l has noticed that two of his directors are exact polar opposites of each other in their leadership style, skills, and competencies. He often thought to himself that they are classic textbook pictures of leadership skills on a continuum. Pete is a strong thinker and is full of innovative ideas to improve his department and the hospital as a whole. He doesn't perceive traditional lines of authority or regulations as a barrier to his innovative ideas, but views them as a potential challenge, as a chess master would regarding his opponent. Pete is full of ideas and energy and is constantly changing, fixing, and moving things forward in his departments. Al had personally witnessed Pete discussing his ideas with the president of the organization with such confidence and courage that even Al did not possess. It seemed that Pete was fearless and disregarded the commonly understood rules of organizational hierarchy. He spoke to the president as if they were best friends or individuals who worked together frequently. Al secretly coveted Pete's ability to be "out there" or "in your face" on issues that Pete was passionate about. In contrast, Caroline is a very quiet but effective leader. She has been in her role for more than 25 years and has 35 years of seniority in the organization. She is highly regarded as an expert in her clinical area and as a soft, compassionate leader with her staff. Caroline is nearing retirement and probably would have retired a few years ago had it not been for the sudden death of her husband. Caroline had shared with Al that she is not retiring now because of her fears and concerns about her financial stability in the present economy. Al noticed that Caroline rarely brought forth any new or innovative ideas, but her departments seemed to hum along without much controversy, crisis, or change. Although Caroline is open to new ideas, she certainly put forth no effort to promote innovation or change in her departments. She seems quite content with the status quo. When reflecting on these two individuals and their strengths and areas needing development, Al would have characterized Pete as a strong-willed and engaged individual who was like a "dog with a bone" when he felt strongly about a proposal or situation. In contrast, Caroline simply and quietly got the job done and changed things when necessary. Caroline could be characterized as a person with a soft, good will who exuded caring and compassion for others but had little energy or will to change the status quo. Al's boss, the chief operating officer (COO), once mentioned to Al that they needed to develop a strategy to deal with the "walking retired," and Al silently wondered if he was referring to Caroline along with some of the others whom they both knew were no longer effective in their roles. Al felt protective of Caroline because of her long years of service and because her performance was essentially good. She met all of the performance goals required of her, her staff seem to be satisfied with her as a leader, and the patient satisfaction scores were also within expected limits. It was just her quiet and unengaging demeanor that caused others to perceive her as low energy and ineffective. In some ways Al thought she was a good balance to Pete's constant whirlwind of energy, excitement, passion, and eagerness to put forth his agenda and to please others. Caroline, on the other hand, had shared with Al that she no longer felt the need to impress others and that she had no desire to move up in the organization to promote herself for other positions. She stated that "my performance speaks for itself, so why do I need to behave differently just to impress others."

Al was under constant pressure from the COO to do "something" with Carolinereassignment to a less visible position or encouragement to retire. Al was a bit concerned about his boss's perception of his own skill incompetency in his role if he didn't do something with Caroline. He was saddened that she was perceived as "burned out" when she met all of the performance requirements and was positively perceived by her staff and physicians. He realized that the organization valued high-energy, quick-thinking, innovative individuals who not only got the job done but also were constantly moving the organization forward into new service lines, care delivery methods, and strategies to improve the workplace environment for staff and physicians. What a quandary! Al was absolutely conflicted about what he should do with Caroline. He knew with certainty that there would be chaos among the clinical nurses and physicians if he should encourage her to move to a new position or to retire. He knew that Caroline did not want to retire, and therefore he could expect a backlash from his actions to encourage her to do so. In his mind he questioned the COO's intentions and the congruency with the organization's values. Looking at it differently, however, Al realized the potential benefits of having an individual in the role who was more energetic and innovative. Such a person might propose new programs and services that would accelerate the department's success and make changes to improve patient care, physician satisfaction, and employee engagement (although these metrics were already within expected ranges). It was more of a "decision of potentiality" than "necessity," which made Al all the more unsettled about pressure to make a change in Caroline's role. Questions 1. What is your perception of Al's personal conflict in this case? 2. How would you describe Al's level of courage in facing the COO's pressure for Al to make a change in Caroline's role when Al clearly feels conflicted about the fairness and appropriateness of the change given that she meets expectations in assigned organizational goals? 3. What do you think Al's best strategy should be in meeting the COO's agenda, being fair to Caroline, and making the best decision for the overall good of his departments and hospital? 4. If you were Al, how would you perceive the political correctness of Pete's informal interactions with the president of the organization given the circumstances described in this case? 5. What qualities does Al demonstrate that may characterize him as being a willing leader, and which attributes might he continually develop to improve his own authenticity as a leader? 6. If Al determines that Caroline should stay in her role, what methods might he consider to "relight her lamp" as described earlier in this chapter? lar pavilion?