Page 254 - Fearless Leadership
P. 254
Aligning Emotionally and Intellectually 241
When we ask leaders if they are emotionally committed, they answer,
“Yes, I think we should move ahead.” However, “I think” is not a feeling.
Therefore, the questions you must ask and answer to gauge emotional com-
mitment are different from those used to assess intellectual commitment:
• Are you willing to stand for this decision, publicly and privately,
even when you are uncomfortable and challenges occur?
• Are you enthusiastic, energized, and passionate about this decision?
• Are you motivated by what can be achieved?
• Are you willing to actively enlist others?
Emil did not respond immediately when he was asked about his level
of alignment on a decision. Instead, he reflected about whether he was
willing to go the distance and actively support the decision at every level
in the organization. He knew there would be difficulties and challenges,
and he wanted to make sure he was willing to remain aligned through
thick and thin. After resolving that he was committed at Level 5, he shared
his stand with the group and said, “You can count on my full alignment
and support.”
Emotional commitment answers the question, “How will people sup-
port this decision in practice—will they be indifferent, neutral, and
unmoved or inspired, enthusiastic, and passionate?
How a CEO Achieved Authentic Alignment with
Successor Candidates
In a horse race for the CEO position in a manufacturing company,
the incumbent CEO asked the two internal candidates to align on
how they would work together if one of them became the next CEO.
Both candidates said they would stay with the organization and sup-
port each other fully regardless of who became the heir apparent.
What Happened. The incumbent CEO felt there were issues that
needed to be resolved between the two candidates. In private ses-
sions with each candidate followed by a combined session with
both, we discovered they were aligned in principle but not in prac-
tice. One candidate, Sid, was merely complying (in other words,
he was at Level 3) with what he thought the CEO wanted to hear.
The other candidate, Bruce, said he was on board but was not sold