I am just about to finish my second course in the master’s program in organizational leadership at Warner Pacific College and already I am learning concepts that I can directly apply to my business.

For example, in the subject of leading change, there is a model of change illustrated by the following graph:

Disconfirming data are challenges to “self-concepts,” or in my case, how I have defined my business and how I operate. When met with disconfirming data, I learned all too often I am in the Deny/Distort/Discount/Ignore circle instead of going between Enthusiasm/Engagement/Learning, Search for Alternatives, and Experiment circles.

In a couple of weeks, I start Financial Environments of Organizations, a seven-week course focused on topics such as “an overview of the general business environment, financial fundamentals, budgetary concept, project analysis, and assessing the financial well-being of the organization. It will also enable students to utilize financial data for strategic planning and decision-making.”

The Individual Project is most interesting and applicable:

Each student will be required to complete a comprehensive financial research assessment of his or her own company or another company in which he or she has considerable personal or professional stake. This research project will require the student to gain significant knowledge about the financial position and functions of his or her own company and how he or she has impact on it. The student will be required to research his or her company using internal and external information including the internet, personal interviews, financial statements or annual reports, and any other data collection method appropriate to the project. The student will then write a 10–20 page paper analyzing the organization including:

• An analysis of the current financial standing of the organization including information regarding how the organization’s financial situation is impacting its future planning
• A competitive and industry analysis
• A risk analysis for the organization
• An analysis of the current financial strategy of the organization, and how they allocate financial resources
• Recommendations for ways to improve the financial condition of the organization.

I’m looking forward to looking a little deeper at my business and how I can improve the financial standing of the work I do for others. It will be difficult, humbling, eye-opening, devastating, and completely necessary.

In a recent MSNBC.com article, ‘Sherlock’ sequel slips, but still tops box office, reporter David Germain writes that “Sherlock Holmes is facing his worst enemy: declining crowds at theaters as this year’s domestic movie attendance dips to the lowest in 16 years.”

This decline in audience is resulting in low box office numbers for the majority of Hollywood films as budgets continue to escalate and originality plummets. Reading between the lines, it is obvious: Hollywood is scared.

While several sources in the article point to marketplaces problems and the recession, all one needs to do is look at how much money Hollywood is pumping into Congress to get them to pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)—$91 Million or roughly the budget for Martin Scorsese’s film The Departed—to understand just what they are afraid of. They are afraid of the Internet and what it represents.

SOPA is focused on piracy because as one article suggests: Hollywood lost $6.1 billion in 2005 due to bootlegging and internet piracy (Piracy ‘costs US studios $6.1bn, BBC News). There is a great discussion on Quora about measuring the effects of piracy and it is worth a glance to see what the impact is. $6.1 billion is not a small number. If that is indeed a true measure of the effect of internet piracy and not an exaggerated number based upon greed and fear, then I can understand why Hollywood would want to fund SOPA.

However, I argue that the number one problem Hollywood is facing is not piracy, but originality. According to a moviefone.com blog post, 2011 set the all-time record for released sequels in a year: 27 (roughly one-fifth of world-wide releases)! Five of the Top 10 Box Office films are sequels, three of them are in the top three, and three join a franchise with at least four other films.

Much like the music industry losing the battle with the Internet in the late 90′s and early 2000′s, it’s time for Hollywood to remake their industry. Not out of greed and fear, but out of a love for the craft and for cinematic experiences. There are actors and directors working today that have embraced the power of the internet. They are funding independent projects, using their clout for the benefit of the trade, and creating an internet experience which embraces the love and passion needed for the survival of cinema.

What’s really the problem? A dying system holding onto it’s last straw.

What’s the solution? Fund the ultimate remake: The re-imagining of an experience which continues to morph and evolve thanks to the marvels of modern-day technology.

It’s time for Hollywood to adapt or die.

I am one month into the pursuit of my master’s degree in organizational leadership and already I am having the experience I was hoping for:  my mind is being blown, my thinking is being challenged, and the words of my friend Russell Mickler are making more sense after each class.

This week’s reading from Level Three Leadership:  Getting Below the Surface by James G. Clawson is all about the changing times and how these changes affect leadership.  As our society moves from bureaucracies centered around organizations and office-oriented power structures, to infocracies built upon information and individual power structured around people and their proximity to customers, leaders may find themselves swimming against a very strong current of change (Clawson, 2012).

What are leaders to do?

How will they adapt to the changing times?  Here is a thought from Clawson:

“The new leaders will be learners who are open to new ideas and who value change.  The new leaders will be trustworthy, respectworthy, and changeworthy.  They will value what others can do, and they will know how to highlight and build on those capabilities.  In the face of changes ahead, they will be clear on who they are and what they stand for” (pg. 50).

Building upon the idea of valuing change and new ideas, Clawson continues defining the new leaders of tomorrow:

“They will be designers and initiators, always looking for a better way, always willing to fix things that aren’t yet broken, but with a specific purpose in mind.  The new leaders will be and/also thinkers instead of either/or thinkers” (pg. 50).

Change is not easy.  It takes a lot of guts to look at your life or career and admit you are deficient in one or all areas.

For the past few years, my attitude regarding my work has led to burnout and boredom.  The overall excitement of discovering new possibilities was replaced with predictable and lack-luster work.  I stopped thinking there were new things to learn.  I became a stagnant and grumpy 32-year old man.  I thought I knew all of the answers, but eventually realized I didn’t know the questions.  I came face-to-face with my arrogance and finally understood the truth:  I don’t know everything.  I barely know anything.

This brings me to the very simple phrase I am learning to live by:  ”I’m not sure, but I’ll try to figure it out.”

As I am figuring things out, I have come across a few websites and videos that have completely blown me away and gotten me excited for the possibilities of change:

Address Is Approximate from The Theory on Vimeo.

What’s blowing your mind and getting you excited to change?