I recently interviewed former NASA Administrator and Secretary of the Navy Sean O'Keefe on my podcast, Thirty Minute Mentors. Here is a transcript of our interview:

Adam: Our guest today has led at the highest levels in the world of government and education. Sean O'Keefe was the Secretary of the Navy, was the administrator of NASA and was the Chancellor of LSU. Sean, thank you for joining us.

Sean: Thanks very much. Adam, enjoy the opportunity to be with you.

Adam: You grew up all over including a number of different naval bases as your dad was an engineer in the Navy. You did your undergrad at Loyola University in New Orleans before going to grad school at Syracuse and kicking off your career as an early member of the Presidential Management intern program. Can you take listeners back to your early days? What early experiences and lessons shaped your worldview and shaped the trajectory of your success?

Sean: Well, I guess the having lived and grown up around the atmosphere that my dad created in the course of his career as a naval officer, every experience was measured by two-year increments before we were transferred to somewhere else. But it was an exciting, an opportunity. And what I realized from that after time and as a young adult later, was it developed a capability to be much more adaptive, flexible, and really not bothered by a change of condition in any place where I was living or working at the time. So the idea of changing and involving myself in something else, changing jobs, changing focus, whatever else, was a much more adaptive kind of experience because of that upbringing. My dad's dedication to his service in the Navy was one that impressed upon me the great value of public service and why that was such a critical undertaking. So the combination of those two experiences, men around him and learning from him all of the kinds of things that he dedicated himself to were both formative aspects of my upbringing.

Adam: When I think about what you just shared and when I think about what you've been able to accomplish over the course of your career, I think back to my time in college. I was a sophomore at USC and I was taking a political science class. I got a degree in business. I got a degree in political science. And the President of the University was Steven Sample, and he spoke to our class. He said that, in your lifetimes, you're going to have five to six different careers, not jobs, but careers. And I thought this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He might be a great university president, but I know exactly what I want to do with my life. I know exactly what my career is going to be. And by the time I was in my late 20s, I probably had five or six different careers. But his point was that what you need to learn at an early age is the ability to adapt to whatever career you're going to have next, the career that you might have in five years or in 10 years might not even exist today. And I want to know if you could share with listeners how you were able to rise within your career, how you were able to utilize that skill of being adaptive, being flexible, to get to the place that you are today.

Sean: Well, that experience that you describe is precisely what I was referring to. What samples are talking about is what I've lived and had the experience as a kid to really go through. And so every one of those career opportunities that I looked at and considered along the way, first, I wasn't fearful of the idea of moving or leaving what I knew was what I was presently doing. And it also motivated me to think that while I might not consider that I'm particularly qualified for any specific kind of job or another. Or somebody else must have thought that I was because that's why they were approaching me to say, would you consider doing this or doing that? And the willingness to kind of consider different paths that others may see some talent or attribute or whatever else that you have that you may not be just all that aware of, that fits that circumstance at that time, that makes you a uniquely or maybe better-qualified individual at that moment to be able to be in a position to work with, lead, whatever that organization is, what that insight tells you, and that's what I usually yielded to, and sometimes independent of what anybody else might think. There were a few jobs I was terribly interested in doing, and there were others that I was astonished anybody thought that I had any wording or the capability to do so, the combination of both of those was evidence.

Adam: What were the most important skills that you developed that allowed you to become so successful in all of these different avenues, and what skills do you believe everyone should develop as they think about rising in their careers?

Sean: I guess I was never deceived myself or convinced myself that I would be any better at someone else's position, and therefore it made it straightforward a proposition to feel comfortable in delegating certain responsibilities to those that did have those kinds of proficiencies, and so no one would ever have accused me during the course of my education, either in high school or in college or anywhere else, of being the smartest kid in the room. That was not one of the monikers that was ever going to be home on me. And no question that realizing that I was not going to be someone who could be better at a whole range of different things than anybody else could, made it a straightforward proposition of saying, if you've got individuals who were responsible for those roles, and they're in those capacities, those are the ones you delegate to until and unless they demonstrate an inability to produce. And so as a consequence, it is in any role I've ever been in. Never confused myself with anyone who had the ability to be the chief engineer, the Chief Scientist, the chief strategist, whatever, in dealing with any of those particular roles as you involve yourself in the kind of capacities that involve leading organizations more broadly.

Adam: It really comes down to self-awareness. Know thyself. If you're the smartest person in the room, you're either in the wrong room or you're the wrong person.

Sean: That's right. Well said. I mean, inevitably, it turns out they're really not. But at the same time, when you act like you've got the answer long before that's ever been delivered to you, that tends to motivate an absence of trust from individuals who are really in positions where they're trying to serve the cause of what that particular organization's involved in those roles, and if they get to the view that they think that you believe you've got a greater capacity to do that than they ever did, and that really erodes the creativity as well as trust that any individuals can have.

Adam: And Sean, the inverse of what you just shared is that when you display humility, you build trust,

Sean:  Indeed, and people are smart enough to figure out what is genuine and when it's not. I didn't have any difficulty demonstrating it was genuine because I really wasn't the smartest guy in the room. That was proven with regularity,

Adam: We've already ticked off a number of the most important characteristics of the most successful leaders, flexibility, adaptability, self-awareness, humility. What do you believe are the most important characteristics of the very best leaders? And what can anyone do to become a better leader?

Sean: Well, in addition to those, and I think you're absolutely right, that is a good compendium of many of the characteristics that make for good leaders and are extraordinary ones who actually can accomplish things. But I think chief among them all is. A very, very deep reserve of integrity. You have to have a reputation that you can be trusted, that people really do feel independent of whether they fully understand the logic of why some instruction or some direction or some strategy, is where you're heading in your leading of the organization, that in the end, even if they don't understand all the nuances of it, if they trust you, then it will work its way through. If they don't, there's almost no way that you're going to be able to recover this. There's no amount of expertise or demonstration of capability that is going to substitute for the trust that you earn over the course of time by doing what you say, as well as saying it and making sure that people really understand that you mean it when you do something. I think it's a critical feature of this which, in so many ways to the really terrible aspect of it is losing the integrity one time and you will never recover it. It is always going to be in the minds of people that independent of what your consistency was in demonstrating a sense of integrity and making decisions if there's evidence of the fact that there was an occasion in which it wasn't in evidence, or there was proven to be not in evidence, that's the part that will consistently hang with A as a reputational description for you, and that's something you can ill afford to ever have happened. So that's that's a question of honesty. It's a question of having the integrity to make a decision that is consistent with your principles, as well as based on what you know or what you believe you know are the facts of what drove you to those conclusions. That's a critical one. I think. In addition to that, is a sensitivity to the culture of the organization, understanding how the cultural values are made up that takes a little time to understand. You can't just walk in on day one and I have a grip on exactly what the culture of the organization is all about. It takes a little bit of time to begin to understand the variables that describe what that culture is all about, and then be mindful of it as you're working your way through it. That doesn't mean that you constantly make a decision that's only consistent with what the cultural values say within the organization, but you just need to be mindful of what those values are for the purposes of at least understanding how you can shape those decisions you move forward with and will be the highest probability of actual acceptance and implementation of those decisions once rendered, that's going to be in your own interest, as well as that of the organization.

Adam: Sean, you shared a couple of really, really interesting themes, and I want to dive into both of them, starting off with integrity. Are there examples that stand out as you're talking about the importance of integrity? Examples of great leaders that you've been around, where you have been inspired by them because they're leaders of integrity. On the flip side, leaders who you have been around where you've seen firsthand, up close and personal, lacking integrity have destroyed their ability to lead.

Sean: I guess, probably the most recognizable individual who folks would have some frame of reference to recognizing would be just the privilege I had of having served in the administration for George HW Bush, the elder George Bush, back in the late 80s and early 90s. I was in the Pentagon at that time, and he made some decisions that clearly were not in his best political advantage to have made but they nonetheless were very consistent with his own values, and I saw that on great regularity with the way he conducted himself. And some would argue that's maybe part of the reason why he didn't have a second term, right? It was a situation where he always acted with what he thought was the right thing to do, and could tell you precisely what those principles were that drove him to that decision. I mean, the decision to move promptly on the day of August 2nd, 1991 when Jose*14:59 decided it would be an awfully good idea to rename Kuwait Province 19 was something that was certainly not in the most immediate popular determination at that time, most folks would have had no idea where that was even happening, and yet he knew precisely that that was a condition that could not stand. And that's exactly what he said, exactly how that would play out, and what time it would take to actually mobilize an action plan to respond to that. That's what he took a lot of patience time and focus to do, to build a world coalition that made that a very successful effort overall. And when it was concluded, that's the point in which he said, that's it we're doing it. Let's withdraw, notwithstanding everybody saying you should go on to this or continue that or something else. No, the objectives were stated. They were achieved, and that did it. This was not to be a determination. So on every dimension of that kind of example, there were very unpopular things and very unpopular decisions he made that nonetheless, in retrospect, folks look at and say they were very consistent with his principle, and they were really demonstrations of the depth of the integrity he had to act in a manner in which that is a completely justifiable position from that point of view. And he's acting on it not because it's popular, but because he could justify it as the right thing to do, was a really profound example.

Adam: That's a great example. As soon as you brought up George H. W. Bush, I thought of a couple of different examples of actions that he took that were very much against his own immediate political interest, the first one being raising taxes. He might have lost the election just because of that. He didn't go into Baghdad. That was the popular thing to do, and history proved that that was the smart thing to do. So that was a great example.

Sean: No, exactly right. And those are the situations where he demonstrated, I thought, remarkable integrity. He was one of those leaders for that I had absolutely no question whatsoever, regardless of whether I understood the direction or not, what he was asking us to do was something completely consistent with his principles, and they were things that he would never ask for something that he wasn't prepared to do himself. I mean, it was a really extraordinary demonstration, I think, of broader leadership objectives, and with great humility, he was someone who also, despite the fact that he had such extraordinary talent, and there was never a hint of arrogance about him, which was amazing, and he had that rare politician's skill, that one on one, or just in a small group of whatever. He made you feel like that was the most important thing he was doing all day long, was listening to you, whether there was even a grade of truth in that or not. But he was really quite an extraordinary man, and I had a great admiration

Adam: You also brought up something really interesting, which is that leaders need to be sensitive to the culture of the organization that they're leading, and in the course of your career, you've led very, very different organizations with very, very different cultures, the Navy, NASA, LSU, what are the commonalities among leading all types of organizations, and what are the differences between leading very distinct organizations?

Sean: Well, first and foremost, I think it starts with a definition of leadership versus management and what definition you adhere to as a general principle in my mind, leading is about leading people, and you manage things, processes, functions, and so forth, is the management side of it. And when you start to confuse those two, that's when it gets you a little bit ambiguous in terms of how you respond to those cases, if you are constantly focusing on leading with the objective that it is a function of, how do you motivate people to move in a common direction or contribute in a way based on their skill set that advances some larger objective, some larger context, that's when you really maximize the value that everyone has to contribute to that. And that's part of what is really at the baseline of the question you're posing, as it pertains to the culture of the organization, everybody wants to feel like they're at least in a position where their role, that they have to contribute to something is important for the purpose of what that organization is around to even accomplish. And so starting with a proposition of motivating people to think about what is it that we do in this organization that is so uniquely different or so special that if we weren't here, it wouldn't be accomplished as well or as successfully, or in some cases, at all, relative to what the world needs or the community needs, or however you define the scope of the impact of what it is. Having everybody appreciate the fact that that's what you bring to this. It doesn't mandate that you know every single precise function of what it takes to accomplish that task, but that your role is critical for the purpose of achieving success and then defining what that success is with clarity. How do you know what it is that at the end you say that was successful? We did achieve what that objective was all about, and why this outcome is precisely what we're looking for. And if everybody begins to think about it, I've got a role in that. And here's what the end result is. And this is the piece of that equation that I'm responsible for. If everybody performs it to the highest level that you can do, you've just accomplished the task of mobilizing the talent that you have within the organization to a much higher level. That's what's special about leading in those situations, and it's independent of what the uniqueness is. Every organization, when you get down to it, at some level, believes that it's unique. Every collection of individuals thinks what they're doing is unique. So whether it was the Navy or NASA or a university setting like Louisiana State University or the one I'm in now at Syracuse, every one of them thinks that they're uniquely different things about what they do. And that's great. That's terrific. That's what helps us feel and think about we think to differentiate what it is we have to deliver relative to something else. 

Adam: I love the way that you broke down what a leader does. The job of a leader is to motivate people to move in a common direction toward a larger goal. How do you do that? By, number one, having a clear vision, and defining success. Number two, communicating that vision, making sure that everyone on your team understands where we're all trying to go. And number three, being able to communicate it in a way where every single person understands that not only is our mission extremely important, special, and unique, but their role is important, special, and unique. Their contribution is invaluable. Without them, where are we going to be? Every single person on your team, every single person in your organization, needs to understand what role they play and just how important that role is.

Sean: You bet. That's a great summary of precisely what the objective needs to be. One of the aspects I found that really is uniquely different about public service is that anything you do and everything you do, every single day, whether you acknowledge it or not, has some impact on someone or some combination of someone's. And if that matters to you, you're really going to be focused on the fact that decisions you make and things that you do are going to affect someone. And if you choose not to do anything at all, that's going to affect someone, that outcome is going to affect someone. And as a result, those are the aspects that if you're mindful of it, motivate you to begin to think about what are the consequences on people by what you're actually involved in, what you're engaged in, what you're trying to accomplish, and the result is going to be an impact on perhaps you, but also people you never will meet. And that really ought to be a daunting proposition of precisely what that's about and what the nature of that job is all about. And that's at every level. It was something that was easy to drive home in some organizations easier than others when you could say, this is exactly the conditions you're going to be doing if you fail to step up to this job, there's going to be a consequence, and there's going to be a result on someone. If you live with that, maybe seriously about the idea that you might be in a rough line of work here, doing this, unless you could deal with the weight of that responsibility going forward. That's what differentiated it. Again, I was privileged enough to have spent time in my life working at companies as well as universities and also being part of public service. But it's within the public service that that is really profound, and an element of that particular impact is clear in almost anything you do in any walk of life, and if you perceive it or pursue it that way, it's amazing how much different you think about what the outcome ought to be, and whether that really does illustrate and capture your best effort to achieve.

Adam: Can you take listeners back to your days leading in public service, leading as Secretary of the Navy and then leading NASA? You were the highest-ranking member of NASA. What were the best lessons that you learned from those two leadership experiences?

Sean: I found that in both of those operable jobs and frankly, in every leadership task in which you're in the position of being visibly associated with the organization being the personification, if you will, to a lot of folks, of what the organization's all about, that you be mindful of the fact that when there is success and when you have achieved a successful outcome, of what the strategy or the mission is all about that, all the people that are associated with that are the ones that should be identified, that ought to be part of that recognition, that everybody who had a piece to accomplish this goal, they be identified and recognizable as well, so everybody can realize the depth and scope and focus of how much this takes. Probably the most extraordinary guy at being able to articulate that in every condition that I ever met was Neil Armstrong. He was a fellow who never did accept an award for anything on his own merit. Always would say: No, no, no. The only reason why this was possible is the following people that all had something to do with that particular mission being successful. It was a really great demonstration of that characteristic, and that was true throughout his entire life. Now the converse is also true. When everything fails, there not only be one person standing there really manifesting to everyone accountability and an acceptance of responsibility for that action of that organization, of failing to achieve something, and that's got to be whoever's leading the organization. In this case, I had plenty of my share of standing there alone to say, yep, this was something that we failed to do right, or failed to do responsibly, or failed to do completely. And as a result, we learned a lot from that experience. We've got to be sure that we do the following things in order to never repeat that. But it's far more important. Now that doesn't mean you relieve anybody else of accountability. You deal with that separately, and you go through those particular decisions in a way that is not a public meeting out of that consequence of accountability. No, that's not the intention here, and that's usually what motivates people to be far more reserved about taking responsibility or stepping up to things is when they're concerned that they're going to be called out individually or exclusively as the person to be thrown into the volcano as a sacrifice to the public outcry for someone to be held accountable for it. No leadership's got to step up and do that, and then separately in a way that is not as visible and as public and as evident to the whole world, is something in which you're trying to make an example of someone. Really met out with those consequences of accountability ought to be if you were expected to do the following thing and failed to do so because you simply didn't bother and were not concentrating on the duty ad, those are the kind of things that are far more understandable to people than being held out as an example to do because that's essentially what the leadership's going to take the duty to do. We can all cite examples of lots of different leaders who ultimately were not part of the organization after some period of time, is they did take that responsibility. For every ship that ever went aground, the captain of the ship always walked away or was held accountable and therefore lost the opportunity to lead. But those kinds of examples are ones that demonstrate the absolute criticality of being mindful of the fact that if you spend a lot of the time really trying to meet out some visible sense or public sense of accountability for someone who is unknown to the public or anybody else who's really dealing within the community, the responsibilities of what's going on that will have a consequence over time, of people avoiding making decisions and simply stepping back and letting something happen that should never have occurred, and that's happened too.

Adam: Sean, you shared a lot of great stuff there. Leadership starts at the top, it stops at the top, leaders have to hold the people they're leading accountable. Leaders have to hold themselves accountable. Leaders have to take accountability, not throw people under the bus. I did an interview with Joe Maddon, one of the great leaders in baseball of our day, and one of the things he shared, is something that all of us, regardless of where we're leading, how we're leading, who we're leading, should take to heart in his career as a major league manager, he never called out any of the players who he managed in press conferences. If you want to hold your people accountable, which you have to do as a leader, the place to do it isn't at the press conference. The place to do it is in your office, behind closed doors, press conference is the place where you hold yourself accountable. You take accountability, take responsibility, and that aligns 100% with what you just shared.

Sean: That's exactly the approach. I mean, some of those closed-door discussions are unpleasant, but at the same time they're earnest, and people recognize that you're not trying to make some public example of it. It's about this incident, your behavior, your responsibility, your duty, whatever fits in the right category. That's where it belongs and where it ought to be sorted out.

Adam: Sean, how can leaders foster innovation?

Sean: Don't get wed to the way you're doing things right now. That's the first thing. If folks can look at something in the context of always being able to identify what is it about the way we're doing things right now that's designed to achieve an objective and then discard all those things and get you there. But look at the objective, look at the final result, and then ask the question a different way, which is, if I were starting from scratch, what are the things I would do to achieve this objective? What do I think I need in order to achieve that outcome? What are the talents, the material, the capacity, whatever it may be in order to achieve that task, that will then reveal an entirely different way of looking at how to achieve that outcome? And that is what motivates innovation faster than anything I don't like getting some particular result, even if it's different than the way it's achieved today, or at all, it could be that you're thinking about some outcome that you think is desirable, that isn't being enjoyed at this time. All of those motivate innovative changes and innovation to be introduced to the way things are done, simply because you're not wed to doing things exactly the way it's done right now, or discarding something because it's not possible to do based on any known procedure now. Instead, you're thinking about what's in the art of the possible and what's in the art of the imagination, letting your imagination be that which defines what the objective ought to be.

Adam: Sean, what can anyone listening to this conversation do to become more successful, personally and professionally?

Sean: Do the things that folks don't naturally step up and volunteer to do anybody in the organization sitting back saying, we really have to have this particular task done, be the first person in line to go do it. There are two great things about that. Number one is the expectations are low that you're going to be successful, because not a whole lot of folks were stepping up to do it, or that their expectation of you is going to be calibrated. Because, gee, you know what you know, but at least we've got someone who's willing to do that job. And when you're successful, people will remember it. They'll realize that the folks who are willing to step up and do what's necessary to make the functions of the organization work are the ones you value the most, and the ones you say, gosh, I can always count on so and so to do that, to be handy, to absolutely be in a mode of doing anything that's going to motivate you to learn something different, even if it's not something everybody else considers to be the most desirable thing in the world. It's much like the point you made at the very beginning of our conversation that the samples offer to you how you're going to do multiple things over the course of your life that have absolutely nothing to do with each other. That's important. Every one of those functions you learn is an experience. It's a new aspect of this, and it's something you can derive something from every step of the way, even if you're not ever duplicating that particular experience of what you achieved. It nonetheless, means you now know more about how that gets done, and you have a better appreciation for what it is you're asking someone else to do at some point. Down the road, when you're leading people in an organization dealing with it. It's part of that journey and the earliest phase of anyone's career. It's the opportunity to step up and volunteer to do just about anything that people require and believe needs to be done in order to move the process forward. You've just now added a visible sense of value to this, the condition that will be remembered and everybody will park in the back of their mind as there's somebody we can count on.

Adam: Sean, thank you for all the great advice, and thank you for being a part of Thirty Minute Mentors.

Sean: Thank you, sir. It's a great pleasure to be with you, Adam. Thank you.


Adam Mendler is an entrepreneur, writer, speaker, educator, and nationally-recognized authority on leadership. Adam is the creator and host of the business and leadership podcast Thirty Minute Mentors, where he goes one on one with America's most successful people - Fortune 500 CEOs, founders of household name companies, Hall of Fame and Olympic gold medal-winning athletes, political and military leaders - for intimate half-hour conversations each week. A top leadership speaker, Adam draws upon his insights building and leading businesses and interviewing hundreds of America's top leaders as a top keynote speaker to businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations. Adam has written extensively on leadership and related topics, having authored over 70 articles published in major media outlets including Forbes, Inc. and HuffPost, and has conducted more than 500 one on one interviews with America’s top leaders through his collective media projects. Adam teaches graduate-level courses on leadership at UCLA and is an advisor to numerous companies and leaders. A Los Angeles native, Adam is a lifelong Angels fan and an avid backgammon player.

Follow Adam on Instagram and Twitter at @adammendler and on LinkedIn and listen and subscribe to Thirty Minute Mentors on your favorite podcasting app.