So..
Leadership and all parts of it are key to an organization's success. I use the word organization because it applies not only to corporations, but government entities, religious groups, sports teams, and even AOL. I served in the military and saw my share of good and bad leaders, I went to school and learned a bit about corporations and how leadership and communication work together. I now work for a state government entity and see worse leadership than I saw in the Army. Surprised? I'm not.
The structure of this column should be as follows: What is Leadership? | Leadership in State Government | Leadership in the Army | Leadership at NFC | Conclusion (maybe)
What is Leadership?
This is a question not easily answered. Leadership is a property, or attribute, of a person. This property gives the person an advantage in making decisions and influencing people. Correctly applied leadership also implies a high ethical standard about that person. That's about as vague as I can get. It's a quality about a person that grants the ability to lead effectively.
Leadership in State Government
My supervisor is a woman who possesses few leadership skills. She is somewhat of a trained leader, but doesn't apply the necessary amount of communication to the office's diet of bullshit. She kicked someone out last week because he "didn't help out." Problem is, he wasn't asked to. He didn't work for us, he just occupied a cubicle here. Our department didn't pay him; this was just where he worked. When he didn't have anything going on, he had said he'd help out if she needed some help. Nothing was requested of him, so he didn't do anything. She claimed he was a distraction to the office and he finally left this week.
Anyway, back to my communication thing. That's important in a leader- the ability to communicate. Among the other skills are reading people, knowing what to say, knowing when you're wrong, and knowing who to ask when you admit that you don't know something.
Oh, yeah, back on State Government... I have never worked in a more inefficient place. I go to meetings in which plans are made and nothing happens. No decisions are made, and not a single person knows what is going on. Therefore, it takes months and months to do very simple changes. That has a lot to do with working in government, but it shouldn't take that long to get something done internally.
A lot of people here (Dept. of Education) are former teachers, and somehow they've forgotten where they came from and who they're here to help. Many decisions are politically based, and they seem to have forgotten that we work to better the children in this state and make it easier to teach and measure performance.
Maybe I should wait a while to comment further about my workplace. I haven't been here for that long, so I'll wait until I've decided whether I can make a difference here.
Leadership in the Army
Noncommissioned officers are supposedly the backbone of the Army. Most of the leadership training they get is provided by the Army itself, and I don't remember being under the influence of many good NCOs. Promotion to the noncommissioned ranks was only a few steps away for me, but it was time to get out. I had better things to do.
Commissioned officers, however, are college-educated (or have at least some college) and are supposed to be self-sufficient and good leaders. I believe I saw more commissioned officers as good leaders than NCOs, but I attribute that to the officer's discipline gained at West Point (or dragging himself to college and ROTC or OCS). That made him actually want to be there. Maybe I'm getting off the subject. No I'm not. Leadership in the Army was only better than the leadership in my current agency for two reasons: Soldiers actually go through leadership training, and those methods of management used in the military are time-proven.
The people here at work didn't go to school for management; they have degrees in education. They learned the educational system and how to teach children (from what I know about the college of education, which could be nothing). Some of them (most of them) just can't lead.
Leadership at NFC
NFC is the computer consulting company I own. No it isn't. But it will be. This is how I envision my organization:
I will lead the company with people I trust personally and professionally (there is a difference.) My primary goal inside the organization is to have people unlike I was in my teenage years working at an auto parts store: I didn’t care about the company because the company didn’t care about me. Their internal and external goals were the same: profits. And it showed.
I will care about my subordinates and not announce the vacation with my family to our house in Aspen while they work. I will try to remember everyone’s name (it won’t be a large corporation) and I will help even the lowest-level position get his or her job done. I will pay for their education if I can. I will be the one to call about anything. The people I work with will be the same person. It will feel good to work with me.
I will always listen to any idea about how to make the workplace better and more comfortable so that my employees can work efficiently without the distraction of something ludicrous as a strict dress code. I wore jeans to work today and felt like I was free to think – and I got work done like no other day I’ve had there yet. I once saw a show about an engineering firm filled with very creative people. Quite a few of them rode bicycles to work but had nowhere to put them. Someone got the idea to string his bike up to the rafters and hoist it high above his desk. I think that was a great idea. Some people followed this method, and no one approached the management about it. The engineers were free to do as they please and be as creative as they were capable of. I encourage this as well.
The education of my employees will be paramount at NFC (which, by the way, stands for “No Fucking Clue”. I didn’t have any idea what to call the company, so that was it.) The importance of education will be another topic later.
If I’m not getting anywhere with this according to you, here’s a list of a few things about the leaders at NFC:
- They teach their subordinates
- They treat subordinates with respect and form bonds with them
- They know the job and more
- They set a good example for others
- They know how to listen and read people so they understand questions and provide accurate answers
- They earn their trust
Okay, people. Let’s act like I actually own NFC and you’re my employees. I need help from you on the company website. Go to the NFC website and use the link to my e-mail to send me your suggestions.
3 comments:
One thing I have said about the leadership in the Army is that it hasn't adjusted to the abilities of those they lead. I think that some have difficulty leading people who are as intelligent and capable as themselves. You would think it would be easier to be an effective leader if your people took care of themselves, but some can't adjust.
Teh same happens in the civilain world. I don't know if people feel threatened or just aren't used to it, but many leaders fail with good teams. I still believe that good leaders surround themselves with people more intelligent than themselves and let them go. You can still control and moderate all situations, but your people will be more willing to help you out if they know you trust them to do the job.
As for NFC. Goo luck, but watch out. I have ben trying to decide if I wanted to takeover Botswana or England, but maybe I should start smaller with a new corporation.
I told you it would be half-hearted. I'll just stick to writing from whatever itch I have to scratch at the moment.
It was good. If you hadn't said it was half-hearted, I would never have known. It was a good job explaining your basic beliefs of a complicated subject in a short time.
Post a Comment