So, what is Inspiration? People talk about inspiration and they typically do so without defining the term. However, when pressed for one, most find it difficult. One definition I’ve heard that I feel best sums it up is “to infuse with life”. I like that. When I feel inspired towards something (and I’ll come back to this here in a bit) it does feel like I have been injected with some amount of the raw energy and power that makes up this thing called life. I said “inspired towards something”. I don’t feel that one can be inspired without a corresponding direction. As unclear as that direction may be, one is still drawn towards somewhere away from where they currently are. This desire to move away is not necessarily in a physical sense although sometimes a physical change may be required. Perhaps one is drawn to think in a different way. Or perhaps to create something that had until then not existed. I also said that when I feel inspired, I feel like I have been infused with “some amount of” this stuff. I do believe that there are different levels of inspiration. In some cases, the inspiration may ignite a blaze within someone that is so powerful it drastically alters the course of their life forever. In other cases, maybe nothing permanent happens and the memory of that inspiration fades with time. What causes these varying degrees I believe is a combination of the psychological state of the subject to be inspired and how the act of inspiring matched up. Taking a step back, perhaps the phrase “the act of inspiring” is wrong. Acts imply actors and I don’t believe that inspiration requires a conscious decision on the inspirer. Sometimes a natural event, like the sunrise, can inspire something. And while many personify nature as this warm, loving mother figure, I disagree that there is an actual consciousness there.

Now how is this different from motivation? Is it different? I believe in effect, they are very similar, but in essence they are quite different. Both stimulate a change, but I see motivation as an external force effecting the change while inspiration somehow causes this effect through some means that is internal to the inspired.

What is divine inspiration? This term ascribes the cause of a particular instance of inspiration to a divine being or god. The subject of the actual existence or not of this actor is well beyond the scope of this post. However, it cannot be denied that, true or not, the divine has been cited as the author of many inspirations. I do believe however, that one may be inspired by something other than this divine being.

Is it possible to inspire everyone? Or is inspiration simply kindling a spark that has always existed, though maybe dormant, into a larger flame? I like to think that nobody’s flame every really goes out. It may dwindle and people may box it in with various parts of their lives, but I don’t think it ever gets completely extinguished. Now, not everybody will be inspired by the same things. People have different priorities in their lives and as I said earlier, they have different psychological states that they live in. However, to say that someone is uninspireable, I feel is just giving up.

Again, I would like to mention how I have done no formal research on the subject and am working on largely only my own experiences. However, I imagine that most people enjoy the feeling of being inspired, that actual instance where we are stirred to do more, to become more. And yet, there are many who may immediately feel displeasure at the change they are drawn towards. As a fellow creature of habit, I understand how difficult change can be. I find it an intriguing situation to love the feeling of being inspired and simultaneously hating the idea of changing. They are competing for our actions. I think that whichever side wins it says a lot about us.

Now to wrap all of this up, I do not know what inspired me to write this. Or even if I ever really was inspired to write this. But I did. So, take it for what it’s worth.

Now my undergraduate work was in philosophy and so I have been forced to adopt the habit of defining my terms. So before going any further, I will attempt to clarify what I mean when I use the words candor, accountability, and discipline.

By candor, I mean simply communicating clearly, openly, and honestly. This must be tempered of course with discretion because there are various items that people do not need to hear or know about. But with those items that do need to be conveyed, it should be done so without any sort of double talk or vague allusions.

Accountability goes hand in hand with integrity. If one says they will do something, they should do it. That’s all it is. Now there will always be extenuating circumstances. Life happens. But there is a subtle, yet very important difference between an actual condition (change in priorities, whatever) that kept someone from getting something done and someone providing a rationalization or justification for not getting something done.

And by discipline I mean having the self control to do something that one might not really want to do. Everybody has certain aspects of their lives that they would like to push off and do later (if ever). Sometimes there are situations that people dread. Discipline is sticking with something and seeing it through when one honestly knows it needs to be done despite one’s personal level of interest or enjoyment in doing it.

The reason I particularly stress these three characteristics is because they overlap each other. When someone speaks candidly about a second person’s work, it is easier for the second person to be held more accountable. And when people are accountable for the work they do, it is much easier to speak candidly about their work. Also, if a person is held accountable for their work, then they will more likely have the discipline to follow through with tasks they may not want to do. Also, if people are more disciplined, then they are likely to be more receptive to being held accountable.

With a corporate culture that encourages these three things, there will be less confusion about where people stand, what needs to be accomplished, and who is responsible for what. People will know what is expected of them. The status quo will be one where people execute their tasks and achieve their goals. The bar is raised for their company.

Now of course underlying all of this is the question of how to implement these ideas and shape a company’s culture. This I believe requires much more than a paragraph tacked on to the end of an already rambling post. However, my short answer is trust. There has to be a trusting relationship between manager and subordinates and between employees and their coworkers. Without this, people will not openly and honestly talk about things. They will not as likely commit to doing something for someone else and see it through. You’re left with a company of people that tell their peers one thing and their managers another. They don’t always follow through and when asked about it resort to pointing out examples of how others did not follow through either. However, if you are able to develop an environment that stresses candor, accountability, and discipline, just imagine the potential you have to excel as a company!

B gets promoted and suddenly is A‘s boss. They are still close. A is respectful of the chain of command and obedient. Time progresses and both A and B continue to do well. One day, A notices something else B could do to improve. A is mindful of B‘s position of authority and cognizant of the fact that there is more than just their friendship at stake. If B is offended by what A has to say, A could quickly find himself unemployed. A doesn’t want to have B‘s position, but rather wants B to improve a certain aspect of what he is doing. A‘s advice is for the betterment of B and their company as a whole. Should A mention anything? Even in the most tactful of ways?

What impact does organizational hierarchy have on giving advice? Should it? I have asked these questions multiple times and every time people have said that A should not bring anything up. Even tactfully. Possibly if he is specifically asked to provide advice, but not always even then. Why? The intentions of A have not changed. Is it simply self-preservation? Not wanting to risk losing his job? At what cost? What if B‘s not changing (which may be likely if he remains unaware of his lacking) were to the detriment of the company?

Why? I don’t know.

I believe that leadership is and looks different in different circumstances. As such, I will not provide my own succinct definition of the term, but rather try to illustrate what it looks like in various circumstances.

Most would agree that the word manipulation has a generally negative connotation. Usually when someone is referred to as manipulative, it is not a compliment. Yet one source defines manipulation as “controlling or influencing something or someone to produce a particular result”. What then is leadership? Some define leadership as “the process of influencing people toward a specific goal”. The differences between the two terms deal primarily with the motives of the actors in each case. The manipulator generally has more self centered reasons for achieving the desired outcomes than the leader and the manipulated usually have less ability to not follow than those who are being led. However, both concepts deal with influencing others for a specific outcome that most likely would not have otherwise been realized. Because of this, the leader must always be mindful of his motives and his actions and how they are perceived lest he be seen as a manipulator.

What then is a manager and how does that relate to leadership? A manager may be a leader, but not necessarily so. Likewise, a leader may be a manager, but also not necessarily. Managers typically are responsible for the day to day activities of the people they manage. They ensure things are done to the standards set by the company and within the given constraints. They help remove obstacles from the paths of their subordinates so that they may be effective in doing their jobs. They become leaders when they help those they are over to achieve something they wouldn’t have on their own.

So leadership involves guiding people to do something. A group of individuals all moving in the same direction is not the same as a team of people being led in a certain direction. There must be influence, guidance, motivation from the leader. Also, this direction the people are going must be specific. The leader needs to have a clear vision of where he is steering his people. Most companies will have some sort of overarching mission or vision statement. While I believe that most of these are bloated to the point of becoming meaningless, the idea behind these is to provide a clear statement of purpose, or where the people are intentionally moving. And while telling a subordinate to run with something, perhaps even something specific, though empowering is not necessarily leadership. In some cases, simply telling someone where to go is enough to get them there. Some people may have similar personal motives for accomplishing something and so do not need anything in addition to being told where to get to. However, leadership also handles the situations where people may be resistant to an idea for a variety of reasons. Having some sort of organizational hierarchy or chain of command may help by clearly laying out positions of authority and corresponding responsibilities. Yet having a position of leadership does not necessarily imply leadership.

Hopefully by now you understand what I mean when I use the term leadership. I am assuming so and will continue on with how to be a leader within a company.

First and foremost, I believe leaders have to have relationships with those they are leading. If a leader’s responsibility is to motivate people and different people are motivated by different means, the leader must know his people. Know your audience. Also, those that are being led must trust that the leader is not seeking some self centered end otherwise the leader may be viewed as a manipulator. In order to have this trust with the people, the leader must have a good relationship with them. The leader builds their trust by being accountable and having integrity. If you say you will do something or be somewhere at a certain time or speak to someone, do it. People understand extenuating circumstances, but they also can detect when someone is justifying a poor excuse. Build an open and honest relationship with your people. However, it is important to not be so concerned with this that a leader is unable to make difficult decisions. Sometimes there will be conflicts of interest. However, if that trust exists, that the leader is acting for the best of the desired goal, then those difficult times should be a little easier.

Secondly, communicate with your people. Do this if only to preserve the relationship you are building with them. People need to know how they are doing and how things are progressing towards the goal that you are leading them towards. Even if there have been setbacks or things are not going as well as you would like, let people know. It is always better for people to have a clear understanding of where things are than for them to get blindsided by the facts. In fact, you may even see people set up in a crisis and help out when had they been ignorant they wouldn’t have. Plus, one of the most effective means of motivation and inspiration is to let other people see and hear your passion for achieving the goal. Communicate and share that fire with your followers.

Thirdly, I believe the best leaders are the ones that people barely notice. This dances with the line differentiating leadership and manipulation, but if a leader can influence people to do something without them realizing that it was the leader’s intention, the people will have more of a sense of ownership and pride in the task. A well placed suggestion or question can help a person realize a potentially difficult yet beneficial change and be less resistant to it because of how the idea got into their head. This will build your people’s confidence and dedication.

It is very possible that my thoughts are way off base. However, from my current place in life, I believe that leadership is intentionally guiding people towards a shared goal and best practiced by building relationships that foster trust and open communication and by helping your people to identify solutions on their own. We’ll see how long it is until I post again specifically to correct or expound on any of these thoughts.