|
|
|
| |
| October 30, 2007 |
|
|
I've been a fan of Stanley O'Neal, Merrill Lynch's former Chairman and CEO who resigned under pressure yesterday, for a long time. It appeared he had all the character traits and performed all the functions expected of a great leader. Yesterday, someone asked me where I thought he failed. Well, although he delivered fantastic results for years, he certainly did not produce the results expected by his board and investors in this sub-prime debacle. Specifically, he went long on the sub-prime market, the market went bust, and Merrill lost billions of dollars. And producing results is probably the most important function of a leader.
But are we right to expect positive results all the time? Are leaders who occasionally fail to deliver results failures? I think not. We want leaders to be courageous and take risks. And what is risk? The exposure to the chance of loss. And we take risk because the reward is the possibility of gain. Or at least we perceive the possibility of gain. So if we want our leaders to take risks in the pursuit of gain, we have to accept some loss.
If all this is true, why is O'Neal now retired? Welcome to the unforgiving world of public companies. CEOs that lose billions of dollars generally aren't given a chance to do it again, at least at the same company. Interestingly, though, if O'Neal had avoided the sub-prime market and it had not crashed, he would likely have been fired for failing to take the risk and losing out on billions of dollars in profits Merrill could have booked. So, in the public company world, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't. Take risks, but never err - at least in a big way - or you'll be fired. |
| |
|
| |
| October 16, 2007 |
|
|
| Leaders and aspiring leaders everywhere, rush out (after you buy my book, of course) to buy The Mindful Leader: Ten Principles for Bringing Out the Best in Ourselves and Others, by Michael Carroll. This is where leadership theory and practice is going. Carroll leads us deep inside ourselves to reveal the ten talents necessary for leadership success. And if you are still resisting meditation as a means of attaining mindfulness, and extraordinary performance as a leader, Carroll may well be the person who brings you to your senses. I love this book! And check out his website: http://www.awakeatwork.net. |
| |
|
| |
| October 15, 2007 |
|
|
| On his The 700 Club show Monday, Pat Robertson said the U.S. will risk God's wrath if it forces Israel to surrender part of Jerusalem to the Palestinians. Hmmm...I'm going to suggest that if it's God's wrath we are trying to avoid, we ought to be shaking in our boots given our government's fraudulent inducement to go to war in Iraq, a war that has cost over a million lives so far. And I'm shaking even more when I consider how many Americans listen to this dude. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Jack and Suzy Welch write a good column in Business Week (always on the last page). I love their October 22, 2007 entry: Define Yourself - Or Others Will. They write, "Make sure people know what you stand for. Under no circumstances, no matter what the size of your company or the business you're in, should you ever let the members of your team guess about your principles or why you make the tough calls the way you do. Tell them yourself, and then tell them again and again."
I particularly like his example of how Bush blew a prime opporuntity to define himself by providing little explanation for his recent veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. His silence created a vacuum, which his critics filled with their own explanation that he is cold-hearted towards children. In reality, Bush likely had a reasonable justification for his veto, but he took a further and largely preventable hit to his already tattered reputation by being silent and allowing his critics to define him. |
| |
|
| |
| October 14, 2007 |
|
|
| The Republicans certainly don't have a lock on lapses of integrity. In California, the Democratic Speaker of the House, Fabian Nunez, is refusing to disclose all the details of the eye-popping expenditures he made with campaign money. He said he would explain some of the expenses but not all because "it's not required by law." Where in the world did leaders ever get the idea that their credibility, or integrity as many people like to call it, is something that gets formed by obeying the law? Credibility is possessing competency and displaying consistency and congruency in words and behavior, such that others have a deep confidence in his abilities and character. When my state's Speaker of the House runs up outrageously high bills on lavish trips and shopping sprees, I'd like an explanation. And if he refuses to provide one, am I off base in assuming he has something to hide? Am I off base in losing my confidence in him? What the hell is wrong with these people? |
| |
|
| |
| October 12, 2007 |
|
|
| I just received my last issue of Business 2.0. Its parent, Fortune, has shuttered the 10-year-old magazine. I am so bummed. Along with Fast Company, another great progressive business magazine, Business 2.0 gave us more insight into the future and a deeper perspective of the present than are possible from mainstream business media. And it packaged it all in a spirit of fun and adventure. Thank you, Josh Quittner (Editor) and your team, for your very meaningful contribution to the economic growth of this nation over the past ten years and, perhaps more importantly, the entrepreneurial experience of millions. We'll miss you! |
| |
|
| |
| October 5, 2007 |
|
|
| The Source of Leadership is officially a bestseller! As of yesterday, it reached a ranking of 176 out of 2.4 million active titles on BarnesandNoble.com and 24 out of over 230,000 business titles. Check out BarnesandNoble.com (currently 35% off)and Amazon.com for great prices on what is being hailed as the "voice of the new leadership paradigm." To those of you who have already bought, thank you for your support! If you like it, spread the word! |
| |
|
| |
| October 2, 2007 |
|
|
A New York jury today found Isiah Thomas, coach of the New York Knicks, sexually harassed a former executive in the Knicks front office and the Knicks then fired her in retaliation for filing a claim against Thomas. The jury awarded $11.6 million in damages to the former executive.
So, again, we have the issue of credibility of a high profile leader. The Knicks and Thomas have proclaimed their innocence and vow to overturn the verdict on appeal. The leadership issue, though, is whether Thomas’ credibility (i.e., possessing competency and displaying consistency and congruency in words and behavior, such that others have a deep confidence in his abilities and character) has been harmed such that he cannot effectively lead. That question won’t await the lengthy appeal process. It may have already been answered, and only those close to the team know for certain. Sure, one can wonder if Thomas is really all that competent given the way the team has floundered in recent years, both with him as head of basketball operations and last season with him as head coach. But the question that arises with this verdict is whether he has in fact met the second test of credibility, that is, displayed consistency and congruency in words and behavior, such that others have a deep confidence in his abilities and character. By a preponderance of the evidence, a jury says no. Let's see what Thomas' constituents (i.e., players, employees, advertisers, and fans) say. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
I don’t care anymore if U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sexually harassed Anita Hill. I cared a lot back in 1991 during his confirmation hearings. I don’t know about you, but I didn’t want a man who did the things Hill said he did deciding the things the Supreme Court decides. At the same time, Thomas vehemently denied Hill’s allegations, and I didn’t want an innocent man denied the opportunity to serve on the Court. Who knows who was telling the truth, but Thomas was confirmed. He has gone on to press the conservative agenda hoped for by then-President George H.W. Bush. And Hill has continued her distinguished teaching career.
But what I do care about is a Supreme Court Justice, occupying one of the premier leadership positions known to humankind, failing to take personal responsibility. And that is exactly what Thomas does in his just-released autobiography, My Grandfather’s Son. Laced with blame, Thomas criticizes broadly. Hill for her allegations. The left for allegedly sponsoring Hill. African-Americans for being too dependent.
The leader who will not take personal responsibility – complete ownership of what is, with no blame, disownment, or neglect – will never have the credibility, the courage, or the ability to inculcate a culture of accountability among his constituents that is needed for effective leadership. And until Thomas owns his life situation and everything that has happened to him, he will not be an effective leader.
Don’t get me wrong…Thomas should have denied the Hill allegations if they were wrong. Indeed, he had a responsibility to state the truth. But once they became history, and he was confirmed to the Court, his focus should be on personal responsibility. What would this look like? How about this, at least with respect to the Hill incident? "I, Clarence Thomas, am completely responsible for the allegations made by Anita Hill and the effects they caused. Although I stand by my denial of her allegations, I understand that I attracted these things into my life and I am working to understand the reasons." This would deepen my confidence in him as a leader. This would not further underscore the incongruence between his words and what others allege about his behavior. This would show courage. This would inspire every constituent of his, and we all are to some extent, to be more accountable in our own lives.
Your Honor, with your book you blew a chance to transcend all that you allege is wrong in the world. But every day is a choice, and opportunity is perpetual. Check out The Source of Leadership, and its companion site, www.thesourceofleadership.com, for more on personal responsibility and seven other drivers of the high-impact leader. |
| |
|
| |
| October 1, 2007 |
|
|
Yesterday in the NY Times, columnist Frank Rich wrote an interesting column about how the 2008 election is shaping up. While conventional wisdom says Hillary has just about locked up the Democratic nomination, Rich says, "Not so fast!" Sure, the Republicans are looking flakier by the moment, but it is not too late for the Democrats to implode. Hillary, Rich says, is very vulnerable. According to Rich, she is mirroring Gore in 2000 in terms of fear about defining herself. "Is she so eager to be all things to all people, so reluctant to offend anyone, that we never will learn what she really thinks or how she will really act as president?" And he says her post-first lady record suggests a follower rather than a leader, citing her inability to offer a credible explanation of why she gave Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq, why she voted against the Levin amendment that would have put some diplomatic brakes on Bush, why it took two years into the war for her to start speaking out against it, and why she held back on describing her health care fix until Edwards and Obama unveiled theirs, thereby revealing the electorate’s hot buttons.
Some political friends of mine say the opinion of Rich is so on point that Republicans are wishing with all their might that Hillary gets the nomination. They believe she, among the Democratic frontrunners, is the most vulnerable in the general election. When push comes to shove, they say, the candidate who has the best and most immediate plan to withdraw from Iraq and who appears to be the best leader will be elected. They say Hillary is slippery on the war and more slippery in terms of several of the key traits and functions of a leader. Specifically, she lacks self-definition (intimately knowing her values, beliefs, higher purpose, and vision of the future, and expressing them clearly); credibility (possessing competency and displaying consistency and congruency in words and behavior, such that others have a deep confidence in her abilities and character); inspiring (listening deeply to others to discover a common purpose, then giving life to her vision by communicating it so that citizens see themselves in it); courageous (able to make the tough calls, perform the tough tasks, and having a propensity for taking risks); and producing results (achieving her vision in the most efficient, holistic, and measurable manner). They remind me that, while Hillary has spent six years in the Senate and eight years in the White House as first lady, her record is not necessarily one of producing results. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
Inquire about booking David M. Traversi to speak or lead workshops
|
| |
 |
| |
A New Leadership Paradigm!
A National Bestseller!
Check out David M. Traversi's much acclaimed new book, The Source of Leadership™ Eight Drivers of the High-Impact Leader. Click here for more information.
|
| |
|
| |
Join The Source of Leadership™ Community
Click here to join the network of leaders and potential leaders dedicated to radically transforming the state of leadership and the performance of leaders everywhere. |
| |
|
| |
The Fruit of the Masters. Click here for our highly coveted list of recommended books on leadership, personal growth, and related topics.
|
| |
|
| |
The Source of Leadership will send you a daily tip designed to help you stay at the top of your leadership game. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
