Now that corporations are closer to being people (at least in the eyes of our legal system) perhaps they will develop a conscience. This is where real leadership is called for - what I call "conscious leadership." This requires a strong sense of fair play, despite the pressures and ideologs backlash. This takes courage - spiritual courage - that takes stands for what's right and fair and sustainable.

The process of self-discovery can be a lifetime process. Examining oneself in earnest can be a never-ending path like hiking in the mountains. Just when you think you have reached the highest peak you see another even higher one off in the distance.

In my last book - Getting to the Better Future - I quote global thinker and philanthropist Lynne Twist on the subject of taking a stand. She says, "Taking a stand is a way of living and being that draws on a place within yourself that is at the very heart of who you are. When you take a stand, you find your place in the universe, and you have the capacity to move the world." Twist also talks about living "the committed life" and lives her own life from that place of commitment. She has definitely taken a stand with her life, inspiring anyone who is fortunate enough to know her.

When we become so internally focused that we ignore or disinvite feedback, consciously or unconsciously, we are being bureaucratic. When our primary interest lies in our routines, our habits, our thinking, our "organization of one" becomes bureaucratic. This "bureaucracy of self" can be just as intractable as the most bureaucratic government organization.

Most forward thinkers agree that if humanity is to evolve to a higher road of functionality we must learn to do it together, in collaboration. This requires us to transcend these differences and prejudices in order to embrace them - and it needn’t be out of idealism or noble intent.

Last summer I learned of a book coauthored by a new acquaintance – Raj Sisodia. The book - Firms of Endearment (2007) - included a quote by Ryuzaburo Kaku, a Japanese visionary businessman I met in 1991 when he was at the helm of Canon, Inc. Kaku was a pioneer in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) movement, and one of the very few CSR advocates who were in high level management positions in large publicly held corporations.

While it may not be practical to poll the “group conscience” or subject ourselves to the possibility of anarchy with no leaders whatsoever, we are creative enough to come up with a new way of thinking and start seeing leadership as the responsibility of us all, not just selected rulers. This is a new way to look at leadership and the wisdom that flows from it.

According to noted futurist Bob Johansen, who specializes in ten-year forecasts, the world is becoming more and more VUCA - his acronym for volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. In his book Leaders Make the Future, Johansen makes the case that leaders need to learn how to effectively deal with these characteristics which will continue to grow in amplitude. If he’s correct, a great many people will get very uncomfortable. People who seek simplicity, certainty, calm and clear definitions and boundaries – which almost everyone wants some time - will be very disappointed. They may be tempted to deny or resist in some way as a matter of coping. Rather than resist this unfolding reality, or deny it, why not learn to work with these qualities and make the best of it?

Recently I came across the writing of a very successful Japanese entrepreneur, Kazuo Inamori, the founder of Kyocera Corporation and creator of the Kyoto Prize. In his book A Compass to Fulfillment, he writes, “The elevation of the soul is the purpose, the meaning of our lives. Life is nothing other than the process of refining our true nature as human beings.” Well this got my attention big time! A very successful businessman stating this for the public record! I wanted more, and read on. Later in the book, he writes about selfless service and offered a different perspective on the foundations of capitalism which I found both refreshing and uplifting.

The power of our thinking – the beliefs we cherish and the assumptions we hold as foundations for our beliefs – is what makes changes in consciousness so powerful. Physical reality flows from our imagination, our ideas about how things could be. We human beings have been blessed with the ability to change the way we think. Thus we can change the world and choose to evolve consciously, on purpose.

The email below was sent by Dr. John Armstrong, a London-based engineer, in response to my July 2010 editorial, “The New Human: Stepping Into the Next Evolution of Our Species” which was adapted from my forthcoming book. Below John’s email is my response. - JR

By systems dysfunction I mean when systems created by humans fail to function as intended, often showing signs of aberrant behavior. Examples within a social systems context might include fewer people dying when doctors go on vacation, legal systems that aren’t always just, educational systems that fail to educate, and so forth. Smaller scale examples might include the addiction recovery center where staff members demonstrate addictive behavior about their work, the spiritual community that resorts to arms and violence, the hospital system where more people catch infections that anywhere else. You get the idea.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke used a phrase I love when it comes to changing our thinking about how things have to be. In a 2004 interview in Leaders magazine the experienced diplomat was asked about people in the world he most admired. He replied, "The greatest person I ever met, bar none, is Nelson Mandela, and I have gotten to know him very well. No man is perfect, not even Mandela, but he took history by the throat, seized it, and changed its course through a combination of moral authority, vision, strategic sense, practical genius, and a remarkable capacity for forgiveness toward the thugs who ran South Africa under Apartheid."

Bigot: strong word you say? Indeed it is and it may be time to call it what it is and stop this incessant sanctimonious crossfire that dominates our airwaves and, for some, our conversations. As background, I have been troubled and quite vocal in my newsletter and blog editorials about the growing ideological divide in the U.S. and the negative impact it is having on my country, seemingly precluding any respectful and civil discourse between opposing views in Washington, our media, or even in living rooms around the country. I see this as a major crisis and perhaps the biggest threat to our future as a nation.

Once we change our thinking, we will all know what needs to be done to create the future we all want. We have plenty of technology and knowledge at our disposal. Once we see what's possible and what we want to happen, we can do it. But it starts with the way we think and the consciousness we bring to our lives and our work.

Could it be that collaboration on a global scale may be finally catching on? Why would I say that when it would appear to have completely vanished from the halls of Congress, the U.N., and most every other established institution created by people to deal with issues affecting all of us? Why would I say that when gridlock, impasse and polarity of ideologies seem to be realities of the day?

‘The twentieth century will be chiefly remembered in future centuries not as an age of political conflict or technical inventions, but as an age in which human society dared to think of the welfare of the whole human race as a practical objective.’ - Arnold Toynbee.  Toynbee might have been on the right track but he missed the century. Perhaps his prediction will come to be in the 21st Century? In my view, it had better be this one and the sooner the better! We don’t have another ninety years to turn around all our crises worldwide. The window for changing course is closing and even the next few years could be pivotal.

Have you been as puzzled by how Bernie Madoff pulled off possibly the biggest and longest running scam in U.S. history? How did really smart people fall for his $50-65 billion Ponzi Scheme* and remain gullible for decades? My curiosity about this seeming impossibility prompted me to dig a bit into the Madoff con, read his pre-trial plea confession, review the history of his career and research articles and interviews since his scam came to light in late 2008.

Have you ever wondered if the debates, discussions and general conversations that occupy our consciousness most of the time are all essentially “small talk” when it comes to what’s really important? I’m not saying that constructive discussion about the crises facing us today – the economy, climate change, population growth, terrorism, environmental sustainability, and other such things - are not important. But don’t you have a nagging feeling that these situations – serious as they are – are simply symptoms of some larger crisis?

We have been conditioned to seek leaders who can fill those heroic slots for us, leaders who are capable of taking strong committed stands in the tradition of World War II heroes Churchill and Roosevelt, civil rights heroes Anthony, Mandela and King and medical heroes such as Nightingale and Salk. But democracies have gotten used to electing prospective political superheroes and then sitting back and critiquing their performance – not too dissimilar to the way people engage in detailed Monday morning post-mortems of the weekend’s sporting events, often leveling criticism at their heroes.

Remember the 1998 movie “Pleasantville” where the mainstream townspeople passed a resolution making it illegal to teach anything other than the “non-changes view” of history in the schools? The black, grey and white world of this 1950s town - where everything was “pleasant” - was invaded by two teenagers from the 1990s, touching off a revolution in self-expression which resulted in the arrival of color for the first time, setting off a huge outcry for a return to the good old days of certainty, pleasantness, routine, predictability and no color.

Resorting to cynicism seems to provide comfort or a palliative for the psyche. There’s an old saying that if you scratch a cynic you’ll find a disillusioned idealist underneath. This is how most cynics are born – out of some painful or disappointing event in their history. And they vowed never to try anything “idealistic” again. The cynic has adapted a prejudice against anything he or she judges to be idealist and is, therefore, predisposed to oppose anything that suggests things can be really better than they are.

For the past five years or so I have made a practice of reciting The Serenity Prayer several times a day, often while on my daily walkabout up and down the hill on which I live in San Francisco.  I have also learned a few things in this practice and they each have to do with the integrity with which I engage this prayer.

Those of us who have been writing and talking about organizational and social transformation for some time continue to encounter resistance to change everywhere we look. As a systems thinking scholar I see it from the system/culture perspective which is fine for an academic take on it. But where does it show up in individual action? What is the forensic of the resistance, the fingerprints of sabotage or the lineage of rationality that prevents lasting meaningful change from occurring in complex cultures, be they familial, organizational, communal or social?

It is time for we Americans to wake up from our self-absorbed, egocentric trances and start taking on the more adult responsibilities of being global citizens, sharing this planet with many others in a sustainable, thoughtful and compassionate way. Instead of building walls around our neighborhoods or our country, we can start engaging with the other 95% of the world as neighbors and help create a world of neighborliness. In such a world there is a place for everyone, even cowboys!

As we grow in consciousness and become more self aware, we will start being more responsible for our world. We will make decisions that are based on what’s best for all instead of pre-programmed reactions mostly based on personal survival strategies adopted in childhood. It is a process - for some of us a lifetime one. And, like many processes, it has plenty of surprises, twists and turns, none predictable, all exciting!

I hear it almost every day: “It was the right thing to do.” But how often is this heard in the average corporate environment? In most corporate cultures the normal attitude – even if unstated - is “it was the smart thing to do” which usually means it was politically expedient. In this context, “smart” means one played it safe, didn’t stick their neck out very far and most of his/her peers agreed it was a wise decision. Imagine a corporate culture in which the everyday decisions and choices are not only viewed as “politically smart” but as “the right thing to do” – that is they are both moral and ethical, regardless of the potential political fall-out. Wouldn’t that be refreshing?

What is the most popular personal commitment, not gauged by what people tell you but observed from their actions and behaviors? Parenting children? Personal relationships, like with a spouse or partner? Excelling in a personal endeavor such as a sport or a business? While all these are fine examples of popular commitments in today’s world, I would like to suggest something you probably weren’t thinking about: People are more committed to their thoughts and opinions than anything or anyone else ...

“Drink responsibly,” reads the ad for a Kentucky whiskey. But the big headline and alluring photos in the advertisement scream “buy our product” and imply they want us to drink it. Do they fear they may get sued if customers get loaded and hurt themselves or others so they add this message to protect themselves? Does it serve as a sort of disclaimer? Or are they good corporate citizens concerned that people will overindulge unless they include the admonition? Admonition or disclaimer, the words remind me that some of us are not responsible in the way we consume. And it applies to many things not just alcohol.

Our Preoccupation With Trivia
 
The other day I came across a podcast entitled “Attention: The ‘Real’ Aphrodisiac.” I learned of a phrase apparently coined by former Microsoft VP Linda Stone: “Continuous Partial Attention.” It describes that “always on” way many people operate, not only in their work lives but their private lives as well.