Politicos treat "unhabits" as a to-do list
by Miki SaxonI read David Zinger’s 37 Unhabits of Highly Successful Managers right after I posted my leadership question.
My first thought was “what a great list” followed closely by how well it describes many of today’s political leaders—unfortunately they don’t seem to have noticed the ‘un’ and are treating it as a to-do list.
So I’ll pose another challenge to you along with the leadership request below.
Cast your comment for the political leader(s) that best embody the habits David describes, preferably with relevant example(s).
November 15th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
A fundamental disagreement you and I will have on this subject: Politician = Job Title, Leader, Leadership = adjectives. Leader/Leadership are often misused as synonyms for politician.
That’s where you get in trouble. A politician’s first loyalty is to his/her party, his/her primary focus is to get re-elected.
A successful politician is one who has held office for a long time and has built strong alliances within his/her party. Leadership, as used in your blog, is just one path in becoming a successful politician, not a necessary quality of a politician.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Hey Miki! your post led me back to the source blog to try to give a positive sum up to the “37”. Watching political “leaders” speak on TV this morning leads me to conclude that the behavior in this campaign is NOT in any way leadership or management. It is simply a sad, negative, destructive, immature child’s game being driven by a largely entertained electorate. We need to look for 37 things to emulate (not de-emulate). Too bad it’s easier to find bad examples.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Also, btw, ‘Party Leader’ is a euphemism for very successful fundraiser, as is ‘showing leadership’.
When people are spoken of as ‘Community Leaders’, it often means they have the capacity to bring in the big bucks on issues they support.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Kathy, you and I have no real disagreement. The adjectives are consistently used in conjunction with the person/actions of every politician and I always treat them as a “wannabe” not an “actually is.” You are also correct regarding the fundraising.
That said, I’d love to hear your opinion on the politician(s) who best embody the most items on David’s list with a link to some background if they aren’t well known.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Bob, you have a stronger stomach than I to watch politicos in the morning (before or after breakfast?). Personally, I haven’t seen either leadership or management in a national election, or a local one for that matter, in years.
So, in your honor, the next challenge is to describe the traits that would allow a politico to use the terms leader/leadership with at least some validity.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Why? Why focus on politicians, who follow the money, why not look at the money directly?
Who has a ton of money in this country, what issues are they backing?
Who has control of the assets/companies that produce the money, and what issues do they see as important?
Or, alternatively, deal with leadership as an adjective, and first make the point about how it leads to success, and then why you’d choose leadership as the path to success.
Otherwise, it seems to me, you are just strengthening the false (IMO) connection between politicians and leadership, as leadership is defined by this blog.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Actually, I watch TV during breakfast- I guess the political entertainment aids my digestion. Like Kathy, I have difficulty focusing on politicians as leaders even though I’m fascinated by the political process- it really is entertainment and the worst qualities associated with “sales”- not caring deeply about those you are selling to, packaging yourself up to be everything to everybody. Sad to say but I think what attracts me to it is the “train wreck” quality of it. You really have to struggle to finds leadership qualities given the requirements of the process- it just doesn’t lend itself to leadership anymore- if it ever did.
November 15th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
Hi Bob -I have a hard time blaming politicians. It seems to be a function of their job description. I have an easier time blaming you and me and the rest of us who have confused entertainment for news and so have encouraged the image over substance issue of which you write.
November 15th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Btw, I thought Gavin Newsom, Mayor of San Francisco, when he supported single sex marriage, behaved like a leader rather than a politician.
And he was roundly criticized for it – many people point to this as the single biggest obstacle between him and national office.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Kathy, I don’t believe that there is an actual definition for leadership permeating this blog. You’d have to go back through the various authors, I only take responsibility since August 16 and it is the quote from Lao Tzu that most closely defines leadership to me.
“As for the best leaders,
the people do not notice their existence.
The next best,
the people honor and praise.
The next, the people fear;
and the next, the people hate…
When the best leader’s work is done,
the people say, “We did it ourselves!”
To lead the people, walk behind them.”
As for Gavin (who I always liked when I lived in SF), any politician who bucks the conservative ideology will have a difficult time until the balance of power shifts away form the extreme right (or left, for that matter) and back to the middle—which is probably too much to hope for.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Bob, I agree with both the entertainment comment and the train wreck, check out my post tomorrow.
I don’t expect to find true leadership qualities, since any leading done is colored by whatever ideology got them elected and the driving desire to be re-elected. Even term-limits doesn’t help, as proven by our current administration.
Too many politicians, along with CEOs, have joined the imperial class, owe nothing to anybody and believe that they are above everything.