Good leaders make it a point to occasionally lose arguments, to be outvoted by the team, and to concede to the wisdom of others whenever they can. They know that getting their way on everything is a surefire way to create a passive team of disengaged followers.
I love reading this!!! I would understand the fact that when leaders bent to the submission of their rightful principles, its not losing their credibility from the perspective of organizational interest but rather an education-driven approach. Our cognitive biases form the virtue of intolerance in the midst of trivial resonance. And, when leaders opted the way to giving in will indeed undermined the tenet of leadership from a subjective inference. I am reminded of one the greatest philosophers who posited that educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all. With this logical assertion, yoi know when to lose or win. Whether your leadership is relinquished or not does not affect the virtue of accepting differences in views of unprecedented educative sense of the claimable wisdomful ignorants.
This was quite an interesting read, as I’m pondering the ins and outs of the clarity. I really wonder if leaders do what they do.
As one who’s been in Leadership rolls for many years I don’t think I’ve ever conceded to losing or backing down on purpose. The one thing I’ve been taught is to let your hire’s do what they were hired to do.
I think a perfect example of this would be Bill Belichick and New England Patriots. I’m far from being a patriots fan or even a Bill Belichick fan but I am a fan of how well that organization ran. The complexities of doing so mean that you have to hire the people whom you trust and instill confidence in to do their part in the running of the business. If I’ve hired an offensive coordinator I expect him to perform as the coordinator and his assistant coaches need to specifically teach and coach the players at the respective positions.
Like in business this too needs to be instilled. as a manager or CEO you’re at a level where you brought people into your organization under your wing to perform as they need to perform. The vision and mission is set in place that needs to be carried out.
Processes and procedures are vital in this endeavor and if we are constantly looking over our shoulders to see what the best move is we are causing waste and delay.
I’m not saying to be a quiet leader, in the same token I’m not saying that I leave it up to you to do what’s right in getting the mission accomplished.
All of this being said, I’m not saying that the process or procedure for pure flowing business cannot be changed or better yet improved. Hence, “ continuous improvement“. But I am saying during daily situational business decisions conceding isn’t letting your team make the calls, you hired them to make the calls. It’s their responsibility to make the calls.
In closing, I am not saying this theory is a show of weakness or softness however, a good leader has put together a team assembled the brain trust to do what they were supposed to do.
Lastly, Love these conversations and perspectives keep up the great work and have a beautiful safe day and stay strong!
Great post, and this is why leadership is an art and not a science. Great leaders have a feel for the situations you describe, know when to loosen the reins, when to tighten them. As you say, especially when it involves vision, mission, and values, leaders need to reserve those decisions for themselves, or weigh in if the organization is about to veer from them. Well said.
The late Steven B. Sample talked about the importance of choosing what hill we are willing to die on (Sample. 2002). Whatever position we hold; I have found this lesson to be true. Much like your post, for the most part I live and let live. The group as a whole decides our approach. The mission is the same. How we get there is where the difference lays. Non-negotiables are my principle/s, the needs of the organization, then the professional relationship. I want to be clear, this doesn't mean I advocate for our management team to treat the team members like sh*t. It means we are all voluntary employees. Let's do the work we agreed to be paid for.
I think you’re right. It’s about working out the differences between stylistic choices and micromanagement and steering the ship. These leadership decisions are different and have different consequences. A leader needs to choose their method carefully
I love reading this!!! I would understand the fact that when leaders bent to the submission of their rightful principles, its not losing their credibility from the perspective of organizational interest but rather an education-driven approach. Our cognitive biases form the virtue of intolerance in the midst of trivial resonance. And, when leaders opted the way to giving in will indeed undermined the tenet of leadership from a subjective inference. I am reminded of one the greatest philosophers who posited that educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all. With this logical assertion, yoi know when to lose or win. Whether your leadership is relinquished or not does not affect the virtue of accepting differences in views of unprecedented educative sense of the claimable wisdomful ignorants.
Great Day to All!
This was quite an interesting read, as I’m pondering the ins and outs of the clarity. I really wonder if leaders do what they do.
As one who’s been in Leadership rolls for many years I don’t think I’ve ever conceded to losing or backing down on purpose. The one thing I’ve been taught is to let your hire’s do what they were hired to do.
I think a perfect example of this would be Bill Belichick and New England Patriots. I’m far from being a patriots fan or even a Bill Belichick fan but I am a fan of how well that organization ran. The complexities of doing so mean that you have to hire the people whom you trust and instill confidence in to do their part in the running of the business. If I’ve hired an offensive coordinator I expect him to perform as the coordinator and his assistant coaches need to specifically teach and coach the players at the respective positions.
Like in business this too needs to be instilled. as a manager or CEO you’re at a level where you brought people into your organization under your wing to perform as they need to perform. The vision and mission is set in place that needs to be carried out.
Processes and procedures are vital in this endeavor and if we are constantly looking over our shoulders to see what the best move is we are causing waste and delay.
I’m not saying to be a quiet leader, in the same token I’m not saying that I leave it up to you to do what’s right in getting the mission accomplished.
All of this being said, I’m not saying that the process or procedure for pure flowing business cannot be changed or better yet improved. Hence, “ continuous improvement“. But I am saying during daily situational business decisions conceding isn’t letting your team make the calls, you hired them to make the calls. It’s their responsibility to make the calls.
In closing, I am not saying this theory is a show of weakness or softness however, a good leader has put together a team assembled the brain trust to do what they were supposed to do.
Lastly, Love these conversations and perspectives keep up the great work and have a beautiful safe day and stay strong!
Great post, and this is why leadership is an art and not a science. Great leaders have a feel for the situations you describe, know when to loosen the reins, when to tighten them. As you say, especially when it involves vision, mission, and values, leaders need to reserve those decisions for themselves, or weigh in if the organization is about to veer from them. Well said.
Good morning,
Good stuff.
The late Steven B. Sample talked about the importance of choosing what hill we are willing to die on (Sample. 2002). Whatever position we hold; I have found this lesson to be true. Much like your post, for the most part I live and let live. The group as a whole decides our approach. The mission is the same. How we get there is where the difference lays. Non-negotiables are my principle/s, the needs of the organization, then the professional relationship. I want to be clear, this doesn't mean I advocate for our management team to treat the team members like sh*t. It means we are all voluntary employees. Let's do the work we agreed to be paid for.
Thanks for your time.
This post reflects Anthony Albanese. He is stoic, focused and resolute.
I think you’re right. It’s about working out the differences between stylistic choices and micromanagement and steering the ship. These leadership decisions are different and have different consequences. A leader needs to choose their method carefully