In leadership there exists a ratio of how much one gives in comparison to how much one receives. Yet there are many leaders who benefit from the receiving and fail to give. In some cases, this ratio turns into a whole number of receiving with no giving.
This past week I physically met a LinkedIn and Facebook connection. He was an aspiring entrepreneur who also had a full time job. After our pleasant meeting in which I shared some general observations and referred him to a couple of my connections, he asked me what could he do for me?
I knew when I met him he was not a ideal customer however I believe one never knows who someone else knows. My response was “Just leave the tip” (I bought breakfast) and when you hear of someone who might benefit from my services, please consider sharing my name. He was genuinely appreciative of my time and that was enough for me.
Another example of this giving receiving ratio is LinkedIn recommendations (written) not the endorsements. For myself, I intentionally decided long ago to have at least a 2 for 1 ratio respective to LinkedIn recommendations. Currently I have given 81 LinkedIn recommendations and received 36. This ratio is being maintained.
Another example of the leadership giving receiving ratio is the sharing of the blogs, LinkedIn articles and special online writings. Since I belong to several forward thinking leadership groups where material is cross-promoted, I am indeed fascinated by the absence of this ratio by some of the group members.
Of course, the lack of reciprocity is justified because they do not feel the content up to their quality standards; they disagree with the content; the posting is too long for their readers; or they don’t have time. This justification may make sense to them. Yet, this appears to me to be an ego self-serving leadership smoke screen that is not fooling the other contributors to the group. Occasionally a member is “nicely called out” and the called out member uses of the aforementioned smoke screen excuses.
For me, I regularly disagree with many of the positions of my professional colleagues from “cold calling is dead” to “value creation” to “social selling.” Overall, the content is fairly well written and my sense is there would be one or more people within my community who would find this information of interest. I know this to be true because people make positive comments on these articles that I have not written.
The real thought leadership question is two-fold:
1. If we all agreed on everything, where would there be growth and change?
2. What are you or rather your ego really fearing?
What the leadership giving receiving ratio reveals is one’s positive core values, one’s business ethics and sometimes one’s excessive ego. When we think of ourselves before thinking of others, this creates a disconnect, disharmony with our own positive core values. For some, they can live with that disharmony, for others including myself, they cannot.
Years ago my Swedish grandmother lead by example of how it is better to give than to receive. I remember her lessons because she held my hand as we walked across the dirt road to give a cake, a loaf of bread to a far wealthier neighbor. She lived her values, her faith and I look to her as a guide for my own daily actions.
Today I do my best to give without the expectation of receiving and I attempt not to hide behind the self serving smoke screens of justification. Yes, sometimes I do fail because my own ego gets in the way. This is why I have combined my values statement with my personal motto – Just Be Values - to keep me from falling into the abyss of ego self-justification.
Share on Facebook
