I have alluded in past blog entries to the dangers of an overly democratic approach to leadership. In other words, take the opinions of the many on board in your decision making, and the resulting business direction could be a very watered down facsimile of what it should be.

It’s about time, then, that I flipped the argument over then to consider the dangers of an overly autocratic approach.

Leaders who go it alone run a massive risk. The risk is that any gaps in their expertise or experience or any flaws in the personality intrude unhelpfully on the decision making process. Brilliant and compelling leaders can falter as they rally the troops marvelously to less than robust strategic plans.

Even the most expert of leaders therefore need what I will call a ‘leadership team’. This should comprise senior people who can fill in any gaps in the leader’s style and abilities.

Some strong-minded and strong-willed leaders might throw their hands up in horror at this, so I feel obliged to provide a very serious history lesson.

Who was Britain’s Chief of the Imperial General Staff (CIGS) during the Second World War? Winston Churchill? No… the CIGS was Alan Brooke (later, 1st Viscount Alanbrooke), foremost military advisor to Winston Churchill who was, of course, the Prime Minister and Minister of Defense.

Brooke was a counterweight to Churchill, whom he described as a ‘genius mixed with an astonishing lack of vision… quite the most difficult man to work with I have ever struck.’ He was one of the few to stand up to the formidable Prime Minister, one without whom the outcome of the war would have been quite different. Churchill acknowledged Brooke’s ability to resist him, once saying ‘When I thump the table and push my face towards him what does he do? Thumps the table harder and glares back at me.’

There are lots of strong leaders out there. I say to you that your strength could also be your company’s weakness. Make sure that your self-knowledge includes recognition of your fallibilities and there’s a good counterweight team around you—including those prepared to thump the table back!

Tags: alan brooke autocratic approach business direction chief of the imperial general staff cigs counterweight democratic approach gaps genius history lesson leadership team military advisor minister of defense prime minister second world war self knowledge strategic plans vision winston churchill
 

Our Leaders Aren’t Doing Their Job



Nearly every ‘happiness survey’ that comes out suggests that our parents and grandparents were much happier than we are.

Now I don’t know about you, but if someone is going to lead me I hope that the place I am being led to is better than the place I left.

So why isn’t it?

Well… we’re all so busy being productive at work, apparently, that we’ve got no time for our partners, our children, our communities or ourselves.

We’re all busy at work because we’ve been conditioned to think that our working lives define who we are, so they’re the most important thing. We’re also constantly conditioned to believe that we need to spend… it’s good for us and it’s good for the economy.

We’re bombarded with advertisements that suggest that our homes, cars, bodies, holidays, electronic goods and so on aren’t as good as they would be if we bought more product. And to buy more product we need to do more work.

Our constant demand for more product and the in-built obsolescence of what we buy puts pressure on the earth’s resources and the environment. The pressure it puts on us makes us unhappy and depressed.

I don’t want to be unhappy an depressed. And I don’t want my children to be either. Yet they’re already being conditioned to being good little consumers.

So here’s the challenge for our leaders:

How are we going to change all this?

How are we going to educate ourselves to aspire to a more meaningful values set?

How are we going to resolve the dissonance between company shareholders who expect year on year bigger and better profits and the pressures on people and the environment that this expectation presents?

Answers on a very large postcard please.

Tags: advertisements bp busy at work cars company shareholders consumers dissonance earth economy electronic goods expectation full responsibility happiness holidays job meaningful values obsolescence parents and grandparents postcard profits responsibility shareholders
 

This article was first published at Blogcritics

The word “leadership” is currently featuring ad nauseam in the UK media.

Because Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called an election.

Ever taken a time out to watch the weekly UK Prime Minister’s Questions? This gives both his own party and opposition members of parliament the opportunity to question the PM. The leader of the opposition gets to question at length.

There’s a lot of posturing and stage management. And there’s a lot of point scoring about leadership; everything is about the right leadership. The accusations come thick and fast:

“The PM cannot lead his political party.”
“The PM cannot lead the country.”

There are of course, parallels between this situation and corporate life. There are always dissenting grumbles that the CEO cannot lead his Board or senior managers, or that the CEO cannot lead his company.

What emerges from all of this? First, the PM—the CEO, the leader—cannot manage all the personalities and activity undertaken in his party or company. He or she will never win over all hearts and minds. There will always be dissent, and there will never be enough energy or hours in the day.

The trick is to devote your leadership energy to those who count… whose minds are open and who want to go in your direction. Others will follow or fall by the wayside. And the trick is to focus on the issues and initiatives that matter. Others will by nature resolve themselves or prove to be the non-issues that they actually are.

And the other trick is to be very thick-skinned. A thicker skin makes bigger winners. Looking at my weight I must have gotten that wrong one way or another.

It could—and probably will—be the thickest skin that wins the UK election because that person will be losing the least sleep over dissenting voices.

Tags: accusations ad nauseam ceo dissenting voices gordon brown hearts and minds leader of the opposition members of parliament opposition members parliament personalities prime minister gordon brown senior managers stage management thicker skin uk election
 

When growing up in Germany we had this running joke that you need a drivers license to drive a stroller.

Looking around more and more employers ask for certifications. Heck, let’s start at specialized schools that demand high school level entry test from everyone—including those that already have an associates or masters degree.

What’s the point?

As with too much bureaucracy too much regulation kills the innovation needed. Have we allowed politics to create a working environment that only supports those that can afford getting a certification?

Who are you going to hire: The certified inexperienced worker or …?

Does too much regulation lead to too much bureaucracy?

Tags: bureaucracy germany heck innovation job joke life experience masters degree regulation specialized schools stroller working environment
 

Fight innovation and progress—out of fear you lose something—not seeing that everyone loses a lot.

Would you agree?

Tags: bureaucracy fear innovation
 

Because they lead big businesses—meaning big tax revenue—one can find many of them involved in politics and influencing society. Not only does one find them in discussions with Senators, Secretaries and Presidents but also involved in games to play states, cities and counties to secure the best tax heaven and other advantages for their business.

Which raises the question:

Who is really running your state: The Governor or the CEOs of a handful of companies?

Tags: ceos games handful presidents secretaries senators tax heaven top executives
 

At least for the German charity SOS Kinderdorf . The German gamer website gamersunity offered the proceedings of banner advertising to SOS Kinderdorf. And got rejected.

Because games promote violence. (In German)

But so do many sports, TV shows, et cetera.

To mark all gamers as violent or promoting violence is just plain wrong and stupid. There, I said it!

Don’t get me wrong—I am neither in favor of violence nor war nor promoting either.

But the picture of the violent gamer that eats little children—as painted by media and politics in Germany—is idiotic.

Tags: banner advertising charity devil gamer games germany media media and politics politics in germany proceedings sos kinderdorf sports tv shows violence
 

US border station scraps sign that says “United States” because terrorists might attack it