Comments on: Do Great Statesmen Make Great Business Leaders?

By: Leaders who DON’T: politicians

Leaders who DON’T: politicians — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:21:51 +0000

[...] of vision. So I thought it was only right that I add to the conversation in more than just the comments on the original [...]

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:14:04 +0000

Miki- thanks for pointing me to the story about how a leader emerged after a group came upon an aircraft crash site. This is a MUST READ on how a leader emerges in difficult situations. I think that it also supports the notion that everyone leads either badly or well. The story got me thinking about preparation- i.e., how was the leader in this case more prepared to deal with the crash scene than others?

By: Miki

Miki — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:07:04 +0000

First, the context doesn’t change my mind. I’m willing to bet that there were plenty of decisions that both Lincoln and Churchill made that in hindsight they felt might have been wrong or could have been better. The sheer arrogance of saying that every decision made was right, as opposed to the best possible based on what wa known at that time is unbelievable.

I already responded to Rhett at http://www.leadershipturn.com/more-about-the-l-word/. It is history that will determine the accuracy of the use of the adjectives ’statesman’ and ‘leader’ and as a professor commented many years ago, history can’t be accurately evaluated until all those who lived at the time are dead.

Miki

By: Bob Turek

Bob Turek — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:35:41 +0000

Miki- the three (Romney, Perot, Cheney) are thought by some to be leaders probably because of position, not because of leadership characteristics, as you relate in your post on “abusing the L word”. That post along with the comments are great reading. Rhett’s “everybody who influences, leads” approach resonates with me. As does his quote, “The question at the heart of this discussion is not “leader or not.” It is “positive, effective leader or not.””

By: Bob Turek

Bob Turek — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:05:55 +0000

Miki- here’s more of the transcript from the Larry King interview. I think it softens the blow of “no” a little. The only reason I mention this is that taking quotes, especially single words, out of context may not tell the whole story. My take on this is that Cheney was taking more about the process of group decision making:

CHENEY: Well, the way you have to operate in these jobs — and the president obviously is the one who bears the greatest burden — he’s the one who makes the decisions. But I clearly support him. You have to do it on the basis of what you think is right and what’s best for the country.

The polls are notoriously unreliable in the sense that they change all the time and they bounce around all over the place. And that if you looked simply at public opinion, for example, a lot of the key decisions in our history would never have been pursued or followed through on.

Washington never would have carried through for seven years of the Revolution. Abraham Lincoln would never have stayed with it in order to win the Civil War. We would have been two separate nations by then.

You can look at major moments in our history and be thankful that we had leaders and presidents who made decisions, stuck with them and saw them through to the end.

KING: But in all cases, they did question themselves. In all cases, they said, well, let’s look at it this way.

Don’t you?

I mean the question is, don’t you ever say, maybe I’m wrong?

CHENEY: No. I think what we do is we look at it in terms of trying to decide what’s the right thing to do. And the — and weigh the evidence. And there’s a lot of debate and discussion.

We went through the exercise at the beginning of this year, you may remember, when the president decided to put more forces into Baghdad. That’s a time when we evaluated a whole range of options; when we talked to a wide number of people with a variety of viewpoints; met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff; talked to outside military experts, as well as the politicos on the ground; and made a judgment.

The president made a decision then, and the — and I think it was the right decision…

By: Miki

Miki — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:27:23 +0000

I just ran into more proof that Cheney is neither a statesman nor a leader, nor is anyone who says it. I saw the quote at http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2008/01/poverty-in-america-ceos-ive-written.html

Q: … Don’t you ever say maybe I’m wrong? THE VICE PRESIDENT: No. (Larry King interviewing Dick Cheney, 7/31/07)

By: Miki

Miki — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:22:23 +0000

Simply put, boss doesn’t equal leader and politician doesn’t equal statesman. The three you list are politicians, certainly NOT statesmen—unless the definition has been drastically degraded. Heading a company doesn’t make one a leader any more than being elected to any office, including President, makes one a statesman. I wrote on this in Stop abusing the L word!

By: Bob

Bob — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:21:24 +0000

Eric- the pertinacity (a new word for me) and magnanimity are interesting in that they require seemingly conflicting attributes. The people I’ve been mentored by always had great hearts but expected me to keep up with their “at all costs” approach.

By: Bob Turek

Bob Turek — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:03:31 +0000

Ren- interesting view. I think everyone leads others- it’s either bad or good. I would be interested in your view on whether overseas filipino workers share the 5 characteristics outlined by Paul Johnson.

By: Bob Turek

Bob Turek — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 02:58:51 +0000

Miki- I appreciate your passion. I tend to agree with the “static” comment. I also think that the qualities, assuming a “good” leader (not Hitler), are interesting to use as assessment elements. Views of leaders are shaped by history and comparisons. The inclusion of Cheney was not to argue politics but to simply name a person who has led a company and led in politics and whether the qualities to attain leader status are similar. Overall, a fascinating discussion. Please continue.