Many of you have probably run across the leadership lessons made public by Colin Powell. Powell does a great job of identifying 18 lessons he believe are important for leaders to learn. In short, they are:
Lesson 1: "Being responsible sometimes means pissing people off."
Lesson 2: "The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help them or concluded that you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership."
Lesson 3: "Don't be buffaloed by experts and elites. Experts often possess more data than judgment. Elites can become so inbred that they produce hemophiliacs who bleed to death as soon as they are nicked by the real world."
Lesson 4: "Don't be afraid to challenge the pros, even in their own backyard."
Lesson 5: "Never neglect details. When everyone's mind is dulled or distracted the leader must be doubly vigilant."
Lesson 6: "You don't know what you can get away with until you try."
Lesson 7: "Keep looking below surface appearances. Don't shrink from doing so (just) because you might not like what you find."
Lesson 8: "Organization doesn't really accomplish anything. Plans don't accomplish anything, either. Theories of management don't much matter. Endeavors succeed or fail because of the people involved. Only by attracting the best people will you accomplish great deeds."
Lesson 9: "Organization charts and fancy titles count for next to nothing."
Lesson 10: "Never let your ego get so close to your position that when your position goes, your ego goes with it."
Lesson 11: "Fit no stereotypes. Don't chase the latest management fads. The situation dictates which approach best accomplishes the team's mission."
Lesson 12: "Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier."
Lesson 13: "Powell's Rules for Picking People:" Look for intelligence and judgment, and most critically, a capacity to anticipate, to see around corners. Also look for loyalty, integrity, a high energy drive, a balanced ego, and the drive to get things done.
Lesson 14: "Great leaders are almost always great simplifiers, who can cut through argument, debate and doubt, to offer a solution everybody can understand."
Lesson 15:
Part I: "Use the formula P=40 to 70, in which P stands for the probability of success and the numbers indicate the percentage of information acquired."
Part II: "Once the information is in the 40 to 70 range, go with your gut."
Lesson 16: "The commander in the field is always right and the rear echelon is wrong, unless proved otherwise."
Lesson 17: "Have fun in your command. Don't always run at a breakneck pace. Take leave when you've earned it: Spend time with your families. Corollary: surround yourself with people who take their work seriously, but not themselves, those who work hard and play hard."
Lesson 18: "Command is lonely."
For further details on each one of these, go to: http://home.att.net/~coachthee/Archives/Colin_Powell_on_Leadership.html
Monday, April 30, 2007
The Way of the General, Essay on Leadership and Crisis Management
The Way of the General
Essay on Leadership and Crisis Management
Authored by Zhuge Liang (Kongming)Translated by Thomas Cleary
( Return to Translator’s Introduction )
The Authority of the Military LeadershipMilitary authority, directing the armed forces, is the matter of the authoritative power of the leading general.
If the general can hold the authority of the military and operate its power, he oversees his subordinates like a fierce tiger with wings, flying over the four seas, going into action whenever there is an encounter.If the general loses his authority and cannot control the power, he is like a dragon cast into a lake, he may seek the freedom of the high sea, but how can he get there?
Chasing EvilsThere are five types of harm in decadence among national armed forces. First is the formation of factions that band together for character assassination, criticizing an vilifying the wise and the good. Second is luxury is uniforms. Third is wild tales and confabulations about the supernatural.Fourth is judgment based on private views, mobilizing groups for personal reasons.Fifth is making secret alliances with enemies, watching for where the advantage may lie.
All people like this are treacherous and immoral. You should distance yourself from them and not associate with them.
Knowing PeopleNothing is harder to see into people’s natures. Though good and bad are different, their conditions and appearances are not always uniform.There are some people who are nice enough but steal.Some people are outwardly respectful while inwardly making fools of everyone.Some people are brave on the outside yet cowardly on the inside.Some people do their best but are not loyal.Hard though it be to know people, there are ways.
First is to question them concerning right and wrong, to observe their ideas.Second is to exhaust all their arguments, to see how they change.Third is to consult with them about strategy, to see how perceptive they are.Fourth is to announce that there is trouble, to see how brave they are.Sixth is to present them with the prospect of gain, to see how modest they are.Seventh is to give them a task to do within a specific time, to see how trustworthy they are.
Types of GeneralsThere are nine types of generals.
Those who guide with virtue, who treat all equally with courtesy, who know when the troops are cold and hungry, and who notice when they are weary and pained, are called humanistic generals.
Those who do not try to avoid any task, who are not influenced by profit, who would die with honor before living in disgrace, are called dutiful generals.Those who are not arrogant because of their high status, who do not make much of their victories, who are wise but can humble themselves, who are strong but can be tolerant, are called courteous generals.
Those whose extraordinary shifts are unfathomable, whose movements and responses are multifaceted, who turn disaster into fortune and seize victory from the jaws of danger, are called clever generals.
Those who give rich rewards for going ahead and have strict penalties for retreating, whose rewards are given right away and whose penalties are the same for all ranks, even the highest, are called trustworthy generals.
Those who go on foot or on a warhorse, with the mettle to take on a hundred men, who are skilled in the use of close-range weapons, swords, and spears are called infantry generals.
Those who face the dizzying heights and cross the dangerous defiles, who can shoot at a gallop as if in flight, who are in the vanguard when advancing and in the rear guard when withdrawing, are called cavalry generals.
Those who mettle makes the armies tremble and whose determination makes light of powerful enemies, who are hesitant to engage in petty fights while courageous in the midst of major battles, are called fierce generals.
Those who consider themselves lacking when they see the wise, who go along with good advice like following a current, who are magnanimous yet able to be firm, who are uncomplicated yet have many strategies, are called great generals.
Capacities of CommandersThe capacities of commanders are not the same; some are greater, some are lesser.
One who spies out treachery and disaster, who wins the allegiance of others, is the leader of ten men.
One who rises early in the morning and retires late at night, and whose words are discreet yet perceptive, is the leader of a hundred men.
One who is direct yet circumspect, who is brave and can fight, is the leader of a thousand men.
One of martial bearing and fierceness of heart, who knows the hardships of others and spares people from hunger and cold, is the leader of ten thousand men.
One who associates with the wise and promotes the able, who is careful of how he spends each day, who is sincere, trustworthy, and magnanimous, and who is guarded in times of order as well as times of disturbance, is the leader of a hundred thousand men.
One whose humanitarian care extends to all under his command, whose trustworthiness and justice win the allegiance of neighboring nations, who understands the signs of the sky above, the patterns of the earth below, and the affairs of humanity in between, and who regards all people as his family, is a world-class leader, one who cannot be opposed.
Decadence in GeneralsThere are eight kinds of decadence in generalship.First is to be insatiably greedy.Second is to be jealous and envious of the wise and able.Third is to believe slanders and make friends with the treacherous.Fourth is to assess others without assessing oneself.Fifth is to be hesitant and indecisive.Sixth is to be heavily addicted to wine and sex.Seventh is to be a malicious liar with a cowardly heart.Eighth is to talk wildly, without courtesy.
Loyalty in Generals“Weapons are instruments of ill omen”; generalship is a dangerous job. Therefore if one is inflexible there will be breakdowns, and when the job is important there will be danger.
This is why a good general does not rely or presume on strength or power. He is not pleased by favor and does not fear vilification. He does not crave whatever material goods he sees, and he does not rape whatever women he can. His only intention is to pursue the best interest of the country.
Skills of GeneralsThere are five skills and four desires involved in generalship.
The five skills are:1. Skill in knowing the disposition and power of enemies,2. Skill in knowing the ways to advance and withdraw,3. Skill in knowing how empty or how full countries are,4. Skill in knowing nature’s timing and human affairs,5. And skill in knowing the features of terrain.
The four desires are:1. Desire for the extraordinary and unexpected in strategy,2. Desire for thoroughness in security,3. Desire for calm among the masses,4. And desire for unity of hearts and minds.
Arrogance in GeneralsGenerals should not be arrogant, for if they are arrogant they will become discourteous, and if they are discourteous people will become alienated from them. When people are alienated, they become rebellious.
General should not be stingy, for if they are stingy they will not reward the trustworthy, and if they do not reward the trustworthy, the soldiers will not be dedicated., the armed forces are ineffective, and if the armed forces are ineffective, the nation is empty. When the nation is empty, its opponents are full.
Confucius said, “People may have the finest talents, but if they are arrogant and stingy, their others qualities are not worthy of consideration.”
Military PreparednessMilitary preparedness is the greatest task of the nation. A small mistake can make a huge difference. When the force of momentum by which soldiers are killed and generals are captured can move with sudden rapidity, should we not be wary?
Therefore when a nation is in trouble, the ruler and ministers urgently work on strategy, selecting the wise and assessing the able to delegate responsibility to them.
If you count on safety and do not think of danger, if you do not know enough to be wary when enemies arrive, this is called a sparrow nesting on a tent, a fish swimming in a cauldron - they won’t last the day.
Traditions say, “Without preparation, military operation are unfeasible.”
“Preparedness against the unexpected is a way of good government.”
“Even bees have venom - how much the more do nations. If you are unprepared, even if there are many of you, mere numbers cannot be counted on.”
A classic document says, “Only when we do our tasks are we prepared; when we are prepared, there is no trouble.”
Therefore the action of the military forces must have preparation.
TrainingSoldiers without training cannot stand up to one out of a hundred opponents, yet they are sent out against a hundred each. This is why Confucius said, “To send people to war without teaching them is called abandoning them." It is also said, "Teach the people for the seven year, and they too can go to war.”
Therefore soldiers must be taught with out fail. First train them in conduct and duty, teach them to be loyal and trustworthy, instruct them in rules and penalties, awe them with rewards and punishments. When people know enough to follow along, then train them in maneuvers.
One person can teach ten, ten people can teach a hundred, a hundred people can teach a thousand, a thousand can teach ten thousand, thus developing the armed forces. Train like this, and opponents will surely lose.
Corruption in the Armed ForcesIn military operation it may happen the scouts are not careful of their signal fires or there may be mistakes in calculation and consequent delays, infractions of rules, failure to respond to the time and situation, disorder in the ranks, callous and unreasonable demand made by superiors on their subordinates, pursuit of self-interest, lack of concern for the hungry and cool, tall tales and fortune telling, rabble rousing, confusing the officers, refusal of the mettlesome to submit to authority, contempt of superiors, or using supplies for personal enjoyment. These things corrupt the armed forces. When they are present, there is certain to be defeat.
Loyal HeartsThose who would be military leaders must have loyal hearts, eyes and ears, claws and fangs. Without people loyal to them, they are like someone walking at night, not knowing where to step. Without eyes and ears, they are as though in the dark, not knowing how to proceed. Without claws and fangs, they are like hungry men eating poisoned food, inevitably to die.
Therefore good generals always have intelligent and learned associates for their advisors, thoughtful and careful associates for their eyes and ears, brave and formidable associates for their claws and fangs.
Careful WatchingThe loss of an army is always caused by underestimating an opponent and thus bringing on disaster. Therefore an army goes out in an orderly manner. If order is lost, that bodes ill.
There are fifteen avenues of order:1. Thoughtfulness, using secret agents for intelligence.2. Organization, gathering news and watching carefully.3. Courage, not being disturbed by the number of the enemy.4. Modesty, thinking of justice and duty when seeing the opportunity for gain.5. Impartiality, being egalitarian in matters of rewards and punishments.6. Forbearance, being able to bear humiliation.7. Magnanimity, being able to accept the masses.8. Trustworthiness, so that there can be serious cooperation.9. Respect, honoring the wise and able.10. Clarity of mind, not listening to slander.11. Reason, not forgetting past experience.12. Human kindness, taking care of the soldiers.13. Loyalty, devoting oneself to the nation.14. Moderation, knowing to stop when you have enough of anything.15. Planning, assessing yourself first, and then assessing others.
Formation of OpportunityTo overcome the intelligent by folly is contrary to the natural order of things; to overcome the foolish by intelligence is in accord with the natural order. To overcome the intelligent by intelligence, however, is a matter of opportunity
There are three avenues of opportunity: events, trends, and conditions. When opportunities occur through events but you are unable to respond, you are not smart. When opportunities become active through a trend and yet you cannot make plans, you are not wise. When opportunities emerge through conditions but you cannot act on them, you are not bold.
Those skilled in generalship always achieve their victories by taking advantage of opportunities.
Good GeneralshipGood generals of ancient times had some overall principles:1. Show people when to proceed and when to withdraw, and people will learn regulation.2. Array them on the lines rightly and justly, and people will be orderly.3. Show respect for them by your judgment, and people will be enthusiastic.4. Motivate them with rewards and penalties, and people will be trusting.Regulation, order, enthusiasm, and trust are the overall principles of generals, by which they are able to ensure victory in battle.
The mediocre are not like this: they cannot stop their troops when they retreat, they cannot control their troops when they advance, they mix up good and bad, the soldiers are not given instruction and encouragement, rewards and punishments are not fair. Because people are not trusting, the wise and the good withdraw, while flatterers are promoted. Such an army will therefore inevitably be defeated in war.
Discerning BasesIf you attack evils based on social trends, no one can rival you in dignity. If you settle victory based on the power of the people, no one can rival you in achievement.
If you can accurately discern these bases of action, and add dignity and faith to them, you can take on the most formidable opponent and prevail over the most valiant adversary.
Victory and DefeatWhen the wise and talented are in the higher positions and undesirables are in low positions, the armed forces are happy. When the soldiers are scared, if they talk to each other of valiant combat, look to each other on by rewards and penalties, these are signs of certain victory.
When the armies have been shaken up several times, if the soldiers become lazy, insubordinate, untrustworthy, and unruly, if they scare each other with talk about the enemy, if they talk to each other about booty, make hints to each other of disaster and fortune, or confuse each other with weir talk, these are signs of certain defeat.
Using AuthorityPeople’s lives depend on generals, as do success and failure, calamity and fortune, so if the rulership does not give them the power to reward and punish, this is like tying up a monkey and trying to make it cavort around, or like gluing someone’s eyes shut and asking him to distinguish colors.
If rewards are up to powerful civilians and punishments do not come from the generals, people will seek personal profit - then who will have any interest in fighting? Even with superlative strategy and performance, self-defense would be impossible under these circumstances.
Therefore Sun Tzu the Martialist said, “When a general is in the field, there are some orders he doesn’t accept from the civilian ruler.” It is also said, “In the army, you hear the orders of the generals, you don’t hear about command from the emperor.”
Grieving for the DeadGood general of ancient times took care of their people as one might take care of a beloved child. When there was difficulty they would face it first themselves, and when something was achieved they would defer to others. They would tearfully console the wounded and sorrowfully mourn the dead. They would sacrifice themselves to feed the hungry and remove their own garments to clothe the cold. They honored the wise and provided for their living; they rewarded and encouraged the brave. If generals can be like this, they can take over anywhere they go.
AlliesTo operate, the armed forces need allies as consultants and assistants to the leadership.
Everyone looks up to those who are thoughtful and have unusual strategies beyond the ordinary ken, who are widely learned and have broad vision, and who have many skills and great talents. Such people can be made top allies.
Those who are fierce, swift, firm, and sharp are heroes of an age. Such people can be made second-ranked allies.
Those who talk a lot but not always to the point, who are slight in ability, with little that is extraordinary, are people with ordinary capabilities. They can be brought along as the lower class of allies.
ResponsivenessWhen you plan for difficulty in times of ease, when you do the great while it is still small, when you use rewards first and penalties later, this is refinement in use of the military.
When the troops are already on the battlefield, the cavalries are charging each other, the catapults have been set in position, and the infantries meet at close range, if you can use awesome authoritativeness to convey a sense of trust such that opponents surrender, this is ability in use of the military.
If you plunge into a half of arrows and rocks, facing off in a contest for victory, with winning and losing distinct, if your adversary is wounded but you die, this is inferiority in use of the military.
Taking OpportunitiesThe art of certain victory, the mode of harmonizing with charges, is a matter of opportunity. Who but the perspicacious can deal with it? And of all avenues of seeing opportunity, none is greater than the unexpected.
Assessing AbilitiesThose who employed warriors skillfully in ancient times assessed their abilities in order to calculate the prospects of victory or defeat:Who has the wise ruler?Who has the more intelligent generals?Who has the more able officers?Whose food supplies are most abundant?Whose soldiers are better trained?Whose legions are more orderly?Whose warhorses are swifter?Whose formation and situation are more dangerous?Whose clients and allies are smarter?Whose neighbors are more frightened?Whose has more food and money?Whose citizenry is calmer?When consider matters along these lines, structural strengths and weaknesses can be determined.
Facilitating BattleA scorpion will sting because it has poison; a soldier can be brave when he can rely on his equipment. Therefore when their weapons are sharp and their armor is strong, people will readily do battle. If armor is not strong, it is the same as baring one’s shoulders. if a bow cannot shoot far, it is the same as a close-range weapon. If a shot cannot hit the mark, it is the same as having no weapon. If a scout is not careful, it is the same as having no eyes. If a general is not brave in battle, it is the same as having no military leadership.
Striking PowerSkilled warriors of ancient times first found out the condition of their enemies and then made plans to deal with them. There is no doubt of success when you strike enemies under the following conditions:Their fighting forces are stale.Their supplies are exhausted.Their populace is full of sorrow and bitterness.Many people are physically ill.They do not plan ahead.Their equipment is in disrepair.Their soldiers are not trained.Reinforcement does not show up.Night falls when they still have a long way to go.Their soldiers are worn out.Their generals are contemptuous and their officers are inconsiderate.They neglect to make preparations.They do not form battle lines as they advance.When they do form battle lines, they are not stable.They are disorderly when they travel over rough terrain.There is discord between commanders and soldiers.They become arrogant when they win a battle.There is disorder in the ranks when they move their battle lines.The soldiers are tired and prone to upset.The army is supplied, but the people do not eat.Each man moves on his own - some go ahead, some lag behind.When opponents have the following qualities, however, withdraw and avoid them:Superiors are considerate and subordinates are obedient.Rewards are sure and punishments certain.The forces are set out in an orderly fashion.They give responsibility to the wise and employ the able.The army is courteous and mannerly.Their armor is strong and their weapons keen.They have plenty of supplies and equipment.Their government and education are substantial.They are on good terms with all of their neighbors.They are backed by great nations.
Psychological ConfigurationsSome generals are brave and think lightly of death. Some are hasty and impulsive. Some are greedy and materialistic. Some are humane but lack endurance. Some are intelligent but timid. Some are intelligent but easygoing at heart
Those who are brave and think lightly of death are vulnerable to assault. Those who are hasty and impulsive are vulnerable to delay. Those who are greedy and materialistic are vulnerable to loss. Those who are humane but lack endurance are vulnerable to fatigue. Those who are intelligent but timid are vulnerable to pressure. Those who are intelligent but easygoing are vulnerable to sudden attack
Orderly TroopsIn military operations, order leads to victory. If rewards and penalties are unclear, if rules and regulations are unreliable, and if signals are not followed, even if you have an army of a million strong it is of no practical benefit.
An orderly army is one that is mannerly and dignified, one that cannot be withstood when it advances and cannot be pursued when it withdraws. Its movements are regulated and directed; this gives it security and presents no danger. The troops can be massed but not scattered, can be deployed but not worn out.
Inspiring SoldiersHonor them with titles, present them with goods, and soldiers willingly come join you. Treat them courteously, inspire them with speeches, and soldiers willingly die. Give them nourishment and rest so that they do not become weary, make the code of rules uniform, and soldiers willingly obey. Lead them into battle personally, and soldiers will be brave. Record even a little good, reward even a little merit, and soldiers will be encouraged.
Self-exertionSages follow the rules of heaven; the wise obey the laws of earth; the intelligent follow precedent. Harm comes to the arrogant; calamity visits the proud. Few people trust those who talk too much; few people feel indebted to the self-serving. Rewarding the unworthy causes alienation; punishing the innocent causes resentment. Those whose appreciation or anger are unpredictable perish.
Harmonizing PeopleHarmonizing people is essential in military operations. When people are in harmony, they will fight on their own initiative, without exhortation. If the officers and the soldiers are suspicious of one another, them warriors will not join up. If no heed is paid to the strategies of loyal, the small-minded people will backbite. When the sprouts of hypocrisy arise, even if you have the wisdom of the great warrior-kings of old, you will not be able to prevail over an ordinary man, much less a whole group of them. Therefore tradition says, “A military operation is like fire; if it is not stopped, it burns itself out.”
The Condition of a GeneralAccording to the code of generalship, generals do not say they are thirsty before the soldiers have drawn from the well; generals do not say they are hungry before the soldiers’ food is cooked; generals do not say they are cold before the soldiers’ fire are kindled; generals do not say they are hot before the soldiers’ canopies are drawn. Generals do not use fans in summer, do not wear leather (or fur) in winter, do not use umbrella in the rain. They do as everyone does.
Order and DisorderWhen a nation is perilous and disordered, and the people are not secure in their homes, this is because the ruler has made the mistake of neglecting to find wise people
When the wise are disaffected, a nation is in peril; when the wise are employed, a nation is secure. When offices are chosen for persons, there is disorder; when persons are chosen for offices, there is order.
Observant GovernmentAn observant and perceptive government is one that looks at subtle phenomena and listens to small voices. When phenomena are subtle they are not seen, and when voices are small they are not heard; therefore an enlightened leader looks closely at the subtle and listens for the importance of the small voice.
This harmonizes the outside with the inside, and harmonizes the inside with the outside; so the Way of government involves the effort to see and hear much.
Thus when you are alert to what the people in the lower echelons have to say, and take it into consideration, so that your plan include the rank and file, then all people are your eyes and a multitude of voices helps your ears. This is the reason for the classic saying, “A sage has no constant mind - the people are the sage’s mind.”
Rulers and MinistersFor rulers, generosity to subordinates is benevolence; for ministers, service of the government is duty. No one should serve the government with duplicity; ministers should not be given dubious policies.
When both superiors and subordinates are given to courtesy, then the people are easy to employ. When superiors and subordinates are in harmony, then the Way of rulers and ministers is fulfilled: rulers employ their ministers courteously, while ministers work for the rulers loyally; rulers plan the government policies, while ministers plan their implantation.
Knowledgeable RuleRulers are considered knowledgeable according to how much they have seen, and are considered capable according to how much they have heard.
Everyone knows the saying that an intelligent ruler is constant through the day and night, discharging the affairs of office by day and attending to personal matters at night. Yet there may be grievances that do not get a hearing, and there may be loyal people promoting good who are not trusted.
If grievances are not heard, the best cannot be straightened. If promotion of good is not accepted, the loyal are not trusted and the treacherous enter with their schemes.
This is the meaning of the proverb in the ancient “Classic of Documents”: “Heaven sees through the seeing of my people, heaven hears through the hearing of my people.”
Not KnowingConfucius said that an enlightened ruler does not worry about people not knowing him, he worries about not knowing people. He worries not about outsiders not knowing insiders, but about insiders not knowing outsiders. He worries not about subordinates not knowing superiors, but about superiors not knowing subordinates. He worries not about the lower classes not knowing the upper classes, but about the upper classes not knowing the lower classes.
AdjudicationWhen rulers adjudicate criminal cases and execute punishments, they worry that they may be unclear. The innocent may be punished while the guilty may be released. The powerful may arrogate to themselves alone the right to speak, while the powerless may have their rights infringed upon by those who bear grudges against them. Honesty may be distorted; those who are wronged may not get a chance to express themselves. The trustworthy may be suspected; the loyal may be attacked. These are all perversions, problems causing disaster and violence, aberrations causing calamity and chaos.
Disturbance and SecurityIt is said that when official are severe in everything, no one knows where it will end. If they feed off the people so severely that people are hungry and impoverished, this produces disturbances and rebellion.
Encourage people in productive work, don’t deprive them of their time. Lighten their taxes, don’t exhaust their resources. In this way the country is made wealthy and families secure.
AppointmentsThe official policy of making appointments should be to promote the upright and place them over the crooked. Governing a country is like governing the body,. The way to govern the body is to nurture the spirit; the way to govern a country is to promote the wise. Life is sought by nurturing the spirit; stability is sought by promoting the wise.So public servants are to a nation as pillars are to a house; the pillars should not be slender; public servants should not be weak. When the pillars are slender the house collapses; when the public servants are weak the nation crumbles. Therefore the way to govern a nation is to promote the upright over the crooked; then the nation is secure.
Pillars of StateFor strong pillars you need straight trees; for wise public servants you need upright people. Straight trees are found in remote forests; upright people come from the humble masses. Therefore when rulers are going to make appointments they need to look in obscure places.
Sometimes there are disenfranchised people with something of value in them; sometimes there are people with extraordinary talent who go unrecognized. Sometimes there are paragons of virtue who are not promoted by their hometown; sometimes there are people who live in obscurity on purpose.
Sometimes there are people who are dutiful and righteous for purely philosophical or religious reasons. Sometimes there are loyal people who are straightforward with rulers but are slandered by cliques. Ancient kings are known to have hired unknowns and nobodies, finding in them the human qualities whereby they were able to bring peace.
Evaluation and DismissalThe official policy of evaluation and dismissal should be to promote the good and dismiss the bad. An enlightened leadership is aware of good and bad throughout the realm. not daring to overlook even minor officials and commoners, employing the wise and good, and dismissing the greedy and weak-minded.
With enlightened leadership and good citizens, projects get accomplished, the nation is orderly, and the wise gather like rain; this is the way to promote the good and dismiss the bad, setting forth what is acceptable and what is blameworthy. Therefore a policy of evaluation and dismissal means effort to know what hurts the people.
What Hurts the PeopleThere are five things that hurt the people:1. There are local officials who use public office for personal benefit, taking improper advantage of their authority, holding weapons in one hand and people’s livelihood in the other, corrupting their offices, and bleeding the people.2. There are cases where serious offenses are given light penalties; there is inequality before the law, and the innocents are subjected to punishment, even execution. Sometimes serious crimes are pardoned, the strong are supported, and the weak are oppressed. Harsh penalties are applied, unjustly torturing people to get at facts.3. Sometimes there are officials who condone crime and vice, punishing those who protest against this, cutting off the avenue of appeal and hiding the truth, plundering and ruining lives, unjust and arbitrary.4. Sometimes there are senior officials who repeatedly change department heads so as to monopolize the government administration, favoring their friends and relatives while treating those they dislike with unjust harshness, oppressive in their actions, prejudiced and unruly. They also use taxation to reap profit, enriching themselves and their families by exactions and fraud.5. Sometimes local officials extensively tailor awards and fines, welfare projects, and general expenditures, arbitrarily determining prices and measures, with the result that people lose their jobs.These five things are harmful to the people, and anyone who does any of these should be dismissed from the office.
Military Actions“Weapon are instruments of ill omen, to be used only when it is unavoidable.” The proper course of military action is to establish strategy first, and then carry it out. Monitor the environment, observe the minds of the masses, practice the use of military equipment, clarity the principles of reward and punishment, watch the schemes of enemies, note the perils of the roads, distinguish safe and dangerous places, find out the conditions of the parties involves, and recognize when to proceed and when to withdraw. Follow the timing of opportunities, set up preparations for defense, strengthen your striking power, improve the abilities of your soldiers, map out decisive strategies, and consider life and death issues. Only after doing appointing military leaders and extending the power to capture enemies. This is the overall scheme of things in military matters.
Rewards and PenaltiesA policy of rewards and penalties means rewarding the good and penalizing wrongdoers. Rewarding the good is to promote achievement; penalizing wrongdoers is to prevent treachery.
It is imperative that rewards and punishments be fair and impartial. When they know rewards are to be given, courageous warriors know what they are dying for; when they know penalties are to be applied, villains know what to fear.
Therefore, rewards should not be given without reason, and penalties should not be applied arbitrary. If rewards are given for no reason, those who have worked hard in public service will be resentful; if penalties are applied arbitrary, upright people will be bitter.
Clarity and ConsistencyGenerals hold authority over life and death. If they allow those who should live to be killed, or allow those who should be killed to live, or if they get angry without discernible reason, or their punishments and rewards are not clear, or commands are inconsistent, or they carry their private over into public life, this is dangerous for the nation.
If their punishment and rewards are not clear, their directives will not always be followed. If they allow those who should be killed to live, treachery will not be prevented. If they allow those who should live to be killed, soldiers will defect. If they get angry without discernible reason, their authority will not be effective. If their rewards and punishments are not clear, the lower echelons will not be encouraged to achieve. If politics are inappropriate, orders will not be obeyed. If private affairs are carried over into public life, people will be of two minds.
If treachery is not prevented, it is impossible to last long. If soldiers defect, the ranks will be decimated. If authority is ineffective, the troops will not rise up in the face of the enemy. If the lower echelons are not encouraged to achieve, the upper echelons have no strong support. If orders are not obeyed, affairs will be chaotic. If people are of two minds, the country will be in danger.
Pleasure and DispleasureDispleasure should not lead you to harm people who have done no wrong; pleasure should not lead you to go along with those who deserve to be executed.
Pleasure should not induce you to forgive those who have done wrong; displeasure should not induce you to execute the innocent.
Pleasure and displeasure should not be arbitrary; personal prejudices ignore worthy people. A general should not start a battle out of personal displeasure; it is imperative to go by the collective will. If he does go into battle because of personal displeasure, it will certainly result in defeat.
Culture and the MilitaryCulture takes precedence; the military comes after. If you put victory first, you will surely get beaten later; if you start out with anger, you will surely regret it later. One day’s anger can destroy your whole life. Therefore a superior man is stern but not ferocious; he may get angry, but not furious; he may worry, but does not fear; he may rejoice, but not overjoyed.
OrganizationA policy to quell disorder involves minimizing offices and combining duties, getting rid of embellishment in favor of substance.
First organize directives, then organize penalties. First organize the near at hand, then organize the far removed. First organize the inner, then organize the outer. First organize the basic, then organize the derivative. First organize the strong, then organize the weak. First organize the great, then organize the small. First organize yourself, then organize others.
Instruction and DirectionA policy of instruction and direction means those above educate those below, not saying anything that is unlawful and not doing anything that is immoral, for what is done by those above is observed by those below.
To indulge oneself yet instruct others is contrary to proper government; to correct oneself and then teach others is in accord with proper government. Therefore true leaders first rectify themselves and only after that do they promulgate their directives. If they are not upright themselves, their directives will not be followed, resulting in disorder.
Therefore the Way of leadership puts education and direction before punishment. To send people to war without education is tantamount to throwing them away.
Thought and ConsiderationA policy of thought and consideration means giving thought to what is near at hand and considering what is remote. As it is said, “If people do not consider what is remote, they will have trouble near at hand.” Therefore “educated people think without leaving their positions.” Thinking means correct strategy, consideration mean thinking of plans for eventualities. One is not to plan policy when it is not one’s place to do so, or consider the scheme of things that are none of one’s business.
Major affairs arise in difficulty, minor affairs arise in ease. Therefore if you want to think of the advantages in a situation, it is imperative to consider the harm; if you want to think about success, it is imperative to consider failure.
Danger arises in safety, destruction arises in survival. Harm arises in advantage, chaos arises in order. Enlightened people know the obvious when they see the subtle, know the end when they see the beginning; thus there is no way for disaster to happen. This is due to thoughtful consideration.
Strength in GeneralsGenerals have five strengths and eight evils.The five strengths are: noble behavior that can inspire the common people, social virtues that can elevate their reputations, trustworthiness and dutifulness in personal relationships, universal love encompassing all the people, and powerful action to succeed in their tasks.
The eight evils are: inability to assess right and wrong when formulating strategy, inability to delegate authority to the wise and the goods in times of order, inability to mete out just punishments for incidents of disorder, inability to help the poor in times of plenty, insufficient intelligence to guard against threats before they have taken shape, insufficient thought to prevent subtle dangers, inability to express what is known intuitively, and inability to avoid criticism in defeat.
Sending out the Armed ForcesIn ancient times, when a nation was in trouble, the ruler would select a wise man and have hime fast for three days in quiet seclusion before going to the gate of the national shrine, where he would stand facing south. He then took a high courtier to present a ceremonial axe to the ruler, who in turn would pass it by the handle to the general, saying:“The military leadership settles matters outside the borders,” and also directing him in these terms:“Where you see the enemy to be empty, proceed; where you see the enemy to be full, stop.“Do not look down on others because of your elevated rank.“Do not oppose the common consensus with personal opinions.“Do not turn from the loyal and trustworthy through the artifices of the skilled but treacherous.“Do not sit down before the soldiers sit; do not eat before the soldiers eat.“Bear the same cold and heat the soldiers do; share their toil as well as their case.“Experience sweetness and bitterness just as the soldiers do; take the same risks that they do.“Then the soldiers will exert themselves to the utmost, and it will be possible to destroy enemies.”Having accepted these words, the general led the armed forces out through the city’s gate of ill omen.The ruler, seeing the general off, knelt and said, “Advance and retreat are a matter of timing - military affairs are not directed by the ruler but by the general.” Therefore “There is no heaven above, no earth below, no adversary ahead, and no ruler behind.” Thus the intelligent think because of this; the mettlesome fight because of this.”
Selection on AbilitiesIn military action, there are men who like to fight and enjoy battle, single-handedly taking on powerful opponents; gather them into one squad and call them “the warriors who repay the nation.
There are mettlesome men with ability and strength, courage and speed; gather them into a squad and call them “the warriors who crash the battle lines.”
There are those who are light of foot, good walkers and runners; gather them into a squad called “the warriors who capture the flag.”There are those who can shoot on horseback, swift as flight, hitting the mark every times; gather them into one squad and call them “the galloping warriors.”
There are archers whose aim is accurate and deadly; gather them into one squad and call them "the warriors of the fighting edge.”
There are those who can shoot heavy crossbows and catapults accurately at great distances; gather them into one squad and call them “the warriors who crush the enemy’s edge.”
These six kinds of skilled warriors should be employed according to their particular skills.
The Use of KnowledgeGeneralship requires one to follow nature, depend on timing, and rely on people in order to achieve victory.
Therefore, if nature works but the timing doesn’t work, and yet people act, this is called opposing the time.
If the timing works but nature isn’t cooperating, and still people act, this is called opposing nature.
If timing and nature both work, but people do not act, this is called opposing people.
Those who know do not oppose nature, do not know oppose the time, and do not know oppose people.
Not Setting Up Battle LinesIn ancient times, those who governed well did not arm, and those who were armed well did not set up battle lines. Those who set up battle lines well did not fight, those who fought well did not lose, and those who lost well did not perish.
The government of the sages of old was such that people were comfortable in their homes and enjoyed their works, living to old age without ever attacking one another. “Those who govern well do not arm.”
When King Shun (reigned 2255-2207 BCE) organized rules and penalties for wrongdoing, he accordingly created knights, or warriors. But people did not violate the rules, and no penalties were enforced. “Those who arm well do not set up battle lines.”
Later, King Yu (reigned 2205-2197 BCE) made a punitive expedition against the Miao tribes, but all he did was demonstrate the martial art and culture arts, and the Miao people became more civilized. “Those who set up battle lines well do not fight.”
King Tang (reigned 1766-1753 BCE) and King Wu (reigned 1766-1753 BCE) and King Wu (reigned 1134-1115) pledged armies for one military operation, by which the whole land was decisively pacified. “Those who fight well do not lose.”
When King Zhao and Chu (reigned 515-488) ran into the disaster, he fled to Qin for help and ultimately was able to get his kingdom back. “Those who lose well do not perish.”
Sincerity in GeneralsAn ancient document says: “Those who are contemptuous of cultured people have no way to win people’s hearts completely; those who are contemptuous of common people have no way to get people to work as hard as they can.”
For military operations it is essential to strive to win the hearts of heroes, to make the rules of rewards and punishments strict, to include both cultural and martial arts, and to combine both hard and soft techniques.
Enjoy the amenities and music; familiarize yourself with poetry and prose. Put humanity and justice before wit and bravery.
In stillness be as quiet as a fish in the deep, in action be as swift as an otter. Dissolve enemies’ collusion; break down their strengths. Dazzle people with your banners; alert people with cymbals and drums.
Withdraw like a mountain in movement, advance like a rainstorm. Strike and crush with shattering force; go into battle like a tiger.
Press enemies and contain them; lure and entice them. Confuse them and seize them; be humble to make them proud. Be familiar yet distant; weaken them by lending strength.
Give security to those in danger; gladden those in fear. If people oppose you, take what they say to heart; if people have grudges, let them express themselves.
Restrain the strong, sustain the weak. Get to know those with plans; cover up any slander. When there is booty, distribute it.
Do not count on your strength and take an opponent lightly. Do not be conceited about your abilities and think little of subordinates.
Do not let personal favor congeal into authority.
Plan before acting. Fight only when you know you can win.
Do not keep the spoils of war for your own possession and use.
If generals can be like this, people will be willing to fight when they give the orders, and the enemy will be defeated before any blood is shed.
( Return to Translator’s Introduction )
Authored by Zhuge Liang (Kongming)Translation Copyright © Thomas Cleary
Essay on Leadership and Crisis Management
Authored by Zhuge Liang (Kongming)Translated by Thomas Cleary
( Return to Translator’s Introduction )
The Authority of the Military LeadershipMilitary authority, directing the armed forces, is the matter of the authoritative power of the leading general.
If the general can hold the authority of the military and operate its power, he oversees his subordinates like a fierce tiger with wings, flying over the four seas, going into action whenever there is an encounter.If the general loses his authority and cannot control the power, he is like a dragon cast into a lake, he may seek the freedom of the high sea, but how can he get there?
Chasing EvilsThere are five types of harm in decadence among national armed forces. First is the formation of factions that band together for character assassination, criticizing an vilifying the wise and the good. Second is luxury is uniforms. Third is wild tales and confabulations about the supernatural.Fourth is judgment based on private views, mobilizing groups for personal reasons.Fifth is making secret alliances with enemies, watching for where the advantage may lie.
All people like this are treacherous and immoral. You should distance yourself from them and not associate with them.
Knowing PeopleNothing is harder to see into people’s natures. Though good and bad are different, their conditions and appearances are not always uniform.There are some people who are nice enough but steal.Some people are outwardly respectful while inwardly making fools of everyone.Some people are brave on the outside yet cowardly on the inside.Some people do their best but are not loyal.Hard though it be to know people, there are ways.
First is to question them concerning right and wrong, to observe their ideas.Second is to exhaust all their arguments, to see how they change.Third is to consult with them about strategy, to see how perceptive they are.Fourth is to announce that there is trouble, to see how brave they are.Sixth is to present them with the prospect of gain, to see how modest they are.Seventh is to give them a task to do within a specific time, to see how trustworthy they are.
Types of GeneralsThere are nine types of generals.
Those who guide with virtue, who treat all equally with courtesy, who know when the troops are cold and hungry, and who notice when they are weary and pained, are called humanistic generals.
Those who do not try to avoid any task, who are not influenced by profit, who would die with honor before living in disgrace, are called dutiful generals.Those who are not arrogant because of their high status, who do not make much of their victories, who are wise but can humble themselves, who are strong but can be tolerant, are called courteous generals.
Those whose extraordinary shifts are unfathomable, whose movements and responses are multifaceted, who turn disaster into fortune and seize victory from the jaws of danger, are called clever generals.
Those who give rich rewards for going ahead and have strict penalties for retreating, whose rewards are given right away and whose penalties are the same for all ranks, even the highest, are called trustworthy generals.
Those who go on foot or on a warhorse, with the mettle to take on a hundred men, who are skilled in the use of close-range weapons, swords, and spears are called infantry generals.
Those who face the dizzying heights and cross the dangerous defiles, who can shoot at a gallop as if in flight, who are in the vanguard when advancing and in the rear guard when withdrawing, are called cavalry generals.
Those who mettle makes the armies tremble and whose determination makes light of powerful enemies, who are hesitant to engage in petty fights while courageous in the midst of major battles, are called fierce generals.
Those who consider themselves lacking when they see the wise, who go along with good advice like following a current, who are magnanimous yet able to be firm, who are uncomplicated yet have many strategies, are called great generals.
Capacities of CommandersThe capacities of commanders are not the same; some are greater, some are lesser.
One who spies out treachery and disaster, who wins the allegiance of others, is the leader of ten men.
One who rises early in the morning and retires late at night, and whose words are discreet yet perceptive, is the leader of a hundred men.
One who is direct yet circumspect, who is brave and can fight, is the leader of a thousand men.
One of martial bearing and fierceness of heart, who knows the hardships of others and spares people from hunger and cold, is the leader of ten thousand men.
One who associates with the wise and promotes the able, who is careful of how he spends each day, who is sincere, trustworthy, and magnanimous, and who is guarded in times of order as well as times of disturbance, is the leader of a hundred thousand men.
One whose humanitarian care extends to all under his command, whose trustworthiness and justice win the allegiance of neighboring nations, who understands the signs of the sky above, the patterns of the earth below, and the affairs of humanity in between, and who regards all people as his family, is a world-class leader, one who cannot be opposed.
Decadence in GeneralsThere are eight kinds of decadence in generalship.First is to be insatiably greedy.Second is to be jealous and envious of the wise and able.Third is to believe slanders and make friends with the treacherous.Fourth is to assess others without assessing oneself.Fifth is to be hesitant and indecisive.Sixth is to be heavily addicted to wine and sex.Seventh is to be a malicious liar with a cowardly heart.Eighth is to talk wildly, without courtesy.
Loyalty in Generals“Weapons are instruments of ill omen”; generalship is a dangerous job. Therefore if one is inflexible there will be breakdowns, and when the job is important there will be danger.
This is why a good general does not rely or presume on strength or power. He is not pleased by favor and does not fear vilification. He does not crave whatever material goods he sees, and he does not rape whatever women he can. His only intention is to pursue the best interest of the country.
Skills of GeneralsThere are five skills and four desires involved in generalship.
The five skills are:1. Skill in knowing the disposition and power of enemies,2. Skill in knowing the ways to advance and withdraw,3. Skill in knowing how empty or how full countries are,4. Skill in knowing nature’s timing and human affairs,5. And skill in knowing the features of terrain.
The four desires are:1. Desire for the extraordinary and unexpected in strategy,2. Desire for thoroughness in security,3. Desire for calm among the masses,4. And desire for unity of hearts and minds.
Arrogance in GeneralsGenerals should not be arrogant, for if they are arrogant they will become discourteous, and if they are discourteous people will become alienated from them. When people are alienated, they become rebellious.
General should not be stingy, for if they are stingy they will not reward the trustworthy, and if they do not reward the trustworthy, the soldiers will not be dedicated., the armed forces are ineffective, and if the armed forces are ineffective, the nation is empty. When the nation is empty, its opponents are full.
Confucius said, “People may have the finest talents, but if they are arrogant and stingy, their others qualities are not worthy of consideration.”
Military PreparednessMilitary preparedness is the greatest task of the nation. A small mistake can make a huge difference. When the force of momentum by which soldiers are killed and generals are captured can move with sudden rapidity, should we not be wary?
Therefore when a nation is in trouble, the ruler and ministers urgently work on strategy, selecting the wise and assessing the able to delegate responsibility to them.
If you count on safety and do not think of danger, if you do not know enough to be wary when enemies arrive, this is called a sparrow nesting on a tent, a fish swimming in a cauldron - they won’t last the day.
Traditions say, “Without preparation, military operation are unfeasible.”
“Preparedness against the unexpected is a way of good government.”
“Even bees have venom - how much the more do nations. If you are unprepared, even if there are many of you, mere numbers cannot be counted on.”
A classic document says, “Only when we do our tasks are we prepared; when we are prepared, there is no trouble.”
Therefore the action of the military forces must have preparation.
TrainingSoldiers without training cannot stand up to one out of a hundred opponents, yet they are sent out against a hundred each. This is why Confucius said, “To send people to war without teaching them is called abandoning them." It is also said, "Teach the people for the seven year, and they too can go to war.”
Therefore soldiers must be taught with out fail. First train them in conduct and duty, teach them to be loyal and trustworthy, instruct them in rules and penalties, awe them with rewards and punishments. When people know enough to follow along, then train them in maneuvers.
One person can teach ten, ten people can teach a hundred, a hundred people can teach a thousand, a thousand can teach ten thousand, thus developing the armed forces. Train like this, and opponents will surely lose.
Corruption in the Armed ForcesIn military operation it may happen the scouts are not careful of their signal fires or there may be mistakes in calculation and consequent delays, infractions of rules, failure to respond to the time and situation, disorder in the ranks, callous and unreasonable demand made by superiors on their subordinates, pursuit of self-interest, lack of concern for the hungry and cool, tall tales and fortune telling, rabble rousing, confusing the officers, refusal of the mettlesome to submit to authority, contempt of superiors, or using supplies for personal enjoyment. These things corrupt the armed forces. When they are present, there is certain to be defeat.
Loyal HeartsThose who would be military leaders must have loyal hearts, eyes and ears, claws and fangs. Without people loyal to them, they are like someone walking at night, not knowing where to step. Without eyes and ears, they are as though in the dark, not knowing how to proceed. Without claws and fangs, they are like hungry men eating poisoned food, inevitably to die.
Therefore good generals always have intelligent and learned associates for their advisors, thoughtful and careful associates for their eyes and ears, brave and formidable associates for their claws and fangs.
Careful WatchingThe loss of an army is always caused by underestimating an opponent and thus bringing on disaster. Therefore an army goes out in an orderly manner. If order is lost, that bodes ill.
There are fifteen avenues of order:1. Thoughtfulness, using secret agents for intelligence.2. Organization, gathering news and watching carefully.3. Courage, not being disturbed by the number of the enemy.4. Modesty, thinking of justice and duty when seeing the opportunity for gain.5. Impartiality, being egalitarian in matters of rewards and punishments.6. Forbearance, being able to bear humiliation.7. Magnanimity, being able to accept the masses.8. Trustworthiness, so that there can be serious cooperation.9. Respect, honoring the wise and able.10. Clarity of mind, not listening to slander.11. Reason, not forgetting past experience.12. Human kindness, taking care of the soldiers.13. Loyalty, devoting oneself to the nation.14. Moderation, knowing to stop when you have enough of anything.15. Planning, assessing yourself first, and then assessing others.
Formation of OpportunityTo overcome the intelligent by folly is contrary to the natural order of things; to overcome the foolish by intelligence is in accord with the natural order. To overcome the intelligent by intelligence, however, is a matter of opportunity
There are three avenues of opportunity: events, trends, and conditions. When opportunities occur through events but you are unable to respond, you are not smart. When opportunities become active through a trend and yet you cannot make plans, you are not wise. When opportunities emerge through conditions but you cannot act on them, you are not bold.
Those skilled in generalship always achieve their victories by taking advantage of opportunities.
Good GeneralshipGood generals of ancient times had some overall principles:1. Show people when to proceed and when to withdraw, and people will learn regulation.2. Array them on the lines rightly and justly, and people will be orderly.3. Show respect for them by your judgment, and people will be enthusiastic.4. Motivate them with rewards and penalties, and people will be trusting.Regulation, order, enthusiasm, and trust are the overall principles of generals, by which they are able to ensure victory in battle.
The mediocre are not like this: they cannot stop their troops when they retreat, they cannot control their troops when they advance, they mix up good and bad, the soldiers are not given instruction and encouragement, rewards and punishments are not fair. Because people are not trusting, the wise and the good withdraw, while flatterers are promoted. Such an army will therefore inevitably be defeated in war.
Discerning BasesIf you attack evils based on social trends, no one can rival you in dignity. If you settle victory based on the power of the people, no one can rival you in achievement.
If you can accurately discern these bases of action, and add dignity and faith to them, you can take on the most formidable opponent and prevail over the most valiant adversary.
Victory and DefeatWhen the wise and talented are in the higher positions and undesirables are in low positions, the armed forces are happy. When the soldiers are scared, if they talk to each other of valiant combat, look to each other on by rewards and penalties, these are signs of certain victory.
When the armies have been shaken up several times, if the soldiers become lazy, insubordinate, untrustworthy, and unruly, if they scare each other with talk about the enemy, if they talk to each other about booty, make hints to each other of disaster and fortune, or confuse each other with weir talk, these are signs of certain defeat.
Using AuthorityPeople’s lives depend on generals, as do success and failure, calamity and fortune, so if the rulership does not give them the power to reward and punish, this is like tying up a monkey and trying to make it cavort around, or like gluing someone’s eyes shut and asking him to distinguish colors.
If rewards are up to powerful civilians and punishments do not come from the generals, people will seek personal profit - then who will have any interest in fighting? Even with superlative strategy and performance, self-defense would be impossible under these circumstances.
Therefore Sun Tzu the Martialist said, “When a general is in the field, there are some orders he doesn’t accept from the civilian ruler.” It is also said, “In the army, you hear the orders of the generals, you don’t hear about command from the emperor.”
Grieving for the DeadGood general of ancient times took care of their people as one might take care of a beloved child. When there was difficulty they would face it first themselves, and when something was achieved they would defer to others. They would tearfully console the wounded and sorrowfully mourn the dead. They would sacrifice themselves to feed the hungry and remove their own garments to clothe the cold. They honored the wise and provided for their living; they rewarded and encouraged the brave. If generals can be like this, they can take over anywhere they go.
AlliesTo operate, the armed forces need allies as consultants and assistants to the leadership.
Everyone looks up to those who are thoughtful and have unusual strategies beyond the ordinary ken, who are widely learned and have broad vision, and who have many skills and great talents. Such people can be made top allies.
Those who are fierce, swift, firm, and sharp are heroes of an age. Such people can be made second-ranked allies.
Those who talk a lot but not always to the point, who are slight in ability, with little that is extraordinary, are people with ordinary capabilities. They can be brought along as the lower class of allies.
ResponsivenessWhen you plan for difficulty in times of ease, when you do the great while it is still small, when you use rewards first and penalties later, this is refinement in use of the military.
When the troops are already on the battlefield, the cavalries are charging each other, the catapults have been set in position, and the infantries meet at close range, if you can use awesome authoritativeness to convey a sense of trust such that opponents surrender, this is ability in use of the military.
If you plunge into a half of arrows and rocks, facing off in a contest for victory, with winning and losing distinct, if your adversary is wounded but you die, this is inferiority in use of the military.
Taking OpportunitiesThe art of certain victory, the mode of harmonizing with charges, is a matter of opportunity. Who but the perspicacious can deal with it? And of all avenues of seeing opportunity, none is greater than the unexpected.
Assessing AbilitiesThose who employed warriors skillfully in ancient times assessed their abilities in order to calculate the prospects of victory or defeat:Who has the wise ruler?Who has the more intelligent generals?Who has the more able officers?Whose food supplies are most abundant?Whose soldiers are better trained?Whose legions are more orderly?Whose warhorses are swifter?Whose formation and situation are more dangerous?Whose clients and allies are smarter?Whose neighbors are more frightened?Whose has more food and money?Whose citizenry is calmer?When consider matters along these lines, structural strengths and weaknesses can be determined.
Facilitating BattleA scorpion will sting because it has poison; a soldier can be brave when he can rely on his equipment. Therefore when their weapons are sharp and their armor is strong, people will readily do battle. If armor is not strong, it is the same as baring one’s shoulders. if a bow cannot shoot far, it is the same as a close-range weapon. If a shot cannot hit the mark, it is the same as having no weapon. If a scout is not careful, it is the same as having no eyes. If a general is not brave in battle, it is the same as having no military leadership.
Striking PowerSkilled warriors of ancient times first found out the condition of their enemies and then made plans to deal with them. There is no doubt of success when you strike enemies under the following conditions:Their fighting forces are stale.Their supplies are exhausted.Their populace is full of sorrow and bitterness.Many people are physically ill.They do not plan ahead.Their equipment is in disrepair.Their soldiers are not trained.Reinforcement does not show up.Night falls when they still have a long way to go.Their soldiers are worn out.Their generals are contemptuous and their officers are inconsiderate.They neglect to make preparations.They do not form battle lines as they advance.When they do form battle lines, they are not stable.They are disorderly when they travel over rough terrain.There is discord between commanders and soldiers.They become arrogant when they win a battle.There is disorder in the ranks when they move their battle lines.The soldiers are tired and prone to upset.The army is supplied, but the people do not eat.Each man moves on his own - some go ahead, some lag behind.When opponents have the following qualities, however, withdraw and avoid them:Superiors are considerate and subordinates are obedient.Rewards are sure and punishments certain.The forces are set out in an orderly fashion.They give responsibility to the wise and employ the able.The army is courteous and mannerly.Their armor is strong and their weapons keen.They have plenty of supplies and equipment.Their government and education are substantial.They are on good terms with all of their neighbors.They are backed by great nations.
Psychological ConfigurationsSome generals are brave and think lightly of death. Some are hasty and impulsive. Some are greedy and materialistic. Some are humane but lack endurance. Some are intelligent but timid. Some are intelligent but easygoing at heart
Those who are brave and think lightly of death are vulnerable to assault. Those who are hasty and impulsive are vulnerable to delay. Those who are greedy and materialistic are vulnerable to loss. Those who are humane but lack endurance are vulnerable to fatigue. Those who are intelligent but timid are vulnerable to pressure. Those who are intelligent but easygoing are vulnerable to sudden attack
Orderly TroopsIn military operations, order leads to victory. If rewards and penalties are unclear, if rules and regulations are unreliable, and if signals are not followed, even if you have an army of a million strong it is of no practical benefit.
An orderly army is one that is mannerly and dignified, one that cannot be withstood when it advances and cannot be pursued when it withdraws. Its movements are regulated and directed; this gives it security and presents no danger. The troops can be massed but not scattered, can be deployed but not worn out.
Inspiring SoldiersHonor them with titles, present them with goods, and soldiers willingly come join you. Treat them courteously, inspire them with speeches, and soldiers willingly die. Give them nourishment and rest so that they do not become weary, make the code of rules uniform, and soldiers willingly obey. Lead them into battle personally, and soldiers will be brave. Record even a little good, reward even a little merit, and soldiers will be encouraged.
Self-exertionSages follow the rules of heaven; the wise obey the laws of earth; the intelligent follow precedent. Harm comes to the arrogant; calamity visits the proud. Few people trust those who talk too much; few people feel indebted to the self-serving. Rewarding the unworthy causes alienation; punishing the innocent causes resentment. Those whose appreciation or anger are unpredictable perish.
Harmonizing PeopleHarmonizing people is essential in military operations. When people are in harmony, they will fight on their own initiative, without exhortation. If the officers and the soldiers are suspicious of one another, them warriors will not join up. If no heed is paid to the strategies of loyal, the small-minded people will backbite. When the sprouts of hypocrisy arise, even if you have the wisdom of the great warrior-kings of old, you will not be able to prevail over an ordinary man, much less a whole group of them. Therefore tradition says, “A military operation is like fire; if it is not stopped, it burns itself out.”
The Condition of a GeneralAccording to the code of generalship, generals do not say they are thirsty before the soldiers have drawn from the well; generals do not say they are hungry before the soldiers’ food is cooked; generals do not say they are cold before the soldiers’ fire are kindled; generals do not say they are hot before the soldiers’ canopies are drawn. Generals do not use fans in summer, do not wear leather (or fur) in winter, do not use umbrella in the rain. They do as everyone does.
Order and DisorderWhen a nation is perilous and disordered, and the people are not secure in their homes, this is because the ruler has made the mistake of neglecting to find wise people
When the wise are disaffected, a nation is in peril; when the wise are employed, a nation is secure. When offices are chosen for persons, there is disorder; when persons are chosen for offices, there is order.
Observant GovernmentAn observant and perceptive government is one that looks at subtle phenomena and listens to small voices. When phenomena are subtle they are not seen, and when voices are small they are not heard; therefore an enlightened leader looks closely at the subtle and listens for the importance of the small voice.
This harmonizes the outside with the inside, and harmonizes the inside with the outside; so the Way of government involves the effort to see and hear much.
Thus when you are alert to what the people in the lower echelons have to say, and take it into consideration, so that your plan include the rank and file, then all people are your eyes and a multitude of voices helps your ears. This is the reason for the classic saying, “A sage has no constant mind - the people are the sage’s mind.”
Rulers and MinistersFor rulers, generosity to subordinates is benevolence; for ministers, service of the government is duty. No one should serve the government with duplicity; ministers should not be given dubious policies.
When both superiors and subordinates are given to courtesy, then the people are easy to employ. When superiors and subordinates are in harmony, then the Way of rulers and ministers is fulfilled: rulers employ their ministers courteously, while ministers work for the rulers loyally; rulers plan the government policies, while ministers plan their implantation.
Knowledgeable RuleRulers are considered knowledgeable according to how much they have seen, and are considered capable according to how much they have heard.
Everyone knows the saying that an intelligent ruler is constant through the day and night, discharging the affairs of office by day and attending to personal matters at night. Yet there may be grievances that do not get a hearing, and there may be loyal people promoting good who are not trusted.
If grievances are not heard, the best cannot be straightened. If promotion of good is not accepted, the loyal are not trusted and the treacherous enter with their schemes.
This is the meaning of the proverb in the ancient “Classic of Documents”: “Heaven sees through the seeing of my people, heaven hears through the hearing of my people.”
Not KnowingConfucius said that an enlightened ruler does not worry about people not knowing him, he worries about not knowing people. He worries not about outsiders not knowing insiders, but about insiders not knowing outsiders. He worries not about subordinates not knowing superiors, but about superiors not knowing subordinates. He worries not about the lower classes not knowing the upper classes, but about the upper classes not knowing the lower classes.
AdjudicationWhen rulers adjudicate criminal cases and execute punishments, they worry that they may be unclear. The innocent may be punished while the guilty may be released. The powerful may arrogate to themselves alone the right to speak, while the powerless may have their rights infringed upon by those who bear grudges against them. Honesty may be distorted; those who are wronged may not get a chance to express themselves. The trustworthy may be suspected; the loyal may be attacked. These are all perversions, problems causing disaster and violence, aberrations causing calamity and chaos.
Disturbance and SecurityIt is said that when official are severe in everything, no one knows where it will end. If they feed off the people so severely that people are hungry and impoverished, this produces disturbances and rebellion.
Encourage people in productive work, don’t deprive them of their time. Lighten their taxes, don’t exhaust their resources. In this way the country is made wealthy and families secure.
AppointmentsThe official policy of making appointments should be to promote the upright and place them over the crooked. Governing a country is like governing the body,. The way to govern the body is to nurture the spirit; the way to govern a country is to promote the wise. Life is sought by nurturing the spirit; stability is sought by promoting the wise.So public servants are to a nation as pillars are to a house; the pillars should not be slender; public servants should not be weak. When the pillars are slender the house collapses; when the public servants are weak the nation crumbles. Therefore the way to govern a nation is to promote the upright over the crooked; then the nation is secure.
Pillars of StateFor strong pillars you need straight trees; for wise public servants you need upright people. Straight trees are found in remote forests; upright people come from the humble masses. Therefore when rulers are going to make appointments they need to look in obscure places.
Sometimes there are disenfranchised people with something of value in them; sometimes there are people with extraordinary talent who go unrecognized. Sometimes there are paragons of virtue who are not promoted by their hometown; sometimes there are people who live in obscurity on purpose.
Sometimes there are people who are dutiful and righteous for purely philosophical or religious reasons. Sometimes there are loyal people who are straightforward with rulers but are slandered by cliques. Ancient kings are known to have hired unknowns and nobodies, finding in them the human qualities whereby they were able to bring peace.
Evaluation and DismissalThe official policy of evaluation and dismissal should be to promote the good and dismiss the bad. An enlightened leadership is aware of good and bad throughout the realm. not daring to overlook even minor officials and commoners, employing the wise and good, and dismissing the greedy and weak-minded.
With enlightened leadership and good citizens, projects get accomplished, the nation is orderly, and the wise gather like rain; this is the way to promote the good and dismiss the bad, setting forth what is acceptable and what is blameworthy. Therefore a policy of evaluation and dismissal means effort to know what hurts the people.
What Hurts the PeopleThere are five things that hurt the people:1. There are local officials who use public office for personal benefit, taking improper advantage of their authority, holding weapons in one hand and people’s livelihood in the other, corrupting their offices, and bleeding the people.2. There are cases where serious offenses are given light penalties; there is inequality before the law, and the innocents are subjected to punishment, even execution. Sometimes serious crimes are pardoned, the strong are supported, and the weak are oppressed. Harsh penalties are applied, unjustly torturing people to get at facts.3. Sometimes there are officials who condone crime and vice, punishing those who protest against this, cutting off the avenue of appeal and hiding the truth, plundering and ruining lives, unjust and arbitrary.4. Sometimes there are senior officials who repeatedly change department heads so as to monopolize the government administration, favoring their friends and relatives while treating those they dislike with unjust harshness, oppressive in their actions, prejudiced and unruly. They also use taxation to reap profit, enriching themselves and their families by exactions and fraud.5. Sometimes local officials extensively tailor awards and fines, welfare projects, and general expenditures, arbitrarily determining prices and measures, with the result that people lose their jobs.These five things are harmful to the people, and anyone who does any of these should be dismissed from the office.
Military Actions“Weapon are instruments of ill omen, to be used only when it is unavoidable.” The proper course of military action is to establish strategy first, and then carry it out. Monitor the environment, observe the minds of the masses, practice the use of military equipment, clarity the principles of reward and punishment, watch the schemes of enemies, note the perils of the roads, distinguish safe and dangerous places, find out the conditions of the parties involves, and recognize when to proceed and when to withdraw. Follow the timing of opportunities, set up preparations for defense, strengthen your striking power, improve the abilities of your soldiers, map out decisive strategies, and consider life and death issues. Only after doing appointing military leaders and extending the power to capture enemies. This is the overall scheme of things in military matters.
Rewards and PenaltiesA policy of rewards and penalties means rewarding the good and penalizing wrongdoers. Rewarding the good is to promote achievement; penalizing wrongdoers is to prevent treachery.
It is imperative that rewards and punishments be fair and impartial. When they know rewards are to be given, courageous warriors know what they are dying for; when they know penalties are to be applied, villains know what to fear.
Therefore, rewards should not be given without reason, and penalties should not be applied arbitrary. If rewards are given for no reason, those who have worked hard in public service will be resentful; if penalties are applied arbitrary, upright people will be bitter.
Clarity and ConsistencyGenerals hold authority over life and death. If they allow those who should live to be killed, or allow those who should be killed to live, or if they get angry without discernible reason, or their punishments and rewards are not clear, or commands are inconsistent, or they carry their private over into public life, this is dangerous for the nation.
If their punishment and rewards are not clear, their directives will not always be followed. If they allow those who should be killed to live, treachery will not be prevented. If they allow those who should live to be killed, soldiers will defect. If they get angry without discernible reason, their authority will not be effective. If their rewards and punishments are not clear, the lower echelons will not be encouraged to achieve. If politics are inappropriate, orders will not be obeyed. If private affairs are carried over into public life, people will be of two minds.
If treachery is not prevented, it is impossible to last long. If soldiers defect, the ranks will be decimated. If authority is ineffective, the troops will not rise up in the face of the enemy. If the lower echelons are not encouraged to achieve, the upper echelons have no strong support. If orders are not obeyed, affairs will be chaotic. If people are of two minds, the country will be in danger.
Pleasure and DispleasureDispleasure should not lead you to harm people who have done no wrong; pleasure should not lead you to go along with those who deserve to be executed.
Pleasure should not induce you to forgive those who have done wrong; displeasure should not induce you to execute the innocent.
Pleasure and displeasure should not be arbitrary; personal prejudices ignore worthy people. A general should not start a battle out of personal displeasure; it is imperative to go by the collective will. If he does go into battle because of personal displeasure, it will certainly result in defeat.
Culture and the MilitaryCulture takes precedence; the military comes after. If you put victory first, you will surely get beaten later; if you start out with anger, you will surely regret it later. One day’s anger can destroy your whole life. Therefore a superior man is stern but not ferocious; he may get angry, but not furious; he may worry, but does not fear; he may rejoice, but not overjoyed.
OrganizationA policy to quell disorder involves minimizing offices and combining duties, getting rid of embellishment in favor of substance.
First organize directives, then organize penalties. First organize the near at hand, then organize the far removed. First organize the inner, then organize the outer. First organize the basic, then organize the derivative. First organize the strong, then organize the weak. First organize the great, then organize the small. First organize yourself, then organize others.
Instruction and DirectionA policy of instruction and direction means those above educate those below, not saying anything that is unlawful and not doing anything that is immoral, for what is done by those above is observed by those below.
To indulge oneself yet instruct others is contrary to proper government; to correct oneself and then teach others is in accord with proper government. Therefore true leaders first rectify themselves and only after that do they promulgate their directives. If they are not upright themselves, their directives will not be followed, resulting in disorder.
Therefore the Way of leadership puts education and direction before punishment. To send people to war without education is tantamount to throwing them away.
Thought and ConsiderationA policy of thought and consideration means giving thought to what is near at hand and considering what is remote. As it is said, “If people do not consider what is remote, they will have trouble near at hand.” Therefore “educated people think without leaving their positions.” Thinking means correct strategy, consideration mean thinking of plans for eventualities. One is not to plan policy when it is not one’s place to do so, or consider the scheme of things that are none of one’s business.
Major affairs arise in difficulty, minor affairs arise in ease. Therefore if you want to think of the advantages in a situation, it is imperative to consider the harm; if you want to think about success, it is imperative to consider failure.
Danger arises in safety, destruction arises in survival. Harm arises in advantage, chaos arises in order. Enlightened people know the obvious when they see the subtle, know the end when they see the beginning; thus there is no way for disaster to happen. This is due to thoughtful consideration.
Strength in GeneralsGenerals have five strengths and eight evils.The five strengths are: noble behavior that can inspire the common people, social virtues that can elevate their reputations, trustworthiness and dutifulness in personal relationships, universal love encompassing all the people, and powerful action to succeed in their tasks.
The eight evils are: inability to assess right and wrong when formulating strategy, inability to delegate authority to the wise and the goods in times of order, inability to mete out just punishments for incidents of disorder, inability to help the poor in times of plenty, insufficient intelligence to guard against threats before they have taken shape, insufficient thought to prevent subtle dangers, inability to express what is known intuitively, and inability to avoid criticism in defeat.
Sending out the Armed ForcesIn ancient times, when a nation was in trouble, the ruler would select a wise man and have hime fast for three days in quiet seclusion before going to the gate of the national shrine, where he would stand facing south. He then took a high courtier to present a ceremonial axe to the ruler, who in turn would pass it by the handle to the general, saying:“The military leadership settles matters outside the borders,” and also directing him in these terms:“Where you see the enemy to be empty, proceed; where you see the enemy to be full, stop.“Do not look down on others because of your elevated rank.“Do not oppose the common consensus with personal opinions.“Do not turn from the loyal and trustworthy through the artifices of the skilled but treacherous.“Do not sit down before the soldiers sit; do not eat before the soldiers eat.“Bear the same cold and heat the soldiers do; share their toil as well as their case.“Experience sweetness and bitterness just as the soldiers do; take the same risks that they do.“Then the soldiers will exert themselves to the utmost, and it will be possible to destroy enemies.”Having accepted these words, the general led the armed forces out through the city’s gate of ill omen.The ruler, seeing the general off, knelt and said, “Advance and retreat are a matter of timing - military affairs are not directed by the ruler but by the general.” Therefore “There is no heaven above, no earth below, no adversary ahead, and no ruler behind.” Thus the intelligent think because of this; the mettlesome fight because of this.”
Selection on AbilitiesIn military action, there are men who like to fight and enjoy battle, single-handedly taking on powerful opponents; gather them into one squad and call them “the warriors who repay the nation.
There are mettlesome men with ability and strength, courage and speed; gather them into a squad and call them “the warriors who crash the battle lines.”
There are those who are light of foot, good walkers and runners; gather them into a squad called “the warriors who capture the flag.”There are those who can shoot on horseback, swift as flight, hitting the mark every times; gather them into one squad and call them “the galloping warriors.”
There are archers whose aim is accurate and deadly; gather them into one squad and call them "the warriors of the fighting edge.”
There are those who can shoot heavy crossbows and catapults accurately at great distances; gather them into one squad and call them “the warriors who crush the enemy’s edge.”
These six kinds of skilled warriors should be employed according to their particular skills.
The Use of KnowledgeGeneralship requires one to follow nature, depend on timing, and rely on people in order to achieve victory.
Therefore, if nature works but the timing doesn’t work, and yet people act, this is called opposing the time.
If the timing works but nature isn’t cooperating, and still people act, this is called opposing nature.
If timing and nature both work, but people do not act, this is called opposing people.
Those who know do not oppose nature, do not know oppose the time, and do not know oppose people.
Not Setting Up Battle LinesIn ancient times, those who governed well did not arm, and those who were armed well did not set up battle lines. Those who set up battle lines well did not fight, those who fought well did not lose, and those who lost well did not perish.
The government of the sages of old was such that people were comfortable in their homes and enjoyed their works, living to old age without ever attacking one another. “Those who govern well do not arm.”
When King Shun (reigned 2255-2207 BCE) organized rules and penalties for wrongdoing, he accordingly created knights, or warriors. But people did not violate the rules, and no penalties were enforced. “Those who arm well do not set up battle lines.”
Later, King Yu (reigned 2205-2197 BCE) made a punitive expedition against the Miao tribes, but all he did was demonstrate the martial art and culture arts, and the Miao people became more civilized. “Those who set up battle lines well do not fight.”
King Tang (reigned 1766-1753 BCE) and King Wu (reigned 1766-1753 BCE) and King Wu (reigned 1134-1115) pledged armies for one military operation, by which the whole land was decisively pacified. “Those who fight well do not lose.”
When King Zhao and Chu (reigned 515-488) ran into the disaster, he fled to Qin for help and ultimately was able to get his kingdom back. “Those who lose well do not perish.”
Sincerity in GeneralsAn ancient document says: “Those who are contemptuous of cultured people have no way to win people’s hearts completely; those who are contemptuous of common people have no way to get people to work as hard as they can.”
For military operations it is essential to strive to win the hearts of heroes, to make the rules of rewards and punishments strict, to include both cultural and martial arts, and to combine both hard and soft techniques.
Enjoy the amenities and music; familiarize yourself with poetry and prose. Put humanity and justice before wit and bravery.
In stillness be as quiet as a fish in the deep, in action be as swift as an otter. Dissolve enemies’ collusion; break down their strengths. Dazzle people with your banners; alert people with cymbals and drums.
Withdraw like a mountain in movement, advance like a rainstorm. Strike and crush with shattering force; go into battle like a tiger.
Press enemies and contain them; lure and entice them. Confuse them and seize them; be humble to make them proud. Be familiar yet distant; weaken them by lending strength.
Give security to those in danger; gladden those in fear. If people oppose you, take what they say to heart; if people have grudges, let them express themselves.
Restrain the strong, sustain the weak. Get to know those with plans; cover up any slander. When there is booty, distribute it.
Do not count on your strength and take an opponent lightly. Do not be conceited about your abilities and think little of subordinates.
Do not let personal favor congeal into authority.
Plan before acting. Fight only when you know you can win.
Do not keep the spoils of war for your own possession and use.
If generals can be like this, people will be willing to fight when they give the orders, and the enemy will be defeated before any blood is shed.
( Return to Translator’s Introduction )
Authored by Zhuge Liang (Kongming)Translation Copyright © Thomas Cleary
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature vs. Nurture
Are people born leaders or are they a product of their environment or a combination of both?
Many of us have worked with that person who everyone just new would be a leader some day. Was it because they were gifted those innate abilities to inspire and motivate or did they just find a career path that allowed them to develop the skills neceesary to lead? Nigel Nicholson, a professor of organizational behavior at London Business School, is an adherent of the somewhat controversial school of evolutionary psychology. Rooted in neuroscience, this discipline asserts that our minds are not so much culturally conditioned as they are hardwired to survive and reproduce. The "profile of human nature," Nicholson writes, "was fully delineated long before the dawn of recorded civilization." "It is now time," Nicholson continues "to return to the idea that some people are simply born with potentialities for leadership."
By accident or design, Nicholson says, people who want to be leaders are more likely to display the alpha-male biochemical profile -- elevated levels of testosterone and serotonin. And those who succeed as leaders typically want to dominate and to achieve through competitive striving. They have natural ability, and they are graced with strong physical constitutions.
Although I tend to agree that each of us are wired with different attributes that have evolved over time. I also think our society and business culture have evolved such that leaders now can come in all shapes and sizes - not just the alpha males. Moreover, I think the truly great companies in the 21st century will recognize that in order to survive and thrive in the increasingly global economy, leadership must be diverse and be stimulated at all levels. So that by nature companies will learn to nurture leadership for those with the divine-given DNA and those who can be trained to lead and lead successfully.
TJV
Are people born leaders or are they a product of their environment or a combination of both?
Many of us have worked with that person who everyone just new would be a leader some day. Was it because they were gifted those innate abilities to inspire and motivate or did they just find a career path that allowed them to develop the skills neceesary to lead? Nigel Nicholson, a professor of organizational behavior at London Business School, is an adherent of the somewhat controversial school of evolutionary psychology. Rooted in neuroscience, this discipline asserts that our minds are not so much culturally conditioned as they are hardwired to survive and reproduce. The "profile of human nature," Nicholson writes, "was fully delineated long before the dawn of recorded civilization." "It is now time," Nicholson continues "to return to the idea that some people are simply born with potentialities for leadership."
By accident or design, Nicholson says, people who want to be leaders are more likely to display the alpha-male biochemical profile -- elevated levels of testosterone and serotonin. And those who succeed as leaders typically want to dominate and to achieve through competitive striving. They have natural ability, and they are graced with strong physical constitutions.
Although I tend to agree that each of us are wired with different attributes that have evolved over time. I also think our society and business culture have evolved such that leaders now can come in all shapes and sizes - not just the alpha males. Moreover, I think the truly great companies in the 21st century will recognize that in order to survive and thrive in the increasingly global economy, leadership must be diverse and be stimulated at all levels. So that by nature companies will learn to nurture leadership for those with the divine-given DNA and those who can be trained to lead and lead successfully.
TJV
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Managing Generation Y
Below is an article written by John Bishop Executive Director of Accent On Success®, a nonprofit dedicated to helping students succeed in school and in life. In addition, he owns Bishop & Company, LLC, a business consulting company specializes in hiring and promotion issues. He has owned two companies and developed sales organizations in the United States, Europe and Japan.
Are Your Managers Ready for Generation Y?
http://www.teachingmoments.com/want-proof.html
I thought that there were some great insights as to how the different generations were raised, the different mindset they have within work environments and what challenges lie ahead as Generation Y enters the workforce. One of the interesting points is that Gen X people are aware of most of the technology that is available today (texting, blogs, internet, Blackberry, etc), however the Gen Y people have been raised using the technology and will challenge the way that work gets done.
Are Your Managers Ready for Generation Y?
http://www.teachingmoments.com/want-proof.html
I thought that there were some great insights as to how the different generations were raised, the different mindset they have within work environments and what challenges lie ahead as Generation Y enters the workforce. One of the interesting points is that Gen X people are aware of most of the technology that is available today (texting, blogs, internet, Blackberry, etc), however the Gen Y people have been raised using the technology and will challenge the way that work gets done.
Authentic Leadership in 3 mins...
Just in case you haven't had a chance to read Bill George's book on Authentic Leadership.
The Journey to Authenticity
The Journey to Authenticity
by Bill George
Leader to Leader, No. 31 Winter 2004
The one essential quality you must have to lead is to be your own person, authentic in every regard. The best leaders are autonomous and highly independent. Those who are too responsive to the desires of others are likely to be whipsawed by competing interests, too quick to deviate from their course or unwilling to make difficult decisions for fear of offending. My advice to the people I mentor is simply to be themselves.
Developing Your Unique Leadership Style
Contrary to what much of the literature says, your type of leadership style is not what matters. Great world leaders--George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, Margaret Thatcher, Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa, John F. Kennedy--all had very different styles. Yet each of them was an entirely authentic human being. There is no way you could ever attempt to emulate any of them without looking foolish.
The same is true for business leaders. Compare the last three CEOs of General Electric: the statesmanship of Reginald Jones, the dynamism of Jack Welch, and the empowering style of Jeff Immelt. All of them are highly successful leaders with entirely different leadership styles. Yet the GE organization has rallied around each of them, adapted to their styles, and flourished as a result. What counts is the authenticity of the leader, not the style.
Nonetheless, it is important that you develop a leadership style that works well for you and is consistent with your character and your personality. Over time you will have to hone your style to be effective in leading different types of people and to work in different types of environments. This is integral to your development as a leader.
Being true to the person you were created to be means accepting your faults as well as using your strengths. Accepting your shadow side is an essential part of being authentic. The problem comes when people are so eager to win the approval of others that they try to cover their shortcomings and sacrifice their authenticity to gain the respect and admiration of their associates.
I too have struggled in getting comfortable with my weaknesses--my tendency to intimidate others with an overly challenging style, my impatience, and my occasional lack of tact. Only recently have I realized that my strengths and weaknesses are two sides of the same coin. For years I felt I had to be perfect, or at least appear that I was on top of everything. I tried to hide my weaknesses from others, fearing they would reject me if they knew who I really was. Eventually, I realized that they could see my weaknesses more clearly than I could. In attempting to cover things up, I was only fooling myself. During my career I received lots of feedback to modify my leadership style so as to fit in with the organization's norms. Several supervisors and human resource specialists urged me to become a different kind of leader: less passionate, more laid back, less engaged, less challenging, less critical of others. I listened carefully to their advice but quietly rejected it. Had I followed this advice, I would have become a "plain vanilla" manager or even been seen as a phony.
It took me 20 years in business to find the right place to devote my energies--a mission-driven company named Medtronic. Had it not been for the frustrations of my previous job, I might never have accepted the opportunity. It turned out to be the most important step of my career.
Dimensions of Authentic Leaders
- Understanding their purpose
- Practicing solid values
- Leading with heart
- Establishing connected relationships
- Demonstrating self-discipline
Acquiring the five dimensions of an authentic leader is not a sequential process; rather, leaders are developing them continuously throughout their lives.
Understanding Your Purpose
Many people want to become leaders without giving much thought to their purpose. They are attracted to the power and prestige of leading an organization and the financial rewards that go with it. But without a real sense of purpose, leaders are at the mercy of their egos and are vulnerable to narcissistic impulses. There is no way you can adopt someone else's purpose and still be an authentic leader. You can study the purposes others pursue and you can work with them in common purposes, but in the end the purpose for your leadership must be uniquely yours.
To find your purpose, you must first understand yourself, your passions, and your underlying motivations. Then you must seek an environment that offers a fit between the organization's purpose and your own. Your search may take experience in several organizations before you can find the one that is right for you.
The late Robert Greenleaf, a former AT&T executive, is well known for his concept of leaders as servants of the people. In Servant Leadership, he advocates service to others as the leader's primary purpose. If people feel you are genuinely interested in serving others, then they will be prepared not just to follow you but to dedicate themselves to the common cause.
One of the best examples of a leader with purpose was the late David Packard, co-founder of Hewlett-Packard. I met him in early 1969 when he was the new Deputy Secretary of Defense and I was the special assistant to the Secretary of Navy. Packard had taken a leave from HP to serve his country. A big, powerful, yet modest man, he immediately impressed me with his openness, his sincerity, and his commitment to make a difference through his work.
He returned to HP a few years later to build it into one of the great companies of its time through his dedication to the company's mission, known as "The HP Way," and to excellence in R&D and customer service. He inspired HP's employees to incredible levels of commitment. At his death he was one of the wealthiest people in the world, yet no one would ever have known it by his personal spending. Most of his money went into funding philanthropic projects. Dave Packard was a truly authentic leader, a role model for me and for many in my generation.
Many leaders search for years, even decades, to find the purpose for their leadership. It is relatively easy to state your purpose early in life, but much harder to develop passion for it. Passion for your purpose comes when you are highly motivated by your work because you believe in its intrinsic worth, and you can use your abilities to maximum effect. If your early career experiences do not inspire you, then it is wise to continue your search in a different venue, job, or company where you can find passion for your work. After all, life goes by quickly and you don't want to spend your time sleep-walking through life.
Practicing Solid Values
| If they cannot trust you, why would they ever follow you? |
While the development of fundamental values is crucial, integrity is the one value that is required in every authentic leader. Integrity is not just the absence of lying, but telling the whole truth, as painful as it may be. If you don't exercise complete integrity in your interactions, no one can trust you. If they cannot trust you, why would they ever follow you?
I once had a colleague who would never lie to me, but often he shared only positive parts of the story, sheltering me from the ugly side. Finally, I told him that real integrity meant giving me the whole story so that together we could make sound decisions. Rather than thinking less of him if he did so, I assured him, I would have a higher opinion of his courage and integrity.
One of my role models of values-centered leadership is Max De Pree, the former CEO of furniture maker Herman Miller. De Pree is a modest man guided by a deep concern for serving others; he is true to his values in every aspect of his life. His humanity and values can be seen through the exemplary way in which his company conducts itself. De Pree describes his philosophy of values-centered leadership in his classic book, Leadership Is an Art. De Pree also subscribes to Greenleaf 's ideas on servant leadership, and expands them by offering his own advice, "The leader's first job is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the leader must become a servant and a debtor."
De Pree believes that a corporation should be "a community of people," all of whom have value and share in the fruits of their collective labor. De Pree practices what he preaches. While he was CEO, his salary was capped at 20 times that of an hourly worker. In his view, tying the CEO's salary to that of the workers helps cement trust in leadership. Contrast that with today's CEOs, who are earning--on average--500 times their hourly workers'wage. As De Pree said recently, "When leaders indulge themselves with lavish perks and the trappings of power, they are damaging their standing as leaders."
Having found the purpose that ignites your passions, you then have to test your values in the crucible of life's experiences. This doesn't just happen by listing your values. Only in the crucible will you learn how to cope with pressures to compromise your values and deal with potential conflicts between them. You have to put yourself in situations in which your values are challenged and then make difficult decisions in the context of your values. This is not easy when the outcome is uncertain and there is a lot at stake. Nonetheless, it is in these situations and not the easy ones that you find the "true north" of your moral compass.
Leading with Heart
One of the most bighearted leaders I know is Marilyn Nelson, chair and CEO of the Carlson Companies, the privately held hospitality and travel services giant. When she became CEO several years ago, she inherited a hard-nosed organization that was driven for growth but not known for empathy for its employees. Shortly after joining the company, Nelson had what she refers to as her "epiphany." She was meeting with a group of MBA students who had been studying the company's culture. When she asked the students for feedback, Nelson got a stony silence from the group. Finally, a young woman raised her hand and said, "We hear from employees that Carlson is a sweatshop that doesn't care."
That incident sent Nelson into high gear. She created a motivational program called "Carlson Cares." As the company was preparing for its launch, Nelson's staff told her they needed more time to change the culture before introducing the program. Nelson decided that she could not wait and decided to become the company's role model for caring and empathy. She immediately set out to change the environment, using her passion, motivational skills, and sincere interest in her employees and her customers. She took the lead on customer sales calls and interacted every day with employees in Carlson operations. Her positive energy has transformed the company's culture, built its customer relationships, accelerated its growth, and strengthened its bottom line.
Some leaders behave as though they have no compassion for anyone. It is your life experiences that open up your heart to have compassion for the most difficult challenges that people face along life's journey. Far too many leaders wall themselves off from people who are experiencing the full range of life's challenges, hardships, and difficulties. They often avoid intimate relationships, even with their friends and loved ones.
Developing your heart means following your own path and being open to all of life's experiences. It means being in touch with the depths of your inner being and being true to your-self. It requires that you know who you are, your weaknesses as well as your strengths. It is in developing compassion that we become authentic human beings.
Establishing Enduring Relationships
The detached style of leadership will not be successful in the 21st century. Today's employees demand more personal relationships with their leaders before they will give themselves fully to their jobs. They insist on having access to their leaders, knowing that it is in the openness and the depth of the relationship with the leader that trust and commitment are built. Bill Gates, Michael Dell, and Jack Welch are so successful because they connect directly with their employees and realize from them a deeper commitment to their work and greater loyalty to the company. Authentic leaders establish trusting relationships with people throughout the organization as well as in their personal lives. The rewards of these relationships, both tangible and intangible, are long lasting.
I always tried to establish close relationships with my colleagues, looking to them as a closely knit team whose collective knowledge and wisdom about the business vastly exceeds my own. Many corporate leaders fear these kinds of relationships. As another CEO said to me, "Bill, I don't want to get too close to my subordinates because someday I may have to terminate them." Actually, the real reason goes much deeper than that. Many leaders--men in particular--fear having their weaknesses and vulnerabilities exposed. So they create distance from employees and a sense of aloofness. Instead of being authentic, they are creating a persona for themselves.
Enduring relationships are built on connectedness and a shared purpose of working together toward a common goal. Every person has a life story and wants to share it with you, if you are open to hearing the story and sharing in return. It is in sharing our life stories that we develop trust and intimacy with our colleagues.
Demonstrating Self-Discipline
Leaders are highly competitive people. They are driven to succeed in whatever they take on. Authentic leaders know that competing requires a consistently high level of self-discipline to be successful. Being very competitive is not a bad thing; in fact, it is an essential quality of successful leaders, but it needs to be channeled through purpose and discipline. Sometimes we mistake competitive people--those who generate near-term results by improving operational effectiveness--for genuine leaders. Achieving operational effectiveness is an essential result for any leader, but it alone does not ensure authenticity or long-term success.
The most consistent leader I know is Art Collins, my successor as CEO of Medtronic. His self-discipline is evident every day and in every interaction. His subordinates never have to worry about what kind of mood Art is in or where he stands on an important issue. Nor does he deviate in his behavior or vacillate in his decisions. He never lets his ego or his emotions get in the way of taking the appropriate action. These qualities make working with Art easy and predictable, enabling Medtronic employees to do their jobs effectively.
Leaders are always being examined under the microscope. Their behaviors are observed, discussed, and dissected by their employees as well as by a myriad of outsiders. Are they having a good day? How will they respond to my proposal? Will they issue pink slips today? Do I dare share these problems with my boss?
To be authentic, leaders must behave with consistency and self-discipline, not letting stress get in the way of their judgment. They must learn to handle any kind of pressure and stay cool and calm. Handling unexpected challenges requires being in peak condition. Like professional athletes, they need consistent habits to keep their minds sharp and their bodies in shape.
Several years ago my wife, Penny, and I were at a conference in San Francisco and decided to walk the labyrinth in the nave of Grace Cathedral. In the labyrinth you start in the outer circle, but the path takes you quickly toward the center, which appears to be the purpose of your walk. As you are about to reach the center, the path turns away and you walk toward the outside. Around the perimeter, sometimes closer, sometimes farther away. Just as you are about to give up on ever reaching the center, the path turns toward the center and suddenly you are there!
The labyrinth is exhilarating, and also highly instructive. The journey itself is the message. Often the most important things you learn in life come when you seem to be going nowhere, or actually backward. This is the way it has been on my leadership journey.
Becoming an authentic leader involves many years of hard work, some pain and suffering, and the wisdom that comes from experiencing life at its fullest. It is only in the labyrinth and crucible of life that we develop into authentic leaders.
Mother Teresa is a compelling example of an authentic leader. Many think of her as simply a nun who reached out to the poor, yet by 1990 she had created an organization of 4,000 missionaries operating in a hundred countries. Her organization, Missionaries of Charity, began in Calcutta and spread to 450 centers around the world. Its mission was "to reach out to the destitute on the streets, offering wholehearted ser-vice to the poorest of the poor." Not only did she have a purpose, clear values, and a heart filled with compassion, she also created intimate relationships with people and exercised self-discipline, all the dimensions of an authentic leader. I doubt that any of us will ever be like Mother Teresa, but her life is indeed an inspiration.
-Taken from: http://www.leadertoleader.org/knowledgecenter/L2L/winter2004/george.html
Saturday, April 28, 2007
'Sconsin?? Harvard and Wisconsin Tie in Turning Out the Most CEOs in U.S.
Harvard and Wisconsin Tie in Turning Out the Most CEOs in U.S.
I thought it quite interesting that a state known for cheese, packers, and Eric Cox might also be regarded as a CEO-factory. Is Professor DeVaugn next?
Here is the article:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=nifea&&sid=aIMI5Fx8d9sM
Interestin tidbits:
"There should be more respect for the kind of education you can get from a large public institution,'' says Sim Sitkin, founding director of the Center of Leadership and Ethics at the Fuqua School of Business, at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.
MBA Matters:
For CEOs who did finish college, an MBA is the preferred graduate credential. More than a third of the 500 U.S. chief executives -- 37.5 percent -- earned their MBAs, and they were three times as likely to have gone to Harvard Business School in Boston than to any other school.
Interesting CEO stats:
Trying Harder
Equal Opportunity
Ambitious
Dropouts
MBA Preferred
Degree Importance Fades
Giving Back
Track Record
So what do you think? Is there a correlation of school to CEOship? Or is there a higher correlation to factors such as wealth/power/influence?
Either way, an interesting read.
Enjoy!
I thought it quite interesting that a state known for cheese, packers, and Eric Cox might also be regarded as a CEO-factory. Is Professor DeVaugn next?
Here is the article:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=nifea&&sid=aIMI5Fx8d9sM
Interestin tidbits:
"There should be more respect for the kind of education you can get from a large public institution,'' says Sim Sitkin, founding director of the Center of Leadership and Ethics at the Fuqua School of Business, at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.
MBA Matters:
For CEOs who did finish college, an MBA is the preferred graduate credential. More than a third of the 500 U.S. chief executives -- 37.5 percent -- earned their MBAs, and they were three times as likely to have gone to Harvard Business School in Boston than to any other school.
Interesting CEO stats:
Trying Harder
Equal Opportunity
Ambitious
Dropouts
MBA Preferred
Degree Importance Fades
Giving Back
Track Record
So what do you think? Is there a correlation of school to CEOship? Or is there a higher correlation to factors such as wealth/power/influence?
Either way, an interesting read.
Enjoy!
The War for Talent Is Back
In my opinion, one of the more important responsibilities of an organizational leader is to find and nurture talent. I found this post on the war for talent at HarvardBusinessOnline. And, to be honest, I'm not sure I agree with what it suggests. The article deemphasizes "great" talent, and seems to suggest "managing to the mean" - by reducing the wage gap, emphasizing systems over superstars, etc.
I found it interesting enough to dig a little deeper into the evidence supporting the argument. Thought you might find it interesting, as well.
-------------------
The War for Talent Is Back
By Bob Sutton, From Harvard Business Online, April 23, 2007
Last week I did a workshop with a group of about 20 CIOs from large companies. Our discussion focused on what they could do to build a more civilized workplace. In the course of our conversation, each of these executives emphasized--as I’ve read recently in The Economist, The New York Times, and BusinessWeek--that building a workplace that attracts and keeps great people is especially important now because the job market for skilled people is so hot. I also have heard similar messages at other companies I’ve visited recently, including eBay, Microsoft, Google, SuccessFactors, and Yahoo!, as well as from managers at companies including Procter & Gamble and Fidelity Investments.
A lot has been written about the war for talent, and--if you actually take an evidence–based perspective--much of it is nonsense. There are a lot of consulting firms and management gurus out there giving bad advice. My colleague Jeff Pfeffer and I spent a lot of time reading and weaving together overall patterns in peer review studies when we were writing Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-Based Management. Recently Jeff testified to Congress about many of these lessons--especially about the implications of research on incentives for civil service reform.
If you want to “win” the talent wars in your firm, five lessons stand out for me:
1. Superstars are overrated. It may seem like you can’t live without them, but you probably can. Check out Boris Groysberg’s research. Boris and his colleagues have some compelling evidence that, when superstars leave, there is little evidence that they do much damage to their firms. There is, however, a lot of evidence that stars aren’t very portable--that unless you can hire the star and his or her team, it likely is a waste of money. Boris tells me that he has some evidence that this finding may not apply to women, that if they have been a superstar in their last firm, they will be a star in their next firm. So it seems that if you hire a man who is a star at another firm, you better steal the whole team, but if you hire a solo woman, odds are it will work.
2. Great systems are more important than great people. The notion that you are doomed to mediocrity if you can’t hire the very best people has little empirical support. Yes, there are big differences between the most talented people and the next level down in most occupations. But systems are more important. Toyota beats the competition as a result of a superior system; Men’s Wearhouse and McDonald’s don’t hire people that are much different from their competitors, but their systems explain their long-term dominance more than their people. As Jeff Pfeffer says, many organizations seem to have “brain vacuums” to turn people who seem to be smart into bumbling fools. Even the most brilliant person is doomed to fail in a bad system, and seemingly mediocre people can become stars in a great system.
3. Create smaller rather than larger pay differences between “star” employees and everyone else. Jack Welch doesn’t believe this; he wants you to give 80 percent of the bonus money to the top 20 percent of your people. And there are a lot of other experts out there who want you to throw most of your salary and bonus dollars to your stars. But Jeff Pfeffer and I have reviewed this literature very carefully and every article that we can find in a peer-reviewed journal--of top management teams, baseball teams, academic departments, manufacturing organizations--finds (controlling for the level of pay) that performance is better when there is smaller distance between the best-paid and worst-paid people. This isn’t an argument for socialism--there are still big differences between the best- and worst-paid people in even the baseball and top management teams with the most compressed pay. But it does suggest that the widening pay gaps between the “best” and “worst” may run contrary to the best evidence.
4. The law of crappy people is probably a myth. I have read of several famous executives (e.g., Steve Jobs) and consulting firms (e.g., McKinsey) that have advocated the law or “rule of crappy people,” which is an assertion that great people will hire other great people, but mediocre people will hire even worse people because they are threatened by competent people. I spent many hours reviewing published research on employee selection, and could find no evidence that it was true. There is evidence that people like to hire people like themselves. And there is some evidence that the most competent people prefer people like themselves, and that less competent people are less picky. But I can’t find any evidence that “B players” or people of average skills and talent levels are afraid to hire people with the same or greater skills.
5. The no asshole rule helps. I was struck by how vehement those CIOs were about how Generation X and Y employees simply weren’t going to put up with nasty bosses and peers. One executive was especially striking as he explained how he learned the wrong lesson from one his first mentors, that a demeaning boss was a good boss. And that he had changed his management style dramatically after figuring out that every time he or one of his colleagues drove someone out and had to replace him or her, it cost them about $100,000--and more for senior people who were driven-out. Indeed, another CIO told me that he had left a higher-paying job for his current one because he just couldn’t stand his boss's demeaning and self-aggrandizing style. And there were several CIOs who emphasized that such bosses and work climates not only drove people out, but they created environments were people devoted too much energy to avoiding blame and the wrath of others, and not enough time to actually doing their jobs. I had not made such a strong connection between the no asshole rule and the war for talent. I was a bit worried about using such blunt language and talking about a “soft” subject with senior people who did such technical work, but they turned out to be one of the most forthcoming and enthusiastic groups that I’ve spoken to.
I found it interesting enough to dig a little deeper into the evidence supporting the argument. Thought you might find it interesting, as well.
-------------------
The War for Talent Is Back
By Bob Sutton, From Harvard Business Online, April 23, 2007
Last week I did a workshop with a group of about 20 CIOs from large companies. Our discussion focused on what they could do to build a more civilized workplace. In the course of our conversation, each of these executives emphasized--as I’ve read recently in The Economist, The New York Times, and BusinessWeek--that building a workplace that attracts and keeps great people is especially important now because the job market for skilled people is so hot. I also have heard similar messages at other companies I’ve visited recently, including eBay, Microsoft, Google, SuccessFactors, and Yahoo!, as well as from managers at companies including Procter & Gamble and Fidelity Investments.
A lot has been written about the war for talent, and--if you actually take an evidence–based perspective--much of it is nonsense. There are a lot of consulting firms and management gurus out there giving bad advice. My colleague Jeff Pfeffer and I spent a lot of time reading and weaving together overall patterns in peer review studies when we were writing Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-Based Management. Recently Jeff testified to Congress about many of these lessons--especially about the implications of research on incentives for civil service reform.
If you want to “win” the talent wars in your firm, five lessons stand out for me:
1. Superstars are overrated. It may seem like you can’t live without them, but you probably can. Check out Boris Groysberg’s research. Boris and his colleagues have some compelling evidence that, when superstars leave, there is little evidence that they do much damage to their firms. There is, however, a lot of evidence that stars aren’t very portable--that unless you can hire the star and his or her team, it likely is a waste of money. Boris tells me that he has some evidence that this finding may not apply to women, that if they have been a superstar in their last firm, they will be a star in their next firm. So it seems that if you hire a man who is a star at another firm, you better steal the whole team, but if you hire a solo woman, odds are it will work.
2. Great systems are more important than great people. The notion that you are doomed to mediocrity if you can’t hire the very best people has little empirical support. Yes, there are big differences between the most talented people and the next level down in most occupations. But systems are more important. Toyota beats the competition as a result of a superior system; Men’s Wearhouse and McDonald’s don’t hire people that are much different from their competitors, but their systems explain their long-term dominance more than their people. As Jeff Pfeffer says, many organizations seem to have “brain vacuums” to turn people who seem to be smart into bumbling fools. Even the most brilliant person is doomed to fail in a bad system, and seemingly mediocre people can become stars in a great system.
3. Create smaller rather than larger pay differences between “star” employees and everyone else. Jack Welch doesn’t believe this; he wants you to give 80 percent of the bonus money to the top 20 percent of your people. And there are a lot of other experts out there who want you to throw most of your salary and bonus dollars to your stars. But Jeff Pfeffer and I have reviewed this literature very carefully and every article that we can find in a peer-reviewed journal--of top management teams, baseball teams, academic departments, manufacturing organizations--finds (controlling for the level of pay) that performance is better when there is smaller distance between the best-paid and worst-paid people. This isn’t an argument for socialism--there are still big differences between the best- and worst-paid people in even the baseball and top management teams with the most compressed pay. But it does suggest that the widening pay gaps between the “best” and “worst” may run contrary to the best evidence.
4. The law of crappy people is probably a myth. I have read of several famous executives (e.g., Steve Jobs) and consulting firms (e.g., McKinsey) that have advocated the law or “rule of crappy people,” which is an assertion that great people will hire other great people, but mediocre people will hire even worse people because they are threatened by competent people. I spent many hours reviewing published research on employee selection, and could find no evidence that it was true. There is evidence that people like to hire people like themselves. And there is some evidence that the most competent people prefer people like themselves, and that less competent people are less picky. But I can’t find any evidence that “B players” or people of average skills and talent levels are afraid to hire people with the same or greater skills.
5. The no asshole rule helps. I was struck by how vehement those CIOs were about how Generation X and Y employees simply weren’t going to put up with nasty bosses and peers. One executive was especially striking as he explained how he learned the wrong lesson from one his first mentors, that a demeaning boss was a good boss. And that he had changed his management style dramatically after figuring out that every time he or one of his colleagues drove someone out and had to replace him or her, it cost them about $100,000--and more for senior people who were driven-out. Indeed, another CIO told me that he had left a higher-paying job for his current one because he just couldn’t stand his boss's demeaning and self-aggrandizing style. And there were several CIOs who emphasized that such bosses and work climates not only drove people out, but they created environments were people devoted too much energy to avoiding blame and the wrath of others, and not enough time to actually doing their jobs. I had not made such a strong connection between the no asshole rule and the war for talent. I was a bit worried about using such blunt language and talking about a “soft” subject with senior people who did such technical work, but they turned out to be one of the most forthcoming and enthusiastic groups that I’ve spoken to.
Friday, April 27, 2007
The Courting of General Jones
Wall Street Journal, Monday, April, 23rd, 2007
General James Jones, former commandant of the U.S. Corps, is being heavily recruited by both major political parties going into the presidential election of 2008. The transition of military leaders into political office is by no means unique in this country. George Washingto, Dwight Eisenhower and, most recently, John McCain are well-known examples. However, what is unique about General Jones is that he is being wooed by presidential candidates and party politicians from both sides of the aisle. "He is like Eisenhower, who belonged to no camp and everyone wanted him," says House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Normally, military leaders' political leanings are clear long before they enter the political arena. What is different about Jones, however, is that he remains adamantly apolitical. That does not mean he is not without strong political opinion. When asked what he would do about Guantano military prison, he quickly replied, "I would shut it down tomorrow."
Overall, his stances sway between both aisles. He believes in a long-term military strategy in Iraq, yet he believes our reputation abroad has suffered terribly. Despite his political ambiguity, prominent political leaders are sure he is on their respective sides. Hillary Clinton has enjoyed her "many conversations about military and political issues" and calls him "the biggest 'get' out there." Senator Barack Obama reportedly "thinks the world of him." Yet Senator Pat Roberts, from Jones' native Kansas, assumes Jones is a Republican.
The key message when looking at how very influential people see Jones is that they all value his insightful leadership. General Jones possesses the rare qualities of a sought-after leader, regardless of which political ticket you stand for.
Matt Weith
General James Jones, former commandant of the U.S. Corps, is being heavily recruited by both major political parties going into the presidential election of 2008. The transition of military leaders into political office is by no means unique in this country. George Washingto, Dwight Eisenhower and, most recently, John McCain are well-known examples. However, what is unique about General Jones is that he is being wooed by presidential candidates and party politicians from both sides of the aisle. "He is like Eisenhower, who belonged to no camp and everyone wanted him," says House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Normally, military leaders' political leanings are clear long before they enter the political arena. What is different about Jones, however, is that he remains adamantly apolitical. That does not mean he is not without strong political opinion. When asked what he would do about Guantano military prison, he quickly replied, "I would shut it down tomorrow."
Overall, his stances sway between both aisles. He believes in a long-term military strategy in Iraq, yet he believes our reputation abroad has suffered terribly. Despite his political ambiguity, prominent political leaders are sure he is on their respective sides. Hillary Clinton has enjoyed her "many conversations about military and political issues" and calls him "the biggest 'get' out there." Senator Barack Obama reportedly "thinks the world of him." Yet Senator Pat Roberts, from Jones' native Kansas, assumes Jones is a Republican.
The key message when looking at how very influential people see Jones is that they all value his insightful leadership. General Jones possesses the rare qualities of a sought-after leader, regardless of which political ticket you stand for.
Matt Weith
Engaging Stakeholders: Triple Bottom Line (Economic, Social, and Environmental)
Sybille Sachs outlines how managers should balance the demands and responsibilities of stakeholders in creating wealth.
Posted by Mike Ritzenthlaer
Since the 1950s, “corporate responsibility” has been discussed from the perspective of corporate “social” responsibility. The idea behind this concept is that the traditional responsibility of management to serve owners or investors should be enlarged to reflect the fact that a firm is always part of society and part of the ecological system. The triple bottom line, which includes economic, social and ecological dimensions, became an adequate tool to measure corporate performance in a broader sense. Therefore, the corporate social responsibility debate often focuses on different categories of responsibilities, for example economic, legal, ethical and philanthropical. But in managerial reality, no natural or distinguishable responsibility categories exist.
Furthermore, corporate social responsibility is often criticized for being treated as a moral substitute to compensate for harmful corporate activities. The critics argue for a more comprehensive understanding of corporate responsibility. I propose we consider corporate social responsibility as “corporate stakeholder responsibility”. The value creation process in firms has become more and more complex and knowledge has become its crucial factor. The focus turns to those who contribute to this process: the key stakeholders. This stakeholder view of the firm focuses on the contribution of all relevant stakeholders (employees, investors, regulators etc) to the enhancement of the value of the firm. Management’s responsibility therefore is to develop the interaction with these stakeholders.
Where to leadWhat then are the main tasks for a manager to fulfill this corporate stakeholder responsibility?1. Management has to identify the relevant stakeholders and assess their contributions in the value creation process. Our investigation shows clearly that stakeholders can contribute to new core competencies and innovative solutions. Including key stakeholders systematically into the value creation process enhances the license to innovate.2. The development of relevant stakeholder interactions also means that management not only seeks a favorable position in the competitive environment but in the whole stakeholder network. This contributes to an enforcement of the firm’s license to compete.3. Whereas traditional strategic management focuses on economic causalities of success, the stakeholder view also includes societal factors. It exploits and considers the contributions and expectations of societal and ecological stakeholders to gain and maintain the license to operate by society.In the business model of the stakeholder view, managers are facing the responsibility to keep up these three licenses. These three licenses emphasize that the corporation is only legitimized in its existence and only fulfils its responsibilities if it creates wealth for and with its stakeholders.Consider also the fact that corporate stakeholder responsibility requires procedural and distributive justice. Procedural justice means integrating the values of all-important stakeholders into the development and implementation of a firm’s strategy. The stakeholders are integrated in the strategic processes by either providing or receiving benefits or providing or bearing risks. Distributive justice acknowledges that all stakeholders who make (voluntarily or not) firm-specific investments either by providing benefit or bearing risks should have the right to the residual claim analogous to the shareholders’ firm-specific investment and their right of residual claim based on their risk bearing function. The table displays a possible example.Stakeholder groups(examples) Contributions to wealth creation Stakeholder involvement regarding strategic responsibility process Wealth disseminationShareholders Capital expenditure, capital risk bearer Voting power at general assembly Residual benefit; shareholder valueEmployees Benefits from human capital; firm-specific investments Forum for information and participation of employees (sounding board) Education, employability, bonus systems, motivation etcCustomers/Users Risks of not being served any more due to corporate focusing Round tables for product and service innovations (lead users) Specific conditionsCommunity Bearing risks due to pollution and contamination Involvement of representatives in strategic sustainability boards Corporate philanthropy, financial and non-financial compensations for risks borne My claim for corporate stakeholder responsibility: managers’ mindsets should be focused on value creation with and for stakeholders.
Posted by Mike Ritzenthlaer
Since the 1950s, “corporate responsibility” has been discussed from the perspective of corporate “social” responsibility. The idea behind this concept is that the traditional responsibility of management to serve owners or investors should be enlarged to reflect the fact that a firm is always part of society and part of the ecological system. The triple bottom line, which includes economic, social and ecological dimensions, became an adequate tool to measure corporate performance in a broader sense. Therefore, the corporate social responsibility debate often focuses on different categories of responsibilities, for example economic, legal, ethical and philanthropical. But in managerial reality, no natural or distinguishable responsibility categories exist.
Furthermore, corporate social responsibility is often criticized for being treated as a moral substitute to compensate for harmful corporate activities. The critics argue for a more comprehensive understanding of corporate responsibility. I propose we consider corporate social responsibility as “corporate stakeholder responsibility”. The value creation process in firms has become more and more complex and knowledge has become its crucial factor. The focus turns to those who contribute to this process: the key stakeholders. This stakeholder view of the firm focuses on the contribution of all relevant stakeholders (employees, investors, regulators etc) to the enhancement of the value of the firm. Management’s responsibility therefore is to develop the interaction with these stakeholders.
Where to leadWhat then are the main tasks for a manager to fulfill this corporate stakeholder responsibility?1. Management has to identify the relevant stakeholders and assess their contributions in the value creation process. Our investigation shows clearly that stakeholders can contribute to new core competencies and innovative solutions. Including key stakeholders systematically into the value creation process enhances the license to innovate.2. The development of relevant stakeholder interactions also means that management not only seeks a favorable position in the competitive environment but in the whole stakeholder network. This contributes to an enforcement of the firm’s license to compete.3. Whereas traditional strategic management focuses on economic causalities of success, the stakeholder view also includes societal factors. It exploits and considers the contributions and expectations of societal and ecological stakeholders to gain and maintain the license to operate by society.In the business model of the stakeholder view, managers are facing the responsibility to keep up these three licenses. These three licenses emphasize that the corporation is only legitimized in its existence and only fulfils its responsibilities if it creates wealth for and with its stakeholders.Consider also the fact that corporate stakeholder responsibility requires procedural and distributive justice. Procedural justice means integrating the values of all-important stakeholders into the development and implementation of a firm’s strategy. The stakeholders are integrated in the strategic processes by either providing or receiving benefits or providing or bearing risks. Distributive justice acknowledges that all stakeholders who make (voluntarily or not) firm-specific investments either by providing benefit or bearing risks should have the right to the residual claim analogous to the shareholders’ firm-specific investment and their right of residual claim based on their risk bearing function. The table displays a possible example.Stakeholder groups(examples) Contributions to wealth creation Stakeholder involvement regarding strategic responsibility process Wealth disseminationShareholders Capital expenditure, capital risk bearer Voting power at general assembly Residual benefit; shareholder valueEmployees Benefits from human capital; firm-specific investments Forum for information and participation of employees (sounding board) Education, employability, bonus systems, motivation etcCustomers/Users Risks of not being served any more due to corporate focusing Round tables for product and service innovations (lead users) Specific conditionsCommunity Bearing risks due to pollution and contamination Involvement of representatives in strategic sustainability boards Corporate philanthropy, financial and non-financial compensations for risks borne My claim for corporate stakeholder responsibility: managers’ mindsets should be focused on value creation with and for stakeholders.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Wanted: Authentic Leaders
Wanted: Authentic Leaders
Saj-nicole A. Joni 09.25.06
Internet start-up billionaire Mark Cuban is a fixture at Dallas Mavericks basketball games. He purchased a majority share of the NBA team in 2000 and has managed its operations ever since with the raw enthusiasm of a fan. As leader of the franchise, Cuban has always been, in a word, himself. His blunt comments about officials, other teams and even his own players have cost him more than $1.6 million in fines from the league. While fans and admirers enjoy the spectacle of his uncensored, “be yourself” transparency, its impact on his business is another matter.
Authenticity has been lauded as the gold standard for leaders who employees yearn to follow: a guardian we know and trust, with values we respect, who makes transparent, cogent and fair decisions we can stand behind. This matters all the way to the bottom line, since a leader who attracts and keeps the best people drives his or her company's performance and competitive position. There are benefits to being perceived as authentic. But thoughtful leaders know that the popular definition of authenticity--being fully yourself, completely transparent, always telling the unvarnished truth--is at odds with the reality of the executive leadership role and responsibilities.
Why? To effectively deal with all the issues executives face, the desire for full disclosure must sometimes give way to discretion. There are too many variables to be 100% authentic all the time, says leadership guru Warren Bennis. “The truth is, we all know that executives operate in roles that come with many strategic, operational, legal and ethical constraints.”
It’s time to rethink what we are looking for in authentic leaders. Despite a plethora of books and people who will tell you otherwise, authentic leadership is anything but simple, straightforward, fully truthful and uncontrived.
Mark Cuban’s judgment in purchasing the Mavericks franchise appears to be sound. But his decisions on and off the court since then have caused even some of his own players to question his leadership. According to Bennis, “What we are looking for is well-honed judgment that is rooted in visible purpose and values that we can consistently count on over time.”
Ron Heifetz, co-founder of Harvard’s Center for Public Leadership, takes this one step further. He teaches that calibrating authenticity by looking at the level of truth and transparency in a leader’s communications misses the mark, leaving out the purpose served when one plays a leadership role in the life of others.
“Authentic leadership is a function of those purposes, those commitments of service and the discipline anchoring them, not a function of self-expression. Fundamentally, leadership is the activity of educating and preparing people to be more adaptive, so that they can marshal resources and creativity to thrive in ever-changing and challenging environments,” Heifetz explains. “Authentic leadership--which includes judgment about pace, framing and what and how to disclose information--is a commitment to serve the growth and adaptability of those you lead.”
At its core, the executive position is a role, and nowhere is the seeming paradox of role and authenticity better understood than in the theater. “In order to effectively take on and play the role of a character, the actor must be 'real,' that is, connected to something authentic from the depths of his or her own being,” says Belle Halpern, co-founder of the Ariel Group, and internationally known for her pioneering work in integrating acting with authentic presence in business. “You must think strategically as you develop your platform for authentic presence and communication. First, it’s about the role, results and people you serve, and only secondarily is it about you. What you seek are the aspects of deeply held self that are most relevant and strategic for the business purpose and requirements of your executive role.”
Diana McLain Smith, founding partner of Action Design, has spent the last 25 years researching and advising relationships at the top that make or break the growth of people and companies they lead. “Many relationships actually dis-incent the very authenticity that people clamor for. Executives are often surrounded by peers and subordinates who both want to be protected from harsh realities and at the same time demand transparency and truth.” Instead of confronting this bind head-on, too many executives err on one side or the other, saying more than people can use or less than they need. Her prescription: “First, you have to understand that relationships--not individual leaders--are the key to authenticity and you build relationships capable of withstanding authenticity.”
The charisma of individuals who gain authority cannot be a criterion for judgment. Ultimately, Heifetz says, you can tell authentic leadership by the ability over time to create a community that cultivates responsible authenticity. “Purposeful honesty and appropriate transparency at all levels are eventual indicators of your organization’s adaptability and ability to thrive.”
Bennis advises us to look for leaders who reach out to the widest network of sources: unexpected sources, dissonant sources, varied perspectives, sources that yield unvarnished truth and outside insight. “Gravitate toward the executive who can create an envelope of safety where people can commit candor without getting canned.”
Every aspiring leader wants to be thought of as authentic, a leader who people trust and will follow. It’s best to get real about the gray zones of honesty and transparency that you will be required to consider and act upon. Develop an explicit way you will measure your judgments about strategic choices and disclosure, and revisit your calibrations regularly. And don’t go it alone. Find someone with wisdom, expertise and an independent perspective to guide and challenge you as you wrestle with the many dilemmas of judgment required of all authentic leaders.
http://www.forbes.com/leadership/2006/09/22/leadership-harvard-cuban-lead-manage-cx_snj_0925opinion.html
Saj-nicole A. Joni 09.25.06
Internet start-up billionaire Mark Cuban is a fixture at Dallas Mavericks basketball games. He purchased a majority share of the NBA team in 2000 and has managed its operations ever since with the raw enthusiasm of a fan. As leader of the franchise, Cuban has always been, in a word, himself. His blunt comments about officials, other teams and even his own players have cost him more than $1.6 million in fines from the league. While fans and admirers enjoy the spectacle of his uncensored, “be yourself” transparency, its impact on his business is another matter.
Authenticity has been lauded as the gold standard for leaders who employees yearn to follow: a guardian we know and trust, with values we respect, who makes transparent, cogent and fair decisions we can stand behind. This matters all the way to the bottom line, since a leader who attracts and keeps the best people drives his or her company's performance and competitive position. There are benefits to being perceived as authentic. But thoughtful leaders know that the popular definition of authenticity--being fully yourself, completely transparent, always telling the unvarnished truth--is at odds with the reality of the executive leadership role and responsibilities.
Why? To effectively deal with all the issues executives face, the desire for full disclosure must sometimes give way to discretion. There are too many variables to be 100% authentic all the time, says leadership guru Warren Bennis. “The truth is, we all know that executives operate in roles that come with many strategic, operational, legal and ethical constraints.”
It’s time to rethink what we are looking for in authentic leaders. Despite a plethora of books and people who will tell you otherwise, authentic leadership is anything but simple, straightforward, fully truthful and uncontrived.
Mark Cuban’s judgment in purchasing the Mavericks franchise appears to be sound. But his decisions on and off the court since then have caused even some of his own players to question his leadership. According to Bennis, “What we are looking for is well-honed judgment that is rooted in visible purpose and values that we can consistently count on over time.”
Ron Heifetz, co-founder of Harvard’s Center for Public Leadership, takes this one step further. He teaches that calibrating authenticity by looking at the level of truth and transparency in a leader’s communications misses the mark, leaving out the purpose served when one plays a leadership role in the life of others.
“Authentic leadership is a function of those purposes, those commitments of service and the discipline anchoring them, not a function of self-expression. Fundamentally, leadership is the activity of educating and preparing people to be more adaptive, so that they can marshal resources and creativity to thrive in ever-changing and challenging environments,” Heifetz explains. “Authentic leadership--which includes judgment about pace, framing and what and how to disclose information--is a commitment to serve the growth and adaptability of those you lead.”
At its core, the executive position is a role, and nowhere is the seeming paradox of role and authenticity better understood than in the theater. “In order to effectively take on and play the role of a character, the actor must be 'real,' that is, connected to something authentic from the depths of his or her own being,” says Belle Halpern, co-founder of the Ariel Group, and internationally known for her pioneering work in integrating acting with authentic presence in business. “You must think strategically as you develop your platform for authentic presence and communication. First, it’s about the role, results and people you serve, and only secondarily is it about you. What you seek are the aspects of deeply held self that are most relevant and strategic for the business purpose and requirements of your executive role.”
Diana McLain Smith, founding partner of Action Design, has spent the last 25 years researching and advising relationships at the top that make or break the growth of people and companies they lead. “Many relationships actually dis-incent the very authenticity that people clamor for. Executives are often surrounded by peers and subordinates who both want to be protected from harsh realities and at the same time demand transparency and truth.” Instead of confronting this bind head-on, too many executives err on one side or the other, saying more than people can use or less than they need. Her prescription: “First, you have to understand that relationships--not individual leaders--are the key to authenticity and you build relationships capable of withstanding authenticity.”
The charisma of individuals who gain authority cannot be a criterion for judgment. Ultimately, Heifetz says, you can tell authentic leadership by the ability over time to create a community that cultivates responsible authenticity. “Purposeful honesty and appropriate transparency at all levels are eventual indicators of your organization’s adaptability and ability to thrive.”
Bennis advises us to look for leaders who reach out to the widest network of sources: unexpected sources, dissonant sources, varied perspectives, sources that yield unvarnished truth and outside insight. “Gravitate toward the executive who can create an envelope of safety where people can commit candor without getting canned.”
Every aspiring leader wants to be thought of as authentic, a leader who people trust and will follow. It’s best to get real about the gray zones of honesty and transparency that you will be required to consider and act upon. Develop an explicit way you will measure your judgments about strategic choices and disclosure, and revisit your calibrations regularly. And don’t go it alone. Find someone with wisdom, expertise and an independent perspective to guide and challenge you as you wrestle with the many dilemmas of judgment required of all authentic leaders.
http://www.forbes.com/leadership/2006/09/22/leadership-harvard-cuban-lead-manage-cx_snj_0925opinion.html
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Qualities Of A Visionary
Qualities Of A Visionary
By Ross Bonander
http://www.askmen.com/money/successful_150/162_success.html
In 1899, the commissioner of the U.S. Patent Office wrote a letter to President McKinley urging him to abolish his office, noting that “everything that can be invented has been invented.” Lacking an imagination, this man’s vision was to shut down the state-sponsored hunt for innovation and new ideas. Contrary to this, a true visionary sees in ways others can’t or don’t, for whatever reason. Furthermore, visionaries across all disciplines share certain qualities, and while nothing they’ve done can be mimicked without corrupting their ideals, they stand today to inspire the rest of us to follow -- not fear or reject -- the direction of our own calling.
Conviction
Any man can disagree, but true dissent requires a rare conviction, especially when one’s thoughts or opinions face a roar of opposing voices.In post-World War II Japan, Soichiro Honda defied a corporate culture that claimed “Japanese companies succeed as one.” He believed that Japanese corporations could benefit from the so-called American business phenomenon, which included a focus on individual achievement. He founded Honda Motor Company and put this into practice, even though he had to face disrespect and scorn from business circles and bureaucrats who tried to block Honda’s growth.Dov Charney, founder of American Apparel, refused to believe that U.S.-based apparel manufacturers could only make money if they had their garments made in Third World countries. But he also knew that if he were to succeed, he’d have to change the way factory workers were treated. He accomplished this through highly competitive wages, paid vacations, health insurance extended to families, free English classes, direct paycheck deposits to save on check-cashing fees, and five certified massage therapists working exclusively with factory workers. The result? 2005 sales in excess of $250 million.
Preparedness
The fabled knock from opportunity is more common than most imagine; far scarcer is the ability to recognize it. As a private pilot, Frederick Smith found himself taking on more and more cargo for companies that were unable or unwilling to wait for space on passenger airliners. Still in college, he wrote a paper for an economics class proposing an express delivery service. His professor was unimpressed, but Smith knew an opportunity when he saw it, and in 1971, he founded Federal Express. Bill Gates realized that if a computer’s operating systems and software were separated from the hardware, then almost anyone could create new technologies -- not just the engineers. Innovation followed on an incomprehensible scale, and Gates was wise enough to put his system on the front line.A visionary must be skeptical and possess another key quality.
Skepticism
Maintaining a dynamic, healthy mistrust for the systems and methods that define an industry or a business prevents the kind of complacency Ralph Waldo Emerson referred to when he wrote, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”When he became general manager of the Oakland Athletics, Billy Beane was more than a little skeptical of the way the MLB worked; after all, he’d been a top-rated prospect who tanked in the Majors. He noted that the scouts and skippers who had awful track records, which would ordinarily prevent them from getting another job in any field, were continually rehired by other clubs. So he fired the old guard and brought in people with an entirely new approach to baseball. While Beane has yet to win a World Series with this new system, the A’s have been incredibly successful, and they’ve done it on a shoestring budget.The World Wide Web was barely five years old when Pierre Omidyar became suspicious that it was headed wholly into the hands of big businesses. In his mind, the technology enabled a different direction: He envisioned it as a global marketplace where people could buy and sell amongst themselves, independently of big businesses. To that end, he created eBay. Contrary to popular legend, the first item sold on his brainchild was not a Pez dispenser, but a laser pointer that didn’t work.
Perspective
Finally, in the mind of the visionary, now and today are not equivalent to never or forever. In 1977, the president of Digital Equipment Corporation said: “There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home.” To some extent, he was right; in 1977, a home computer would have been fairly useless to the average individual. Yet, at that very moment, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were busy releasing the legendary Apple II computer, which gave people plenty of reasons to have a home computer.
The term “visionary” is overused the same way “genius” is -- it is often attached to people who are probably not worthy of the title. For this reason, the true test is the test of time at its most brutal. If someone is capable of carrying an idea from cradle to grave, against the proverbial grain, and contrary to the multitude of voices quick to say “no” or “never,” then he truly deserves the title of visionary.As for the U.S. Patent Office, since 1900, it has issued millions of patents and currently receives well in excess of 300,000 patent applications each year.
By Ross Bonander
http://www.askmen.com/money/successful_150/162_success.html
In 1899, the commissioner of the U.S. Patent Office wrote a letter to President McKinley urging him to abolish his office, noting that “everything that can be invented has been invented.” Lacking an imagination, this man’s vision was to shut down the state-sponsored hunt for innovation and new ideas. Contrary to this, a true visionary sees in ways others can’t or don’t, for whatever reason. Furthermore, visionaries across all disciplines share certain qualities, and while nothing they’ve done can be mimicked without corrupting their ideals, they stand today to inspire the rest of us to follow -- not fear or reject -- the direction of our own calling.
Conviction
Any man can disagree, but true dissent requires a rare conviction, especially when one’s thoughts or opinions face a roar of opposing voices.In post-World War II Japan, Soichiro Honda defied a corporate culture that claimed “Japanese companies succeed as one.” He believed that Japanese corporations could benefit from the so-called American business phenomenon, which included a focus on individual achievement. He founded Honda Motor Company and put this into practice, even though he had to face disrespect and scorn from business circles and bureaucrats who tried to block Honda’s growth.Dov Charney, founder of American Apparel, refused to believe that U.S.-based apparel manufacturers could only make money if they had their garments made in Third World countries. But he also knew that if he were to succeed, he’d have to change the way factory workers were treated. He accomplished this through highly competitive wages, paid vacations, health insurance extended to families, free English classes, direct paycheck deposits to save on check-cashing fees, and five certified massage therapists working exclusively with factory workers. The result? 2005 sales in excess of $250 million.
Preparedness
The fabled knock from opportunity is more common than most imagine; far scarcer is the ability to recognize it. As a private pilot, Frederick Smith found himself taking on more and more cargo for companies that were unable or unwilling to wait for space on passenger airliners. Still in college, he wrote a paper for an economics class proposing an express delivery service. His professor was unimpressed, but Smith knew an opportunity when he saw it, and in 1971, he founded Federal Express. Bill Gates realized that if a computer’s operating systems and software were separated from the hardware, then almost anyone could create new technologies -- not just the engineers. Innovation followed on an incomprehensible scale, and Gates was wise enough to put his system on the front line.A visionary must be skeptical and possess another key quality.
Skepticism
Maintaining a dynamic, healthy mistrust for the systems and methods that define an industry or a business prevents the kind of complacency Ralph Waldo Emerson referred to when he wrote, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”When he became general manager of the Oakland Athletics, Billy Beane was more than a little skeptical of the way the MLB worked; after all, he’d been a top-rated prospect who tanked in the Majors. He noted that the scouts and skippers who had awful track records, which would ordinarily prevent them from getting another job in any field, were continually rehired by other clubs. So he fired the old guard and brought in people with an entirely new approach to baseball. While Beane has yet to win a World Series with this new system, the A’s have been incredibly successful, and they’ve done it on a shoestring budget.The World Wide Web was barely five years old when Pierre Omidyar became suspicious that it was headed wholly into the hands of big businesses. In his mind, the technology enabled a different direction: He envisioned it as a global marketplace where people could buy and sell amongst themselves, independently of big businesses. To that end, he created eBay. Contrary to popular legend, the first item sold on his brainchild was not a Pez dispenser, but a laser pointer that didn’t work.
Perspective
Finally, in the mind of the visionary, now and today are not equivalent to never or forever. In 1977, the president of Digital Equipment Corporation said: “There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home.” To some extent, he was right; in 1977, a home computer would have been fairly useless to the average individual. Yet, at that very moment, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were busy releasing the legendary Apple II computer, which gave people plenty of reasons to have a home computer.
The term “visionary” is overused the same way “genius” is -- it is often attached to people who are probably not worthy of the title. For this reason, the true test is the test of time at its most brutal. If someone is capable of carrying an idea from cradle to grave, against the proverbial grain, and contrary to the multitude of voices quick to say “no” or “never,” then he truly deserves the title of visionary.As for the U.S. Patent Office, since 1900, it has issued millions of patents and currently receives well in excess of 300,000 patent applications each year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)