By Rick Van Arnam
Northfield, Vermont.
July 4th
nears. And near Independence Hall in
Philadelphia resides a bell with a large crack that has become an American symbol
of freedom. The Liberty Bell, renamed by
early 19th century abolitionists, rings as an object lesson in
character and reputation in a modern world that enjoys labeling people with as
few words as possible. Whether the label
matches a person’s true character is the stuff that really matters when we
pause to remember people of great influence or personal importance.
The
Liberty Bell Principle, inspired by this American icon, states that what you stand for is also by that
which you will be remembered, and is the last of my eleven principles offering
a personal strategy for character development.
Accompanying the principle is a question on which to think, What
words will ring your name? Whether
we like it or not, our rememberance will likely be wrapped in a short ribbon of
five words or less. It is not just
because we live in an era where attention spans are as short as a “Headlines News,” report, although that
has something to do with it. But it also has something to do with the historic nature
of obits and their bold typeface begging for readers’ attention, limited in
length and by the width of its column.
There
are a couple of encouraging points on which a person draws in comparing character
with the Liberty Bell. The first is
this: despite the large crack and the likely nicks, dents and dimples that make
the Liberty Bell unique, the bell remains known for that which it stands – not
its imperfections. This is true with
people, too, and should be substantial especially when shortcomings, mistakes
or errors may weigh heavy.
Additionally,
I like that there is no gap between the Liberty Bell’s reputation and that for which
it stands. The Liberty Bell was cast with the scripture verse from Leviticus
25:10 that says, "Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” True alignment is not easy, though. John Wooden once said, “Be more concerned
with your character than with your reputation, because your character is what
you really are while your reputation is merely what others think you are.” Breaking this down, this challenge can become
a stretch because while we have complete ownership for the person we are
becoming, others have the final say on our reputation.
In the
April 30th issue of Time
there is a compilation of articles that briefly describe “The 100 Most
Influential People in the World.” Reviewing
this list provides numerous examples of how public reputations are formed in
the media with a few words. Imagine the
fun it would be to actually spend time with those on the Most Influential People
list to gain insight into both reputation and character!
Newly
minted billionaire and FaceBook CFO Sheryl Sandberg, for instance, is described
by Coca-Cola Chairman and CEO Muhtar Kent with, “Her energy, her passion and
relentless optimism are infectoous, inspiring all of us who’ve had the chance
to work with her.” Then there is Al-Jen
Poo, with a title of Labor Organizer, whose goal, writes Gloria Steinem, is
“peace and justice in the home.” Her success as a “gifted organizer” seems to
verify that her goal is in alignment for that which she stands….and may
ultimately be remembered. Jeremy Lin, of
the NBA’s New York Knicks, appears as one of the featured influencers and
writes about another featured influencer, Tim Tebow’s who is now with the NFL’s
New York Jets. Lin is described as
someone who “worked hard and stayed humble” by U. S. Secretary of Education Arne
Duncan, while Lin describes Tebow as someone who “consistently reflects his
values day in and day out.”
Not to
overlook the dark side of effective influence, Time places people like Kim Jon Un (North Korea), Mullah Mohammed
Omar (Afghanistan | Taliban), Sheik Moktar Ali Zubey (Somalia) and Bashar Assad
(Syria) in its Rogues’ Gallery. Much
less space is dedicated to these leaders, but strong words and phrases provide
supporting evidence. For example, “gulags,” “famine,” “global terrorist list,”
“nightmarish visions,” “cracking down,” and “if only because he can kill most
efficiently” describe these rogues appearing in their own gallery.
Time’s compilation is both fun to read and informational,
but I also ran across another example of concise characterization in a recent New York Times interview. Chris Barbin is Appirio’s Chief Executive
Officer. The company, which boasts a tag
line of ‘Cloud Powered Business,’ hires
people looking for three values: trust, professionalism and gray matter. Barbin runs his company against another set
of values: customers, team and fun. (Blogger’s Note: I like the
differentiation in values pointing out that this technique is similar to
Patrick Lencioni’s differentiation between Permission-to-Play Values, or those baseline,
must-possess qualities to be considered for hire, and Core Values, those that
differentiate companies and against which decisions should be made.)
Barbin goes on to say that one of his favorite interview questions is to
ask a candidate what he calls a “best-friends” question. If he asked a candidate’s three best friends
for one word that would describe the candidate, and neither could use the same
word, what three words would make up the response?
Hmm.
If your
best three friends were posed the same question, how would they respond? Would there be a gap between how they
describe you and how you describe yourself?
Or, more pointed, is there a gap between their response and the person you
would like to be and be known as? After
all, who wouldn’t want to be included in a list of influential people
especially if our friends describes us exactly as we thought of ourselves,
too? That would be worth remembering.
RVA
References
http://www.ushistory.org/libertybell
“The
100 Most Influential People in the World,” Time Magazine, April 30, 2012
“In One Adjective, Please Tell Me Who You Are,” by Adam
Bryant, The New York Times, May 19, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment