable, 2013), writes, “The first stage of learning is silence, the second stage is listening.” What the best leaders understand is that on-going learning is mission critical to being successful as a leader, and that it begins with learning to be quiet. I like this old Gaelic phrase which I think captures the spirit of this idea, namely “quietness without loneliness.” It is hard to do, and it makes the listening element even better. 

Many years ago, our oldest son took his mom and dad on a multi-day hiking trip in the southwest. In my earlier years, I had done a lot of hiking and camping, and was pretty confident that I could handle this trip. Since my own hiking equipment was dated and not in the best shape, our son borrowed some newer equipment from friends.

On the day we were packing our backpacks, a variety with an internal frame that I had never used before, our son watched me struggle with how to load it so the weight was evenly distributed. In my old back pack from the late 60’s which had an external frame, I knew how to do this with my eyes closed. In this one, I was baffled. 

He watched me struggle for a while, and finally said: “Do you want a pro tip, Dad?”

I answered, “Sure” and stuck out my hand, thinking he was going to give me some physical item.

He smiled, and said: “Cannon balls before feathers. Put the heavy items closer to your hips and the lighter items toward the top.”

I looked at him, and I looked at this modern back-pack, and then I smiled. He was 100% correct. I was loading it wrong, and this insight was the solution. I also smiled, because while I had done it in the past, it did not mean I knew how to do it in the present. I needed to be open to learning, and being taught. 

Next, this form of leading others requires us to understand something else that is rarely discussed in the world of leadership. James Kouzes and Barry Posner in their book, A Leader’s Legacy (Jossey-Bass, 2006), note, “If we’re going to be authentic in our leadership, we have to be willing to serve, and we have to be willing to suffer.” The first time I read this I had to stop reading, and really ponder this deep insight. Because in my work as an executive coach, I have met many people who are suffering, and who have suffered. As Kouzes and Posner explain, “Everything leaders do is about providing service.” And the best leaders are passionate about serving. Still, “... the word passion in any dictionary that includes origins you’ll see that it comes from the Latin word for suffering. Passion is suffering!” And suffering is normal. 

Still, if we grasp this insight, we recognize one more thing that Kouzes and Posner shared that makes sense: “When we choose to lead every day, we choose to serve. Leading is not about what we gain from others but what others gain from us.” Our hope as leaders is that what people gain from us is clarity, connection, and confidence in order that they can serve others, too. 

Furthermore, as we define leadership as the combination of stewardship and service, I am reminded of the following quote by the American basketball coach, John Wooden: “A player who makes the team great is better than a great player.” What I have noticed about great leaders is that they are team focused, especially in the areas of building and maintaining a cohesive leadership team. As Patrick Lencioni in his book, The Advantage: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else in Business (Jossey-Bass, 2012), notes: “Becoming a real team requires an intentional decision on the part of its members…. teamwork is not a virtue. It is a choice - and a strategic one.” And a critical role of the leader is to choose people who will work well as a team, especially players who will “make the team great,” referencing Wooden’s early observation. 

One unique element about these leaders is that they create a good climate or internal environment on the team. Lencioni calls this “vulnerability-based trust.” As he explains in the aforementioned book, “At the heart of the fundamental attribution error is the tendency of human beings to attribute the negative or frustrating behaviors of their colleagues to their intentions and personalities, while attributing their own negative or frustrating behaviors to environmental factors.... Of course, this kind of misattribution, where we give ourselves the benefit of the doubt but assume the worst about others, breaks down trust on a team.” Therefore, he continues, “The only way for the leader of a team to create a safe environment for his team members to be vulnerable is by stepping up and doing something that feels unsafe and uncomfortable first.” 

This is where I have spent a great deal of time coaching leaders who want to embrace stewardship and service as their form of leadership. In particular, we discuss the power and importance of role modeling key behaviors as a leader and as a team member. Recognizing that each leader has different strengths and talents, great leaders build on the strength of their team members and their respective teams. They recognize that trust is built on clarity, experience, and compassion, recognizing that all involved are doing their best even on the days that they struggling on the inside and/or outside. When leaders comprehend this insight and this perspective, they can serve their team and the company in an authentic and healthy way too.

Fourth, as leaders choose the combination of stewardship and service, they must discern the difference between ripe and unripe issues. When I taught my year long course on leadership and organizational change, I would ask the students to read an  interview of Ron Heifetz, the director of the Leadership Education Project at Harvard University’s John F Kennedy School of Government, in an article called “The Leader of the Future” by William Taylor in the June 1999 issue of Fast Company magazine. Many would complain that the article from 1999 was so “old,” and “why couldn’t they read something written more recently.” However, once they had read the article, they always said it was very helpful and good. 

In one section of the interview, Heifetz explains the concept of a “productive discomfort zone.” He notes that “Drawing attention to tough challenges generates discomfort. So you want to pace the rate at which you frustrate or attempt to change expectations.” Then he writes: “That means distinguishing between ‘ripe’ and ‘unripe’ issues. A ripe issue is one in which there is a general urgency for action. An unripe issue is one in which there is local urgency -- a readiness to change within just one faction. The work that it takes to ripen an unripe issue is enormous -- and quite dangerous. It needs to be done, but it's different from working a ripe issue.”  

This is such a simple concept, and yet such a powerful concept. Leaders, who embrace a reward-centered and self-centered form of leadership, don’t care about their people. They just want what they want, and don’t choose to ripen issues. Instead, they force things through the organization in order to get them done. The outcome of this choice is the creation of massive levels of distrust and, over time, a complete destruction of continuity and teamwork within the organization. 

Jim Collins, in his book, How The Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In (HarperCollins, 2009), calls this the “Hubris Born of Success.” As he explains, “Great enterprises can become insulated by success; accumulated momentum can carry an enterprise forward, for a while, even if leaders make poor decisions or lose discipline… [decline] kicks in when people become arrogant, regarding success virtually as an entitlement, and they loose sight of the true underlying factors that created success in the first place.” This whole perspective is the result of leaders believing “We’re so great, we can do anything!”. And as a result, people become disengaged. 

However, when leaders choose to steward what matters most and serve their people, they can discern the difference between ripe and unripe issues. Then, thoughtfully and carefully, they can execute their plans related to the ripe issues and to ripen the unripe issues. The outcome from this choice is the on-going building of trust and commitment, plus teams getting stronger and more resilient in the face of difficult or challenging times. 

What leaders need to understand is something that Brené Brown put so bluntly and clearly: “There is no app for transformation.” They also need to understand that there is no app for leadership. When an individual chooses to combine stewardship and service, they recognize that every person’s life has meaning, and every life has an influence, and is being influenced by other lives. We are all connected, and truth be told, every person is seeking a life of connection, purpose, and meaning. It is from this foundation that an individual will, over time, become a great leader. It is worth the time, effort, and energy to pursue this course of action because the outcome will always be transformational. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change