Back to Index
13 habits of highly effective leaders
April 16, 2007
An adaptation from "The Art of Leadership and Management on
the Ground" - A practical guide for leaders and managers
to build sustainable organisations for permanent social change
EFFECTIVE LEADERS BEWARE OF THEIR SHADOW1
So, what is your shadow? Allan Kaplan refers to the shadow as that
thing or energy that arises when we have too much or too little
of something or strive too much or too little towards something.
He says: "When we direct our energies in too focused a fashion,
a balance is lost; yet life strives towards balance."2 For
example, you are fiercely fighting against poverty but you are poor
in other respects, e.g. relationships with other people, don't
look after yourself, mental poverty, etc. You start to romanticise
poverty. I once worked with a health institute caring for sick people
but internally the relationships were very sick. It was a sickness
that pervaded the institute. Remember, the more you strive for something
the more its opposite will appear. The sharper the light of consciousness
the more intense is the darkness of the subconscious. Where you
have high peaks you also find deep valleys. Where you have strengths
you also have weaknesses, Your shadow is not necessarily a negative
or destructive phenomena. It is when you deny this shadow that it
is invested with destructive energy. You lose control over it and
it starts to control you. So, how do you approach your shadow? Don't
fight it. Make it your friend, your ally. Be aware of it. Embrace
it and integrate it. When you push it away then you live in denial.
Then it will haunt you, control and ultimately destroy you!
LEADERS UNDERSTAND THEY ARE ALWAYS ON TRIAL: I.E. POWER + PRIVILEGE
I am always amused when I hear leaders in NPO's bemoan the
fact that they have no privacy in their personal lives. Well, what
do you expect? To think you can have privacy in an organization
is to suffer from serious delusions. The risk of leadership is about
the risk of occupying a space that makes you visible and vulnerable.
If you try to deny this it will haunt you wherever you go. In leadership
there is always a trade off between power, privilege and privacy.
You cannot have the first two and refuse to let go of the third
one. In an NPO it is actually worse since we work with public funds
and other resources entrusted to us. When you betray that trust
how can you claim privacy or even confidentiality as some corrupt
leaders prefer to call it?
Sorry, but you
will always be under scrutiny. Not only what you do inside the organization
but also outside of it. If you don't like this intense scrutiny
then step down because you are then not qualified to lead. To lead
is a choice, a choice to accept power and privilege, to occupy that
space provided for you, a very sacred space. But it is also a choice
not to accept power and privilege, to maintain your privacy and
to abandon that space! This is why Drucker says that a leader is
paid to be uncomfortable. As a leader you are always on trial. Whatever
you say, do, write or even not say, not write and don't do
is always being scrutinised. As Drucker said, "But a leader
is not a private person, a leader represents."3
LEADERS COMBAT HERO WORSHIPPING
All leaders are fallible because they are human. There is no perfect
leader. When people start to hero worship you then it is not about
you really. It is about them and what they lack in themselves. They
develop expectations about you that you are not even aware of. When
you cannot meet those expectations then they will crucify you, forgetting
it was all about them and not about you! Where you see this phenomenon,
fight it. You may feel good in the beginning when others put you
on a pedestal, but there is a price to be paid later on. Most of
the time it will happen that the very people that put you on that
pedestal will try and destroy you at a later stage. I have heard
this from many leaders in various organizations.
LEADERS PAY ATTENTION TO INVISIBLE LEADERSHIP
This is probably one of the least appreciated elements of leadership
development. Simply put, it means what are you doing when no one
is watching? What are you doing behind closed doors? How well do
you treat yourself and your family, your partner, children, friends,
etc? What are you doing to advance the interest of your organization
when no one is watching? What do you do at night, what are you reading
and studying? How disciplined are you when on your own? Some people
may not know it but great leaders are made through the things they
do when nobody can see them. They make sacrifices without expecting
credit for it, build relationships, caring for others, helping others
grow without expecting anything in return. They don't abuse
their partners and the trust others put in them. They don't
use others as tools to advance themselves. They defend others even
in their absence. They don't manipulate or take short cuts.
In short, they build inner power, a power that cannot be taken from
them. They build integrity. They learn to become whole. And they
constantly strive for balance.
Many times great
leaders create the unintended impression amongst subordinates that
it is easy to manage an organization. It is like someone running
a 100-metre hurdle effortlessly and someone in the crowd thinking
how easy it looks. When the person in the crowd attempts the same
thing, he realises how difficult it is. The point is that the athlete
was not observed during training, when they constantly practised,
when she was preparing for the race. Invisible leadership is like
practising when no one is watching. You are on your own. Remember
a race is not only won while running it. It is
won while you also prepare for it. Invisible leadership
is like preparing for your race. You have to practice all the time.
There is no end in how much you can learn. So, what are you doing
while no one is watching?
LEADERS UNDERSTAND THAT IMAGE+IDENTITY = INTEGRITY
Just like organizations, leaders also have an image
that they project to the outside world. But your image (that which
is visible) and your true identity (what you do privately) may not
be the same. Your true identity refers to what
I have discussed under invisible leadership. There must be congruence
between what you stand for in your public and private life. I have
seen many of my own close comrades who failed this test. Some of
them still do. I have also failed this test miserably until I started
to work more seriously on myself.
When there is
an imbalance between your image and your real identity then you
will suffer from a lack of personal integrity or
inner character. What you stand for in public and what you do in
private is not consistent. Scot Peck reminds us that the word integrity
comes from the word integration. And integration he says means to
bring the parts together.4 The opposite of integration is separation.
When things separate, they disintegrate or they fall apart. When
you lack personal integrity then you fall apart. It is in this situation
where leaders who are not authentic or real are forced to wear masks
to cover up their treacherous deeds. They cover up, sow division,
recruit camp followers to compensate for their own insecurities,
ignore policies and objective criteria when making decisions, or
use policies to benefit them personally, play up to the camp followers
who provide legitimacy to their masks, and become generally reckless!
The same applies
to organizations where you also have an image and an identity. Sometimes
you read beautiful reports about the work of organizations just
to find out later how corrupt these organizations are internally.
Then there is a lack of organizational integrity.
(See the part dealing with board development) For example, an organization
may preach about gender equality just for you to find out that its
own female members feel marginalised and oppressed.
When you lack
personal integrity as a leader it becomes impossible
for you to develop organizational integrity. You cannot have one
without the other. And you are not born with this quality. You have
to develop it. It is a process. You have to be open and honest with
When you see
signs of disintegration, learn to watch yourself and correct your
behaviour. Admit your mistakes or indiscretions and move on. Learn
to become whole. It is a process and a very painful one. There are
no short cuts. When you live in denial about this, then you become
unfit to lead as well as a danger to yourself and others. So, get
LEADERS UNDERSTAND THE DEMANDS BETWEEN TASK BASED AND EMOTIONAL
As a leader you have to make decisions about people working with
you all the time. You have to decide on their placement in the organization,
their promotion or even demotion, salary levels, evaluate their
performance, etc. It is therefore a good thing to know as much about
the staff member as possible to guide you in your decisions. When
you approach the development of a person in a holistic manner, then
finding out as much about the person helps you to understand the
other person. But there is also a danger. This is the danger of
getting too close. You are unconsciously sucked into the person's
personal life. You become aware of the person's trails and
tribulations and can allow these to influence your decisions about
this person. This is dangerous.
is that there is a fine line between knowing enough about someone
to assist that person in her development and maintaining a distance
to allow for objectivity in decision making. At an extreme level
you can have two individuals who are emotionally involved and where
these lines are totally blurred. And it cannot be otherwise because
the demands of a task-based relationship (at work)
are totally different from the demands of an emotionally
based relationship (in your personal life). In the first
instance you are contractually bound to perform certain tasks and
deliver certain results and in the second instance you have a choice
to stay in that relationship. You are not subject to deliver certain
predetermined results for which you are financially rewarded.
report to each other and they are emotionally involved then you
may have a recipe for trouble. You will unconsciously put each other
under unnecessary pressure in order to prove to others that you
are objective. When one of the parties is not producing the results
based on the predetermined performance criteria, then the temptation
to be subjective can be great. But this will not help. Unless you
work in different departments and report to different people, you
should rather review your relationship and the impact it has on
the organization. This also applies in the case of family members
or friends working together. And remember, even if you try very
hard to be objective there will always be other staff members and
volunteers who (because of their own personal agendas) convince
themselves that you are favouring the other person. I know this
because I had personal experience of this phenomenon. I was compelled
to make the difficult decision to end a relationship that lasted
for four years. And even after ending this relationship I was still
perceived to be subjective towards the other party! So, be warned.
LEADERS KNOW HAPPINESS IS AN INSIDE JOB
As a leader your job is to make others happy. Right? Well, that
is very wrong. In fact, it is dangerous thinking! It is not your
task to make others happy. I have met many human resource managers
who labour under this illusion. They tend to think that they are
employed to maintain good human relations that will lead everyone
to be very happy. The emphasis in their work is therefore on how
much people pay, endless teambuilding activities, overlooking certain
malpractices, etc. All of these aimed at making and keeping a person
Well, your job
is not to make people happy. It is to help others grow. It is to
continuously create an environment where people can realise their
own potential and where ordinary people can learn to do extraordinary
things. For people to expect that your job should be to make them
happy is an impossible expectation. It is impossible because happiness
is primarily an inside job. It must start with you.
This myth of
leaders employed to make others happy flows from a flawed understanding
of what relationships are all about. Some married couples firmly
believe that it is the duty of the husband and wife to make each
other happy. Wrong! Scot Peck argues strongly against such thinking
that can only lead to so much frustration. According to him, you
get married to help each other grow. When that growth is not taking
place you are bound to have a breakdown in that relationship.
The pain inherent
in that process always accompanies your personal growth and development.
You cannot avoid that pain. When true leaders therefore take responsibility
to make others grow and develop, they also face the risk of people
who will try to avoid that pain.5 When people practice avoidance
behaviour (a form of denial) then they start to project that pain
onto to other people. The leader usually becomes a convenient target.
Remember, you are paid to be uncomfortable. This is another source
of that discomfort. People that are not very conscious of the dynamics
of organization will tend to personalise this inner conflict that
they are experiencing.
that are truly committed to create an environment to make others
grow and develop will therefore not always be very popular. And
that is so because they have to force people to confront their own
pain. Leaders who strive for cheap popularity will help people to
avoid this inevitable pain. But this also makes them the most ineffective.
Decide whether you want to be effective or popular?
LEADERS ARE BRAVE - THEY FIRE THEMSELVES!
A leader acts like a coach. Coaches don't play the game with
their team players. They help to prepare them for the game. That
is why I say that a game is not really won while you play it. It
is first won while you prepare for it. Have you seen how some coaches
like to stand on the sideline and freak out at players who commit
errors while playing? They throw tantrums, become angry, shout at
the players and just generally lose self-control. Are you also like
this kind of coach? Do you also throw tantrums at board or staff
meetings, lose self-control and become aggressive? Well, if you
are then you are in the wrong job. You don't trust yourself.
You have not prepared well enough. When coaches perform badly, when
there are no proper results, when they cannot show much for their
high salaries and perks, they get fired. Sport codes are riddled
with such examples. And it cannot be otherwise. For a leader that
underperforms is a danger to the organization and also to himself.
He should be ruthlessly removed, for the sake of himself as well.
The non-profit sector has a lot to learn from the sporting codes!
There was a
case of a director in Cape Town who was so obviously under performing
for years, but who earned a horrendous salary. Managers in the corporate
sector must have envied him. Instead of his board getting rid of
him years ago, he actually proposed that the organization should
dissolve! Outrageous you might think, but in the NPO sector this
is common practice. If they don't propose dissolution of their
organizations, then they make sure they get rid of the boards, the
very people who appointed them! In one case the entire board resigned
from an organization. Instead of the director resigning due to this
vote of no confidence and restoring the integrity of the organization,
this man decided to continue as if nothing happened. Needless to
say, he continued earning a huge salary for plundering and killing
the organization. When confronted by others about his destructive
behaviour, he boldly claimed that he was "protecting the integrity"
of the organization. He was reminding me of the United States government
who goes on a world crusade to advance democracy by destroying it!
So, this gentleman was "protecting organizational integrity"
by destroying it. And whilst he was able to provide salary increases,
bonuses and loans and generally went on a spending spree, he had
enough followers. Until all the funding dried up course! Well, if
you don't perform according to the demands and criteria of
performance placed upon you, please do yourself a favour: Be open
and honest and fire yourself!
LEADERS KNOW THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS NOT THEIR LIFE!
In my days of utter confusion I used to think that the organization
is my life; that my work is my life. Later I realised how dangerous
this kind of thinking is and the bad practices it generates. And
it actually happens without one being aware of its consequences.
On the surface it sounds very progressive and a statement of total
loyalty and commitment. But this is only on the surface.
I have learnt
that to regard your organization as your life is to unknowingly
promote a form of sectarianism. This is how a close comrade of mine,
Ronald Wesso, aptly puts it: "An organization becomes a sect
through subjecting the humans who create it to itself. In a way
people relate to an organization as gods. They create, build and
sustain it - without them it cannot exist. In a sect this
is also true. But something astonishing comes to happen - the creation
of gods over the creators. Instead of something human individuals
create jointly in order to live freer and better, these individuals
come to accept they have been created in order to free and better
the organization. Rather than shaping the organization to serve
their needs and lives, the individuals shape their lives and subject
their needs as befits the organization until tragically, the organization
becomes their sole purpose; they lose their lives to the organization." 6
Peter Drucker once said: "If you make the organization your
life, you are defenceless against the inevitable disappointments."7
Well, ask me. I should know!
So, make sure
you keep your personal life separate from your organizational life.
Make sure you spend time to develop your personal life and not subject
it to the life of the organization. When you do this, letting go
of the organization and giving up formal power is much easier and
less painful. It is like a woman who gives herself completely to
her husband. She sacrifices everything, until the day when they
have to separate or divorce. The woman is devastated! She only knew
one life! The life of her husband! Her husband became her sole purpose
for living. (Remember this saying: "I will die for you!")
Her own independence has been sacrificed on the altar of total loyalty
and she never prepared herself for the inevitable disappointment.
A divorce or temporary separation is sometimes the only solution
for this person to reclaim her independence and even sanity! So,
be careful and remember the organization is not your life.
is what Peter Drucker had to say about this phenomenon:
"I would not want any person to give his or her life to an
organization. One gives one's very best efforts." And
again "When effective non-profit leaders have the capacity
to maintain their personality and individuality, even though they
are totally dedicated, the task will go on after them. They also
have a human existence outside the task. Otherwise they do things
for personal aggrandizement, in the belief that this furthers the
cause. They become self-centred and vain. And above all, they become
EFFECTIVE LEADERS WORK THEMSELVES OUT OF THEIR JOBS!
When I ask leaders and managers what is their most important job
they usually come up with different responses, none of them the
right one as far as I am concerned. Your most important job is always
to work yourself out of your job! For as long as you stay in your
job you will never know if anyone has really developed, or if you
really made a long term sustainable impact. You will never know
if you have passed the final test of leadership - the continuation
of the organization. For as long as you stay you can only stunt
the growth and development of other members including yourself.
fear what will happen to them after they leave their jobs prefer
to stay in their comfort zones. Confronted by a sea of unemployment
they are literally scared to take a step out of their organizations.
They fear the worst. But this is precisely the point. It is about
their fears, their personal interests and not the interests of the
organizations they lead. It is about what will happen to them and
not what will happen to the organization. They get trapped and start
to project that fear onto the organization. They start to confuse
their needs with the needs of the organization. Precisely because
your most important task is to work yourself out of your job, succession
planning cannot be delayed until you take that step. You have to
work on it all the time. Where there is nobody to succeed you, look
on the outside. Be honest with those who harbour leadership ambitions
within the organizations, even those who are most in denial about
ARE SOME GUILDELINES FROM MY EXPERIENCE:
1. Make sure you spent time on succession planning. This is a crucial
part of a risk management strategy and taken very seriously in the
corporate sector. Shareholders who invest in a company take their
money very seriously. We do not do the same in the NPO sector because
it is not really our own money on the line. Well, no one knows what
will happen to anyone at any stage and therefore you should apply
your mind to who will succeed you as a leader.
2. If you don't
have the right people within the organization, look outside. Scout
for available talent. This is not easy in the NPO sector. The skills
and experiences we look for are scarce and therefore expensive.
You cannot start looking for those skills and experiences when you
are about to leave.
3. If you have
a choice, make sure that your successor is already employed whilst
you are still in the organization. This will give you time to mentor,
coach and properly induct the person. Leaving this to somebody else
is a high risk and can only create the space for someone with hidden
motives to usurp power and compromise the integrity of the organization.
I know of an organization where someone appointed as acting director
to help find the successor to the previous director decided to be
acting director for more than a year instead of the prescribed three
months. This person had no prior experience of managing an organization
at that level and it was not long before the organization was caught
in the grip of a severe crisis. To crown it all, this person was
handsomely rewarded by his board for work not done! This was at
a time when the organization was facing a funding crisis. (Remember
the early example of the director who "protected the integrity"
of the organization?)
for succession can never be done in great haste or under pressure.
Consult with other leaders who have had similar experiences and
get advice. Get your board involved as well. They will have to make
the final decision in any case so let them help you. Remember that
you should never choose your successor. Yes, you make recommendations
and give advice since you know and understand the demands of the
job. But your board must decide finally. It must be an objective
decision and not a subjective choice. Leaders can sometimes fall
into the trap of selecting people who remind them of themselves,
i.e. they look for a copy. This is dangerous! A copy is simply an
imitation of the original and is always weak. When you make such
a selection you will set the other person up for failure.
5. Make sure
the central task is clarified because this will determine the person
you will finally select. Clarify what the organization requires
at that stage. What skills, competencies and expertise are necessary
to carry out that task successfully? Look for a track record, for
a record of success. And don't forget to check and double
check references. Talk to those who worked with the potential candidate
before such as donors, network partners, previous superiors, etc.
Get a cross section of opinion. Ask for previous assignments successfully
completed. This is a strategic position and you have to be thorough.
Give this person an assignment before the position is finalised
and check the results.
6. And when
you leave make sure that you have a back-up plan if your initial
plan backfires. When I left my organization years ago, I made many
mistakes in this regard, some with disastrous consequences! You
don't have to make the same mistakes. Talk to those who have
already been through this experience. Consult them. And remember,
don't rush this decision. You are dealing with the most strategic
position within the organization. At this level the organization
will rise or fall.
7. And be careful
for picking the perfect number two in the organization; the person
who thinks that the top job will automatically become his/hers once
you leave without showing anything for it. This is very tempting.
It saves you all the money in the world and since you know the person
for a long time and have worked with him/her, it becomes expedient
to appoint the number two. When I left my organization years ago,
the same pressure was exerted to do this. I refused to fall in this
trap. I knew we had to look outside for talent. The central task
has outgrown the internal members. Some people did not like this
but I had to be honest with myself and the organization. I wanted
to live with my conscience. But as soon as I left, the decision
to look outside was abandoned immediately. The organization is now
an empty shell! The board resigned, almost the entire staff were
retrenched or left in anger and disillusionment, projects were closed
down, funding dried up, staff loans were paid out left, right and
centre, bonuses and increases were paid and organizational property
vandalised. The last time I heard this person was still in charge!
I don't know of what!
is what Drucker wrote about appointing the number two:
"Partly out of emotional commitment, partly out of habit,
the perfect number two is put in the top spot, and the whole organization
suffers. The last time I saw this was in one of the world's
largest community chests. Fortunately the number two who was picked
by his predecessor because he was so much like her realised after
a year that he didn't belong in the top job and was utterly
miserable in it - and he left before either he or the organization
had been badly damaged. But that is a rare exception."9
In my experience I only know of two cases where the number two abandoned
the position after they realised that they were not up to the pressure
required by the job. And in both cases it almost happened too late!
EFFECTIVE LEADERS ARE SELF-MADE
I am always confronted with the question: "Are great leaders
born?" My answer is always NO! In any case I must still find
a person who can identify a great leader at birth! I am not aware
of any scientific tool that can measure this process. In any case
I always wonder how people expect any person to enter the world?
The fact is
that effective leaders are self-made. Even if you have all the potential
to become a great leader, you still need to be trained, mentored
and coached. Great leaders don't fear the strengths of others
more experienced than them. And remember, leadership cannot be taught
like you teach history at university. Leadership is a practice,
a discipline in its own right. So leadership is about doing and
not dreaming. Not everybody is fit for leadership, especially at
the highest level of the organization. Here it is not just about
developing certain characteristics and then you become an effective
leader. This is wrong thinking. You have to practice and practice
correctly. And the place to start is in your own personal life.
Personal leadership precedes organizational leadership. Like I stated
in my introduction, it does not mean that you will automatically
qualify as a great leader, but it is a necessary requirement.
EFFECTIVE LEADERS ARE ALSO EFFECTIVE FOLLOWERS
There is no leader who can claim to know everything. To think this
is self-delusion of the highest order! To know something means to
be aware or conscious of something. Sometimes this is equated with
being clever, to have knowledge that others don't have. In
a world of complexity this understanding can be dangerous sometimes.
It is summed up in that old slogan by Francis Bacon namely: "Knowledge
is Power!" Nothing is said about how the knowledge is applied,
of the morality of applying knowledge. It is like the brilliant
scientists in the United States who have enormous knowledge about
science but uses it to develop weapons of mass destruction! Now
how useful is this kind of knowledge anyway?
Did you notice
the slogan on the dedication page of this book? It says "Knowledge
is power but Consciousness is light!" And this means that
how knowledge is applied is as important as the knowledge itself.
Effective leaders understand that knowledge without consciousness
is dangerous. But more is involved. What we also need is conscious
consciousness. This is the awareness/knowledge that you cannot always
know! Life is too complex for any one person to know everything.
In a knowledge based society that is highly specialised effective
leaders understand that they should be humble and admit from time
to time that "I don't know". To admit that you
do not know and that you need help from time to time is a sign of
strength not weakness.
It is a good
practice therefore for effective leaders to get out of their own
office or comfort zones and assume the role of being a follower.
I used to spend time in various departments in my organization working
with and next to the office administrators, finance staff, and so
on. I also used to rotate the chairpersonship in meetings by delegating
to others to chair. Here I assumed the role of the follower. In
the beginning people were very nervous. For some chairing a meeting
was a frightening prospect! But this was how I expressed my need
to be educated by my staff. Here I consciously stepped out of my
role as leader and consciously assumed the role of a follower.
It is important
in a highly specialised organization that staff understands the
need to educate their leaders. But it is more important for the
leader to show that he is in need of education. Five dynamics unfold
during this process:
1. The leader gets first hand exposure to the day-to-day challenges
experienced by the member in her work.
2. The hidden potential to exercise leadership of the member can
be uncovered and cultivated.
3. The leader communicates his humility to the member and his desire
to lift the person up to the level of becoming an effective leader.
4. Staff members will value the time the leader spend with them
to see what they are good at.
5. By listening to your staff member in a non-threatening environment
(you are in their space) you promote upward communication by listening
to them about the challenges they face.
EFFECTIVE LEADERS SUFFER FOR THEIR ORGANIZATIONS
This is a very important question and one where there is a collective
ignorance in many organizations. In any organization, there will
be someone taking up (unconsciously of course) the role of sufferer.
This is not accidental. This is a simple group dynamic. You see,
wherever human beings come together, there will always be issues
amongst them. These issues emanate from people's past experiences.
Some people may have been abused, physically or mentally, some may
have grown up with single parents or even no parents at all. Others
may have been denied a decent education whereas others may have
had painful experiences of torture, etc. The fact is that we live
in an imperfect world and therefore we are all imperfect human beings
trying to cope with a world in a painful transition. When groups
come together, be it in the family, organization, your friends,
school, etc. you will always find that the group strive unconsciously
to maintain its own group health. It is trying to cope as a group
or a team. It tries to cope because the issues we all bring to the
group cannot be left in a vacuum. Remember that nature abhors a
vacuum. Someone therefore unconsciously steps forward to fill that
vacuum. This is the person who is absorbing the issues for the group
to maintain its collective health. In the traditional family we
call this person "the black sheep". At school this person
is labelled "the problem child". The fact is not that
the child is a problem but that the teacher has a problem understanding
the child! What the teacher does not realise is that the child is
protecting the group (or class in this case) or that the black sheep
in the family is protecting the entire family (or white sheep)!
who suffers for the group is also found in your organization. It
is not always easy to locate this person but try to find out who
is the most depressed or who is having the most issues in the organization.
Sometimes the leader steps forward unconsciously to play this role.
the task of a true leader is to create more leaders not followers!"
is paid to be uncomfortable. If you are comfortable then it is a
sure sign that you are doing something wrong." (Peter Drucker)
Frank Julie, independent development consultant and author of "The
Art of Leadership and Management on the Ground" (A practical
guide for leaders and managers to develop sustainable organizations
for permanent social change)
To read more
about the book, view its detailed contents and comments from community
leaders and academics around the world, please go to www.frankjulieblogspot.com.
To order the book and get a free list of donors in South Africa,
please e-mail Zandile Stols (PA) at email@example.com
1.Robert A. Johnson (1993)
Owning your Own Shadow
2. Allan Kaplan (2002) Development Practitioners - Artists
of the Invisible, chapter 11
3. Drucker (1990) Managing the Non-profit Organization, p. 48
4. M. Scott Peck (1993) The Different Drum, pp. 234-253
5. M. Scott Peck (1983) The Road Less Travelled, p. 13
6. Ronald Wesso (2003) When God Is Called A Party, an unpublished
7. Peter Drucker (1986) The Effective Executive, p. 260
8. P. F. Drucker (1990) Managing the Non-profit Organization, pp.
9. Ibid, p. 26
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.