Psychologist Carl Jung distinguishes our lives in halves. He states that the first half of our life is the process of individuation. This is where most of the energies of our family of origin, our educational systems, our institutions, our social norms, and most anything else focuses their attention, effort, and energies. As I see it, the gravitational pull of this initial stage is systemic, immense and deeply integrated into our psyche. Most of the people that I work with are still largely defined and bound by the effects of our initial need to find solid, safety, success, and solidarity.

But there is a second important act that asks us to integrate our collection of styles, perceptions, ideas of ourselves into something that is more authentic to what it means to be good. This calling is not to some moralistic posture, but to thinking and applying of ourselves to the situations and people of our lives in ways that supercedes our historic addiction to our own egocentric needs.

For some, the movement continues to summons an orientation past ethnocentric (the superiority of ones group) ideas and norms to a worldcentric/post-conventional (a commitment and practice of being and doing good for all people) lifestyle. This new activity of our lives is a chosen one that pushes past reptilian brain stem ethics to a neo-cortex, even spiritual standard. This act two orientation is about the maturation, alignment and practice of the highest intellectual, emotional, spiritual and social intelligence applied to situational, individual, and group needs.

There is more to unpack with this, but ask yourself the question: “How am I acting?” then do something to raise the level of your play.

Leaders live in the gap created by the current reality as perceived, and the preferred future as conceived. These tensions that are self created or given to us by others, ask us questions of how we will be responsible to the entire equation that the gap creates. We are commanded - whether internally or externally - by our accepted goals that are both large and small, complex and simple. These commands make us who we are, or bring out an emerging wholeness that exists. Philosopher Martin Buber moves us along in this thought when he says: “There does seem to be a built-in sense of indebtedness in the consciousness of man, an awareness of owing gratitude, of being called upon at certain moments to reciprocate, to answer, to live in a way which is compatible with the grandeur and mystery of living.”

Responsibility to a call to close the gap, to grow, to emerge, provides both the value of satisfying the tension of unmet goals, but also creates a quality of living that distinguishes us from merely practicing fidelity to what it means to be a human being, and strengthens our consciousness expressed in being human.

Today whether in the cubicle of the office or another living space, we demonstrate our understanding of what is before us, within us, and upon us, as we respond to the situations command to act. Let us pay attention because we are responding one way or another.

I was listening to a leader speak about the ebb and flow, or uneven progress within a particular project he was assigned. He was frustrated with what he felt were long delays in achieving results. The coordination of a matrixed work environment that had dotted lines of accountability and alignment was proving to be difficult. This leader wanted synchronicity of thought and action in all of his efforts.

I see this same type of struggle for synchronicity in our personal lives. We want steady flow of measureable progress in our relationships, our experiences and in anything concerning our well-being. When we grow we don’t want the gap of maturity and immaturity to increase with those we love. When we want to rest, play, reflect, cut-loose, or an assortment of other options, we largely want the world around us to be “in sync” with where we are, or want to be.

I am growing in my conviction that the best leadership whether for professional and personal reasons is competence in strategically living the tension of opposites, entanglements, and de-synchronous dynamics. This process is not just about optimizing effect within the external situation, but the deeper changes within the life of the individual leader. Waiting, tension of opposites, lack of things going the way we want, are some of the critical elements for improvement. Maybe results aren’t as much about a smooth, straight, and upward pathway as they are about intelligent leadership within cycles, incongruence, and variation from our own idea, or ideal.

Your thoughts?