From Lead Gunners to Gun Leaders

In Australia the slang term “Gunner” is a derogatory term for someone who is always shooting off ideas but rarely does anything about them. It comes from their constant verbal shots of “I am gunner do this and they are gunner do that…”. The lead gunner wants to look good by spruiking ideas, but knows that attempting delivery of their “great idea” is a risk. It requires action and capability they are not confident about, so they have handy a list of complex barriers they use as a excuses for their lack of delivery and commitment. I often wonder what they see when reflecting (assuming they engage in genuine self challenge). Are they aware of their limitations, or blissfully in their own little “reality”.

Typical of the dry and not so subtle Australian sense of humour is you can buy such people a circular wall decoration called a “tuit”. This removes their excuse of “I’m gunner do it when I get a round to it”. In contrast, the slang term “Gun” applies to someone at the peak of their performance. A gun athlete wins the gold medal, they are the best and everyone knows it. A gun leader is a highly respected individual who delivers on sustainable promises. People trust them and are inspired by them.

I have observed lead gunner behaviours in many of today’s so called “leaders”. Many are fantastic at describing their vision or mission (assuming they know the difference). However, they have very little idea (or intention perhaps) of acting to convert these into reality. This is often driven by fear of the unknown and the unpredictability of the longer term future. The fact that we live in a complex world should be seen as a great advantage and source of opportunities for innovation, not an issue. However, it has resulted in many at the top (I refrain from saying leaders) making decisions that are short term focused to reduce risks and “optimise” short term gain. A better leadership approach is foster “collaborative opportunity before issues” (see earlier post). Although risks are important to decision making, the risk analysis needs to come after the creative interactions to generate a wide diversity of opportunities. This mindset of focusing on short term “risk free” actions for immediate benefit to the few is the action of gunners not leaders. Now more than ever we need genuine authentic leaders who think, behave and act in a sustainable manner. It is far easier to describe what a house is, than to build it. It is even more difficult to convert the newly constructed building into a home, which a family of people “own”, identify with and feel a sense of belonging and safety. Organisations often lack this sense of belonging, causing stress, a lack of loyalty and high employee churn. So back to our Lead gunners…

How do we encourage the decision makers to shed the gunner mentality and remove the barriers to realisation, rather than constantly talk about what is stopping them. “I can’t deliver this until….” echoes along the corridors of the top floor, along with “I wasn’t my fault, we couldn’t have known and this has never happened before”. Get over it! The world is complex and unpredictable. If you want the privileges of being a leader in such a world, deal with this - or get out of the way for someone who can! In fact, if you are a capable leader you will revel in the uncertainty and leverage the diversity and emergence whilst acting in a responsible manner. Such an approach will drive a positive performance spiral in your organisation and contribute to the “greater good” not to mention your reputation.

So, where are we going to find people who get this? Leaders accept the challenges and the responsibility of creating a shared vision which all members of their “tribe” want to willingly follow. Because, if they don’t have willing followers, they can hardly be leaders can they! So are you gunner join the typical leaderless or be a gun leader?

Boundary riders for creative innovation

Boundary Spanning Leadership, a book by Chris Ernst and Donna Chrobot-Mason from the Center for Creative Leadership was released last week has been an immediate success. It is in fact, a good example of its own philosophies in that it draws on a wide range of ideas from many contexts to support the research on which it is based. It also leverages the impressive networks into which the CCL authors have within their circles of influence to promote the ideas it contains. They cleverly contrast the common perception of boundaries as barriers to progress with the less commonly applied definition as frontiers. This highlights an important aspect of our role as leaders is to challenge boundaries to forge new territories on the path a discovery pathway that drives innovation and performance. Although these principles may not seem new at first glance to some, what is unique about the book is the simple way in which these complex issues are simplified with a well structured pathway that clarifies how you can transform the concept of creative innovation into a reality. They provide interactive ways to engage people to participate, that is taking good theory and weaving a pragmatic process in place to deliver results.


I was attracted to this book because I often referred to myself as a “boundary rider”, explaining that my role has often been to solicit new options by drawing from a wide range of disciplines to stimulate conversations at the edge of people’s experiences and knowledge. I, as I am sure others like CCL and similar innovation consultants, have used such approaches for many years to make a difference for the people we interact with. The challenge we often have is when people ask what we do. It can be hard to define and mundane job titles do not do our work justice. This is what Chris and Donna have captured so well. They clarify some of the more creative elements and processes we deploy through a sharper focus and demonstrate why this creates value.


When being introduced to new people (even by some of my former bosses, clients and family members!), rather than tell them what I do my introducer often says, “He can explain what he does as I am not sure”. My replies vary depending on who it is and the context, but some of my favourites have been “I bend people’s minds” or “I am a boundary rider across multiple knowledge disciplines”. These statements are not meant to be arrogant or create a sense of superiority- they are meant to stimulate a creative conversation by offering something a little mysterious and intriguing. These responses invariably trigger another question and the exchange of good questions is always a more creative and fun two-way interaction to share knowledge than simply telling them answers (which like names are bit mundane and quickly forgotten).


Like my friend the Yak illustrated above, boundary riders are highly enthusiastic in what they do and if given a little freedom around emergent interactions and permission for the group to experience some small “mistakes” in a safe fail environment – the groups can create a lot of innovative outcomes whilst having a lot of fun along the way.

Reflective Metaphor Model for Performance

I have been developing a new model to enhance performance through an action research program. It combines reflective practice, conversations that matter, behavioural metaphor and assessments of impacts on (largely intangible) performance outcomes. Application of the new model (illustrated) is highlighting the power of combining these concepts into an ongoing capability development cycle. By adapting the behaviours required at each stage of the cycle, the individual or team can align thinking to desired outcomes (such as impact on stakeholders and team performance). Recording and challenging their thoughts in a Reflective Impact Diary at each stage assists their development. For example, the structure reinforces enabling simulations before any planned interaction as well as recollection and challenge after the event to highlight key learnings. Learning is even stronger if the conversations and constructive challenges at all stages are done collaboratively.

This approach helps participants to preselect the behaviours are the most appropriate to achieve the desired outcomes of each conversation at each stage. This highlights the purpose of each conversation and matures participant’s thinking before the interaction, thereby improving the chances of success. Actively engaging with colleagues in Conversations that Matter at each stage of an adapted reflective practice cycle (Reflect, Plan, Do, Observe), enables richer learnings and stronger relationship development. Embedding Zoo Metaphor into this approach enriches the understanding of the behavioural interactions for both “Reflection in Action” and “Reflection on Action”. Combining reflective practice with conversation structure, behavioural analysis and metaphor is unique. Placing reflection at the beginning of the cycle to simulate creative conversations about possible outcomes is something that some people do some of the time. The suggestion of this model is to consciously do this in a structured way and enables the actors to be better prepared than the traditional approach of Plan, Do, Observe then Reflect. Separating pre-reflection (simulation before the event) from planning is a critical point. Simulation is about creating and testing a range of options using divergent thinking. Planning typically is more about selecting which options from a range should be used and in what order using convergent thinking. The behaviours to be displayed in each of these conversations are very different to optimise the process. If simulation and planning are done together it is probable useful emergent opportunities will not be developed (or perhaps even recognised).

The interdependence of these four approaches and the synergies they generate with each other makes them powerful. Although any of them can be used alone, together they become much more influential and contribute more to personal and team capability development. All four concepts help those using them to develop a deeper understanding of themselves and others and the interactions they can then have with them. My PhD research is assessing the impact this will have on performance (of individuals, teams and organisations). I am very interested to hear what you think (and also from people who wish to participate in the research).

Behavioural Based Leadership

Leadership is behavioural - not a position!  The person at the top of an organisation may be a poor leader.  They may occupy the top job and command decisions, but this does not mean they are a GOOD leader.  A real leader is a person who has WILLING followers.  People want to help them because they are inspired by them and respect them as a person.

To become a leader of great standing requires a history of proven performance where your stewardship and demonstrated actions have served other well.  A leader of such standing shows a complex understanding of responsibility and can read other's behaviours to the point where they know what is best for them (even if their followers are not consciously aware of why).  They seem wise and have a mature set of behavioural capabilities that carry them well in times of crisis.

The model above lists 20 behaviour based capabilities that a great leader would be expected to have.  Perhaps not all well developed, but they would be aware of which need further development and what they need to do, experience or learn to achieve this improvement.  Capable behavioural leaders care about their own development as well as the development of those who follow them.  they have an adaptable style which shows visionary action orientation (Eagle), wise mentoring (Owl), collaborative engagement (Bee), the ability to take command if appropriate such as in a crisis (Lion) all supported by a philanthropic foundation.  The have an inherent ability to read the situation and quickly adjust their style to optimise the outcomes for "their people".  I have met a few such leaders, but they are few and far between.  Have you met any? 

Conversations that Matter

Constructive conversations are the single most powerful way to engage people and make a difference for those you interact with. It is a pity that many people underestimate the power of the conversation. Everyone engages in conversations, but only a small percentage know how to create the right environment for "Conversations that Matter".

Effective conversations that matter follow a simple structure defined around understanding what you are trying to achieve and four fundamental focus areas: Outputs, Outcomes, Benefits and Beneficiaries.

For example, brainstorming, making a decision and authorising actions are all usually done through conversations, but in each of these cases, the focus of the conversation is different. This impacts on the type of information being exchanged and the people you need to involve. Certainly the outputs (tangibles such as documents, lists, decisions, communications) and outcomes (intangibles such as emotions, buy-in, creativity, identity and "enhanced performance") are very different. Brainstorming conversations that matter generate outputs such as lists and outcomes like creativity and potential (and perhaps even fun). A conversation that matters about succession planning and business continuity will generate outputs like a strategy, some decisions, agreed actions and hopefully some processes and pairing of mentors and mentees. However, the outcomes may be great (the strategy is good, the chemistry between the pairs positive and there is time to achieve the desired knowledge transfer) or bad (the strategy is impractical, matching poor, a lack of trust and sharing is ineffective). Too many projects that finish on time and on budget are a failure because we converse about the more easily measured tangible outputs rather than the far more difficult (and important) intangible outcomes. "We finished on time and on budget, but once the project team disappeared we had no idea how to operate the system effectively let alone optimise it". Very familiar words, regardless of what type of industry!

This is where conversations that matter generate their most significant impact. Managed well, the facilitator ensures everyone in each conversation understands the purpose of the conversation and what benefits will be delivered to which beneficiaries. Performance improvement results when the ultimate owners and users of the new idea, product or concept have been engaged in a series of conversations that matter at the appropriate moments throughout the initiative. This generates engagement, ensures understanding of how each interaction will impact their performance after it is finished and how the right knowledge is going to be transferred to them so they can take ownership. A good facilitator knows how to ensure each conversation is completed across each of the four focus areas so that everyone involved is fully aware of the impacts. When the leader creates the right environment for the conversations that matter to flow, it builds trust, effective relationships and greatly increases the likelyhood of achieving the desired outcomes. For more on Conversations that Matter refer to the book, Being a Successful Knowledge Leader or ask a Zoo Ambassador

By the way, metaphor is a great way to have fun with conversations that matter. Metaphor can be used to stimulate emergent ideas and get people thinking outside the box (if brainstorming or focus on consequences and risks if in a decision forum). All Organizational Zoos are happier places when people talk with each other with a positive purpose, rather than talk at each other with avengence.