Leader

The ancient Greeks and Romans were very concerned with political, military, and financial effectiveness. Since human nature changes slowly, if at all, we should not be surprised to learn that many ancient leaders and authors had quite a lot to say that is of relevance today. The book's subjects relate to many of the tricky areas of human interaction and psychology. There are sections on leadership, building and losing constituencies, consulting and decision making, strategy, competition, collegiality and teamwork, risk taking, recognizing opportunity, communications, management-employee relations, motivation, hiring and firing, delegation, and handling success and coping with mistakes.

I found the ancient materials very interesting, learning about classical figures I had not heard of before. I would have enjoyed the book even if it had not been presented as a business management book. Since the work is done by classicists, the ancient references are numerous, well chosen and spicy.

As a management guide, the book is not nearly as big a success. However, I did not find it any less good than any of the books I read which regurgitate what other writers have had to say before.

There were no big "ah-ha's" for me. Maybe I've been reading too many management books.

On the other hand, I didn't read anything here that was a bad idea for a business person to think about.

There's some very fine humor in several sections. For example, the "consultants" are usually seers, interpreters of oracles, and advisors. The explanations given for bad advice by the "consultants" are often pretty funny.

Many people report knowing better when they make a mistake in these areas . . . but taking the wrong path anyway. Now I wonder what the ancients would have had to say about that?

Think carefully, especially when you feel caught up in an emotional reaction!

Consequently, my stronger criticism is for the general way in which Hamilton's strengths are presented; they are essentially reduced to the fact he supported a strong central government. The political struggle between the Federalists and the Republicans that led to the fatal duel is also reduced to the vague point that Hamilton called Burr dangerous in the newspapers. So, on the one hand I recognize that Hamilton is a problematic figure for a juvenile biography, but on the other hand this volume misses giving young readers a solid understanding of why he was one of the most important political figures of his day despite the fact he was never elected to political office. We are told Hamilton was an excellent writer, but while there are references to the Federalist Papers and other important pamphlets, we never really get a taste of his public rhetoric. The book is illustrated with historic paintings and etchings, some of which show Hamilton. Other titles in the Revolutionary War Leaders series look at not only Jefferson and Washington, but also Benedict Arnold, Nathan Hale, Thomas Paine, and Betsy Ross.

One of the most important responsibilities for top management is management succession. And according to the authors, top management currently often fall into the trap of making decisions about candidates based on lopsided or distorted information. "Frequently, they fall prey to the 'halo effect': overvaluing certain attributes while undervaluing others. ... To make matters worse, many organizations do not have the right procedures in plan to produce a complete and accurate picture of their top prospects." The authors have developed an evaluation process in which a candidate is assessed by a group of people, who have observed his/her behavior directly over time and in different circumstances. The authors first start with a list of leadership criteria (team player, coaching, operational management, speaking, ambition, similarity and familiarity). This is then complemented with a list of questions, which covers both hard and soft skills. This list of questions should be discussed by the group of people mentioned above. From the information that comes out of these questions, the group can determine development priorities for the candidate. The authors finish the article with some encouraging words: "We believe that leadership is more available than people think. The trick is to identify it properly, and doing so requires sorting through the myriad nuances and subtleties of leadership." The first step is to improve the evaluation process.

Nice article on the evaluation process of leadership talent, which has been a widely discussed issue in recent years/months. Yes, perhaps the authors just touch the surface in this article, but it is an useful starting point for many organizations. I recommend this article to top management and human resources professionals. The authors use simple business US-English.

In a departure from this tired and arguably broken premise, consultant and coach Dick Richards provides lessons from leaders operating outside of corporations: in not-for-profits, the arts, sports, religion, education, government...

In drawing insights from his interviews with these leaders, Richards argues that leaders succeed by securing follower commitment. He posits that this happens when leaders work on, if not master, ten competencies in four interrelated domains: political, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual (defined as, "the sense of a calling from some source larger than one's self").

When a leader's capabilities coalesce in these four main areas of competence, she becomes, in essence, a fuller, richer human being. As a result, others positively respond to the improved leader by choosing to invest more of themselves in pursuing the leader's mission.

~~~ Familiar but..., Soft but... ~~~
In this framework, Richards proffers a cogent, integrated way of *thinking* about your own leadership. Drawing on historical and personal anecdotes, quoting philosophers, researchers and leaders, Richards both echoes and transcends conventional business literature (including the recent spate championing "emotional intelligence").

It would be fair to argue that there is little new here. But that would be off the mark. As Dick Richards himself candidly points out, there is more than plenty of literature and seminars traversing the broad, overly worn leadership field. Fortunately, the intriguing whole that Richards has woven is more than the amalgam of its recognizable threads.

Likewise, it would be patently unfair (to both reader and author) to dismiss this thoughtful, occasionally lyrical work as too soft, too philosophical, or too New Age-y. By moving past the sterile Insert Tab-A into Slot-B mentality that underpins so much prescriptive management literature, Richards elevates his readers, helping them to transcend the heartless transactional world so many work in. (Still, while there's more than a modicum of practicum in the book, readers probably will want more guidance on how to translate the principles into action. Perhaps Richards is at work on a "field guide.")

Dick Richards proudly writes, as his title suggests, of the *Art* of leading. One senses that Richards thinks as an artist, a world-savvy poet reflecting on leadership. One could mistake the book for a wizened corporate shaman's love letter to meaning-starved managers.

~~~ Bottom Line ~~~
Dick Richards' THE ART OF WINNING COMMITMENT is more gestalt than how-to, more fresh synthesis of the known than breakthrough. It should ignite your little gray cells, kindle your interest in self-development, inflame your own commitment to fostering commitment in your colleagues. And help you become a better person in the process.

Don Blohowiak, Lead Well® Institute; editor, The Leader's Letter