Showing posts with label complexity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label complexity. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

The Real Trouble With Free Speech

In his excellent book, "Worse Than War" (2009, Public Affairs, New York), Daniel Jonah Goldhagen explores the issues of "genocide, elimination, and the on-going assault on humanity". At the end of Chapter 9 he makes the comment "actual minds create actual worlds". His point is that what we think about other people and what we believe should be "our" world eventually becomes the "actual world" for us. When an opportunity then arises where we can bring that world into being, we tend to grab it with both hands. If our thinking is around the exclusiveness of our family, our group, our race, etc then, when given the opportunity we will try to ensure everyone else acknowledges this and yields to our wishes. "We are in control". The result is often "worse than war".

I've been thinking about this a lot lately as the issue of free speech has been debated in the Australian media. In an earlier blog, talking about the incidence which started this latest discussion on free speech, I said:
"Before I proceed, let me make some things clear. First in relation to free speech. In my new book "Third Generation Leadership and the Locus of Control: knowledge, change and neuroscience" (2012, Gower Publications, UK), I make the following statement:
I have spent my life believing in the power of a democratic society where the rule of law ensures that people will not be imprisoned without trial; that habeas corpus is a vital component of a free society; that secret police and interrogation without legal representation is wrong and an abuse of power; that freedom of faith, speech and association are inalienable rights – even if I disagree totally with what you say, believe or with whom you associate, you have an absolute right to say what you want, follow the faith or non-faith of your choice, and associate with whoever you wish."

There are many people in every society who don't think critically about what they hear on the radio, see on TV or in the movies, or read in the newspaper. People who specialise in propaganda (from Goebbels down) have known and do know this. The result is that they are fully aware that if you say something often enough and authoritatively enough, eventually many people will believe it even if it is palpably untrue. For this reason every person and/or party pushing a particular agenda seeks to ensure that their message is propounded strongly and often. The role of "shock jocks" in the media is often critical in this.

Some would argue that this then becomes an abuse of "freedom of speech". I disagree. The real trouble with freedom of speech is that, all too often, the right to speak out is too seldom used by those of us who do apply our critical faculties to what we hear, what we see, and what we read. This failure by us to speak out ultimately runs the risk of letting "the inmates run the asylum". If that happens then, as Goldhagen makes very clear, the following words by Pastor Martin Niemoller (which originally applied to Nazi Germany) could have increasing relevance in today’s society no matter where that society may be:


First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.



What sort of "actual world" do you want? If we are concerned about the messages promulgated by radio, TV, films and/or newspapers our response should not be to advocate some form of censorship. Rather our response should be to ensure that our voices are heard along with the others. But let's make sure we do this in an acceptable and respectful manner. A mark of true leadership is that we ensure all voices are heard - not just those who promote bigotry and discrimination.

What do you think?

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com




Monday, June 25, 2012

Stop the PPM NOW!

So the Australian Federal Parliament has gone into the winter recess without resolving the issue of desperate people trying to get a better life - refugees - by risking their lives on inadequate boats. I have no doubt that, despite the shows of emotion during the debates, we will now be regaled by blame apportioning - each side will blame the other for its intransigence and, no matter what the rhetoric, all will try to make political capital out of the fiasco and tragedy.

Our politicians are showing themselves exemplars of PPM - Piss Poor Management. They say that political points should not be made out of this. They claim to be interested in and concerned about the refugees. Then go and continue their puerile facade of blaming each other for a failure to stop the boats coming. Their behaviour belies their words. Their behaviour makes it clear that they don't give a damn about the refugees - they are interested only in their own political stance and the possibility of retaining or obtaining power. This applies to all the political parties in our Federal Parliament.

Like many others, I've had enough of the negativism from the Coalition opposition. I've had enough of the resolute refusal to consider any view but their own from the Greens. And I've had enough of the "do it my way" from the Labor government. And I've more than had enough of the rambling rhetoric of the radio and news media shock jocks who foster extremist views through their commentary on the refugees themselves and on any attempt to take a truly humanitarian stance in dealing with them. And I am totally fed up with the demonising of refugees coming by boat when, in reality, they comprise only a small proportion of the illegal migrants in Australia who have arrived legally, mainly by air, and then overstayed their visas.

It is not an offence to be a refugee. It is not an offence to flee from perceived persecution. It is not an offence to be so desperate that you get on an unseaworthy vessel, travel huge distances, and endure untold hardship in order to find a better life for yourself and your family.

After World War II we took in huge numbers of refugees from Europe. Some of what, today, are our most successful business operations were founded from amongst these numbers. After the Vietnam War we took in thousands of refugees. Today many of these are making their mark as valuable contributors to our society. What's different with these new people?

Part of the reason they are refugees is that we have helped destroy their homelands. We invaded Iraq on a lie; we invaded Afghanistan on a pretext; we are complicit in terrorising people in Pakistan's border areas through the use of drones that kill the innocent along with the possibly guilty. We rightly mourn the deaths of our own solidiers in these conflicts; we are rightly concerned at the physical and emotional injuries suffered by our soldiers in these conflicts - but what about the innocent victims - the "collateral damage" -in these countries. This is the source of the refugees. We share a significant proportion of the blame for their condition because we have contributed to their plight.

I understand that true leadership is a foreign concept to our politicians, but, just for once, it would be great to see them look at the really big picture then do the right thing - place genuine concern for these refugees that we have helped create ahead of their petty political posturing. Until they do that then the task given to former defence chief, Angus Houston, is the ultimate act of cynicism (and that's no reflection on Angus Houston - its just that he's not being set up for success.)

People are dying while politicians play games. That's Piss Poor Management at its worst.

Our politicians need to stop this PPM now.

Saturday, June 9, 2012

Empires - building and destroying - high evidence of PPM

One of my neighbours used to be a Police Officer. From time to time we chat and set the world to rights - someone has to do it, and it might as well be us! Just the other day he raised the issue of empire building - the situation where managers become more concerned about their status and power than they are with results - consequently they add staff (full-time, part-time, casual, contract etc - it doesn't matter) rather than examining work practices and capabilities then considering these in light of the results to be achieved. Very often the impact of such actions is demotivation of good staff, under employment of many, reduced productivity (it takes more resources to achieve the same output), but increased remuneration for the manager because of the 'increase in responsibility'. As he says, he's seen it too often and, despite the rhetoric of organisations operating efficiently, it is one of the most common sources of frustration at the lower levels of organisations.

In part our discussion arose because of the recent statement by the NSW (Australia) Treasurer that, while currently embarking upon a reduction of 5,000 people from the NSW Public Service, a cut of another 10,000 is to be made in the next financial year. We've both seen it all before! Time and again politicians announce cuts to the Public Service, implement those cuts, demoralise and politicise the remaining workforce, then, when they are eventually ejected from power, leave behind a public service that is larger and, often, less efficient than the one with which they started. In the interim they've lost many really good people and much of the corporate knowledge that is really essential to avoid repeating past mistakes.

Empire building and empire demolition both tend to be indicators of PPM - Piss Poor Management. Both adding more staff and reducing staff levels are very often "easy way outs" for complex problems that managers don't want to confront. Rather than dealing with productivity issues, PPM will add staff even though there is current capability available. Similarly, rather than appropriately deal with serious systems problems its easier to make staff cuts then complain about the amount of leave accumulated by the reduced workforce that remains.

Lets consider a few issues in NSW. Removing graffiti costs the NSW rail service some $60 million a year. Road trauma in NSW costs $billions a year. Crimes such as breaking and entering, theft, burglary, malicious damage, etc cost individuals and insurers millions of dollars each year. The authorities admit that very few of these crimes are fully investigated or offenders arrested and charged because the resources available to Police and the like are inadequate.

There's an old saying that "prevention is better than cure" and another that advocates putting a fence at the top of a cliff rather than maintaining an ambulance at the cliff's foot. If NSW needs to save large amounts of money - and I fully accept that this is the case - then investing money in actions to prevent graffiti, to improve road safety (and speed cameras will never do this but improved roads, increased and obvious police presence, and better driving training will) and to prevent crime at all levels has the potential to save far more money than may be available from simply cutting public service numbers or reducing expenditure in areas such as education, social welfare services, etc. Unfortunately no politician of any flavour seems to understand this.

PPM indicates a lack of leadership. Beware both those who build empires to bolster their own egos and those who slash and burn staffing levels for short term expediency and to gain political points.

What do you think? Please post your comments below.

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Improving Decision Making

Chris Stephenson, a highly successful and well respected CEO who is now a management consultant in Sydney, has recently completed a valuable study on decision making[1].

There is plenty of material available that shows the importance of making good strategic decisions and, in retrospect, it is always easy to nominate “good” or “bad” decisions. Of course, there are also plenty of models around that can work us through a process (usually quite time intensive) designed to ensure we make the “right” decision.

But most of us don’t have the time to work through some complicated decision-making model and, even if we did have the time, the evidence shows that there is still no guarantee that we will make a “good” decision every (or even most of) the time. In fact there is data that shows only about 15% of organisations have the ability to make and implement important decisions effectively.

Stephenson interviewed CEOs and Executives in Australia about their decision making processes. His interest was to find out how we can improve the quality of decision making – in other words, rather than considering decisions that had been made and then deciding were these decisions “good” or “bad”, he wanted to find out those things surrounding the final decision being made so that the probability of a “good” decision improved.

He found that the key factors that resulted in poor quality decisions were:

  • No decision-making process – Decisions are made on a case by case basis often by a small sub-group or by the CEO alone mandating a direction without any discussion.
  • Lack of transparency – Excluding stakeholders from decision-making, withholding information, side-bar discussions between the CEO and individuals outside of the TMT.
  • Low tolerance for diversity and alternate views – A low appreciation of the value of diversity and experience.
  • Disrespect – Treating those with different views as disloyal and not team contributors.
  • Data – Ignoring data when it didn’t confirm favoured outcomes. Over relying on small data samples when they supported desired outcomes. Pretending everything is OK when it’s not.
  • Dominant individuals – A CEO or others dominating the discussion and chiding anyone that offers alternative inputs.
  • Self interest – Allowing self interest to be the basis of decision outcomes rather than organisational best interest.
  • Emotional factors – Taking decisions on gut instinct without cross-checking against the data. Not appreciating the affect of personal biases on decisions.
  • Narcissism – Decisions driven by individuals with an over developed self belief and inability to comprehend other people mattering or themselves being wrong.
  • Ego – Decisions driven by one person’s agenda to further themselves.

All business decisions today are made in an environment of increasing complexity, information overload, reducing lead-times, personal motives, survival and self-serving instincts, and pressure associated with meeting market expectations. What Stephenson found out was that the quality of decisions depended a lot on:

  • Knowing who is making the decision and their accountability for it
  • Understanding the timeframe
  • A robust process
  • Transparency
  • Inclusiveness
  • Appreciating diversity
  • A sense of order
  • Accurate data
  • Mutual respect
  • Active debate on issues with everyone involved having a say

Where this second set of factors were clear throughout the organisation – in other words, this was the organisation’s culture - the quality of decision making improved significantly.

What decision making culture exists in your business? As Stephenson shows, its not hard to make it positive.

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com



[1] Unpublished DBA thesis through Southern Cross University.

Monday, January 30, 2012

A Skink's View of Life!


We have skinks at our place. For the technically minded, they are Common Garden Skink (Lampropholis guichenoti), but we simply call them “skinks”.

We also have a cat.

The two tend to be mutually exclusive – so, as far as possible, we protect “the skink” from “the cat”.

The other day I was pottering in the kitchen when I saw a skink running across the floor. I also saw “the cat” sitting on the back porch – right in the skink’s path. I moved to catch the skink and then commenced a game of hide and seek that took me about 30 minutes to win. Fortunately “the cat” didn’t see “the skink”!

Eventually, securely apprehended, “the skink” was taken out another door and released into the safety of the garden.

Got me thinking.

My intentions towards “the skink” were entirely honourable – I wanted to save its life. The skink also wanted to save its life – survival is a strong instinct. We were in total accord – except the skink couldn’t get the message. It was totally unable to move its brain’s area of control out of “the red zone” – mainly because it has no “blue zone” – so it got increasingly traumatised and ran around oblivious to the real danger – “the cat”.

Fortunately there was a happy ending this time, but, as I say, it got me thinking.

How often are the threats from which we run not really threats at all?

Our “red zone” of brain control can’t tell what “threats” are real and what are not. When our brain is under the control of our red zone, anything different or that challenges our comfortable way of thinking and acting can be seen as a threat – even when, at the worst, it is benign or, at the best, it is very positive. Our red zone can prevent us from responding appropriately. We will respond to “the threat” by fight, flight, or freeze no matter what.

All too often our daily living reflects a skink’s view of life!

Of course this skink’s view of life in encouraged by irresponsible media who fail to call the government to account (Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel-Palestine relationships are cases in point) and by those who have a vested interest in keeping us scared so they can exercise control and explain how “they” can keep us “safe” by taking actions “they” deem appropriate.

But we’re not skinks. People have a blue zone – and we can learn how to shift our brain’s area of control into the blue zone so that we can live differently.

I can help you make this shift.

More information about me at http://www.dglong.com

What do you think? Please make your comments below.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Focus on the Horizon

Very recently I drove a rally car and I have the video to prove it!

For my birthday last year, the family gave me a voucher for a rally car driving experience - drive 2 different cars, each for 8 laps, then do a "hot lap" with an experienced (and in my case, luckily, a very successful) rally car driver. It was great fun. I thoroughly enjoyed it and I learned quite a bit about handling a car under vastly different conditions from what are experienced in day-to-day road driving.

Lesson 1: focus on the horizon
Many years ago my first driving experiences were on rough roads in country areas and farms. I thought I understood how to control a vehicle on greasy road surfaces. I learned that there is a big difference between driving a car very slowly on mud and gravel when compared with driving it fast. When driving fast I have learned to focus on the horizon, keep the wheels pointed in the direction I want to go, and to be careful not to try and correct too much for all the slipping and sliding that occurs. It is counter-intuitive.

Lesson 2: transfer the weight
The cars I drove were either front wheel or all-wheel drives (one of each). I learned that braking hard transferred the weight of the car from the front wheels to the rear wheels and that, if I needed to make a sudden or sharp turn, the best way of doing this was to brake hard, turn the wheels in the direction I wanted to go, then let the car do the work. By braking hard when I came to a turn, letting the car do the work, then accelerating out of the corner I could achieve my objectives while maintaining control.

Lesson 3: listen to the experts
Over the years I've driven a wide range of vehicles (including tractors and ambulances) at just as wide a variety of speeds under almost every possible road condition. I approached this adventure secure in the knowledge that I was a highly experienced driver with a very good record regarding accidents. At the safety briefing all of those doing the course were advised to listen to the instructor who would be sitting beside us on the track. I'm glad I heeded this. My instructor had won a number of international car rallies and could see things I couldn't in regard to my driving. Listening to him enabled me to start slowly then develop to quite fast circuits - and I only spun out twice! Listening to the expert saved me embarrassment and possible injury while simultaneously enabling me to have fun and achieve my objectives.

Seems to me that there's some pointers there for business as well as for life in general.

I'd love to know what you think. Let me know in the comments below.

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Boldly Forward into the Unknown

I'm looking out my home office window and there's my garden in all its glory - not!

Last winter I carefully prepared the soil and ensured plenty of nutrients were present. In late winter and spring I planted a wide variety of vegetables and seeds then carefully watered and fed them, but, apart from some lettuce and spinach, nothing's gone as planned. Sydney's weather has meant that things I couldn't control have had a huge negative impact.

For me, there are parallels with my 2011 experience.

This time last year everything seemed rosy. I reviewed 2010's results, revised my annual plans and was totally convinced that 2011 would be one of my best years ever. It wasn't! Circumstances beyond my control meant that, while certainly not (or even near) a disaster, 2011 could not really be described as "the best thing since sliced bread"!

How will my current gardening results affect me in 2012? Well, I'll harvest and use what I can then, in winter, I'll again prepare the soil for next year and start all over again. I know that there are always things like the weather that I can't control. But I also know that the only way I will have totally fresh vegetables is to grow my own and so I will continue in the knowledge that some years are always better than others.

I guess I'm a bit like Chauncey Gardener in "Being There". I understand and accept nature's cycles.

Chauncey, of course, was naive and his simplicity was manipulated and abused. But, we all know (even if sometimes we don't want to accept and face it) that there are powers greater than our own that impact on everything. All of us who teach and facilitate business planning at any level are at pains to point out the need to build in contingency aspects and to constantly review actual against plan so that remedial action can be taken.

The truth is that the only things we can really control are our attitudes towards the future and our response to what actually happens. Customers may or may not buy. Commodity prices may or may not rise or fall. Exchange rates may or may not remain stable. World economic woes may or may not continue (although personally I believe they are more likely to continue). Clients may or may not pay on time. Et cetera! We can plan. We can work to our plan. We can do everything right - and still the desired results might not eventuate. That's the reality.

As you move forward into the unknown - into 2012 - what's your attitude? Are you allowing any negatives from 2011 to dominate? Is there an anxiety because of the realisation that desired results depend as much on what others do as on what you do? There are things that you can do within your own mind to change that (you can move into the blue zone of courage rather than remain in the red zone of fear) and there are also plenty of people available to provide coaching, mentoring, and wisdom to help you on your journey.

Move boldly forward into the future. Your 2011 experience (whether positive or negative) is paralleled by that of countless others. You can make 2012 your best year ever - and if you need help, there are many sources from which you can get it.

I'd love to know what you think. Make a comment below.

More information about me at http://www.dglong.com

Friday, December 9, 2011

Engagement brings service brings profit

Some years ago I was staying at the Sheraton Towers in Singapore. One morning I was meandering through the hotel lobby and obviously appeared a little lost. A person cleaning the floor greeted me warmly, asked if there was anything I needed and, on being told I was simply going out for a walk, offered guidance as to the nearest train station and the shortest route to Orchard Road. Having been to Singapore many times and being very familiar with the city, I didn't really need his help but, without disclosing this to him, I thanked him for his interest and went on my way. That one experience did more to make me a "Sheraton fan" than did anything else in the hotel.

Back in 1990 I was in England when I got a phone call saying my father was in hospital and I should return to NZ as quickly as possible in order to see him before he died. My flight itinerary was with Finnair and I immediately contacted them to see if, under the circumstances, I could change my flights to another airline as Finnair had no appropriate scheduled flights to Bangkok - the transfer point. I was told "no". I phoned Qantas, explained the situation, and was told to get myself to Heathrow Airport, identify myself to the staff there, and that they would guarantee to get me on the first flight home. They did. I have never since flown Finnair (and have no intention to do so) and I became a Qantas fan.

Now I do not know what training they give cleaners at the Sheraton or to call centre staff at Qantas, but I do know that these two people gave me service that was exemplary and which put their organisations in a very positive light. I have used these experiences to recommend the Sheraton Towers ever since and, until the tragic demise of their service over recent years, I was a fervent advocate of Qantas

My point is simple. Two small actions by people very low in their organisation's hierarchies meant I changed brand allegiance as well as recommending to others that they change their brand allegiance too. This isn't unusual. Market research has for years made it clear that both good and bad service get talked about and shared. Good service can bring about increased market share while bad service can bring about decreased market share. Increased market share can bring about increased revenues and profits.

We all know we are living in a tough economic environment. We all hear organisations bemoaning the fact that business success is getting harder. But instead of increasing service to customers and clients we find reductions in front line service people and an increasing (and to many of us) infuriating reliance on automated responses and machines that are totally unable to provide the flexibility and commonsense that is usually needed. Machines and automation are great for totally standard issues but abysmal at anything requiring thought.

If organisations today seriously want to improve their revenues and their profits they need to improve their service. This is especially the case with retail and "service" organisations. Provide the leadership that creates an environment where you can be successful.

What do you think?

More about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com

Friday, September 9, 2011

Seasons and business

I work from home and as I look out of my office window I see new growth and blossoms on fruit trees that, only a short time ago, were dry sticks. The camellias are putting on a magnificent show; orange and cream clivia flowers are appearing from clumps of green leaves and my vegetable garden is alive with ingredients for summer salads. The strawberries are looking good, too. It’s a great time of year!

Yesterday I was talking with a small business owner who’s going through a hard time. Despite having a reputation for high quality work performed on time and within budget – a reputation earned over many years – sales are down and cash flow has been negative for some time. No matter what he tries in order to generate new business, nothing seems to work and although his core customers continue to be supportive, he is feeling tired and frustrated. “Its hard to maintain enthusiasm and motivation when you feel that nothing’s working,” he said to me.

Business can be like that – especially when you’re a one-person operation and have no internal support. Most small business owners can understand the feeling.

The small business owner with whom I was talking has been in business for 5 years. He’s very well qualified and has an impressive CV. His customers love him for his honesty, his integrity, and the quality of his work. But the nature of his expertise means that he is brought in to deal with specific problems which, once resolved, require no on-going constant relationship. So he needs referrals and new customers for growth and regular cash flow. But in today’s economic environment demand has dropped and he is struggling.

I suggested there was a message for him from the seasons.

1. Its not always summer!

Summer is the time for the beach; for barbeques with friends and family; for enjoying the warmth and sunshine.

For the last couple of years the man with whom I was speaking had been experiencing a “summer” in relation to his business. He had done the hard yards. He had marketed his expertise and had developed an impressive list of satisfied customers. Cash flow had been good and he and his family had enjoyed a high standard of living. Life was good.

But all summers end eventually and an important aspect of summer is to use this time to prepare for autumn and winter. If you’re a farmer, it’s the time for harvesting the grass that has flourished over spring and for making the hay and silage that will feed your animals over the winter months. In addition to everything else, it is a time to think of new ideas and to dream new dreams.

2. Winter can be a ‘downer’.

When its cold, wet, and miserable its easy to get despondent. The days can close in on you and sometimes there seems to be more darkness than light. This is a time when tempers can become frazzled and little irritants can escalate to become “bigger than Ben Hur”. But this is also the time when one needs to prepare the gardens for the coming seasons. It is a time for pruning the fruit trees; removing the remnants of past crops and getting the soil ready for new ones.

The man with whom I was speaking was in the depths of winter. We spoke of the need to re-examine his business model – to prune and prepare before moving forward. We examined possible changes.

3. There is always a spring.

Sometimes spring is late arriving – but eventually it always arrives. You plant the garden in late winter in the hope that about 2 weeks later new seedlings will appear, thinning can occur, and the summer crop is under way. But sometimes the spring rains and warmth are delayed; the seeds fail; and you have to sow again. Annoying but not disastrous.

You change your gardening practices to suit the conditions secure in the knowledge that eventually the conditions will be right for the seeds to germinate and grow. The important thing is to not lose faith that the right conditions will emerge.

We ended our conversation by considering the business conditions that are emerging now and what he will need to do in order to take advantage of these.

We’ve got another meeting organised for next week when we can plan the way forward for my frustrated small business owner. He’s starting to learn from the seasons.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

A healthy organisation?

When I work with any organisation, I divide my attention into the 5 areas that determine health and sustainability and, among others, I ask the following questions:

1. Knowledge. How clear and focused are the vision, purpose, and objectives/goals of the organisation (both qualitative and quantitative) and how well are these known and understood throughout the organisation?

2. Strategy. In broad terms, how does the organisation intend to make its vision a reality – to attain its objectives/goals.

3. Non Human Resources. Does the organisation have the right resources to operate affectively and how does it ensure that the right resources are available at the right time and in the right place for the right people?

4. Structure. What is the decision making process? What is the lowest level in the organisation where decisions can be made and what are the repercussions of making the wrong decisions? What is the decision making environment within which the Executive Team operates?

5. Human Process. What are the labour turnover figures and how do these compare with your targeted turnover rate as set out in your business plan? What are you doing about any discrepancy? What are your recruitment processes and how could these be improved? How do you develop and maintain the requisite level of competence at all levels of personnel and how could this be done better? What process do you use to monitor customer/client satisfaction and how could this process be improved? How do you monitor the external environment that will or could impact on the organisation and what use do you make of this information? What is your relationship with the various trade unions / professional bodies that are represented in your organisation and how could these be improved? What process is used to get on-going, real time feedback from personnel on issues and concerns?

Providing cash flow is positive, these are the areas that will determine whether or not an organisation is healthy. Answering these questions will highlight possible “ouch” points that need to be addressed.


More information is at http://www.dglong.com

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

... and start all over again!

“Failure is a word I don't accept” – John Johnson

Johnson was a “self made man” in the USA who became one of the first Afro Americans to establish a major international business. He attributed his success to the fact that he never allowed external circumstances to dictate how he should feel, think, or act. He saw issues and problems as something to be overcome rather than as things that would destroy him.

The many things I remember from my childhood include a ditty from a movie called, I think, “I love Melville”. It went “Life has its funny little ups and downs, downs and ups, ups and downs” and gave me the impression that its always important to get up and try again after any fall. Those childhood memories also include the words, from I think, another movie “pick yourself up, brush yourself off, and start all over again.”

The end of any year is a time for reflection.

All of us have experienced many things during 2010. Some of these have been the ‘highs’ that we wanted – happy moments and times we consider the successes of the year. For many people these ‘highs’ vastly outnumber the ‘lows’ and, for some, may even mean that the ‘lows’ are forgotten. That’s a nice position to be in.

But for others, right now the ‘lows’ dominate. Just yesterday I was talking to a woman in her 40’s who, very early in the conversation made the comment that she had recently buried a teenage son. I can hardly imagine what this woman and her family must be feeling. Last Friday I heard that a friend from earlier years had lost his business and his home because of international economic factors. I know he will be devastated but making contact with him in order to provide support is proving difficult. Aged in his early 60’s, he’s going to find it hard to start again.

These are extremes. Fortunately most of us won’t have experienced things as devastating as this. But no matter what we have experienced - whether it is the ‘highs’ or the ‘lows’ – the critical thing is how we respond to it.

From my own experience, sometimes it seems as though it is easier to pick yourself up after a really significant “low” than it is after a whole series of smaller “lows”. It’s a bit like the “boiled frog syndrome” – when the temperature rises slowly the cumulative effect isn’t noticed in time to do something about it, but when the temperature rises suddenly the frog escapes and survives.

I wonder what 2010 held for you. More importantly, I wonder how you dealt with whatever happened.

I'd love to know what you think of this. Please make your comments below.

More information about me at http://www.dglong.com and my video blog is at http://www.youtube.com/user/GreatLeadership3G

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Its all about ambiguity!

The current federal political situation in Australia is symptomatic of the problems with First Generation Leadership and Second Generation Leadership. Both of these depend on hierarchy and control. They both make it clear as to where the "real" power lies and who is in charge. They are both totally inadequate for situations where there is a significant amount of complexity and ambiguity.

Of course our media are inextricably linked into this model, too. The impact of this is that on TV, radio, and in the print media we are confronted by calls for "certainty" and an end to what is seen as an impasse. First Generation Leadership (compliance) and Second Generation Leadership (conformance) seek to bring things back to levels of simplicity that can be handled by people who lack the requisite ability to deal with the reality of ambiguity and complexity.

The truth is that the people of Australia have made it clear that they don't really think either major party is up to the task of governing. They don't really trust either party - and with good reason. And the media "shock jocks" especially are affronted by this.

Our two party political system has lied us into wars of choice that have lead to the deaths of 21 soldiers and countless others wounded or emotionally affected. Our two party political system has seen the main contestants vie with each other as to who can be tougher on refugees and the disadvantaged. Our two main political parties wasted their campaigns by rubbishing their opponents and failed to give us any reason to vote for them. Our two main political parties are both subject to the whims and fancies of unelected power brokers with vested and undeclared interests that, in reality, have little or nothing to do with what is best for Australia overall.

Now these parties have to negotiate with people they have tried to marginalise and/or ignore for years - people who once were members of their parties but who rejected them. The scarcely hidden anger and frustration from the establishment is great.

Personally I don't think any political party is a good one - in fact I think political parties indicate a decline in democracy. Equally I think there is a danger in a small number of independents being able to ultimately decide what is done.

We need a new approach to leadership - one that is able to understand and to deal effectively with increasing amounts of ambiguity and complexity. We need to make the shift to Third Generation Leadership.

Please let me know what you think about this. You can post your comments below.

More information about Doug Long at http://www.dglong.com