The better thing

Leadership appears or already exists? To me leadership is a state of mind. Yes. Something within us and that only appears when we become aware that it exists in us. However, as our brain is lazy and defends himself from overwork, are the trigger events that can, if we want, lead us to the awareness that our brain has an owner (Antonio Damasio). When we conscientize (become aware) like Paulo Freire, we never cease to have that starting mark for leadership. I am, I exist and command what you will allow me, in my life. This is leadership; I know what I want and I'm not going there. If I can develop a reasonably balanced speech I will begin to "delight" other and other. These are the followers who, on our behalf, will be free and build your own way. When that happens that's leadership: others to do what they think is the right thing.

The Gift

Science and technique cannot consider the gift. State can't tax it and market tries, but fails, to reduce it to merchandise/goods or services. Gift is both anarchy and acracy. However, carries with it the weight of tradition and ancestral wisdom. Can be understood, but not closed, using a body of concepts. How do we say actually it is quantic, towards the non-linear, the indeterminate, the diffuse and the uncertain. Gift is in the opposite field of the coeteris paribus, the accumulation, the efficiency, the productivity, and the utility. As a paradoxical element of our existence, gift shapes what concerns and scares us in the obligations, losses, differences, debts and relationships.

The orange management

Keep calm. I'm not speaking about the governmental party's colour. I'm not yet a political commentator. When I speak of the Orange I am referring to the color of Ken Wilber’s dynamic spiral. That color which corresponds to the modern and self-oriented man. That one set aside the rational and competitive woman. By the way, the one who sticks the teams motivated by success and playing to win. If Don Beck, American Psychological Association (APA) member and founder of Integral Studies Institute, visited Portugal he would recommend the change of the Primer of power exercise. In fact we need to develop an intelligence of power that reflects the complexity of the world today. For starters it was nice to have in the country a noble purpose to life. Later, politicians should act with elegance and dignity. On the other hand, was a sign of wisdom not to forget that the ideology of the market is important but market is imperfect in crisis. It was also essential to take social responsibility of all in relation to all. In conclusion we left the desire that the public things be treated above the mere homemade and mean corruption.

The importance of doing what you say

One of the aspects where I fight with myself is in the congruence between what I say and what I do. I can't get high percentages, but it's not, I'm sure, with percentages that the life one lives. Life is, above all, like to feel every moment with happiness. In search of love and happiness of every moment we go making concessions, establishing agreements and mitigating conflict. Life is not a straight line, as Edson Athayde said, in 2012. Life is a space of encounter when there's so much mismatch in this life (Vinicius de Moraes). Indeed, do what you say is more difficult than you might think. It is not always feasible. Always is mismatch, now is real. Before the other, our psychological pair, essential to our existence, now, we have to be what we are: Beings in transit to a better life. We can only achieve with a greater knowledge of ourselves and thus we will be able to know others more deeply. Then, it's doing what you say, with happiness.

The powerful and the transformational leaders

In 1978, a biographer, with the name of James McGregor Burns wrote a book titled "Leadership", in which described the lives of people who he felt were world-class leaders — Gandhi, Mao, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Stalin and Hitler. An important conclusion of the book is the distinction between two types of leaders, those who wield power and the transformational ones. The criterion used by Burns to make that distinction was the leader's concern for the wishes and needs of their followers. According to Burns, which simply wield the power impose an external control over their followers. These are leaders who see their own ends as more important than those of others. In fact, they see others as objects that are desirable because the others are instruments to help them gain what they want, or so undesirable, because they can make others’ lives or interfere with what they want. Although these leaders are able to achieve results in the short term, they do so at a high price. At best, their tactics result in followers that do not reflect, they learn to keep their heads down and do as little as possible to avoid problems. At worst, they create an atmosphere of ill-will or latent malicious compliance. At the base of a toxic environment is fear. For its part, transformational leaders are concerned about the needs and interests of their followers as well as their own. They create an environment that induces the motivation and commitment. They see people as human beings capable with their own needs, feelings and opinions. They seek mutually beneficial goals and lead their followers to higher levels of motivation, behavior and even morality. These leaders, according to Burns, judge its effectiveness not by their press clippings, but for real social change or transformation of individual attitudes and organizational behaviour.

The vulnerable leader

People, like the greater appreciation with which they face the negative aspects of life, refer more to distrust than trust, mainly because they feel betrayed or abandoned by others. Trust is like fresh air. Just realize their lack when it disappears. In fact, we need it to be healthy. On essence of trust are the fundamental human relationship values: honesty, integrity and respect for others. Then, on a scale of inference, makes sense the existence of organizational and constitutional values. It is up to leaders of organizations and political leaders implement the fundamental values, because the achievements involve more than written words. But most politicians, bankers and current leaders have failed in practice the fundamental values, creating an environment of mistrust in institutions and in the laws that regulate them. The uncertainty, vulnerability and confidence are related. Collaboration and mutual aid are required to accept the risks that characterized our current way of life. Hence the focus on restoring confidence is the biggest current challenge of people, organisations and societies/civilizations. Trust is a positive feeling, while fear and anger, negative sensations, are the sign of trust betrayed in our relations and contexts. We all need predictability and goodwill for we accept us in our vulnerability vis-à-vis others. The predictability results from the existing equilibrium in the context in which it evolved. The goodwill generates positive relationships. The acceptance of our vulnerability is a regenerating sensation of our ability to trust. In times of uncertainty, leaders have come to focus on data, economic and financial indicators, showing extreme coldness in relation to errors, to the emotions and uncertainty statements. All this because they fear losing control of the situation and also because have not learned to act in caordic contexts. Leaders have to be brave and accept their own vulnerability vis-à-vis others. The acceptance of vulnerability is the way to renew the capacities of innovation, change and creativity, because we do not diminish nor weakens, promotes the recovery of confidence and makes us happier.

Brain seesaw

Matthew Lieberman, in a post published on 27 December this year in the Harvard Business Review Blog, puts the following question: Why our brains are wired to connect, our brains have made it difficult to be both socially and analytically focused at the same time? In other words, why is it that when a Manager cares about the results of an enterprise, seldom worry, simultaneously, with the welfare of workers that ensure the efficient functioning of the enterprise? The answer is given by the author alerting for different parts of the brain that activate those ways of thinking. The regions on the external surface of the brain, the frontal lobe, near the skull, are responsible for analytical thinking and are highly related to IQ. On the other hand, are in the Middle regions of the brain, where touching the two hemispheres, which support the social thought. These regions enable us to gather the thoughts, feelings and goals of the person based on what we see of your actions, words and context. There exists a sort of seesaw who plays cerebral preventing the thoughts of one of the regions allow the simultaneous other reasoning. All of this tends to be exacerbated by the fact that, in the business world, be given highlight those that get results. How much more work the focus on results less work the other side of the seesaw. Urges therefore start to reverse the trends and bet more on authentic leadership. In this model the focus is placed on people and their well-being. IE, empathy and compassion will ultimately contribute to the efficiency, which is never neglected.

One vulnerable leader is like two not vulnerable leaders

People, like the greater appreciation with which they face the negative aspects of life, refer more to distrust than trust, mainly because they feel betrayed or abandoned by others. Trust is like fresh air. Just realize their lack when it disappears. In fact, we need it to be healthy. On essence of trust are the fundamental human relationship values: honesty, integrity and respect for others. Then, on a scale of inference, makes sense the existence of organizational and constitutional values. It is up to leaders of organizations and political leaders implement the fundamental values, because the achievements involve more than written words. But most politicians, bankers and current leaders have failed in practice the fundamental values, creating an environment of mistrust in institutions and in the laws that regulate them. The uncertainty, vulnerability and confidence are related. Collaboration and mutual aid are required to accept the risks that characterized our current way of life. Hence the focus on restoring confidence is the biggest current challenge of people, organisations and societies/civilizations. Trust is a positive feeling, while fear and anger, negative sensations, are the sign of trust betrayed in our relations and contexts. We all need predictability and goodwill for we accept us in our vulnerability vis-à-vis others. The predictability results from the existing equilibrium in the context in which it evolved. The goodwill generates positive relationships. The acceptance of our vulnerability is a regenerating sensation of our ability to trust. In times of uncertainty, leaders have come to focus on data, economic and financial indicators, showing extreme coldness in relation to errors, to the emotions and uncertainty statements. All this because they fear losing control of the situation and also because have not learned to act in caordic contexts. Leaders have to be brave and accept their own vulnerability vis-à-vis others. The acceptance of vulnerability is the way to renew the capacities of innovation, change and creativity, because we do not diminish nor weakens, promotes the recovery of confidence and makes us happier.