OK, so context is important. But to focus on “everything” is to focus on nothing. Without some sort of filter to determine what’s significant, the world, to quote William James, is a “great, buzzing confusion.” Eventually you must decide which contextual elements are most important with respect to achieving your organization’s mission. So how to prioritize?

Well, the philosophy of science tells us that we have a couple of choices. We could start with some a priori assumptions about what makes for effective leadership. Approaching the problem this way means that you rigidly apply those Seven Habits or Six Sigma or One-Minute or Four-Hour principles to every situation, because those are the fixed principles you must accept as valid in every situation and for every leader.

So let’s say you apply those principles– if your organization succeeds,  it’s all good. But if it fails, well, it must be your colleagues’ fault for being uncooperative, or maybe they just haven’t tried long or hard enough—in fact, it might even be your own damned fault. But once you’ve gone down the road of making these assumptions, do you notice that it’s never the assumption’s fault? That’s the promise and the peril of this approach. A priori assumptions offer simple one-size-fits-all answers to the questions you face. They might satisfy momentarily, like a fish offered to you when you’re starving– but before long you’re hungry all over again.

There is another way– one that teaches you to fish.

Following the Degrees of Freedom means that you don’t start with an assumption about what works, but instead you start by observing the particulars of your situation and your own behavior carefully. If you know how to observe (and yes, I know this is a loaded premise, but bear with me), then the principles of what works in context emerges from those observations. Instead of a one-size-fits-all solution, paying close attention to context teaches you how to unlock the distinctive requirements of any situation you face.