Welcome to
Chris Brady’s
Blog

“The only way to be happy, is to give happy.”

  • Stack20o20books Andy Stanley wrote, "It is not the acquisition of information that properly prepares a leader to lead; rather, it is the application of the right information.  People need to be trained around the core principles they need to know, not an endless amount of information that is nice for them to know."

    In today’s Information Age, information is all around us.  It is almost too plentiful.  We can get information about almost any subject nearly effortlessly.  But an increase in information does not necessarily lead to an increase in knowledge, and certainly not so for wisdom.  We must become adept at tuning out the noise, figuring out quickly and effectively what information is relevant and principle-based, and disregarding the rest.  The most successful people are those who can disseminate the important from the almost-important as a matter of habit.  In all the noise of our modern world, what is important?  What is fruitful for study?  What is worth my time to learn?  What is principle-based?  What is core?

    This is where it is helpful for a developing leader to have a mentor who can recommend great books that will focus on the right information.  A strategic leadership development plan and system are also very important.  The short-cut through the noise is to follow someone who has successfully navigated the same waters successfully.  To lead, one has to be a student.  To grow quickly and effectively as a leader, one must become an astute student. Get good at getting the right information.  You can’t learn everything, so focus on learning the most important things!      

  • Would_you_have_invested_3Feel free to add captions to this!  But I also wanted to make the point that appearances can  be deceiving!  This is Bill Gates and his gang at the outset of launching the largest company in world history!  Would you have invested in these guys?????  I think I’d more likely have tried selling them hair spray.

  • Ftfred4_2      The American Revolutionary War, which likely hadn't been called that yet, was not going well for the colonials at the end of 1776.  George Washington and his volunteer army had been battered all across the islands of New York by the British.  The combined forces of the Royal Navy and the British regular infantry and cavalry had made a mockery of the colonial resistance. A nighttime escape in fog was all that preserved Washington’s forces.  Made to retreat into New Jersey, the colonials were then pushed all the way across the Delaware River into Pennsylvania. Fortunately for them, the British decided to hunker down for winter, and pulled most of their forces back to New York.  Detachments were left throughout New Jersey to keep an eye on the miniscule colonial force.

         With enlistments running out, and the confidence in the cause of independence at an all time low, Washington made a daring move to cross the Delaware on Christmas night and surprise-attack the garrison at Trenton.  In the annals of military history, it was a small engagement, but in the morale of the colonies it was a master stroke.  Washington’s attack succeeded perfectly, capturing the entire detachment at Trenton.  Instead of going from defeat to defeat, retreating across state after state, the little band of revolutionaries had proven that they were not yet beaten.

    The commander in chief of British and Hessian forces in America, Major General Howe, was furious.  He immediately ordered General Cornwallis and his army to march on Washington in New Jersey with full force.  Over five thousand professional soldiers, including artillery, set out immediately for New Jersey.

     

     George Washington, managing his prisoners and captured stores in Trenton, received word of Cornwallis’s advancing army.  He quickly dispatched 600 men to slow the British advance so he could arrange yet another of his last-minute escapes. Without sufficient time to depart on his terms, his little army would be crushed. 

           250pxehand_2

     Washington placed the French aristocrat General Roche de Fermoy in command of the small force.  de Fermoy was one of a long line of adventurers from Europe who had come to America seeking military honors and fame.  Many of these men made claims concerning their past leadership experiences and titles that may or may not have been true.  Forced to keep good relations with foreign countries supporting the cause, Washington was often given no choice but to award command positions to many such adventurers.  Some proved capable, others did not.  Second to de   Fermoy, with his 200 Pennsylvania rifleman, Washington placed Edward Hand.  Hand’s men, accustomed to hunting in the hills of Pennsylvania, were famous for their marksmanship.  They were deadly accurate with their long, rifled guns.

                                

     It would be 600 men against 5,000, but the colonials only had to slow the advance of the mighty British.  Placing themselves in the woods on either side of the road, and splitting the Pennsylvania riflemen into two groups,100 for each side of the road, the colonials got into position.

                            

     The sight of 5,000 men in brilliant military discipline marching boldly down the road was apparently too much for de Fermoy.  At the first shot fired he was seen riding at a full gallop toward the rear of the colonial lines.  Then he continued

    22619012riding and left the scene altogether.  Confused and stunned, Edward Hand calmly assumed overall command.

     

    Hand directed the colonials to wait until the British were extremely close before firing.  Then suddenly the woods around the British force erupted in smoke and noise and clumps of British soldiers fell wounded and dead.  The British scrambled to form battle lines, then they fired in rapid succession.  But the colonials had already pulled back through the woods.  Now the Pennsylvania riflemen had their turn from a greater distance.  Again, the incoming fire into the exposed British was deadly.  Not to be deterred, the British ordered an advance into the woods, but by the time they reached where their enemy had been hiding, the colonials were long gone.

                                         

     This process of heavy hidden fire, quick retreat, Pennsylvania rifle decimation, and more retreat was repeated throughout the day.  At no point did the small colonial force give the British a chance to use their superior numbers or artillery.  But continuously the raking fire from multiple angles of woods was deadly for the British.  By the time this process was repeated for the fifth time, however, Hand and his brave band of men were being overrun.  There was only so much 600 could do against 5,000.  But suddenly loud bursts of artillery shells were heard as plumes of dirt and death soared into the sky among the advancing British ranks.  It was Washington’s main army joining the resistance.  The two armies were beginning to engage as it grew dark.

                                              

     Cornwallis, weary from pushing through heavier resistance than expected, with enormous casualties on his side, decided not to press the attack at night.  He called off his troops and encamped for the night.  And of course, this is exactly what Washington needed.  He kept campfires burning and charged a small group of men with making enough noise to sound like an entire camp.

                                                 

     Washington’s escape was successful that night, as he stole away an entire army from right under the nose of the enemy.  Marching quickly before Cornwallis could figure out what happened, Washington and his force showed up in Princeton,

    L_welcome_pagestack1_003New Jersey and routed and captured the troops Cornwallis had left there in reserve.  Ultimately, Washington was able to escape the beleaguered British and winter safely, riding high on the wave of victories he had stolen from the jaws of defeat.

                                     

    The small victories at the close of 1776 proved critical.  Moral was raised, hope in the cause was re-sparked, and the fight for independence survived its closest brush with extinction.  And as is usually the case, it all hinged on leadership.  Edward Hand and his contrasting example of leadership as opposed to de Fermoy could not be more illustrative of the difference between true and counterfeit leadership.  De Fermoy was all bluster; beating his chest and showing his titles and claiming great abilities.  But when the first shot were fired, he fled for the hills like a frightened school girl.  On the other hand (couldn’t help the pun), Edward Hand had no formal training or title or claim to fame.  But he was a real leader.  When the imposter fled the scene, Hand filled the gap.  He very confidently and competently took command and did what needed to be done.

                                              

     This great example from the founding of a nation and what it shows about leadership should never be forgotten.  Imposters in the world of leadership abound.  Those who talk the loudest about how great they are, what they are going to do, and how great their abilities are, are often the first to flee the scene when the going gets tough.  Real leaders, on the other hand, quietly go about the business of doing what needs to be done; often without fanfare or title or official position.  As Orrin Woodward is fond of saying, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.”   Indeed, you can learn a lot about someone by how they act when the shots are fired, when the 5,000 are advancing on 600, when it is time to put up or shut up.  In motocross racing there is a saying that, “When the gate drops, the talk stops.”

     

    Further, it can be seen how much can be accomplished by just one person deciding to lead.  Edward Hand was only one man, and he wasn’t even officially in charge of the 600 men who had been abandoned by their commander.  But his actions had enormous ramifications on history.  Every leader would be wise to remember his example.  One person can, and does, make a difference.  And often, that difference is too large to be measured.

                                                        

     So when challenges come your way, when the shots being fired are live ammunition, when the going gets tough: you will have a choice.  You can be a de Fermoy, or you can be an Edward Hand.  That choice, at those moments, will define your legacy.  Choose well.  Lead.          

  • Safety_3This one is funny enough without a caption!  But I’m sure you readers out there can enhance it!

  • There are two important questions we should each ask ourselves on a regular basis:

    1.  Ten years from now, what will I wish I had done today?

    2.  If I knew I couldn’t fail, what would I be working on?

    Life is complicated.  No matter who you are, you will encounter problems and challenges.  There are endless tasks to complete, and there is always something around the next corner to challenge your resolve.  But keeping yourself grounded in the bigger picture is a good guard against distraction, discouragement, and ineffectiveness.  These two questions help keep the bigger picture of what you are trying to accomplish at the forefront of your mind.

  • Sydney_car_oopsMany people have asked me to keep doing the caption contests, so here’s another one.   A bit more subtle, but I am sure you guys will split my sides with your wit, yet again!  Have a blessed day!

  • Congratulations There is a famous saying that, "People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care."  Although we have discussed many things on this blog, such as the need for leaders to learn, to grow, to discipline themselves, to carry heavy burdens, and to serve others, it can never be forgotten that leadership is made up of the substance of caring

    Many, many leaders throughout history have started well but finished poorly.  Studying their lives, it quickly becomes evident that they lost touch with their roots.  Somehow, in the process of gaining ascendance and advancement, they became corrupted by their power gain.  They became a little too focused on themselves.  Along the way, they forgot who they were and what they were about.  Somewhere on the journey they stopped caring about the cause or the individuals involved and became engulfed by self interest.  One author called this phenomenon becoming "unmoored," as when a sailboat drifts away from its anchorage. 

    Caring is an interesting concept.  Of course a leader cares about his or her cause.  Of course a leader cares about the attainment of the vision.  Of course the leader cares about his or her legacy and what is left behind.  But does the leader care about the people?  More importantly, does the leader care about individuals?  And most importantly, does the leader care about you?

    Insincerity does not work for those who truly want to lead.  There is no "fake it ’till you make it" in true leadership.  Phonies are easy to spot.  True caring is a heart thing.  It can be felt.  We know that someone cares for us and about us instinctively.  And my experience has been that the biggest leaders are the ones who, along with all the other great traits we’ve been discussing here, can also connect on a heart-level of caring with the people they influence. 

    The questions to ask yourself about your leadership are this: do my people know how much I care about them?  Do they know what I respect about them the most?  Have I told them lately or made sure they know this?  Am I actively adding value to their lives?

    Let people know that you care.  Play with your heart on your sleeve.  Give yourself to your people as much as you give yourself to your cause, and you’ll see the cause advanced much quicker.  And most importantly, you’ll be loving people all along the journey, which is the point of the journey in the first place!

  • Often, it seems, leaders are asked to carry an unfair load.  In fact, this is one of the hallmarks of leadership.  Leaders are the ones taking responsibility when everyone else waivers, leaders are the ones accepting the blame when it was actually the accumulative effect of others' involvement, leaders are the ones paying the price of going somewhere first, where many tiOver20loadmes they haven't even been themselves.  Leaders take the flak, the responsibility, and the bulk of the wind resistance from being out front.  For sure, leaders are put in a position of higher responsibility.  They are held under higher scrutiny and loftier standards than the rest, and they are expected to have a great attitude when everyone else has failed.  Leaders are expected to be the toughest, the most consistent, the strongest, the fairest, the hungriest, and the most courageous.  No wonder we admire them so!  And no wonder the apostle Paul had to encourage his proteges with the phrase, "never grow weary in well-doing."

    If this list of requirements sounds daunting: it is.  Leading is dangerous, exhausting, exposing work.  So why, again, would anyone volunteer for the position?

    Because!

    At least that's the way my four year old would answer!

    For the real answer (with apologies to my son), we must go back to the definition of a leader.  As defined in the Launching a Leadership Revolution book, Orrin Woodward and I defined leadership as:

    Leadership is the influence of others in a productive, vision-driven direction and is done through the example, conviction, and character of the leader.

    Notice that leadership involves someone who is "vision-driven."  And what causes the drive toward the vision? Conviction in the cause they pursue, and their strength of character.

    What does this mean?

    It means that a leader does not set out to become a leader, as such.  A leader becomes a leader the moment he or she decides to act on their conviction.  A leader's character is such that he or she simply can't leave well enough alone, and must do something about whatever situation confronts them.  Someone in danger, a cause not making enough progress, a project that stimulates the imagination, a group of people without direction, etc. all make up the type of situations that spark a leader into action. 

    Once the leader realizes the situation, sees the problem to be solved, or the challenge to be embraced, he or she takes immediate initiative towards the vision.  It can't be helped.  It's the natural outpouring of the leader's character and vision.

    So a leader is driven into a position where he or she accepts more responsibility, accepts a higher percentage of the "shots" from the "peanut gallery," and volunteers to carry an "unfair" load.  Interestingly, true leaders do it willingly and with enthusiasm!  Why?  Because leaders come alive when they are infused with a challenge.  Real leaders are overcome with joy at being called to apply their gifts to a worthwhile cause. 

    And what about everyone else?

    Usually, "everyone else" looks at the leader with a bit of admiration, but also with a bit of curiosity. It's like looking at a dog chasing a rabbit, and then removing the rabbit from view.  Without the rabbit to explain the dog's behavior, he looks mad.  And for many leaders, people can't quite make out the vision the leader is chasing as clearly as the leader can.  As a result, leaders look a little mad to the uninformed.

    Just what is it that makes that leader behave like that?  Why would anyone want to put themselves in harm's way as a leader does?  What makes them tick?  Isn't it better to be comfortable, play it safe, mind one's own business, and take it easy?    Maybe, for some.  But never for a leader.  A leader carries an unfair load, and believe it or not, loves it!  Why?  Because what a leader does makes a difference, it matters, it changes things, and that's what a leader lives for! 

  • Oops2I was right; the readers of this blog are a creative bunch! I am still laughing at your captions from the boat picture.  Here’s another, (then we can get back to business).