Are we up to the challenge?

Like most Americans, I have been shocked and devastated by the tragedy in Newtown.   Who can ever forget the death of 20 innocent children at the hands of an unbalanced young person?  
As I listen to the discussion these senseless deaths have engendered, I am appalled at the suggestion that the solution to gun violence is more guns.  America already has an unhealthy obsession with guns.   With 5% of the population of the globe, we have about 50% of the guns in private hands.   There are more guns in the US in private hands than in the Russian army.  Does this make sense?
I believe in the second Amendment whose purpose was to prevent oppression by another unjust government, such as the one that the colonists had experienced.

That does not mean that assault weapons should be in private hands.   I remember when I was young and TV was young, there was already dismay at the violence on TV and its possible effects on children.  The violence then was tame compared to the violence now in computer games, films, and TV.

It is time for us to pause and reflect on what we are doing.  Is this a nation bent on suicide?  Is this a nation bent on self-dsstruction?   No one needs an assault weapon.
We need to have more than a conversation, the euphemism one hears again and again on television news.  We need to take leadership in solving a problem.
In this season of healing and peace, let us take a giant step forward as a nation and show leadership in facing our own problems and solving them so that there are no more Newtown tragedies in your town and my town.

The Fiscal Cliff and Leadership

If the nation goes off the fiscal cliff, it is unclear what the economic impact will be.  Some think it will adversely affect the stock market, whereas others think it will slow down US growth.  But, the more obvious impact will be political.  The failure to resolve issues relating to the fiscal cliff are a potent example of the failure of leadership. 

On Sunday December 9, former Secretary of State and Presidential Chief of State, James Baker, presented a rational way to approach the fiscal cliff.  I thought to myself:  why isn't he at the table, mediating between Congress and the presidential administration?   
Baker presented careful, thoughtful approaches to resolving the fiscal cliff.   Who is listening?

It is clear that the US needs to cut its addiction to spending and needs to raise more revenue.  No matter how it is carved up, we shall all be asked to contribute in some way either through increased taxes or lower deductions.   

The gamesmanship of not wanting to raise taxes is symbolic on both sides.  Everyone involved knows more revenue has to gathered, and we have to reduce spending in some significant areas. 

Everyone wants to appear as a fiscal conservative but  has there been a true fiscal conservative in decades?  Even some of the most famous supposed conservatives in fact spend liberally for their own districts or their own states.

Pledges not to raise taxes are a kind of blackmail to hold over the head of Congress.  They are meaningless and should be abandoned.

A realistic approach to the fiscal cliff is necessary.   Congress and the administration have only a few weeks to wake up, or we all pay more taxes without any decisions being made.   That is the easy path.  Then Congress can blame the President, and the President can blame Congress.  That will be a failure of leadership and an invocation of "blame" as a substitute for rational decision-making.

Heroes and Leaders?

As a society, we love to create heroes only to tear them down later.   David Petraeus illustrates this point perfectly.    We embued Petraeus with heroic qualities as great as any of our World War II stars, including Eisenhower and MacArthur. 

When our hero was shown to be all too human, he not only fell from grace but his impressive record has been blemished.

Why don't we recognize from the outset that leaders are humans, not heroes on a pedestal, and view them accordingly?

The Two Myths that Haunt Us

The Two Myths that Haunt Us   

7/8/12

Two myths seem to haunt us as we go about our daily lives.  We can argue that these myths gnaw more deeply at women than men, but that may not be the case.

What are they?  The myth of the balance life and the myth that “we can have it all” dog our life and career paths.

For years I have taught a graduate course on Women and Leadership, and these two issues come up year after year.    

The two are interrelated and perhaps a belief in one leads to a belief in the other.

Contemporary women (and men too) believe that they can have a work-life balance.   The work-life balance suggests finding a perfect formula for dividing one’s attention between work and family and other interests.   The reality is that both work and family want 100% of one’s attention or at least 2/3 of it, and to spend time on work takes away from the family and vice versa.  Women in particular are guilt stricken when work intrudes on time they want to spend with their children.  Society may be more forgiving of men who spend time at work away from the family, but contemporary men feel guilt too. 

After years of reflection and life experience, my own conclusion is that one can have serial work-life balance but not simultaneous.   What do I mean?  Maybe over the next two months, I can focus more on family, but in the busy season in my work in the fall I know that I will have to focus more on work than on family activities.

This myth is closely related to the belief that “one can have it all.”   What is all, anyway?  First of all, “all” for you may differ from “all” for me.   All at 25 differs from all at 50.   You get the picture.   Does it mean that we can have everything that we want?   Does it mean that we can achieve success in careers and success in families?    This topic can be explored at great length, but the bottom line is that “having it all,” is abstract concept which is probably impossible to achieve.  Historically, for a woman, it probably meant that one can have a career and a family.   For a man, it probably meant that he could be a success at work and a super dad. 

On some level,"having it all" is possible for both men and women but requires a lot of work and attention.  Having it all is elusive and often the conception of “all” changes as we experience life.  

I encourage women to undertake both career and family.  But, that is not the same as “having it all,” and it will exact a heavy price.  One has to be disciplined, realize that leisure time is a luxury and one will have to juggle on a daily basis.  Not everyone can handle the pressures intrinsic to the process.

I think it is time we address these two myths.  I shall tackle these topics more.  This is just my opener on this theme. 

Developing a Strategy for Leadership

To develop a strategy for leadership, one must have a goal and a dream.  One cannot wander aimlessly  hoping something will fall into place:

To help you think about your own path, I offer the following questions to think about:
1- Do you have a goal for your life and career for the next 5-10 years?
2- Where do you want to be in 5 (10) years? What do you want to do?
3- What are some intermediate stages to achieve that goal?
4- What pitfalls must be avoided?
5-What challenges are anticipated?
6- What kinds of support do you have to help you achieve the goal?
7- What are your personal strengths that will help you to achieve the goal?

Answering these questions will be a big help to getting you on track to achieve your goals.

Is everyone a leader?

Where have all the leaders gone?   That lament is not infrequent in our society.  On the other hand, the popular literature suggests everyone can be, or is, a leader.   Is this possible?   

Some people do not want to lead.  They would rather follow, or perhaps they have never thought of themselves as leaders.  The whole concept may be alien to them.   

To be a leader requires commitment, intentional behavior, and focus.   These behaviors may not be right for everyone.   

To understand leadership, one also has to understand that not everyone seeks to be a leader

How Crucial Is One Leader?

With the disgrace of Bo Xi Lai in China, there seems to me to be an exaggeration of his significance in the overall Chinese political system.   Yes, it is a blot on the Chinese Communist Party, but, so what?   It does not prevent the party from functioning nor does it disable the rest of the leadership.  

I decided to put myself into the role of a Chinese person analyzing the US in order to point out the significance of the exaggeration.   The situations are not 100% parallel since the the US is not a one-party system, but the point is clear, I believe.

John Edwards, a disgraced American politician, is in President Obama's party.  A Chinese person might well interpret this as a disgrace to the Democratic Party that will handicap the President in his upcoming re-election campaign, in the same that Americans are viewing Bo's disgrace as a problem in the upcoming Chinese succession process.

In reality, does Edwards' disgrace in any way pose an issue for the President, the de facto leader of the Democratic Party?   No.   For most people, John Edwards has become irrelevant in the US political process.

I suggest that the same principle applies to Bo Xi Lai.   With his disgrace, he became irrelevant.  Yes, people may be disillusioned.  But, many Americans were personally disillusioned, when the seemingly idealistic Edwards proved to have clay feet.

Let us not exaggerate the significance of any one leader in our political system or other political systems.

Reflection. crisis avoidance, and Leadership

It is rare to find a book on leadership that does not put forth the virtues of reflection.   The unexamined life seldom leads to good decisions.    If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there; a famous truism.  
It is important to take time to reflect whether once a day or once a week.   Where am I going?   What am I doing?  Where are my priorities?   What are my must do tasks?   What can I defer and what must I do today?
Some people answer those questions by responding to urgent deadlines, rather than thoughtfully considering what is important in life.  
We all have some deadlines.  Some unintended and urgent necessities and some crises.  But we should not live on the edge, constantly skirting the next crisis.    It is important to think through one's priorities but allow enough flexibility to meet crises or urgent demands when they occur.
Good planning and reflection cannot solve all problems, but it can help us to avoid living in crisis mode.

Exceptional Leadership
May be subtle, may be invisible, and may be present all around us.   There a subtle forms of leadership around us every day that we don't always notice.   We look for the grand-scale leadership and often miss the quiet leaders, unheralded and unrewarded, who live next door, who work in the next cubicle, and who quietly go through life with little tasks of leadership.   Look for signs of leadership nearby rather than the spectacular acts of public leadership.

Some book suggestions on leadership

In recent months, I have read some marvelous books that treat leadership directly or indirectly.

Jeffrey Archer: First among Equals.   A novel about the career path of British political leaders over a 20 year period, from new MPs to the quest to become Prime Minister.

Richard Ben Cramer:  What It Takes:  The Road to the White House.   This is a detailed analysis of the men who sought to become Presidential candidates in 1988.  GHW Bush, Dole, Hart, Gephardt, Dukakis, and Biden are among the featured politicians.   A fascinating retroactive study that has amazing relevance in this political year.

Heileman and Halperin: Game Change.    This study leading up to the 2008 presidential election has become almost iconic in its analysis of each of the candidates.   One section of the book was made into an HBO film in 2012 (the section on Sarah Palin).   Each of the sections is fascinating.  I read it when it came out and re-read sections this winter after the film came out.

P.S.  On a different note, I don't recommend the film, Iron Lady, which portrays Thatcher principally in her declining years.   Leadership is largely lost in this tragic film that views her years as PM through the lens of dementia.

What is Leadership?

It has been a while since I posted on this blog.   In the fall, I had two demanding classes that involved a lot of attention and grading. Also I was immersed in leadership theory in one of the course so the blog did not seem necessary.   In the winter I was finishing up a major research project -- a co-authored book on emerging global powers.    Blogging on leadership went to the back burner.   It's time to think about this again.

I have been thinking lately about the basic question:   What is leadership?   How do we know it when we see it?
How do we know it is missing?
I have been in some situations in recent months when leadership was needed, but absent.   What can one do about it?   It is easy to say: step up and lead.   But, it is harder actually to do it.

I have to think about this issue.... What is leadership?  

Norma