In The 8th Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness, Stephen R. Covey adds a habit to the original seven described in his best seller, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Covey’s 8th habit is to determine your unique contribution and help others do the same. This is the habit of leadership. According to Covey, great leaders work on themselves first, making sure they’re balanced, well-rounded human beings before they try to influence others.
Covey, who died in 2012, was a business and leadership consultant and an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Most of Covey’s work reconfigures religious advice on meaningful, productive living for a secular audience. His most famous book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (1989), focused on the importance of character development in professional productivity, successfully merging the business and self-help genres. In First Things First (1994), he extended 7 Habits by providing more concrete advice on time management.
The 8th Habit, published in 2004, marked a shift in Covey’s focus from the individual level to the bigger picture of organizations and leadership. Covey argues that to meet the needs of modern staff in contemporary workplaces, leaders need to revolutionize the way they lead. Instead of focusing primarily on processes and products, the best leaders of the future will focus on individual people, and on helping them fulfill their potential by identifying their “voice”—their unique contributions—and sharing them with the world.
Covey’s concept of “voice” encompasses all parts of the human being (body, mind, heart, and spirit). He examines how to identify this unique contribution at several levels: as individuals (Part 1 of this guide); organizations (Part 2); and leaders, who serve as the bridge between individuals and organizations (Part 3).
To add historical context to his discussion of leadership and organizations, Covey steps back and examines the progress of human civilization to date. He states that we’ve advanced through four broad stages:
Moving between these stages has involved massive upheavals in how we understand the concept of work.
Ecological-Evolutionary Theory and Human Social Development
The classification system that Covey uses is based on the work of sociologist Gerhard Lenski, who began publishing on “ecological-evolutionary theory” in the 1960s. Lenski categorized human societies according to two factors: their environment, and their technological capabilities. His classification system listed seven types of societies: hunters and gatherers, horticulturalists, fishing societies, herding societies, maritime societies, agricultural societies, and industrial societies. While Lenski’s ideas are often used to argue that more complex societies are morally superior, this wasn’t his intention—rather, he argued that societies that develop new technologies quickly tend to outcompete societies that are slower to do this.
Covey refers to the transition points between these four stages as paradigm shifts. We use paradigms—sets of beliefs and attitudes that shape how we look at the world—to explain complex problems to ourselves and each other. For example, a key paradigm shift in astronomy was the Copernican Revolution—when scientists moved from a geocentric understanding of the solar system (Earth as the center of the universe) to a heliocentric one (the sun as the center).
(Shortform note: Philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn discussed paradigm shifts in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, popularizing the term. Kuhn pointed out that while paradigms help scientists solve certain kinds of problems, they also trap scientific thinking inside a particular framework, meaning that solutions to other problems remain out of reach. This also applies to Covey’s discussion of workplace and management paradigms.)
Each of the paradigm shifts between these four stages forced workers to discard outmoded beliefs and practices to make way for the new ideas of the incoming stage. People had to learn to deploy completely new skill sets, and those who didn’t were left behind. For example, at the beginning of the Information Age, many people who had previously spent their work day doing manual tasks found that they were now sitting in front of a computer and answering emails or manipulating spreadsheets.
(Shortform note: The shift between the Industrial and Information Ages was partly due to the increasing automation of manual tasks. While this shift led to large-scale job losses in manual labor, it also paved the way for the rise of the service economy and the increasing integration of products with services.)
Covey points out that many current management practices are hand-me-downs from the Industrial Age, when the goal was to be productive. Too many companies treat people as objects, slot them into rigid hierarchies, and squelch their natural leadership capabilities.
In the great cultural and material shift of the Information Age, we’re aiming for more than productivity alone: We’re pursuing greatness and personal meaning. We’re trying to create the conditions that will unlock our individual and collective brilliance.
(Shortform note: Author and business professor Gary Hamel says that while Industrial Age leaders were focused on the challenges of efficiency and scale, Information Age leaders need to prioritize innovation, adaptability, and resilience.)
According to Covey, we’re about to enter a fifth age: the Age of Wisdom, in which we’ll be primarily guided by our moral principles and our wish to serve others. Exercising the 8th habit is the key to entering the Age of Wisdom—as individuals, organizations, and leaders.
(Shortform note: Covey’s optimism about what will follow the Information Age isn’t shared by all commentators. Other authors have suggested that it’ll be the age of dealing with information overload, the Experience Age, or even the Age of Reckoning, in which we’ll finally have to solve all of the problems created by our behavior in the previous stages.)
Covey asserts that a change in leadership is the key to organizational success amid these paradigm shifts. He notes that management and leadership are distinct skills. Management, an Industrial Age skill, deals with objects; leadership, an Information Age skill, inspires people. Both management and leadership are crucial if an organization is to function well. But Covey sees most organizations today as suffering from a lack of leadership and an excess of management.
An important function of modern leadership is building and supporting strong teams: teams that are made up of people with complementary strengths. In strong teams, members willingly contribute from their strengths and actively compensate for the weaknesses of other team members. This is why Covey insists that great leaders must help others identify and use their unique contributions, as we’ll discuss in Part 3: The Leader.
Management vs. Leadership: Alternative Views
Covey sees the difference between management and leadership as focusing on things vs. people. Other authors also distinguish between management and leadership but use different criteria: For example, John Maxwell argues in 5 Levels of Leadership that management is maintaining the status quo, while leadership is creating change. CEO and author Vineet Nayar proposes three differences between leaders and managers: counting value vs. creating value (a manager supervises; a leader delegates), circles of power vs. circles of influence (a manager gives orders to direct reports; a leader gives advice to people who come to seek it), and managing work vs. leading people (echoing Covey’s key distinction).
In The Hard Thing About Hard Things, venture capital firm co-founder Ben Horowitz formulates a similar divide, but he frames it as distinguishing two different types of managers: “Ones,” who are big-picture, strategic thinkers (Covey’s leaders), and “Twos,” who are more focused on processes and goals (Covey’s managers). Horowitz suggests that all leaders are some combination of One and Two. In his opinion, the best CEOs are primarily Ones but have a healthy dose of “Two thinking” that keeps the organization from becoming chaotic.
Your voice, according to Covey, is your unique personal contribution. It’s the point where your gifts, your passion, and your moral compass overlap. Identifying and sharing this contribution is your chance to move from treading water to swimming strongly in your personal and professional life. Moving forward, we’ll refer to Covey’s idea of “voice” as “contribution.”
(Shortform note: Covey’s concept of “voice” echoes the Japanese concept of ikigai. Your ikigai, or life purpose, sits at the intersection of your talents, your passions, what the world needs, and what you can be paid to do.)
Covey comments that children contribute freely and confidently—they do what they love, they work together and share with others, and they speak up when they don’t like something. As we grow, however, oppressive or overly competitive systems at school (and later at work) squelch our individuality and stifle our expression.
(Shortform note: UK Educator Sir Ken Robinson dedicated much of his career to pointing out how standardized education systems kill children’s creativity. In his 2006 TED Talk on this topic, he argues that giving children diverse educational experiences helps them become more creative and well-rounded adults.)
Covey first explores how to apply the 8th habit on an individual level. He suggests that we replace old work paradigms with a “whole-person paradigm.” Under this paradigm, people aren’t only bodies (as in the Industrial Age) or only minds (as in the Information Age). Instead, they’re complete individuals with physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual needs. (Shortform note: Covey first introduced this way of thinking about human needs in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, which was published 15 years before The 8th Habit.)
Covey sees individuals as made up of four parts. Healthy people consciously develop the capacities of all four parts, and their contribution springs from the unique way in which they combine and express them. Each of the parts corresponds with a basic human need, as well as with a specific type of intelligence:
Covey says that developing self-control, focus, dedication, and integrity will transform you into an exceptional leader. Of all of these forms of intelligence, Covey sees integrity as the key: Integrity functions as your moral compass, determining the direction in which you’ll apply all of your other abilities.
Comparing Covey’s Model With Other Models of Human Needs and Intelligences
Covey’s model of the human being as consisting of mind, body, heart, and spirit (each of these with corresponding needs and intelligences) is likely drawn from his religious background. This model overlaps with well-known models of needs and intelligences in some ways and diverges from them in others:
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a broad-based triangle with five levels: physiological needs, need for safety, need for love and belonging, need for esteem, and need for self-actualization. Covey’s proposed needs for “survival” and “connection” are good matches with Maslow’s model, but his need for learning and the need to give back are grouped together in Maslow’s “self-actualization” category.
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences describes nine types of intelligence: verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial-visual, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist, and existential. Covey’s “conscience” and “passion” fit within Gardner’s conception of intrapersonal intelligence. However, for the others, Covey’s conception of human intelligence is more metaphorical than Gardner’s. Covey’s “discipline” refers to more than just the physical body, while his “vision” refers to a generalized problem-solving capability.
Next, Covey addresses how organizations can use the 8th habit to thrive. He sees organizations as consisting of four main components that align with the individual’s body, mind, heart, and spirit.
Covey maps his model of individual human beings onto organizations as follows:
By looking at each of these components separately, Covey says we can diagnose and treat many of the common problems that organizations face. For example, a lack of enthusiasm and emotional investment from employees is caused by neglecting the heart of the organization and can be remedied through empowering leadership (the role of The Advocate, below). The lack of a mission statement—or, conversely, having an overly idealistic or hollow mission statement—is caused by neglecting the mind of the organization and can be remedied by assuming the leadership role of The Navigator.
Alternate Metaphors for How Organizations Work
Covey’s human being metaphor for organizations isn’t an unusual approach—in fact, in many countries the law treats corporations as a kind of person.
However, a variety of metaphorical options are available. In Images of Organization, economist Gareth Morgan describes eight metaphors that we commonly use to talk about organizations: machine, organism, brain, cultural system, political system, psychic prison, instrument of domination, and flux and transformation. Each metaphor has different implications for how we understand leadership, organizational change, and our work inside organizations, so it’s important that we choose our words carefully.
For Covey, organizations are made up of one thing: relationships. He defines organizations as networks of relationships with a shared purpose. Strong, healthy relationships mean a strong, healthy organization.
You can strengthen relationships by applying the intelligences of your body, mind, heart, and spirit:
Together, these components foster trust. According to Covey, trust isn’t an individual quality—instead, he sees it as the nurturing environment needed for a relationship to flourish.
Additional Advice on Building Strong Relationships
Covey’s advice for strengthening relationships is fairly abstract. In practice, how can you build strong relationships day to day? In The Power of Moments, Chip and Dan Heath suggest that you strengthen your relationships by focusing on moments of connection with others. They offer the following three-step process:
Create a shared moment. Invite people with a shared goal to spend time together.
Allow for voluntary struggle. People who choose to experience hardship together form tighter bonds.
Reconnect with the meaning of the work. Show people how what they’re doing fits into the bigger picture.
The Heaths don’t mention trust, which is central for Covey, though he doesn’t go into great detail about what it means. In The Culture Map, business professor Erin Meyer fills in some of the gaps: Meyer explains that there are two basic types of trust, and that the type you prioritize at work depends on your culture.
In cultures in which trust is primarily task-based, such as Denmark and the United States, people who work competently and consistently are trustworthy. To build task-based trust, demonstrate to others that you’re efficient and professional. Leaders in these cultures should show that they care about their staff’s professional needs.
In cultures in which trust is relationship-based, such as Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, trustworthy people are those whom you’ve spent a lot of time with or know well. To build relationship-based trust, colleagues should spend time getting to know each other, while leaders should create opportunities for staff to spend time together socially.
Finally, Covey focuses on how the 8th habit applies to leaders, who serve as the bridge between individuals and organizations. According to Covey, leaders in the Age of Wisdom should focus on cultivating self-control, focus, dedication, and integrity within their organizations. Instead of issuing orders from above, they should encourage team members to develop these four intelligences within themselves, thereby nurturing the team members’ own unique contributions.
(Shortform note: This focus on self-work is typical of Covey, who espouses an approach to leadership based on character rather than personality. This approach has gained popularity since Covey’s death, with research increasingly focusing on “self-leadership” or “worthy leadership.” The Worthy Leadership model, for example, has three main facets: capacity, commitment, and character.)
To do this effectively, leaders also need to develop these qualities in themselves. Covey maps the four types of intelligence onto four different roles that a leader should be able to step into as needed: the Auditor, the Navigator, the Advocate, and the Captain. The relationships between the different layers of Covey’s model (parts of the human being, types of intelligence, key components of relationships, and leadership roles) are summarized below:
| Parts of the human being | Body | Mind | Heart | Spirit |
| Type of intelligence | Self-Control | Focus | Dedication | Integrity |
| Key components of relationships | Engagement | Independence | Selflessness | Honesty |
| Leadership roles | The Auditor | The Navigator | The Advocate | The Captain |