The Welch Company
440 Davis Court #1602
San Francisco, CA 94111 2496
July 14, 1996
Project Management Institute Northern California Chapter
Asilomar Conference, Monterey, California|
Executive Mindset Obstacle to Leadership
New Needs, New Roles, New Skills for a New Milleneum
By Rod Welch
"Obstacles to Leadership" has three dimensions within the meaning of the
Asilomar Conference theme:
Leadership and Technology,
Partnership for the Future
The key obstacle technology poses for leaders has long
been recognized as increasing the risk of error due
to the compression of time and distance. "Haste makes waste"
encapsules the problem leaders face when information flows too
fast for the human mind to recognize correlations and
implications essential for accurate understanding and
effective decisions. The popular
notion that people typically use only a small portion of
mental capacity can be seen, for example, in results from
phone calls, meetings and even professional
events like this year's Asilomar Conference, where people
are overwhelmed by the blur of continual information.
The solution is new tools, skills and roles that reengineer the practice of
management so that leaders can keep up on the Information
- What obstacles does technology pose for leadership?
- Can technology help leadership overcome obstacles?
- Can leadership help technology by overcoming barriers to change?
Recent articles in PMI's publications suggest a new science of Communication
Metrics for using technology to align people, as called out in management
standards like ISO and PMBOK. This method makes it faster and easier to
understand information and follow up so that things get done quickly and
accurately. Yet, ultimately only the courage and vision of leadership can
empower people and institutions to meet the challenge of a faster paced world
in the 21st century.
The Asilomar Conference begins with defining what leaders do.
The role, tasks, and opportunities are reflected in the recently
released Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (hereafter PMBOK), which defines leadership in
section 2.4.1, as:
- Establishing direction - developing both a vision of the
future and strategies for producing the changes needed to
achieve that vision.
- Aligning people - communicating the vision by words and
deeds to all those whose cooperation may be needed to
achieve the vision.
- Motivating and inspiring- helping people energize
themselves to overcome political, bureaucratic, and
resource barriers to change.
From this definition a matrix shows the correlation of
tasks and obstacles that comprise the leadership/technology
| | |
| | L E A D R S H I P |
| OBSTACLES | |
| and +---------------------+----------------------+---------------|
| SOLUTIONS | Establishing | Align People | |
| | Direction | Communication | Motivating |
| | | | |
|Obstacles Caused | Technology Hype | Data Pollution Means |Constant Change|
|by Technology | Obscures Direction | Miss-communication | Erodes Will |
| | | | and Focus |
| | | | |
|Obstacles Solved | Access to History | Integration Aligns | Technology |
|by Technology |Illuminates Direction| People & Objectives | Moves the Team|
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Leadership to | | Educate to Overcome | Support |
|Deploy Technology| Lead by Doing | Fear Ignorance Denial| Initiative |
| | | | Demand Results|
The PMBOK defines "communication" in section 2.4.2, as
involving the exchange of information. The sender is responsible
for making information clear, and complete so it is received
correctly. The PMBOK further states "The receiver is responsible
for making sure that information is received in its entirety and
understood correctly." This idea is restated in section
Since leadership is responsible to "align people through
communication," the interest in achieving a successful result
places responsibility for ensuring that information is fully received
and correctly understood squarely on the leader. Such is the
essence of "influencing" people called out in PMBOK section
2.4.5. Indeed a key leadership attribute is communicating in a
way that cannot be misunderstood and ensuring correct
understanding through timely follow up.
This offers a clear target consistent with the Asilomar
theme to seek a better partnership between leadership and
technology. It follows from a recent field study published in
the December 1995 issue of PMnetwork, p. 5: "The Role of Risk in
Determining Project Approach." The author reports that key
factors of success on high risk projects are: communication,
understanding and problem handling. An earlier study done in
1988 by Seattle based A/E management consultants, Martin-Simond,
Inc., found that the "...most salient link to overall job
satisfaction and low turnover is communication in the firm." Of
course common sense tells us that effective leadership requires
good communication. If the boss does not get accurate, timely
information, then it is difficult to chart a proper course, i.e.,
to set objectives and strategy. If the boss does not explain the
direction and strategy well, then the team will have a hard time
reaching its destination.
The PMBOK Chapter 3 calls for the use of "integrated
processes." This is supported by growing awareness of
International Standards Organization (ISO) criteria. So, another
way to view "communication" is as a continuous process to achieve
common goals. The "New World Order Needs Old Time Religion"
article on Communication Metrics (published in PMnetwork May 1996
p. 36), describes projects and organizations as a "community" of
skills and interests which "communication" focuses on common
objectives to build and maintain shared meaning over time, so
people can work together effectively, i.e., cooperate. It cites
three integrated processes for effective communication:
Communication is Leadership
The leadership component of communication is in PMBOK section
2.4.1 on setting objectives and motivating performance. Clearly,
when people speak there is always an intent to lead the listener
toward some understanding that is usually aimed at achieving
specific follow up action. Accordingly, communities need strong
leadership as an element of communication. How can technology
help the process by which leadership does its part of the
communication process in setting objectives and motivating
Commnication is Understanding
Most of us associate the notion of leadership with someone who
can talk people into doing things. This is regarded as a
personal trait beyond the reach of technology, except to widen
the audience subject to leadership, as with politicians making a
speech on television. Such people are described as "good
communicators." Deciding what to talk people into doing,
however, requires setting objectives and deciding which path to
take. So today we demand that the leader have the "vision
One dimension of setting objectives is recognizing organic
structure. All of existence is comprised of components or
building blocks of nature: atoms, molecules, cells, and so on.
Human objectives have a corollary structure: life, air, food,
water, shelter, etc. Every organization has a mission ultimately
aimed at satisfying some aspect of the basic human objective to
live: vision, strategy, tactics, tasks, and many other forms of
structure that comprise a complex array by which modern people
organize themselves. Those who understand this complexity well
enough to select the right objective from among the multiplicity
of choices are said to posses "vision." Computers can aid this
selection process by enabling the leader to capture and maintain
the organic structure of the many possible objectives. It can
also capture the record of performance in pursuing objectives, so
that at any moment a vision of the future can be tested based on
understanding the past. The TQM movement has spurred awareness
of the challenge to set the correct vision.
What though does the understanding part of
communication mean and how is it impacted by technology?
People try to achieve "understanding" through meetings,
calls and documents. There remains a sense of unease, however,
that understanding is missing, so people try harder with endless
meetings, more calls and today email, resulting in an avalanche
of information. The electronic component of this effort is
hailed as the "Information Highway." Many are beginning to
question whether this works. Intel's presentation at Asilomar on
"Information at your Fingertips, Myth or Reality," cites the
Information Highway as resulting in "data pollution."
In simplest terms "understanding" means getting desired
results. If desired action is taken, the leader assumes people
got the message, i.e., "understood" what was intended. Such
assumptions sometimes turn out to be mistaken. Near term action
can align with leadership direction for reasons other than those
put forward by the leader, and those other reasons can later lead
the team off course. This suggests a deeper sense of what
"understanding" means. It seems related to the underlying
reasons for action and the connections or linkages to desired
results, i.e., objectives. The legal profession refers to
"causation" to describe the connections between events,
chronology, reasons and objectives that comprise "understanding."
Similarly construction people recognize the importance of
connections that support a structure. "Understanding" is so
critical in construction that specialists are used, called
"architects," to figure out the right connections, and they
inspect the actual work against original objectives set out in a
data base, called "plans and specifications," to ensure those
connections are correct so that the building will stand up under
the loads it will encounter. Similarly, lawyers inspect to see
if testimony will stand up under what they call "scrutiny." They
also use the term "discovery." The legal presentation at
Asilomar describes "discovery" as resulting in a data base of
management details analogous to the architect's data base of
construction details. These forms of inspection reflect the
popular TQM notion of "metrics" to see how management is
So "understanding" can be meaningfully grasped from its
root words that suggest the connection between something that
"stands under" or supports something else. In a building, a
column supports a beam. In management, "understanding" is a set
of facts and objectives that supports a decision for action.
Without adequate support, i.e., understanding, eventually a
structure of concrete and steel, or of decisions taken by
managers, will fail. Thus, leadership that convinces the team to
take action where there is no understanding of the key
connections between cause and effect will NOT achieve the aims of
communication to build a better community, but rather will lead
people down the wrong path.
"Understanding" in management is bi-directional with
respect to time. It looks forward and backward from the present.
The leader must grasp the correct connections between objectives
and the record of prior performance as support for setting
direction. The team must be helped to see the connections
between the direction set to reach specific goals in the future,
and their skills and awareness of constraints and opportunities.
This often requires conveying information about some of the
reasons for setting direction, i.e., sharing understanding, in
order to form shared meaning that can sustain conflicting
influences that arise over time.
What are conflicting influences?
When people leave the leadership arena, e.g., a meeting,
they continue to be influenced by subsequent events and
information. So "understanding" requires aligning action to be
taken in a manner that either supersedes subsequent influences,
or is seen to be consistent with them, including personal goals.
This means associating desired action with goals commonly
recognized to be highly desirable, e.g., survival, promotion,
higher earnings. Leadership that fails to make this alignment
In today's environment, managers go from meeting to
meeting and receive a constant barrage of calls, documents and
email throughout the day. All of these "influences" impact
conduct. How does what the leader said in meeting "A" align with
what is in our contract, or with what a different leader said in
meeting "B," "C," telephone call "K" and email "D." Clearly, the
more we communicate about a wide range of issues the greater the
web of connections becomes that requires alignment for effective
leadership. This increases the chance of making a
miss-connection. So leadership must not only "align people
through communication" as called for by the PMBOK, it must also
have in place a continuous process to maintain shared meaning
over time as people are subjected to a constant stream of other
influences. Otherwise, initial alignment will drift away.
This point seems to follow from work by Dr. Thomas K.
Landauer in his paper on cognitive science entitled "A Solution
to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of
Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge." Dr.
Landauer describes a study showing human mental "understanding"
changes as a function of new information. Initially, this does
not seem very insightful. We all hope to become more
"knowledgeable" by getting more information. That is why we go
to school, read books, newspapers, watch television and attend
meetings at work and seminars like the Asilomar Conference. Dr.
Landauer's point, however, is that this change in knowledge state
occurs often without the volition or awareness which normally
accompanies our thirst for more knowledge.
Another way to see the crucial insight of Dr. Landauer's
point is to consider "Murphy's Law" (see also discussion in
New World Order...
This is the famous worry
about mysterious errors that seem to crop up unexpectedly and
cause havoc. It was considered at the 1994
under the aegis of TQM.
An obstacle to leadership then is that having motivated
the team, common understanding of the vision, strategy and
tactics at time "now," will later, at time "now + t1," (a day,
week, month, year), drift off course, absent directed effort to
maintain shared meaning. Since it occurs slowly and
incrementally, people are unaware of this drift. Executives are
particularly burdened because they are less subject to being
questioned about what they know by the people they encounter in
daily work. The absence of a daily "metric" to link
communication back to original sources, reinforces belief that
our knowledge is consistent when in fact it is drifting off
course under Landauer's finding of induced meaning from the
constant flow of information. Thus, leaders and followers alike
gradually float in circles, like a ship without a compass, as the
human mind drifts in a sea of information.
Because meaning drift occurs slowly it is hidden from
the conscious mind. Leaders are therefore drawn to the common
sense conclusion that others have not told the truth, or are less
dedicated to working hard than they are. Only rarely do
executives get the chance to discover their "knowledge" is
mistaken, as when being examined by a lawyer who shows
documentation that conflicts with testimony. Those occasions are
often dismissed as "blowing things out of proportion," rather
than a recognition that business practice needs to be adjusted to
avoid the malady of false knowledge due to the mind's bent to
drift off course.
Communication is Follow Up
How can technology help leaders make the adjustments
needed to avoid drifting off course?
This leads to the third key ingredient in communication:
a system of "follow up" linked to original understandings that
ensures desired action is taken, because if needed action is not
taken, leadership fails. How is "follow up" accomplished?
Turner has explained at the Conference how the
construction industry uses a system of inspection to ensure the
actual work conforms to the original details. Thousands of years
of cultural evolution in the construction industry shows that
without an inspection process calamity will often occur because
the web of connections in constructing a building is so complex
that even people of good will can make a mistake. So the
architect periodically shows up on site and compares the actual
work with the construction details in the plans. This is a
feedback "metric" process to measure results against intentions
and requirements, and then plan and schedule adjustments.
In the computer industry we use a different form of
"follow up" called "debugging." Many end users have experienced
the frustration of using software that was not adequately
debugged. In the middle of doing an important task, the computer
or the software fails, also called "crashes" -- failed "metrics."
How do leaders debug or inspect to follow up on their
decisions? There are two basic methods: accounting which
reports earnings and impacts the stock price, and lawsuits which
create a data base of "management details" that led to harmful
conduct, and impose adjustments to conform to community
standards, called "law." Two intermediate forms of "follow up"
have emerged called cost and schedule control. There is actually
a third form that has long been a staple of daily leadership
called "meetings" or more simply "dialog." The manager or leader
can ask the team how they are doing and assess, like a judge,
whether the understandings conveyed comport with original
objectives. Indeed, this form of follow up makes up the bulk of
most leadership time: talking and listening.
The challenge of the Information Highway is that all of
this talking and listening impacts understanding in ways that
cause the team to drift off course under Landauer's theory of
knowledge acquisition that says more information causes
What is the missing ingredient that can make more
information useful instead of harmful?
Let us turn back to the model of the architect
inspecting the work. Recall this is done from a data base called
plans and specifications that reflect original understandings
about the construction details needed to achieve the end result.
This data base is not static. During the course of the project
changes will be needed that are reviewed and approved to meet
unforeseen conditions or to accomplish various needs that become
apparent as work progresses. The job of the architect is to
integrate new details in a way that does not adversely impact the
functioning of the original details, so that the overall
objective can still be accomplished.
It is not too difficult to see that the leader of a
business has an analogous role in guiding the team toward a
common objective and accommodating needed change that becomes
apparent along the journey. The key difference is that the
architect has a data base from which to inspect and link on-going
activity to measure performance. The business leader lacks this
ingredient. This is becoming a growing obstacle to effective
leadership in the age of the Information Highway that causes
"data pollution" cited by Intel in its presentation at Asilomar.
The architect can measure a door to see if it is located
as planned. But, when a leader hears a report in a meeting about
progress and plans for future action, how can the leader measure
whether this communication aligns with the data base of
management details for the initiative being reported? The leader
can look at notes from the last meeting, or ask a manager to
check the file for letters and contract provisions related to the
report received, but this is so time consuming that the effort is
only made if a catastrophe occurs such as an industrial accident
or a lawsuit is filed. In those rare instances when the record
is checked, leaders find that they cannot read their notes and
everyone has a different recollection.
Of course there is no "process" at the present time to
create a "data base" of "management details" to effectively trace
new information against original understandings, as the architect
does with his data base of construction details to inspect a
building for conformance with the plans and specs. There is a
lot of "management information" and many data base reports, but
they do not address the heart of leadership work which is
deciding which path to take on the Information Highway of the
21st century. Those decisions are predicated on dialog and there
is no tradition or practice to capture understandings from
conversation that comprise the majority of "management details."
Leaders are in fact cut off from the details of most of the
decisions they make each day. The Information Highway compounds
this disconnect by increasing the number of details that impact
performance and the rate at which errors are distributed.
Technology can redress this growing disconnect by
empowering leaders to capture the record of daily management
details and connect it up to prior related events and
organizational objectives. This new practice provides the
understanding and follow up that is essential for effective
While the architect works with a finite dimensional
space, the manager deals with an amorphous "knowledge space" of
information, time and objectives. All of us readily recognize
dimensional space because we deal with it all the time by
interacting with a world bound by gravity and distance. All
of us use the terms "knowledge" "information" and "data"
regularly, but interchangeably. Figuring out how to use
technology to improve leadership requires, however, making some
distinctions. Data can be considered as facts and figures, as in
a cost report or personnel report on the number of vacation days
we took last year. It is helpful to use "information" to mean
the language that forms a narrative description to position
"data" in a context relevant to immediate concerns. "Knowledge"
is the web of connections between information from different
sources over time and the various objectives it impacts. So
information connects data, and knowledge connects information
resulting in "understanding," which is our goal.
Time magazine (Mar 25, 1996 p. 50) recently reported
efforts in cognitive science to research human consciousness.
This is the faculty that converts data into information and into
knowledge, common sense, wisdom and vision which leaders seek.
Like all organic structures in nature, it appears the mind has
the capacity to assemble wider patterns of understanding as a
function of time.
A complete structure of consciousness can be represented as:
+---- Vision (seeing the future by knowing the past)
Leaders | History (specialists write and form judgements)
do this? --+ Wisdom (i.e., "uncommon sense")
| Common Sense (culture, tradition, manners)
+---- Knowledge (web of connections cause/effect)
+-- Data |- IT is struggling to bridge
Computers do | Words/Numbers -----+ this gap for managers
this --------+ Bytes
+-- 0,1 (on off, yes no, right wrong, life death)
Computers can quickly assess whether a switch is open or
shut and report this as 0 or 1, reflecting innate dichotomies of
existence: on off, right wrong, etc. From this simple clarity,
computers create bits, bytes and words/numbers. This forms the
foundation for computer wizardry in producing lots of "data."
However, this is only useful to leadership after it has been
"processed" into higher forms. Today, technology is struggling
to convert "data" into "information," but leaders don't use
information. Management Information Systems (MIS) are created
for managers. Leaders use knowledge, common sense, wisdom,
history and vision. How can technology help leaders convert
information into these higher forms?
The presentation at Asilomar on the law explains how the
builds a chronological record of management
details after-the-fact. Technology can help leaders build this
data base concurrently with the work, so that it can be used like the
architect's plans and specs to check, i.e., measure,
understandings as work progresses. The New World Order... paper
published in the May 1996 issue of PMnetwork calls this process
"Communication Metrics." It explains how effective follow up,
which is difficult for leaders to accomplish by conventional means,
can be consistently accomplished by using technology that
integrates time and information so that every task a leader, or
anyone else, performs is automatically linked back to its
predecessor as a first order check, or "inspection," to ensure
that action is connected to the right details. This accomplishes
traceability to original sources called out by ISO criteria and
provides the alignment of people that the PMBOK says leaders
should perform. These links to causation comprise the
"understanding" that people hunger for today. Links to cause and effect
in an automated
steady course of shared meaning that enable
communities to withstand the
meaning drift that otherwise debilitates even powerful and supple
minds on the Information Highway.
It has long been recognized that tools which empower
people to accomplish needed tasks faster and more accurately,
generally provide motivation from the realization that success is
easier to accomplish. Therefore, technology that improves
understanding and follow up, makes it easier to motivate people
to accomplish difficult objectives.
The challenge of applying these tools, however, remains
complex. It is akin to efforts in earlier times to persuade
people to send their children to school. When there is wood to
chop, crops to harvest and water to fetch, "book learning" seems
too remote a benefit compared with the immediate need for action.
Similarly, when there are endless meetings to attend, calls to
make and planes to catch, the prospect of investing time to
capture the record in a way that creates a meaningful data base
of "management details" seems too remote to justify the effort.
As well, the cost of not capturing the record typically occurs
weeks, months and years later, and this disconnect in time makes
it difficult to recognize the added value of capturing the record
at a time when it is well enough known to be meaningful at a much
later time when prior understandings are needed.
Recognizing the benefit of investing that
provides a deferred reward is accomplished in the banking
industry by providing regular near term benefits called
"interest." Interest payments encourage people to avoid
immediate consumption in favor of pooling resources that thereon
permit allocating resources to larger efforts that eventually
yield much larger rewards. In theory, the system would work
better without paying out these short term interest payments, but
it is a necessary element to overcome fear of the unknown,
similar to adopting technology that promises future rewards by
investing time to create a data base of management details.
People are afraid to make the investment until there is a wide
enough experience base that shows a strong likelihood of
achieving a reward. That is why it took 5,000 years for the
alphabet to become a universal standard for human knowledge. Like
investing to pool resources, the alphabet is a powerful tool, but
it takes many years of training to master the methodology, and
even after having done so, there is no guarantee it will result
in desired rewards. When rewards are deferred from immediate
costs, the disconnect in time engenders ignorance, fear and
denial of need and value added.
Thousands of years has shown that investing time to
learn reading and writing offers a much better opportunity to
succeed. That is the most that technology can do to improve
leadership, understanding and follow up that comprise effective
communication through the connections that convert information
into useful knowledge and ideas.
A strategy to meet the resistance of deferred reward
modalities is to use a specialist to create the data base of
management details, similar to the way an architect creates and
maintains the details needed to construct a building. For an
executive this might be a leadership aide, as used in the
military, or a para legal/associate attorney, used in the legal
profession. An Assistant Project Manager might fill this role in
the construction arena; a Communication Manager might be used in
the corporate setting; a Process Analyst might be used in the
high tech industry. What does this person do that is not being
done now and which needs to be done in order for organizations to
In a poetic sense this person "tends the garden of
knowledge" as it grows each day within a particular business
environment. This supports the "Continual Learning" function
promulgated by emerging management standards such as ISO. It
requires collaborating with those who carry out the work to
capture and maintain the structure of objectives that evolve to
ensure the work is linked to the vision and strategies formulated
by leadership. The record of conversations, calls, meetings and
correspondence must be captured and linked to create the web of
understandings that comprise organizational knowledge.
The record needs to be structured in a way that makes it useful to
decision making relative to opportunities and constraints from
commitments, contracts and community standards in laws,
regulations, ordinances and company policies. The Communication
Manager/Leadership Aide, must be proactive in "digging out of the
system" the correlations and implications that reveal conflicts
to adjust and Action Items to pursue that are not otherwise
apparent in the heat of battle. This must all be done in a way
that is timely, yet not intrusive nor threatening to the
self-esteem of team members.
The reason for creating this role is the same as for
hiring an accountant. Most executives know accounting, and
everyone is aware of budgets, but the volume of numbers to follow
and the need for accuracy requires that a specialist do the work,
again similar to hiring an architect to create the construction
details for a building. People intrinsically feel the architect
does something they cannot do, and so feel a Communication
Manager is not needed because they can do that work. In fact
most executives feel their strength is the ability to
communicate. But, as seen, communication is more than convincing
people to act, i.e., talking people into doing things, or simply
giving orders. The Information Highway creates a new environment
that makes it more difficult to figure out what orders to give
and to maintain shared meaning and follow up on orders that are
given. Accordingly, the increased volume of information and
consequent need to ensure accurate understandings may in some
cases warrant someone to perform this part of communication in
order to make leadership effective.
New tools, roles and skills are of no value without
leadership to support initiative, demand results and provide the
courage to overcome ignorance, fear and denial.
Columbus' ships that sailed to a new world were of no better
craftsmanship than those of his peers, yet they were energized by
the courage and vision of a leader that other ships lacked.
Ideas require a champion. In the modern era of constant change,
organizations need an "Ambassador of Change" who can ferret out
the choices, investigate the claims, test the theories and
shepherd the good ideas through the treacherous waters of the
status quo. This is evident from the frenzy to "reengineer" by
eliminating managers to fit the vision, ideas and skills of
leadership. Managers change where they work, who they work for
and if they work, in a veritible game of "musical chairs," called
downsizing, but there is no reengineering of how executives work
to improve their productivity.
Executives are hard working, smart people with sensitive egos and
old world skills who fear change. They know they make a living
by thinking, planning and communicating. They recognize
computers should improve these skills, but worry that failed
promises of the "paperless office" have actually increased their
workload on the Information Highway; and, executives fear people
skilled with "Communication Metrics" threaten their job and
self-esteem. These obstacles of ego and fear require special
support. Ambassadors of Change are therefore critical to reach
the new reality of automated management practice.
The challenge of changing in the right direction is
described in George Gilder's book "Microcosm" quoting Lynn Conway
on introducing new ideas, specifically educating management in
the early years of the computer industry to adopt VLSI design:
"How can you take methods that are new, methods that are
not in common use and therefore perhaps considered unsound
methods, and turn them into sound methods?"
"I was very aware of the difficulty of bringing forth a new
system of knowledge by just publishing bits and pieces of
it among traditional work and then waiting until after it
has all evolved and someone writes a book about it."
VLSI is one of the key breakthroughs that made possible
the exponential growth of the personal computer and ushered in
the Information Highway. Ms. Conway points out that the best
and brightest of her day in the 1970s resisted VLSI as unsound,
contrary to common practice.
Now, 25 years later, many of those who resisted the hardest have
become wealthy titans of industry, respected for vision and
sought out for opinions on how to "reengineer." This year's
Asilomar Conference shows we need another system of knowledge to
form a better partnership between leadership and technology. All
we need is the courage and the vision to set sail once again for
a new frontier: applying the "Law of the Microcosm" to leverage
the power of the mind can overcome the strongest resistance, the
highest obstacle, and usher in a bountiful era progress.