Maybe I’m just old fashioned…
But…
If you are a 1/3 owner in a business and you are claiming a tax loss of about $1 billion, the math implies that you had to destroy $3+ billion in corporate value to use that write-off.
Everyone associated with the company lost their jobs and a liquidation process probably recovered only pennies on the dollar for the debtors and other investors.
I’m pretty sure that is not considered a good business model.
But hey…
I might just be a bit old-fashioned.
To paraphrase the old saying, “Leadership
is like the weather – everyone talks about it, but no one does anything about it.” People seem to accept leadership, good or bad, as a cosmic fate that simply happens. If we benefit, great. If we suffer from inadequate leadership, it is perceived as bad fortune and unavoidable.
I do not accept those premises. Unlike the weather, we can do something about leadership
Leadership development is one of the single most important strategic activities undertaken by business entities throughout the world. To ignore the need for excellent leadership practices is an invitation to catastrophe.
Here is what the science says:
I think there are three main fallacies that directly contribute to poor leadership development:
Fallacy one – “Real” leaders have charisma. Continue reading
I had a podcast interview with Jonathan Pritchard over at A Life Well Designed. Jonathan uses design principles to analyze challenges in life and business, then applies design techniques to find elegant, effective solutions.
(For some reason I had a tough time enunciating, but I hope the messages were clear.)
I enjoyed the interview immensely, thanks Jonathan!
EOM,
(http://www.alifewelldesigned.com/podcast/alwd-008-leadership-with-ken-wrede/)
What is the point of all of it?
Millions of dollars are spent each year on personality assessment tests. But, nobody can express a clear reason why.
“Two and a half million Americans a year take the Myers-Briggs. Eighty-nine companies out of the US Fortune 100 make use of it, for recruitment and selection or to help employees understand themselves or their co-workers.”[1]
Almost 90% of Fortune 100 companies perform these tests. This is amazing to me.
I have taken these assessments. After receiving my results, my first thought always is: interesting, but so what?
I see a lot of commentary and articles on how to assess leadership styles and roles.
Are these useful tools? Can we use them to predict behaviors or successes? Continue reading
Why do we fear the NSA?
Why do we fear sharks?
Why do we fear anything?
Here’s some context:
Which should you fear more, the creature whose main potential for attack is within swimming distance of shore in salt water or the item that is the featured item in every single bedroom? Continue reading
I, like everyone else, was vastly entertained and totally engaged by Chris Hadfield during his missions assigned to the International Space Station (ISS).
It was a great piece of public outreach that I think captured the world’s attention on science and space.
So, why does this topic show up here?
Think of it as a thought experiment.
A way to exercise critical thinking skills and follow a line of research.
As I watched Chris’ videos I thought to myself “where the hell did he find a guitar?”
“Did NASA waste money just to get the instrument up there just for Hadfield?”
This is nothing more than an example of following a simple thread of thought that I found interesting. An example of posing a question (or two) and trying to find reasonable answers. Continue reading
“Cause of death?”
“The heart stopped.”
If you are a CSI fan, a fan of the spinoffs, forensic or crime documentaries, or any other show or movie of the genre, you’ve probably watched hundreds of hours of forensic science.
You’re practically a coroner!
Forget all of the testing, the gruesome details of each case, the motives, or the means; the cause of all deaths come down to one final outcome…
The heart stopped.
I can’t say that I have seen hundreds of leadership programs, but I can say that I have been responsible for sponsoring and building, maybe, ten programs from scratch. I’ve been exposed to others (maybe 30) in an advisory role or as a participant.
In each case, the success or effectiveness of leadership training came down to the question “was the heart still beating?” Continue reading
In class, leadership seems all so simple. It is in black and white. There are diagrams. One chapter seems to lead logically to another. Like any new practical skill, the theory is not the same as practice. Is leadership a science or is it an art?
Excluding the “mystic” part, I have come to realize that it is a bit of both science and art.
I have been studying leadership since I was 18. It was MS 101, an introduction to military science. My first professional career military preparation class as an Army cadet.
As I mentioned in an earlier article, one of the difficulties is the use of the word “leadership”. It is commonly used, but the context changes as it is used as a noun, verb, adverb, or adjective. The definition has to be inferred through context. That makes every article you read confusing and, at times, a seeming contradiction to other articles.
My own experience from the numerous classes, beginning with the first class, is that the instructor will emphasize every aspect of leadership on an equal basis. From an academic point of view it was because you had to be tested. The equivalency of everything made prioritizing action based on theory confusing. The history and theories are interesting, but hard to apply on a daily basis.
Over the years and other classes, I was always surprised to see that there was rarely an overlap from one leadership course to another. It was confusing because how was it possible for leadership traits and leadership principles to morph from year to year, source to source. The instructors taught from within their narrowed vision of experience or shared the latest article on “The 10 Secrets of Leadership” which also changed from author to author.
How do you know what to apply? Can you predict leadership success or failure?
One of the hardest comments for anyone to say when speaking of Bill O’Reilly is “I have no opinion about the guy.” He makes it almost impossible to separate the messenger from the message.
Human bias is not part of an intellectual process, it is an emotional one. Almost everyone has a bias regarding O’Reilly. If the bias is positive, people agree with him automatically because he resonates with them emotionally and reinforces the group opinion (several documented biases come into effect that strengthens group membership). If the bias is negative, another group of people disagree, also automatically, with biases that enforce their group feeling.
Full disclosure on my part… My own biases of O’Reilly stem from my perception of his abrasiveness and my lifelong cynicism of self-appointed experts and authorities.
I have to put those aside. Ignore the news hype and make a fair analysis so I can fairly judge O’Reilly and ask the question…
Was Bill O’Reilly really lying?
I recently discussed Bill O’Reilly’s media crisis (here). He responded to his critics and the crisis terribly. I also discussed Brian Williams’ crisis and the mitigating circumstances that I believe contributed to a faulty memory recollection that blew up into a media frenzy (here).
Does O’Reilly deserve the same benefit of doubt that I feel Williams deserves? Do the same mitigating circumstances apply?? Continue reading
The color green is important here.
If you are alive today and watched any kind of television in the last 20 years you’ve seen the green screen of night vision recording: war reporting, “ghost hunters”, traffic helicopters, numerous movies. The pictures are instantly recognizable as having mediocre resolution, but clear enough to see the creepy reflection of light from retinas of the filmed subjects.
The color red is important here.
One of my favorite action movies growing up was “Ice Station Zebra”, a Cold War espionage thriller based on the 1963 book by Alistair MacLean.
One of the scenes that stuck with me was when the crew made preparation for night watch on the conning tower bridge. Before the watch crew went on duty, everyone was wearing red-tinted goggles to protect their night vision. The memory is vivid and it was reinforced through to adulthood: red flashlight filters and maps designed to be readable at night with a red filter (quick explanation: night viewable maps have features depicted in red ink, the assumption is that everyone will use red filters at night and the red ink becomes near invisible when viewed with red light).
Spies, submarines, arctic setting, Super Panavision 70, no kissing… woooohoooo! The perfect Saturday afternoon movie fare for a kid. (It is rumored that Howard Hughes watched the movie 150 times on a continuous loop, if it was good enough for Howard… well, I digress.) Continue reading
K.W. Wrede 