It’s a rainy Monday here in Vermont and I refuse to see it as dreary.  Rain sparks sensations of freshness: scents of lilacs and lilies of the valley, visions of color as flowers begin to stretch and grow their way to the surface, and sounds of birds and high pitched peepers as they make their returns

Imagination is a wonderful thing, not only for dreary days, but for stagnant businesses, ongoing problems and unfulfilled lives. Some may think of it as an escape, avoidance and foolishness. They’re the ones who don’t get it.

Imagination is the first step in creation and progress. It is fun, not work. It engages our playfulness, our inner child and our laughter.  It takes us to places that pure seriousness never goes. And it is necessary.

Of course, it’s not so common in business, and is often discouraged in life.  Let’s get serious. Quit wasting time. Stop that foolishness. Follow the rules.  Stay inside the lines.  That’s not logical. Be practical. These comments shut down our imaginations and knock the creativity right out of us.

Neuroscientist Rodolph Llinas tells us why these comments dampen creative spirits. In his book I of the Vortex, he wrote: “The neural processes underlying that which we call creativity have nothing to do with rationality. That is to say, if we look at how the brain generates creativity, we will see that it is not a rational process at all; creativity is not born out of reasoning.”

At an economic development meeting about a year ago, as we gathered to find ways to respond to youth leaving our state, a person stood up to remind us to be more youthful and creative in our thought.  She asked how many people thought they were creative.  A few hands went up. She shared that when that question is asked of a class of kindergartners, all hands go up.

Another interesting tidbit, children laugh several hundred times a day.  By time were 35, we laugh only about a dozen times a day. So what happens to us through life?

Bad habits, that’s what. The most damaging habit we are taught throughout our formal education is that there is just one right answer or one way to see things. I was about to write that may be true with mathematical problems when I remembered my answer to a 10^th grade geometry proof.  The teacher told us it would take 27 steps as a clue for us to know when we had it right. 

I never got to 27 steps.  For me it only took three steps. My teacher, to his credit, didn’t automatically dismiss it as wrong.  He studied it and then called in the other teachers in the math department to take a look.  They all agreed it was right, even though they had never before seen it done that way.

My point: rarely is there just one answer or one way. Going beyond routine, assumptions, appropriateness, long-standing rules, and the tried-and-true requires a letting go and sanctioning of the new, different and even uncomfortable.  It will lead to progress, though maybe not directly. You might just have to travel the messy, unpredictable path that creativity sometimes requires.

To illustrate my point, I’ll leave you with a story from one my favorite books on creativity: A Whack on the Side of the Head by Roger von Oech:

“In 1792, the musicians of Franz Joseph Haydn’s orchestra got mad because the Duke promised them a vacation, but continually postponed it. They asked Haydn to talk to the Duke about getting some time off. Haydn thought for a bit, decided to let the music do the talking, and then wrote the ‘Farewell Symphony.’ The performance began with a full orchestra, but as the piece went along, it was scored to need fewer and fewer instruments.  As each musician finished his part, he blew out his candle and left the stage. They did this, one by one, until the stage was empty. The Duke got the message and gave them a vacation.

            Refreshed and somewhat tan, I just returned from Jamaica where warmth, both in weather and smiles, prevail.  Not surprising, the lyrics of Bob Marley’s carefree song, “Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” continue to play in my head.

            My mindset became an amusing juxtaposition as I picked up the New Yorker from the mail pile and began to read  Elizabeth Kolbert’s article, Everybody Have Fun; What can policymakers learn from happiness research?

            The simple answer to that question is “not much.”  The research, for the most part, scratched the surface and asked the same old questions.  Happiness, after all, is not a new phenomenon for this century. Philosophers, psychologists and people in general have long tried to universally define happiness.

            It’s not just a matter for public policy, as has made the news globally from Bhutan to Europe and the U.S., but also for business practices. Engaged employees, a.k.a. happy employees, are all the rage now that it’s been shown bottom lines are all the healthier because of them.

            The business world has made progress. It’s realizing that happiness in the work place goes beyond the pay check. Just as in society, money can’t buy happiness. It’s a tool that’s helpful, but more money does not equal more happiness.

            And that’s just what the research showed in Kolbert’s article. A 1978 study asked lottery winners, quadriplegics and a control group about their happiness before and after their life-changing events.  There were no real distinctions between the groups; money didn’t increase happiness and physical limitations didn’t eliminate it.

            Other data showed that despite increases in Americans’ income, house size and number of cars, levels of happiness have “remained virtually unchanged” for the past 50 years.  In addition, countries with lower per capita income levels often register higher average happiness levels.

            These are not new revelations.  And yet we, as a society, can’t seem to let go of falsehoods that have us believing more is better, and one’s net worth directly correlates with one’s level of happiness.

            It was in 1943 that Abraham Maslow presented the hierarchy of needs, detailing how one’s basic needs must be met before one can aspire to such things as self-esteem and self actualization.  Meeting basic needs does not translate into happiness any more than superseding them, however it allows one to move beyond survival and onto living.

            While policy holders and business leaders can and should create environments and conditions conducive to happiness, they cannot ensure it. Our Founding Fathers had it right when they included the pursuit of happiness among the fundamental rights.  Happiness is not something to be given, but pursued.  It’s personal, and it’s a choice.

            Not to be confused with pleasure and satisfaction, happiness is an active state of being, not fleeting feelings. It is unique to each person, with the best definition being self actualization.

            The legend about the ancient tribal leaders who struggled with where to hide the secret of happiness concurs.  Foregoing the highest mountains, the deepest ocean waters and the core of the earth, they chose to hide it in the heart of each individual.  They assumed it was the one spot where it would remain unfound.

            So let’s end the centuries-old debate, and encourage some personal expeditions into the heart of happiness.  That better work place and world will follow.          

            This month’s Entrepreneur magazine shares some interesting, and opposing, perspectives on engaging employees in behaviors that have positive outcomes for the business.  The cultural implications couldn’t be more disparate.

            In one article, a Midwestern credit union has banished Facebook and Twitter from the work place, and is about to forbid cell phones on the premises. Seems management’s repeated attempts to get employees to be more focused on the customer and their jobs have failed.

            It was noted that they want to trust their people to do the right thing.   But instead, have concluded “the only way we can let people know we’re serious, and really discipline hard-core offenders, is by instituting a uniform policy banning cell phones.”

            It’s not that I’m opposed to having principles by which everyone operates, but the message that is being sent by this company is just the opposite of what they say they want.  The reasoning behind the rules will breed distrust, and distance employees even more from the company.

            I have observed first hand that managing for the worst case scenario creates a culture that begins to feel like a prison.  James Autry, author of For Love and Profit, has spoken to this issue many times.  Creating policies in like manner of this credit union, is shirking management responsibilities and taking the easy way out.  Autry’s and my advice would be the same: If there are offenders, deal with them, one on one.  Do not treat everyone like an offender.

            A few pages further in the magazine we find an article that might be helpful to this credit union.  It’s titled: “Creating a culture of Excellence.”  Citing examples of what is done by 10 companies that are getting it right, Jennifer Wang says the prevailing theme is that leaders are visible and show they value each employee. And the result: an incredibly high level of trust.  

            It’s conceivable that the examples given in this one article will not be enough to convince the credit union or any company that is of like mind.  So let me recommend a quick read of The Dream Manager by Matthew Kelly. 

            It all begins with a janitorial service business that has high turnover, unhappy clients and a decreasing bottom line.  It seems to be a hopeless situation.  But there’s a happy ending, for both the company and the employees.

            The turnaround starts with some simple dialogue. The solutions came as a collaborative effort: Management asked, employees talked, management listened and together they made improvements.

            Going deeper, the management style transformed into one that, like the companies Wang lists, recognizes employees are whole people, with needs, hopes and dreams of their own.  When the work place incorporates avenues for employees to accomplish personal goals along with company goals, it becomes a magical place.

            It’s what we refer to today as engaged employees. And as Towers Watson attest, those companies with highly engaged employees out perform the others significantly.

            At the end of the day, you have to engage the hearts and minds, along with the feet and hands to have a winning work place team.

            Now is the right time.  Ask any of the Olympic medal winners or last night’s Oscar winners.  They will tell you, NOW is the right time.

            At the opening ceremonies of the Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver, the Gardiner Sisters agreed in song… “Follow your heart, right from the start.”  Now is the right time to start living, or working, your dream.

            The word “dream” is spoken a lot on these momentous occasions.  It’s a word that is expected, accepted and real when spoken by the top performers in these fields. And yet in everyday life, dreams are often sabotaged by doubts and doubters, perpetuating not just short term procrastination but lifelong regrets.

            Dreams are founded on passion, and when pursued generate more energy than any other motivating factor.  With total belief, they give the power to propel beyond any perceived obstacle.

             In the business world, dreams exist in the beginning as organizations are created. With maturity, comes a different attitude. Dreams are seen as soft, a head-in-the-clouds waste of time, being too abstract and just a wish.  Quite frankly, dreams that aren’t pursued are just that.

            Businesses take up strategic planning, which many believe to be a more concrete process. The problem with most strategic plans, though, is they leave out the dreaming step, and end up with more of the same. They wrongly perceive the key word to be “more,” when it is the “same.”  And the “same” isn’t a long-term strategy for success. 

            The vision, the imagination and creativity that helped crystallize the organization’s path in the beginning is not tapped. Mired in protective mindsets, safeguarding the position of individuals and the organization, new directions feel too risky.  Nay-sayers are honored, for what is usually mistaken as loyalty.

            Ironically, dreamers who engage in the pursuit, work the steps of a strategic plan.  Gathering information, determining action steps, creating measurements, as well as planning and adjusting for obstacles along the way are just what they do. The difference is that their level of belief, passion and drive carry them further.  They take the necessary hard work in stride, and safe is no where on their radar.

            Geoffrey Fletcher, when accepting his Oscar for Precious, Best Adapted Screenplay, acknowledged the work and shared the moment, saying, “This is for everybody who works on the dream everyday.”

            Life pursuits are no different than those of business.  In working with kids, I hear them talk about their dreams, and then the possibilities for failure.  They’ve heard such things as “most don’t make it,”  “you can’t do that,”  “you might not win.”  They are hungry to talk about how their dreams could come true, a topic often avoided in an effort to keep them from getting their hopes up too high.

            On into adulthood and the work place we go, all the time being cautious with our hopes.  And yet, when given the chance, we want to be there to experience dreams coming true for others.  We soak in the feelings of victory and success, allowing ourselves, for a few moments, to dream again.

            In so doing, try to remember this perspective from Sarah Ban Breathnach, “The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.  But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.”  And then consider some “doing.”

            In various leadership positions throughout my career, I’ve often thought if I could wave a magic wand I would want to give people confidence.  I had observed that confident people behaved differently. For the most part, they seemed less defensive. 

            Upon further observation, it became clear that confidence was not something that was always experienced holistically.  For example, I’ve coached some folks that are very confident in their abilities to do their job, but not so confident in the value of themselves as individuals. Therefore, defensiveness emerged.

            Then there are those who are so confident that their defensiveness is elevated to arrogance, and takes on the face of bullying, diminishing anyone who questions them.

            Carol S. Dweck addresses these behavior differences more eloquently in her book, mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Rather than speak of them in terms of confidence, she talks about their mindset and how that translates into behavioral styles.

            In examples of what most would consider successful people, she draws lines of distinction by detailing values and coinciding behaviors.  She would no more put John McEnroe in the same athletic ranks with Michael Jordan and Babe Ruth, than she would group Lee Iacocca and Steve Case with CEO greats Jack Welch and Lou Gerstner.

            And here’s why. McEnroe, Iacocca and Case share what Dweck terms a “fixed” mindset, whereas Jordan, Ruth, Welch and Gerstner share a “growth” mindset. The differences are as stark as being billions in the red as opposed to billions in the black.

            Giant egos, airs of superiority and constant parading of their greatness are characteristics of the fixed mindset group.  Abuse and judgment of the underlings, especially the most competent, is routine and required to uphold the self-created royal status of fixed-mindset leaders. Talent, not effort, is supreme.

            McEnroe blamed losses on many things, but never himself.  The responsibility didn’t lie with him, so neither did the fix.  He even blamed his temper tantrums on others for having allowed them.  Jordan and Ruth, in contrast, looked losses in the face and increased efforts to improve their games.        Likewise Iacocca and Case sat atop success with the sole focus of elevating their self-image. All the while, Chrysler and AOL Time Warner danced with disaster.  True to their fixed mindset, both CEOs lost their crowns but not their elitist attitudes.

            With a switch in mindsets, it was human potential, teamwork and growth that drove Welch and Gerstner. Like the spotlighted Undercover CEOs of the current TV program, they went to the ranks and thrived on good communication.

            Turf wars were banned, credit shared and mentoring replaced blame.  The “Royal I” was no where to be found, resulting in wins all around, including nothing less than stellar financial gains for GE and IBM.

            So you see, while confidence is a characteristic linked to leadership, it alone does not guarantee a leadership style that is respected and sustains success.  True leadership, after all, is only sustainable through the engagement and growth of self and others.  Dweck’s book does a great job substantiating this through a collection of detailed examples.