Posted on Dec 5, 2015
Would you leave these (5) Bad Leadership Habits Behind In 2016?
10.6K
80
25
19
19
0
Would you leave these (5) Bad Leadership Habits Behind In 2016?
I'm not saying that anyone has these or displays these bad leadership habits, but if the shoe fits wear it. What are your thoughts RP Members and Leaders. Is the author onto something here? What's your opinion on these 5 habits (bad or indfiffeent)? I agree with all of them in the framework of the author's context, but I'm sure there is some indifference to at least Number 2 & 3. Looking for some great discussion and feedback!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2015/10/31/5-bad-leadership-habits-to-leave-behind-in-2016/
1. Lionizing The Few
2. Best Practices
3. Cost Cutting
4. Political Correctness
5. Unwillingness to Change
News Flash – there is no perfect leader. But there’s also no arguing the fact that some leaders are much better than others. So, what’s the difference between those leaders whose career trajectory rockets upward with great velocity, and those whose careers move at a snail’s pace, if at all? The best leaders know when to stop harming themselves, they know when to get out of their own way, and they know what to STOP doing.
I have long held to the belief that leadership exists to disrupt mediocrity. However my observation is that many in positions of leadership tend to protect the status quo (mediocrity’s best friend) at all costs. The best path forward for any organization looking to improve performance it to immediately stop doing anything that creates, emboldens, or builds on bad leadership habits. Don’t embrace outdated, static, or politically correct thinking – neutralize it at all costs.
I'm not saying that anyone has these or displays these bad leadership habits, but if the shoe fits wear it. What are your thoughts RP Members and Leaders. Is the author onto something here? What's your opinion on these 5 habits (bad or indfiffeent)? I agree with all of them in the framework of the author's context, but I'm sure there is some indifference to at least Number 2 & 3. Looking for some great discussion and feedback!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2015/10/31/5-bad-leadership-habits-to-leave-behind-in-2016/
1. Lionizing The Few
2. Best Practices
3. Cost Cutting
4. Political Correctness
5. Unwillingness to Change
News Flash – there is no perfect leader. But there’s also no arguing the fact that some leaders are much better than others. So, what’s the difference between those leaders whose career trajectory rockets upward with great velocity, and those whose careers move at a snail’s pace, if at all? The best leaders know when to stop harming themselves, they know when to get out of their own way, and they know what to STOP doing.
I have long held to the belief that leadership exists to disrupt mediocrity. However my observation is that many in positions of leadership tend to protect the status quo (mediocrity’s best friend) at all costs. The best path forward for any organization looking to improve performance it to immediately stop doing anything that creates, emboldens, or builds on bad leadership habits. Don’t embrace outdated, static, or politically correct thinking – neutralize it at all costs.
Leadership
Leadership Development
Best Practices
Political Correctness
Edited 8 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
8
8
0
I abhor the term "best practices." There is a really big grain of truth, but the much better term is "good practice."
There ARE ways of doing business or acting that are generally better than others, which are known to experts in any given field. These are "good practice." Professionals (or those who want to be) tend to follow them, because they are proven to me more effective than not.
The problem with "best practices" is exactly what the article, rather poorly, highlights - the tendency to believe that the you are "done" once you have identified and implemented them.
The other problem with "best practices" is that it assumes that there is ONE "best" that can be identified. This is going to change from industry to industry, company to company, local culture to local culture, and leader to leader. I, for instance, religiously used 30 minute every other week one on ones with a given format with all my directs as well as a LONG staff meeting every week. Despite the bitching, which could be epic at times, within a few months of initiating this, I had a highly productive and self-directing team, which deconflicted issues on its own. I gained 25% + of my total work time back, didn't have any other scheduled meetings with my people, conflicts down well over 75%. Others in my organization tried to mimic my approach and met with failure - different people, different sub-organization, different goals.... Not a "best practice", but a good one. I would recommend leaders in a highly projectized environment consider it strongly, I would not recommend it nearly so much in a highly operational/throughput focused environment.
An honorable mention for #5. An unwillingness to chance *IS* bad. An unwillingness to change "just because" is good. Any organization is a complex system of systems. Changes have both cascading and ripple effects. Changes will, for sure in the short term and maybe in the long term, have a destabilizing effect on the systems and lower productivity and throughput. The benefit of those changes may well be worth it. It may not. Changing before having given serious though to these impacts is irresponsible.
There ARE ways of doing business or acting that are generally better than others, which are known to experts in any given field. These are "good practice." Professionals (or those who want to be) tend to follow them, because they are proven to me more effective than not.
The problem with "best practices" is exactly what the article, rather poorly, highlights - the tendency to believe that the you are "done" once you have identified and implemented them.
The other problem with "best practices" is that it assumes that there is ONE "best" that can be identified. This is going to change from industry to industry, company to company, local culture to local culture, and leader to leader. I, for instance, religiously used 30 minute every other week one on ones with a given format with all my directs as well as a LONG staff meeting every week. Despite the bitching, which could be epic at times, within a few months of initiating this, I had a highly productive and self-directing team, which deconflicted issues on its own. I gained 25% + of my total work time back, didn't have any other scheduled meetings with my people, conflicts down well over 75%. Others in my organization tried to mimic my approach and met with failure - different people, different sub-organization, different goals.... Not a "best practice", but a good one. I would recommend leaders in a highly projectized environment consider it strongly, I would not recommend it nearly so much in a highly operational/throughput focused environment.
An honorable mention for #5. An unwillingness to chance *IS* bad. An unwillingness to change "just because" is good. Any organization is a complex system of systems. Changes have both cascading and ripple effects. Changes will, for sure in the short term and maybe in the long term, have a destabilizing effect on the systems and lower productivity and throughput. The benefit of those changes may well be worth it. It may not. Changing before having given serious though to these impacts is irresponsible.
(8)
(0)
SFC Eric Williams
Here, here...what's best for one leader may very well NOT be good for another leader.
Great point!
Great point!
(1)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
COL Vincent Stoneking Great points - thanks for adding to the discussion! It is great to get input from all leaders in this forum. So much experience and knowledge!
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SFC Eric Williams - Sergeant; You have a VERY good point. "Leaders" come in all shapes and sizes and personality types. What works for one will not work for another. When I retired I reminded my junior officers that if they were in doubt what to do in any situation they should think about what I would do in that situation and then NOT DO IT (unless it was what they would do themselves without knowing that that was what I would have done).
A leader's job is to lead and for that they need willing and enthusiastic followers. Forced followers don't need a "leader" they just require a "director".
A leader's job is to lead and for that they need willing and enthusiastic followers. Forced followers don't need a "leader" they just require a "director".
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
The article hints at, but never explicitly mentions it. The differences between, and the need for Leadership & Management. Leadership is a Philosophy, a Science, and an Art which deals with the DEVELOPMENT of People. Management however is about the UTILIZATION of Resources. People can be Resources, just like Equipment, or Money, or Time.
Unfortunately I think what happened was the balance between Lead & Manage got out of whack. Leadership was "intuitive" but management was something that could be "codified" which is why we ended up with Best Practices, Cost Cutting, etc. Now that we have all these great examples of Leaders to work from, and can SEE what they do, and why they work, the balance is shifting back. It's no longer a case of duplicating the organizations they built, but mimicking the philosophies they espoused.
I keyed into 3 & 4 specifically.
Cost Cutting seemed like common sense, and then I remembered something Adam Carolla said on his Podcast. "Chase the Dollar, not the nickel." What he meant was, the 5% of cost savings you were focused on wasn't worth the effort & resources you are expending, when you could be looking for additional sales that would net you additional sales or new opportunities. It's so easy to get into that "save a nickle" mindset, and it just creates a toxic environment if it is taken too far.
#4 is trickier. I think people are overly concerned with being politically correct just as much as the next person, but they can't use this as an excuse to be an (pardon my French) Asshole, Mean-spirited, or just plain Abusive. We want Candor though. The problem is that there is a lens of Experience and Ignorance which that Candor shines through and "Political Correctness" is a filter to that.
As for #2... I agreed with his assessment. There are no best practices. All practices need to be ready evolve at any moment, because any environment evolves at any moment.
Unfortunately I think what happened was the balance between Lead & Manage got out of whack. Leadership was "intuitive" but management was something that could be "codified" which is why we ended up with Best Practices, Cost Cutting, etc. Now that we have all these great examples of Leaders to work from, and can SEE what they do, and why they work, the balance is shifting back. It's no longer a case of duplicating the organizations they built, but mimicking the philosophies they espoused.
I keyed into 3 & 4 specifically.
Cost Cutting seemed like common sense, and then I remembered something Adam Carolla said on his Podcast. "Chase the Dollar, not the nickel." What he meant was, the 5% of cost savings you were focused on wasn't worth the effort & resources you are expending, when you could be looking for additional sales that would net you additional sales or new opportunities. It's so easy to get into that "save a nickle" mindset, and it just creates a toxic environment if it is taken too far.
#4 is trickier. I think people are overly concerned with being politically correct just as much as the next person, but they can't use this as an excuse to be an (pardon my French) Asshole, Mean-spirited, or just plain Abusive. We want Candor though. The problem is that there is a lens of Experience and Ignorance which that Candor shines through and "Political Correctness" is a filter to that.
As for #2... I agreed with his assessment. There are no best practices. All practices need to be ready evolve at any moment, because any environment evolves at any moment.
(7)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS Awesome comments and perspective - thanks for always participating in these forums Aaron!
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
COL Mikel J. Burroughs Thank you. I think the worse one is
"many in positions of leadership tend to protect the status quo"
"many in positions of leadership tend to protect the status quo"
(6)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
CPT (Join to see) That can be dangerous for some teams and organizations! I owe you a "vote up" tomorrow or the next day, I'm so far behind LOL!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google