Competition or Collaboration?

There is always a dilemma how to get better results: by fostering competition or collaboration between employees for the executions of organizational tasks.

The humanity from the dawn had to collaborate in order to have bigger chance for survival, so I would (always) vote for collaboration. Our basic communication tool (language) provided two main issues for the success: learning and passing the knowledge and the second is explaining or danger warning to other members of the pack.

On the other hand competition was, throughout our history, a driving force that continued moving humanity forward. It is most evident from the conflicts between tribes or societies. Imperialism, known from ancient times, is about economic expansion by grabbing defenseless countries (like Alexander the Great or/and Genghis Khan). Looting the countries for raw materials by forcing the labor to later force them to buy expensive manufactured goods is also accompanying humanity from dawns. But this competing attitude helped in driving developments that improved many aspects of life, and is continuing to do so. What else is globalization?

Definitely, conflicts were and are still part of our environment. And for them you need collaboration (again): to start or to solve them. But, on the smaller scale, could scientists in e.g. CERN compete with each other and still produce the same results as they do – or do they collaborate?

Continuing the struggle of thinking which one – collaboration or competition – yields better results, I would again like to say that it is collaboration: compare teamwork against solo or egocentric behavior of a player on the football terrain. Unfortunately, today we are often forgetting team play and are only competing with each other, against countries, environment… and not really understanding that there is no win for us while doing so. I think that for the progress towards a better world we should principally collaborate with one another and not compete against one another. Could this then be the ultimate goal?

No way!

Can Obedience nurture Trust?

Someone told me that blind obedience nurtures trust (my post Disciplines of execution). Let me elaborate this a little more.

I was told once that obedience is the basic issue to foster trust in organizational structure!

I was kind of surprised by such unilateral thinking and explanation of the working environment and could not figure out where from this way of thinking comes. In all my years of working experience I never thought that obedience can or may nurture trust. Just the opposite: I believe that obedience is a one way communication. And trust is definitively a two way issue.

Let me review what I have already written about to clear my position on the subject.

In the post Loyalty at work I stressed that in strictly traditionally hierarchical organizations (companies or even countries) there is only one way of implementing the will or preferences of the leader or owner - it is called a command!

Well I can argue that even in such hierarchical organizations at different incidents employees should always be (are) treated with respect. It is the obligation of the organization to see that individual leaders or managers do not abuse their power or mistreat their subordinates.

In another post Leadership and trust I expressed that trust is vital and is one of the fundamentals of any kind of cooperation between two living beings! I can definitely claim that it is very difficult to expect the trust in leaders that are practically squeezing last drops of effort out of employees with a command.

If we look even on broader scope – our environment – my post To trust the Capital? goes even beyond trust of any living being: can we trust the systems we are implementing and having as the only solution today?

Disciplines of execution

Not long ago I met a young upwardly mobile professional. While discussing his views on management practices his position was clear: the subordinate has to do as he is told by his manager no matter the consequences! I kind of disagree: what if this ‘command’ costs company a bad reputation or money or lost customers. He was clear again: regardless, a subordinate has to follow what he/she’s been told to do! Lower ranked people have, most probably, less experience, less information and no broaden picture about the final goal. I was kind of surprised by such determined stand point, but had to point out that a company is not a military organization (even there some flexibility is possible). If a subordinate cannot execute the order then a manager cannot trust him/her, was his prompt answer.

A bit of a shock for me: from blind obedience to trust issues.

I have been managing and leading different teams in different environments. I do not remember ever expecting my co-workers (not subordinates) to execute blindly what I had ordered. On the contrary, I was trying hard to stimulating their own opinion(s), their own way of doing it but with the notion to take responsibility as well. I still follow what Ken Robinson said: “The role of a creative leader is not to have all of the ideas; it is to create a culture where everyone can have ideas and feel that they’re valued!”

I’m positive that the true threats to humanity are not the Hitlers, the Dahmers and the Mansons but those that blindly obey. As those that order cannot do it by themselves they can achieve it only through the means of obedient people. Therefore, I am strongly against the situation when a person in authority makes a decision or gives a command, that decision or command should be followed without questioning simply because a person in authority gave it.

Who is the greatest leader of all time and why?

If you ask the question publicly expect nothing less than argumentative and disagreeable discussions.

We may consider leadership politically, historically, from the business prospective and many more aspects and settings.

This topic has been rolling in my mind for a long time now because I am looking for the best leadership practices and also the people performing them. I was amazed by people’s approach to this question on the internet. It has almost nothing to do with leadership but rather about personalities that important people have or had.  You may find ‘answers’ under the titles like ‘XYZ Things the greatest leaders all have in common’,  ‘Who are the greatest leaders of all time?’ or ‘The greatest leader of all’ and similar.

Are they describing basic leadership methodology and then, based on it, show who the great leaders were (are)? No, they are not! Do these articles have anything in common then? Absolutely yes!

Most of the researches are listing what a leader should not lack. See what I wrote in the blog Added value of leadership names or labels: “Is it all about different behaviors, different styles, or just to give a new label in front of the word leadership?” Those articles just state the “names” (mostly applied in western societies while forgetting the other parts of the world) and what those leaders were great for. Some go deeper and explain what leaders contributed to their societies.

Leadership and values

In my post on Virtue – Morality – Ethics and leadership I have written down that virtue motivates, morals and ethics constrain.

Most of the times people tend to mix virtue, morals and ethics not having a clear idea which term to use and when. We are asked for an ethical behavior or moral business and at the same time are explained that values have changed in last decades. The subject is doubtlessly too valuable. What is usually missing is an important measurement framing. Why?

Values are our fundamental beliefs. They are the principles we use to define that which is right, good and just. They guide us when we determine right versus wrong, good versus bad. We could name them our standards since we compare or evaluate deeds whether they meet that standard or fall short of it.

Storytelling tool in leadership

What is the perfect tool to connect with, inspire or motivate another? If you are trying to sell something, present it, give a speech or you are just the audience, the difference between interesting and boring is storytelling.

Stories are changing the way we think, act, and feel and can capture our imaginations, illustrate our ideas, arouse our passions, and inspire us. If a story is well told it can create an intense, personal connection between the audience, the idea and the teller. Think just how you have been listening to them as a child.

What exactly is a good storytelling - the art of using communication: verbal, tone and also gesture to tell components and metaphors of a story to an audience? Throughout human history stories were the actual building blocks of knowledge and by teaching them we learned to anticipate the possible consequences. Stories formed the foundation for memorizing events, persons or other data and to learn about them. That is why we could say that stories connect us with past, present, and future...

Could this tool be used in a business environment to form the foundations of a different workplace culture where hard facts failed to? Could this tool communicate and connect employees, customers, partners, suppliers, colleagues, and more?

Loyalty at work

In working environment have you ever wondered about:

• Does a mutual feeling of trust within the organization increase productivity and commitment to set goals?
• Why can’t you handle an employee that frequently appears to undermine your authority or sabotage your projects?
• What is wrong when you entrust to employee and still, because of him, in team there is no teamwork attitude?

Most of the times the answer to the above questions is about loyalty: the quality of “faithfulness” to you as a leader or your principles, your country, organization, work, your vision, your superiors and subordinates.

Loyalty is a two-way street. Majority understands it as being loyal to those above forgetting those below. But, a leader depends on team. All of them should be committed, productive and reliable so that the entire department, company or country could be successful.

Resistance to change

To change . . . Why bother?

Heraclitus said: “Change is the only constant in life.” Accordingly, people like to change things or other people but are usually not so willing to change themselves.

Why do people resist to the change? Is it because they mistake inertia or no-change for safety and predictability? Logically, the fear of the unknown frightens us. Leaving a comfort zone and facing uncertainty creates a lot of anxiety thusly paralyzing any activity for a change even if the current situation or process is not functioning well. It is much more difficult to accept the change when we lack confidence. Mostly, we all tend to postpone the difficult or uncomfortable things that need to be changed. Postponing them until the very last minute (known as a “student syndrome”), until something generates an impulse of urgency. Why we believe that there is always enough time to think about a change tomorrow I have already described in Cause and consequence / Urgent and important.

Dào (Dao, Tao) – the Way

In my blogs I have been using a term Dào (Dao, Tao) and would like to share with you my understanding of the meaning of the concept.

Dào is usually translated as way, road, channel, path, doctrine, or line. Chinese language is a tonal language so we must not confuse Dào with Dǎo, although for us it sounds the same. The latter, Dǎo, has an entirely different meaning: to lead, to transform, to guide, to conduct and or to direct.

There are some who would like to believe that Dào is a sort of ultimate creator, a God? It is not. God interferes with people and things, Dào never does. It is said that he who pursues Dào does less day by day. Less and less is done until nothing is done at all; when nothing is done at all, nothing is left undone. This is the fundamental difference between God and Dào – there is no interference when Dào is in concern. At the same time we should understand that Dào in Daoism can have dual meaning. One is religious and the other philosophical. The understanding and use of Dào in my book Leadership by Virtue is the latter.

China’s history and culture impacting Leadership - 3

The third example I would like to share with you is the historical novel Three Kingdoms, written in the tradition of the Spring and Autumn Annals which are attributed to Confucius. The historical novel of the Three Kingdoms is so important because it describes China’s tradition of political culture and the struggle to define its political form, transporting the reader from the highest councils of dynastic power to the lowest fringes of society, from the capital and key provinces to the edges of the empire and beyond. The novel offers a startling and unsparing view of how power is wielded, how diplomacy is conducted, and how wars are planned and fought. The novel has in turn influenced the ways that the Chinese think about power, diplomacy, and war. It is a tale of China itself in its infinite variety.

While ‘preserving moral judgment’ in every turn of phrase the novel marks the ‘rise and fall of kingdoms’ in a grand sweep of time. The novel has added to this tradition by reaching the broadest possible public with its message. This challenges a reader to reflect on how his own conduct measures up to the standards of loyalty and filial piety as they are fulfilled or betrayed in the novel. As Jiang Daqi said in the preface to the novel ‘merely to read it but not apply [its lessons] vigorously in one’s own life, is inferior to [real] study.’

China’s history and culture impacting Leadership - 2

The second example from China’s history for an outstanding leadership can be taken from the novel: Journey to the West. The main character is Sūn Wùkōng, Brother Monkey or Great Sage. The narrative uses a lot of symbolism and is based on the Daoist philosophy. Brother Monkey represents the heart and resides in fire, which is a fifth Daoist element. He was born from a stone and acquired supernatural powers through Daoist practices on the Mountain of Flowers and Fruits, which is the source of yīn and yang. The whole settlement and the place represent the Daoist theory of five elements where the other four are: Fruit and Flowers represent wood, Water Curtain where Brother Monkey hides refers to water, Iron-Plated Bridge leading to his camp refers to metal, and Rocky hill refers to earth. 

China’s history and culture impacting Leadership - 1

In this and the next two blogs I will try to shed some light on the topic of how one should behave and what one should aim for to be a successful and superior leader. Here I will take it from a non-Western perspective – from China’s history that is quite rich and could be the source of potentially broader viewpoint in today’s (mostly western) leadership methodologies.

I begin with a story Outlaws of the Marsh. The main character Sòng Jiāng, the descendant of a landowner's family, nicknamed Timely Rain, was a clerk of the county magistrate’s court in Yuncheng. He was especially adherent to playing with weapons and adept at many forms of fighting. At the same time he had a reputation for being extremely filial and generous in helping those in needs. He helped anyone who sought his aid, high or low, making things easy for people, solving their difficulties, settling differences, saving lives, even providing his guest with food and lodging in the family manor. And so he was famed through the province of Shandong and Hebei. However, in silence he suffered in the face of the arbitrariness and corruption of the imperial justice system.

Corporate governance in multicultural organization

Corporate governance refers to the issues associated with the way corporations are structured, managed and operated. The use of the term “corporate governance”, the evolution of the concept and what it entails has started in the early 1980’s.

 Among the first was the Cadbury Committee. They defined the purpose of corporate governance in 1992 namely, as a set of processes, customs and policies that frame the business of the company and help manage the subsidiaries. This is then operationalized in a uniform method through administered or controlled directives.

The most quoted and referred to document in this field is the OECD principles corporate governance. OECD defines it as a set of relationships between a company’s management, its board, its shareholders, and other stakeholders. Corporate governance also provides the structure through which the objectives of the company are set. The means of attaining those objectives and performance monitoring are determined. So, the main recommended principles are stated as rights and equitable treatment of shareholders, interests of other stakeholders, role and responsibilities of the board, integrity and ethical behavior, disclosure and transparency.

“The Way” of Leadership

Dào – the Way and Confucianism

Although Dào literally means ‘a way’ or one of its synonyms, the meaning was extended to mean ‘the Way.’ And this term, variously used by many Chinese philosophers such as Confucius, Mencius, Mò Zǐ, and Han Fei Zǐ, has a special meaning within the context of Daoism, where it implies the essential, unnamable process of the universe.

Daoism is traditionally traced to the mythical philosopher Lǎo Zǐ , the ‘Old Master’ to whom the text Dào Dé Jīng has been attributed. Dào Dé Jīng is translated as ‘The Classic/Canon of the Way/Path and the Power/Virtue,’ the title was generally used from the Tang dynasty period (618–905).

And the Daoism philosophy owes more to Zhuāng Zǐ (4^th century BE) the author of the core texts of the Chinese way of thinking known as ‘Daoism.’ Zhuāng Zǐ is traditionally credited as the author of at least part of the work, the one bearing his name, the Zhuāng Zǐ.

English: Analects, by Confucius. Östasiatiska Museet, Stockholm. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Confucianism principles are based on the written work The Confucian Analects (Lún Yǔ) ‘found’ by Confucius who lived two thousand and five hundred years ago.  The Chinese language does not use the word Confucianism, instead it is called Rú Jiāo meaning ‘scholar’ and ‘teach.’

To trust the Capital?

You will all remember the oil spill across the Gulf of Mexico back in April 2010?

The oil spills are a classical ‘low probability -- high-impact events’ as the one in Santa Barbara, California, in 1969, when more than eleven million gallons were dumped into coastal waters. From there on, we’ve seen more than our share of these kinds of accidents.

If there are lessons to be learned from those catastrophes, among the first ones are that “pre-disaster assumptions tend to be dramatically off base” and that “the worst-case scenarios were downplayed or ignored”.

We could argue whether this attitude is driving us against all the basic principles of Nature. Uncontrollably destroying the natural environment and exploitation of resources beyond recovery are just some of the profit-oriented results. Is such a conduct responsible behaviour to future generations?

Virtue – Morality – Ethics and leadership

The three: virtue, morality and ethics are not new philosophical terms. To Aristotle the good for human beings must essentially involve the entire proper function of human life as a whole. And this must be an activity of the soul so that expresses genuine virtue or excellence.

Virtue, in short, is a desire for honourable things. Aristotle defined the virtue as habits of acting or dispositions to act in certain ways. In China the term Dé is probably the closest modern English equivalent that means ‘virtue’ in the sense of ‘personal character,’ ‘inner strength,’ ‘virtuosity,’ or ‘integrity.’ Chinese character Dé, written as 德, is composed of the radical彳followed by the number ‘fourteen’ or shí sì (十四) over ‘one’ or yī (一) ‘heart / mind’ or xīn (心). The simple meaning is that one has to have a big heart for fourteen people.

Martial arts are a value-driven system

In the past, the main objective of martial arts was effective and efficient combat that regularly resulted in mortality or caused some degree of injury, often very severe, while today, martial arts are being used in more than one way. The first would be in the direct usage of martial arts that serves the original purpose. It is only used in extreme situations by military, police, and such organizations.Nowadays, the term is usually associated with various unarmed Asian martial arts, such as Wing Chun, karate do, judo, taekwondo, aikido, and others, and martial arts using mostly cold weaponry, such as kendo, ninjutsu, battojutsu. In reality, it encompasses a whole plethora of martial arts from around the world, like boxing, savate, capoeira, jeet kune do, krav maga, fencing, and much more. But here we need to be aware of the differences in the ways of thinking coming from the environments influenced by Confucianism, Daoism, or Buddhism on one side, and the West on the other. This is all reflected in those martial arts. While the Chinese martial arts are predominantly rhythmic in movement, the Western tend to be more dynamic and tense.