For those that really think, they know that mistakes are a gold mine. Or can be. Or should be. But most don't know because most people and organizations operate from a model that, whether in theory or practice, mistakes are unacceptable. Successful people work here, we expect success. We strive for success. Blada, blada, blada. I'm not merely O.K. You're not merely O.K. I'm a winner, your're a winner. We're all winners here.
Classic "hamburger management" as the great, but now obscure (by choice), Adrian Savage*, would call it. Macho, macho, men. We want to be macho men.
So many "C Students" remain at the helms of business and industry and failure is not an option on a daily basis in their cultures. They just don't know that failure can be a gold mine. Maybe because they would have to admit one or two of their own on their way to the top, and that's not how it works.
All this to say - Listen to this and watch the TED Talk and tell your friends and suggest that they share it some way, some how, with the many many neanderthals out there still infecting business, government, non-profits, small and large, all in "leadership" positions.
This fella was our CEO and this was part of a New Manager Orientation. Trust me, he had no friends. He said that if his mother wasn't performing he would sit across the table and have to fire her. At the first management meeting he presided over he told everyone to look to their right and then look to their left. Then said, "See these people? 50% of you won't be here in a year."
Mr. Snell is still out there somewhere in New England I've heard.
Bureaucracy: One too Many Cooks In the Kitchen. One major challenge with the bureaucratic organization
is the massive tier of managers with the power to intervene in the
activities of those below them, even when these ‘subordinates’ act
outside the manager’s area of expertise. Unfortunately, all too often
these managers lack the necessary trust and good sense to leave well
enough alone. I wholeheartedly agree that the post-bureaucratic
organization will feature empowered employees, guided mainly by a set
of shared goals. Oddly enough, I’m going to suggest another process to
address this – think of it as reverse bureaucracy. A process by which
senior managers have to build a business case to justify intervention
with subordinates outside their normal jurisdiction would be very
The video and talk speak for itself. To transform operations through a new kind of leadership on a Navy submarine when almost EVERYTHING in the "regulations" and "culture" of the Navy dictate the opposite is truly astounding.
People should do some looking into this fella, David Marquet. I will.
If you want to enjoy what you do and feel that the world is, in some small way, a better place because of your efforts, you need to take your time. Sure, you can breeze through being a leader, substituting formulaic actions for true expertise and understanding. But why would you want to do that? If you have no time to pay attention beyond that required to set financial targets and hound people to match or exceed them, can you truly call yourself a leader? There's the crux of the problem: if outcome is all that matters, especially if it needs to be produced as cheaply as possible, there's no rationale for treating people well. It costs money and interferes with getting the most out of them in the shortest time. We rightly despise tyrants and criminals who exploit and enslave people for their own ends, but are there methods so different from corporations that cut costs by forcing people to work longer and longer hours for the same pay? Or those that renege on pension rights to boost short-term profits? Or those that outsource manufacturing to Far Eastern sweatshops? Even though sweatshops are common, they are so widely recognized as wrong that companies employing them go to great lengths trouble to deny or distance themselves from their operations. FromSlow Leadership, by Adrian Savage, 2006.
Good luck ever getting a copy. Emailed the author and he has no plans to reprint. Appeared to have no interest either. Too bad for the world.
I no longer have a dog in the hunt re: gay anything in the Roman Catholic Church. If Pope Francis confirms there is a "gay lobby" well, he's the pope and he probably has looked into the matter.
In any case, many organizations perhaps have rogue or corrupt corners that have to be dealt with.
So it's not about gay to me, it's about how the leadership of Francis is being exercised in a situation with a rogue or corrupt inner group.
Pope Francis did not say how he would tackle such a lobby in the Curia, the church's central government. But during the June 6 meeting with the Latin American and Caribbean group he raised the subject of reforming the Vatican — something, he said, that “almost all Cardinals asked for” in the meetings leading up to the conclave that selected him as Pope in March.
“I also asked for it,” he said. “I cannot promote the reform myself — [on] these matters of administration I am very disorganized, I have never been good at this — but the cardinals of the Commission will move it forward.”
He asked those present to pray for him “that I make mistakes the least possible.”
One of Francis' first acts as Pope was to create a commission of eight cardinals who will help him on Church governance including curial reform. The commission is to meet for the first time in October, although Francis already is consulting them and others.
Informed Vatican sources tell Newsmax that Francis has been holding a series of brainstorming sessions with Vatican-based cardinals and other senior Vatican officials on how to reform the Curia.