Egoship. I doubt that I coined the term, but I did think of it independently. It’s been popping into my head for a number of years now as I read stories of astronomical pay packages for business leaders.

It didn’t take a business guru to start noticing that along with those salaries seemed to come an ermine cloak, although some were sable and others only mink, and the egos that went with them.

And considering what’s happening, things aren’t changing as much as you’d think—or like.

“Six top money managers of Harvard University’s endowment, which has lost $8.1 billion since the summer, earned $26.9 million in compensation in its most recent fiscal year.”

“Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, an Associated Press analysis reveals.”

“Six financial firms that received billions in bailout dollars still own and operate fleets of jets to carry executives to company events and sometimes personal trips, according to an Associated Press review.”

“The highest-ranking executives four firms have agreed under pressure to go without their bonuses, including John A. Thain, who initially wanted a bonus this year since he joined Merrill Lynch as chief executive after its ill-fated mortgage bets were made. And four former executives at one hard-hit bank, UBS of Switzerland, recently volunteered to return some of the bonuses they were paid before the financial crisis. But few think others on Wall Street will follow that lead.”

Of course not. Wall Street egoships aren’t going to give back anything, they had to be forced to forgo what they did. Why should they take a hit for the trouble they caused? It would be almost un-American.

And as Michelle Singletary said today, “Who in their right mind thinks a chief executive earning a $1 a year is actually making a sacrifice?”

Of course, Wall Street sticking to its ways as much as possible should have been expected. The great thing about egoship is that it knows it can do no wrong, so it never needs to apologize or take responsibility.

And if the reformers show up at its door egoship knows exactly what to do:

• Say all the right things;
• make impressive, empty gestures;
• be patient until they forget and go away; and then
• return to business as usual.

Are we going to forget this time? You tell me.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: sxc.hu

Starting last June a college professor, who goes by CandidProf, has been writing a series of posts based on his first hand experiences with students and administrators.

Recently I was asked why I included them in Leadership Turn; it isn’t an education blog and what exactly did the topic have to do with leadership. To be honest the question floored me.

The only thing I can think of that has more to do with leadership than education is parenting.

Both require serious leadership skills, but beyond that their focus, kids, are leadership’s future.

CP is on hiatus for now, but that doesn’t reduce the need to focus on what could become the greatest leadership void ever faced.

Not the positional leaders who posture and strut, but the real leaders who step up in that instant when initiative is required and retire when the situation moves on. In other words, the thousands of regular folks on which every business and society depends—“…leadership is for instances. How people react to the things that happen around them—that’s the crux of life.”

Parents are the first and foremost source of leadership skills, not because they actively teach them, but because ‘monkey see, monkey do’. Unfortunately, as a whole, the job done leaves much to be desired.

Now we’re facing a gift-giving season in the worst economy in decades. You would think this was a great chance to teach children that they can’t have everything; that instant gratification isn’t guaranteed; that they aren’t entitled.

But it’s not happening. In article after article parents, especially moms, say the same thing. That they plan to cut everything—except the kids presents. “I want her to be able to look back and say, ‘Even though they were tough times, my mom was still able to give me stuff.”

Financial experts, such as Michelle Singletary, disagree, “By discussing with them that money is tight, you are admitting that at times you can’t do or get what you want. You are teaching them you can’t spend what you don’t have… Make the choice not to spend if you can’t afford it this year. Love your children like never before, but don’t go shopping out of guilt if you don’t have the cash.”

Even better than the economic lesson, which in itself has great value, you will start your children to understanding that not everything is within their control (or yours); that they aren’t entitled to have their every wish come true; that ‘instant’ isn’t their birthright, ‘gratification’ doesn’t always happen and that they really won’t die if they don’t get <fill in the blank>.

Who’s right? All the sacrificing moms or the minority like Singletary and me?

What do you think?

Your commentsg—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: flickr