Coming soon--my latest newsletter and video. There's something very new for both of them, and I'd like to introduce you to them now.
The video and the newsletter pertain to the same person and something he did that can benefit you--Daniel Morgan and the campfire conversation. Morgan was an American general during the Revolutionary War. Among the many dramatic chapters of Morgan's life, and specifically, his life as a leader, is the story of how he approached the most pivotal battle of his military career. Prior to the Battle of Cowpens in early 1781, Morgan engaged in a series of campfire conversations. I make the argument that this technique was responsible for what happened the next day. You'll soon be able to watch my video on Morgan, read the newsletter that's devoted entirely to him, and download the Morgan installment of The Tackle Box from my Shop. I think you'll find all of this material quite provocative and worthwhile.
Many of you know that I especially like the analogy of a river in understanding history's role in your life. To restate it briefly--time moves like a river, you put in at a point, you're on the river for a while, and then you pull out at a later point. The stuff between embarkation and debarkation is the flow of your life.
There's a lot more to it, of course, but this will suffice to give you a sense of my thought on it.
Now, here's my point to you at this moment--take a little time today or over the next few days and try to describe your spot on the river right now, as you head into late summer 2010. Does it look pretty much like it did 5, 10, or 20 years ago? What's changed and what's stayed the same? And what have you learned that prepares you for the next stretch of river ahead?
I'd like to continue with my previous post on leadership and division. Yes, I think responding to division is one of the most important duties of leadership. This does not mean, however, that I think unanimity or consensus are the key goals of a leader who faces division. Because I love history, I love reality. Reality tells me that a workable core, a reasonable degree of unity, is the best goal for dealing with division. The upshot of this approach is that a leader must keep the core group together, make sure that its immediate fringes (the places where it touches those in division) have some opening for give-and-take with the core group, and can respond to those most extreme opponents, those diehards of division. We have exaggerated the role of consensus and near-unanimity in today's leadership. A workable core is the better way.
We hear a lot about the need for vision in a leader. That is one of the top responsibilities in leadership. Agreed. However, an overlooked aspect of leadership is the reality of division. A leader can have the grandest vision in the world and yet if he or she can't cope with division among the team of followers, disaster will result. When you enter a leadership position or know of a person who does, please make certain to think meaningfully about the presence of division, the dynamics in the near term future that can cause division, and the most appropriate and available strategies for dealing with division. To do otherwise is to court disaster.
One of my favorite historical case studies pertains to George Washington as President. He had a particular view of division and found himself having to cope with the unraveling of this view over eight years. It's an outstanding example for you to study and reflect upon.
Just read an article that got me thinking. The piece was online and it was about the 5th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the devastating effect of the event on the political careers of George W. Bush, Kathleen Blanco, and Ray Nagin. Once more, you see the role that key anniversaries (the 19th wouldn't make the cut, the 5th almost always does).
I want you to think about the role of anniversaries in your organization. I'm not talking about ordinary ones like long-serving employees and so forth. I'm referring to events, decisions, actions, and a host of other things that have been critical in the history of your organization. You can use these anniversaries in your leadership to inspire, to crystallize or re-crystallize a vision, to promote accountability, and many more ways, too. Acknowledging the passage of time is an important resource at your disposal as a leader.
This month is the 20th anniversary of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, which led to the Gulf War of 1990-1991. Because of the round number (20), this anniversary has produced a spate of articles on the event and its meaning. The articles point to a fascinating fact and truth of history--that it can change in form, substance, and meaning over time.
Several commentators emphasize that the decision to leave Hussein in power left conditions that nurtured the subsequent Iraq War. They blame this for what one called "the 20 Years' War."
My point isn't to agree or disagree. It's simply to say that time alters the meaning of history. By the way, in researching the Gulf War as part of my transformation and leadership module (the U.S. military 1974-1991), I was struck by how ragged, uneven, and unsure events were in 1990-1991. We tend to think of that event as amazingly swift and straight. Take it from me--it wasn't. Let me know if you want to know a little more about my findings.
Let me give you a brief glimpse into leadership and transformation. The example is from my module on the American military, 1974-1991 and the link between transformation and leadership. In the mid-1970s, Tommy Franks was a mid-level officer who, in a new assignment, accidentally bumped into a private in a hallway. "F--- you," the private sneered to him. Approximately 15 years later, an Air Force pilot was on CNN telling an interviewer that he was proud to serve his country in the Gulf War. That, my friends, is one impressive transformation in one short span of time. Learn how they--we--did it.
