The leadership lessons I learned from attending the legendary James Taylor concert
July 27, 2022
I showed up to hear the legend and his band. What I received was a message richer than his music.
My parents saw James Taylor in concert 50 years ago. He has been part of our family woodwork ever since.
His voice – like a warm fireplace and my favorite slippers.
His life – could have easily been a tragic figure.
James Taylor found his voice and his place in the world.
When did you first hear that voice?
James Taylor was the second artist/vocalist I felt this way about. I was in fifth grade. (The Jackson Five, with Michael singing ‘ABC’ came first.)
When “You’ve Got a Friend” came over the radio waves inside my mother’s patio home in the desert, I froze.
The song itself, of course, was stellar (written by Carole King)…but that voice. It was sad and soothing and commanding and liberating all at the same time.
I had the chance to see James Taylor in concert this week at the Phoenix Suns Arena and was hungover with love not only for his brilliance as a musician but his composure in telling his story between each number.
These were the leadership lessons I learned from attending the legendary James Taylor concert:
1. Take Care of Yourself
A quick overview: James Taylor was hospitalized for suicidal depression as a teenager and later heavily addicted to drugs (and had to have vocal surgery as a result of issues relating to this), went through rehab several times, and has now been clean and sober for 38 years.
He still attends meetings and strives to make peace every day with his addictive personality.
Music was his salvation, his way to express himself…and we are the grateful benefactors.
He also tours on a regular basis and keeps physically active by riding bike, cross-country skiing, rowing, and (drum roll, please) warms up his voice every day (even when there are no gigs, ahem), citing the “use it or lose it” philosophy and following in the footsteps of his vocal idol, Tony Bennett.
2. Give Your Best - Your Best
JT understands the importance of the ‘giving’ aspect of a musical life and the responsibility it entails.
Before talking about the emotional gifts he showers onto his people (see what I did there?), his shows have always been top-notch experiences with the stage populated with some of the best musicians known to the world of music.
Noting but the best for his fans.
He also takes wonderful care of his bandmates (Some have been with him for over 30 years).
And check this out. On his website, www.jamestaylor.com, he gives free video guitar lessons, so you can see how he does what he does.
3. Know That You Are Enough
The biggest takeaway for the night was the fact that JT is very, very, very comfy in his own skin.
Look, the show had some amazing back video playing but for the most part, the strength of the evening came from a man on a bench with his guitar.
No dancers.
No pyrotechnics.
He very clearly spoke his truth.
And, guess what?
It sounds like he’s speaking when he sings, doesn’t it?
Seriously. He’s speaking his truth to you.
He’s not being anyone he isn’t. And vocally, he understands that one can have lots of impact doing way less than one may think one needs to do.
If it comes from the heart and it’s real, you’re golden.
He rests in the knowledge that he’s enough.
Given his past, James could have easily been a tragic figure. But he found his voice and his place in the world.
His music has rested in my soul for decades, but his story was new to me–and I hope you have found some encouragement from it as well.
Here’s to you, Sweet Baby James…!
More Blog Articles
Nine Standard Practices To Get You Started FOREWORD: THE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT REALITY Let's face it: leadership development is a staple in every educational institution. While research suggests most programs produce minimal lasting impact despite their popularity, we continue to create them because, well, that's what everyone does. Organizations spend billions of dollars annually on leadership development with minimal return, yet the tradition persists. Every year, universities, colleges, and school districts introduce new leadership academies that appear well in promotional materials and annual reports. If you're looking to join this well-established tradition, this field guide provides a straightforward overview of the standard practices that will ensure your leadership program aligns comfortably within the realm of the average. THE AVERAGE LEADERSHIP ACADEMY EXPERIENCE: 9 STANDARD PRACTICES 1. Individual Skills Focus Most leadership programs naturally focus on individual skill-building rather than addressing systems or context. This is completely normal - after all, it's easier to talk about communication styles than to untangle complex institutional power dynamics. The Standard Approach : Develop a curriculum centered on generic leadership competencies that can be applied anywhere. Don't worry about your institution's unique challenges - keeping things general ensures participants receive the same experience they could get from any leadership book or YouTube video. 2. Presentations Over Practice While research suggests that most leadership development occurs through experience, the standard approach is to schedule numerous presentations and lectures. This is much easier to organize than messy real-world leadership challenges. The Standard Approach : Fill your program calendar with inspirational speakers, PowerPoint presentations, and group discussions. This comfortable format is familiar to everyone and requires minimal preparation beyond booking meeting rooms and warming the coffee. 3. Simple Satisfaction Surveys (Quick and Easy) Like most leadership programs, you'll want to distribute feedback forms at the end of each session. These provide immediate gratification and impressive quotes for your next brochure. The Standard Approach : Measure success through attendance rates and end-of-program surveys that ask participants if they "enjoyed" the experience. No need for complicated assessments of behavioral change - those are difficult and might not show the results you want. 4. Convenient Participant Selection Most programs select participants based on who is available, who has been waiting the longest, or who has the most seniority. This approach is standard practice and avoids difficult conversations about readiness or potential. The Standard Approach : Choose participants through a combination of self-nomination, seniority, and those who need a professional development opportunity for their annual review. This approach requires minimal effort and ensures a smooth workflow. 5. Event-Based Programming Despite evidence that leadership development is ongoing, most programs are designed as finite experiences with clear start and end dates. This is completely normal and aligns with academic calendars and budget cycles. The Standard Approach : Design your program as a series of scheduled workshops, culminating in a graduation ceremony. Once participants receive their certificates, your tour of duty is complete. 6. Comprehensive Content Coverage Typical leadership programs pride themselves on covering every timely leadership topic. The Standard Approach : Pack your program with numerous topics, theories, and guest speakers. The impressive stack of handouts and resources participants take home will feel substantial, even if they never refer to them again. 7. Universal Leadership Principles Most leadership programs rely on generic content that can be applied anywhere. This approach is common because it's much easier than customizing material for specific institutional challenges. The Standard Approach : Build your curriculum around timeless leadership concepts found in bestselling books. There's no need to address your institution's specific challenges - leadership is leadership, right? 8. Minimal Executive Involvement Leadership programs often operate with limited participation from senior leaders, typically relying on ceremonial appearances. This is normal - executives have many demands on their time. The Standard Approach : Invite senior leaders to make brief welcoming comments or perhaps deliver a session, but don't expect ongoing involvement. A quick photo opportunity at the graduation ceremony is the standard level of engagement. 9. Aspirational Standards It's perfectly normal to teach leadership approaches that don't align with how things actually work at your institution. Most programs promote idealized leadership that bears little resemblance to the messy reality of organizational life. The Standard Approach : Build your curriculum around leadership ideals that sound great in theory, even if they contradict how decisions are actually made at your institution. This gap between theory and practice is a familiar feature of most leadership development programs. THE ALTERNATIVE: BETTER PRACTICES OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT If you're actually interested in creating a leadership development initiative that delivers lasting impact, research suggests focusing on: Systems-Based Approaches that address organizational context alongside individual skills (Galli & Müller-Stewens, 2012) Experience-Driven Learning centered on real challenges rather than abstract concepts (McCall, 2010) Ongoing Development with coaching and application opportunities (Petrie, 2014) Meaningful Assessment that measures behavioral change and organizational impact (Avolio et al., 2010) Senior Leader Involvement that models and reinforces desired leadership behaviors (Gurdjian et al., 2014) A FINAL WORD: REAL LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT IS POSSIBLE We understand the challenges you face. Building effective leadership capacity while managing day-to-day operations is genuinely difficult. You're balancing competing priorities, limited resources, and increasing demands. Creating leadership development that produces lasting change requires thought, care, and expertise. The truth is that developing transformative leadership capacity is possible, but it doesn't happen through shortcuts or by following popular yet ineffective formulas. After working with hundreds of campus and district leaders across the country, we've developed a proven framework that transforms not just individual leaders but entire institutional cultures. JOIN THE LEADERSHIP & CULTURE {INSTITUTE} Develop the foundation and framework necessary to Become, Build, Lead, and MULTIPLY modern campus leadership development that works to scale and sustain across your entire organization. The Difference: Your people become YOUR GUIDES. Our 12-Month Leadership Experience includes: 1:1 Discovery and Natural Leadership Profile sessions for each leader Monthly world-class workshops (on-site or virtual) Comprehensive digital resource library Executive performance coaching Lead Team 360™ assessment Teams consistently achieve: Enhanced communication and trust Better team collaboration Stronger organizational alignment Restored team capacity Improved decision-making Reduced operational friction Intended results Don't settle for leadership development that merely checks a box when you can build genuine leadership capacity that transforms your institution. Ready to elevate your team's performance? Visit https://www.higherperformancegroup.com/lci to learn more about the LEADERSHIP & CULTURE {INSTITUTE}. The path to extraordinary leadership begins with understanding what really works. REFERENCES Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Quisenberry, D. (2010). Estimating return on leadership development investment. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(4), 633-644. Beer, M., Finnström, M., & Schrader, D. (2016). Why leadership training fails—and what to do about it. Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 50-57. Conger, J. A., & Benjamin, B. (1999). Building leaders: How successful companies develop the next generation. Jossey-Bass. Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63-82. DeRue, D. S., & Myers, C. G. (2014). Leadership development: A review and agenda for future research. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations (pp. 832-855). Oxford University Press. Galli, E. B., & Müller-Stewens, G. (2012). How to build social capital with leadership development: Lessons from an explorative case study of a multibusiness firm. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 176-201. Gurdjian, P., Halbeisen, T., & Lane, K. (2014). Why leadership-development programs fail. McKinsey Quarterly, 1(1), 121-126. Hess, E. D., & Ludwig, K. (2017). Humility is the new smart: Rethinking human excellence in the smart machine age. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations (6th ed.). Wiley. McCall, M. W. (2010). Recasting leadership development. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(1), 3-19. Petrie, N. (2014). Future trends in leadership development. Center for Creative Leadership.
The Case for the Dynamic Authority Model The most EFFECTIVE campus leadership flows to whoever has the most relevant expertise for the current challenge. Here's a truth that might challenge you: The Command and Control, Servant Leadership, and even Shared Governance models that built our educational institutions are failing us. Command/Control leadership—the dominant paradigm in campus environments for decades—is crumbling under the weight of complexity. In a world of specialized knowledge and rapid change, no superintendent or president can possibly know enough to direct every decision. Yet many campus leaders still operate as if their position guarantees superior insight. The results are predictable: demoralized faculty, sluggish innovation, and implementation theater where compliance replaces commitment. Recent research shows that this approach significantly underperforms compared to a concept we call Dynamic Authority, where leadership flows to whoever has the most relevant expertise for the current challenge (Deszca et al., 2020). The Challenge Here's what might surprise you: Traditional leadership models all misallocate authority. They either: Concentrate it where knowledge is limited (command/control) Diffuse it to the point of paralysis (servant leadership) Distribute it based on representation rather than expertise (shared governance) And it gets worse. Servant Leadership emerged as a well-intentioned correction. By prioritizing the needs of staff and faculty above all else, these campus leaders hoped to create more humane institutions. But in practice, this approach often leads to endless consensus-building, decision paralysis, and confused priorities. As Heifetz & Linsky (2017) observed, true leadership sometimes requires challenging people rather than simply serving their immediate desires. Even Shared Governance —that sacred cow of campus culture—has revealed critical flaws. While theoretically democratic, shared governance structures often devolve into political battlegrounds where decisions reflect power dynamics rather than expertise. Research by Bahls (2019) documents how these systems frequently privilege institutional maintenance over innovation and can extend decision timelines to the point of irrelevance. Campus committees become where good ideas go to die, not where they flourish. Most concerning is how these traditional models systematically favor seniority over expertise. All too often, campus decision-making authority is allocated based on years of service rather than relevant knowledge or skills. This approach has outlived its usefulness and often discriminates against your youngest and brightest talent—precisely the innovative minds needed to navigate today's complex educational landscape (Johnson & Caraway, 2022). Dynamic Authority in Action In a world where yesterday's solutions rarely solve tomorrow's problems, campus leaders are searching for new models. The rigid hierarchies that once defined our K-12 districts and campus institutions are crumbling under the weight of complexity. Here's the truth: expertise no longer follows the organizational chart. Navy SEALs discovered this decades ago. Their response? A system they coined, Dynamic Subordination. This leadership approach flips traditional models on their head. Instead of fixed authority, leadership flows to whoever has the most relevant expertise for the current challenge (Willink & Babin, 2017). The commander becomes the follower. The specialist becomes the leader. Then they switch again. It's leadership as a verb, not a noun. In educational settings, this is what we now call Dynamic Authority . Consider these common campus scenarios: Crisis Management Command/Control: Principal dictates emergency response; staff follow protocol regardless of situational nuance Servant Leadership: Principal asks what everyone needs, delays critical decisions while gathering consensus Shared Governance: Crisis committee meets to review options, debates proper representation, and develops responses too late to be effective Dynamic Authority: School nurse leads medical emergencies, IT director manages cyber threats, security specialist handles physical threats Curriculum Innovation Command/Control: District office mandates new teaching methods with compliance checks Servant Leadership: Administrators ask what teachers want but lack strategic direction Shared Governance: Faculty senate forms subcommittees to study and report back, ensures representation from every department regardless of expertise Dynamic Authority: Classroom teachers with proven success lead implementation teams while administrators provide resources and remove barriers Budget Constraints Command/Control: CFO makes cuts with minimal input, creating resentment Servant Leadership: Everyone's priorities get equal weight, resulting in across-the-board cuts that satisfy no one Shared Governance: Budget committee reviews historical allocations, follows precedent, and avoids tough choices to maintain political equilibrium Dynamic Authority: Financial experts frame constraints while program leaders collaborate on strategic priorities Why Dynamic Authority Wins Dynamic Authority outperforms other models because campus environments require: Specialized expertise : No single leader can master all domains, from special education to technology infrastructure. Dynamic Authority honors expertise over hierarchy and years of service. Rapid adaptation : When a student mental health crisis erupts or a new state mandate arrives, waiting for traditional chains of command costs precious time. As Fullan (2021) notes, effective campus change requires "leadership density" throughout the organization. Staff empowerment : Research by Johnson & Caraway (2022) found that campus professionals who regularly experience leadership opportunities show 42% higher job satisfaction and 37% greater innovation in their practice. Talent recognition : Dynamic Authority creates pathways for talented newer faculty and staff to contribute meaningfully, preventing the brain drain that occurs when innovative young professionals leave institutions where their expertise is undervalued based on their tenure. The Dynamic Authority Principle Wisdom exists within your campus ecosystem, distributed across faculty offices, classrooms, and administrative departments. Dynamic Authority simply acknowledges this reality. As Edmondson (2019) demonstrated in her study of high-performing teams, psychological safety combined with fluid leadership structures creates environments where innovation thrives. Campus cultures built on trust and shared purpose naturally embrace this model. Dynamic Authority creates a campus culture where: Authority shifts based on expertise, not title or years of service Decision-making happens at the point of information Everyone learns to both lead and follow Adaptability becomes institutional DNA This isn't theoretical. Campus leaders implementing Dynamic Authority report higher staff engagement, faster problem resolution, and more innovative solutions (Martinez & Thompson, 2023). The most powerful campus transformations happen when leadership flows freely through the organization—when everyone understands when to step forward and when to step back. What leadership transition will you begin first? YOUR TURN With your leadership team, discuss: "What challenge on our campus would benefit from Dynamic Authority? Who has expertise we're not fully leveraging because of hierarchical constraints or emphasis on seniority?" "Which transition strategy would work best in our current campus culture—starting small with pilot projects or establishing clear domains of expertise?" "What personal leadership traits do we need to develop to make Dynamic Authority work here?" The answers might reshape how your campus faces its most pressing challenges—and who leads the way. REFERENCES: Bahls, S. C. (2019). Shared governance in times of change: A practical guide for universities and colleges. AGB Press. Deszca, G., Ingols, C., & Cawsey, T. F. (2020). Organizational change: An action-oriented toolkit. SAGE Publications. Edmondson, A. C. (2019). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. John Wiley & Sons. Fullan, M. (2021). The right drivers for whole system success. Center for Strategic Education. Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2017). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of change. Harvard Business Press. Johnson, R., & Caraway, S. (2022). Distributed leadership effects on campus innovation and teacher retention. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(3), 412-438. Martinez, K., & Thompson, J. (2023). Adaptive leadership structures in higher education. Journal of Campus Leadership, 45(2), 118-134. Raelin, J. A. (2018). Creating leaderful organizations: How to bring out leadership in everyone. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Willink, J., & Babin, L. (2017). Extreme ownership: How U.S. Navy SEALs lead and win. St. Martin's Press.