Management and Leadership Insights
15 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Manish Sharma from Transformational Leadership!

Leadership: Who is Barun Biswas ?

Leadership: Who is Barun Biswas ? | Management and Leadership Insights |
His voice was fearlessly bold and calm. " If we cannot take care of our mothers and sisters , we do not deserve to be living in a civilized society. It is better to be dead than living in constant fear.

Via Dr. Susan Bainbridge
Manish Sharma's insight:

Hats off to Barun Biswas!

Dr. Susan Bainbridge's curator insight, August 29, 2013 10:15 AM

A story of one of the many thousand transformational leaders who may never become world famous, but had enormous impact on his world.

Rescooped by Manish Sharma from Female Leadership!

Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders?

Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders? | Management and Leadership Insights |
The real gender issue isn't a lack of qualified women, but a surplus of unqualified men.

Via Maria Rachelle
Tom Wilson's comment, September 15, 2013 4:28 PM
At this moment, America politicians and journalists are nurturing a number of dangerous perceptions about Russia and the world that President Putin was brushing up against in his comments about "AMerica exceptionalism". Basically, America is the most dangerous nation in the world because nobody can really challenge us and we think out shit doesn;t stink. Iraq is one consequence, but the attitudes of most of Washington is totally Cold War and everyone pretty well holds the Conservative position that we vanquished Russia in a war and we are entitled to the fruits of the conquerer, when the fact is Gorbachev pulled the plug on a bad idea and joined our side. But my point is that this is a another example of a shared reality based on perceptions that are unchallenged. I believe Obama, who is as prone to this point of view as any American, has the moral courage to reconsider this reality and, as I say, I think Syria will validate him and Putin before either man leaves office while Bush is hoping History will vindicate Dick Cheney in 50 years or so.
Tom Wilson's comment, September 15, 2013 4:44 PM
As far as the connection between "likability" and "hassles" is that the perceived need to be likable and the need for mission focus are not entirely collateral agendas: likability is not on the critical path, but there is always an element in a population for whom likability is the essential competence. Very often, there is a covert agenda attached to this requirement, which is to say, the people who want you to be more likable want to exercise a controlling variety over your behavior by limiting your variety. That is where the hassle comes in,
Tom Wilson's comment, September 15, 2013 5:17 PM
I just read the Likable versus leadership article and it is a useful discussion. I agree with much of it. In the military context, one of your tasks is to create player subordinates who can take your place if you are killed. I know that seems extreme, but that dimension should always be an element of command. This article brushes up against this issue in its statement that the object is to get people committed to the mission and not to the personalty of the leader. But the little preamble to the article presents an issue that defines the whole issue: leadership is not a popularity contest. Now, for my money, Steve Jobs was just a bully and he reflected a subculture in the business embraced of the winning through intimidation ethos of the Corleone family. It is very popular among MBA's, generally, the Donald Trump Kick Ass and Take Names You;re fired management style. The fact is, management by fear is the dominant management philosophy in the American corporate culture, so it is hard to narrow the phenomena down to a specific coalition. As a Ranger, I was something of a kick ass and take names kind of guy in the military, but the military is a different culture and it never lasted very long.You got to get everyone's attention and change of command is always hard on everyone. But in the day intercourse of work, it is hard to be the simple courtesies and conventions of polite society to buffer whatever rough edges your circumstances may require. My dad, who was a colonel, never failed to thank his drivers and other orderlies he might be assigned during his travels when it was not at all required by protocol. My dad was likable, but he could bring both privates and generals up short when he felt the need to do it. But he was always a model of courtesy. George C. Marshall went out of his way to avoid any appeal to flattery or off-task sociability: he called Eisenhower "Eisenhower" after he became president and he refused to allow FDR to call him anything but Marshall or General. He was one of the greatest of the greatest generation. But he was never popular, in the Access Hollywood sense of the word. On the other hand,George W. Bush's role as president of the Texas Rangers was almost entirely defined by likability. Of course, he was surrounded by people who did all the heavy lifting. Nevertheless, he was a very effective element of the Texas Ranger's business plan.