TC0003: Values Based Leadership vs. Salesmanship

GEN Eisenhower speaking to troops
the day before D-Day

If you Google ”Definition of Leadership” (and who hasn’t?) you get 80.8 million returns.  My personal definition comes from one of the nation’s greatest statesmen, soldiers and leaders, former President Dwight David Eisenhower.  His definition is elegant in its simplicity: “Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it."  This is a leadership definition with values as its bedrock.

In this definition, the only difference between leadership and salesmanship is values.  The only difference between Adolph Hitler and Mahatma Gandhi was values.  Each was a charismatic visionary, capable of great influence over others.  However, where Hitler was a creature in the depths of depravity, Gandhi’s value set made him a force for moral supremacy.  Values count.

If you are in a leadership position then you have been granted regulatory authority over others.  With that authority you incur the absolute responsibility for those others.  That regulatory authority is what makes a supervisor.  But what makes a leader is the willingness of another to follow you.  Regulatory authority grants power from above.  Leadership is the empowerment of the leader by the led.  The question all leaders search for the answer to is “what is the element that causes empowerment?”.  I believe that trust is the basic bond of leadership and the element of empowerment, as my mentor, GEN Fredrick M. Franks instilled in me.    If you would be a leader, then you must have the trust of the led.  It is the led that must bestow upon you the mantle of leadership that is also a mantle of servitude.

If trust is the basic bond of leadership, how do we become trustworthy? It has been my observation that people hear about 40% of what I say.  They see 100% of what I do.  For my teenage children the hearing ratio appears to be much lower.  You know the saying, if you talk the talk, you must walk the walk.  As I mentioned earlier, values may be taught, but they are more easily caught. Dan Nolan

Next Post: Values as the Bedrock of Leadership

TC0002: Defining our Terms

One of the characteristics of any profession is that it has its own language.  It is that language that allow for rapid communications.  Doctors, lawyers, cops and soldiers all have their own way of speaking and distinct terminology.  It is important that we have that same ability to communicate volumes with a single word by defining the language of leadership and decision making.   Most importantly, we need to figure out where the term “management” fits in this discussion.  

As important as leadership is, it is not the alpha and omega. Other skills are also necessary.    In the military, the term management has acquired a pejorative connotation.  It is considered the antithesis of leadership.  “We manage things and we lead people”.  The belief is that leaders are heroic figures while managers are cold-hearted automatons with green eyeshades. 

This is a novice’s view and does a disservice to the study of management.  That being said, many distinguished authors have taken up the Management/Leadership argument.  Bennis and Nanus make a point of describing dysfunctional organizations as being over managed and under led. “Managers are people who do things right and leaders do the right thing” .  Koontz, Odonnell and Weihrich define management as the process of planning, organizing, staffing, leading and controlling at any level in any organization.  Drucker defines management in terms of the manager.  The manager is responsible for the plans and performance of others and the creation of relationship of trust between them, himself and his superior. 

This definition most closely aligns the processes that are decision-making with leadership.     It is my intent to define management in terms of these two components.  In this view, management equals command, therefore the term Command Management makes sense.

The debate about management and leadership centers on the concept that people, processes and things are separable.   I am hard pressed to think of a single situation in which things are managed separately from people.  Management is the coordination of things, processes and people toward a goal.  Leadership is not distinct from management; it is its critical underpinning.  Things and people comprise organizations and units. It is important to understand this frame of references regarding organizations before proceeding.

Organizations are structured collections of people and things.  If it is not structured it is a mob.  If it is a collection of just things, it is a warehouse.   Organizations learn; if motivated by leaders.  Organizations evolve if the team’s vision of the required structure evolves and the organization encourages change.  Evolution is preferable to revolution; revolution is preferable to extinction.   Ask the dinosaurs.  Dan Nolan

The purpose of this blog is to provide a framework for thinking about these components of command management as well as additional philosophy supporting its application.  It’s primary focus is the leader, but the need to build cohesive teams that are agile, versatile, durable, initiative driven, and able to evolve in a rapidly changing environment is the ultimate goal.  

My intention is to provide ways to think about leadership and decision-making as well as some tactics, techniques and procedures that can be put to work immediately.  The fundamental assumption underlying the concept of command management is that the leader is self-aware and believes in the underlying desire of all members of the team to be successful.  If one is unable to embrace this seemingly Pollyanna philosophy, break out the green eye shades and keep bean counting.

Next Post: Leadership and Decision Making Defined

TC0001: The Command Prompt

Over the course of a twenty-six year career in America’s most trusted institution, the United States Military,  I have had the opportunity to study all kinds of leaders and authoritarians.  In the decade since I left the military I have worked for and with small technology companies and defense industry giants.  I have started three companies and been the mid wife at several other entrepreneurial births.  In every case, the difference between success and failure has been two things: leadership and decision making. 

I will admit that I am predisposed to thinking in terms of leadership and decision making; those are the components of what the military calls Command.  Command is defined as to direct with authority.  This is a very simple definition with great depth. 

The purpose of this blog is to share my thoughts on command and its relevance to business, government, nonprofits and community service.  It has been often said that military leadership is to leadership as military music is to music.  I hope I can dispel that misconception and show that the tactics, techniques and procedures inculcated in military leaders is every bit as applicable to organizing the church bizarre as to leading a platoon in combat.  What the leaders wants to accomplish in both cases is mission accomplishment at minimum cost.  The only difference is the nature of that outcome. 

I hope you find this blog useful and please feel free to share your comments.     I look forward to the dialog.  Dan Nolan

Next Post: Defining our Terms